Markus Lehner
After months of fruitless negotiations by the “centrist” parties, the conservative People’s Party (ÖVP), the liberal NEOs and the Socialists (SPÖ), intended to build a “firewall” against the anti-immigrant Freedom Party (FPÖ), heading a coalition, the self-proclaimed „people’s chancellor “ Herbert Kickl, has now been invited by President Alexander van der Bellen to form a Black-Blue coalition (the colours of the two parties).
Though the right wing populists have shared office before, from 1999 to 2005 and again in 2017-19, they have not held the chancellorship before. Now, with nearly 29% of the vote in last year’s election and 57 out of the 183 seats in the lower house of parliament, if negotiations are successful, they would head the federal government.
This would not only mean more reactionary policies against migrants. The coalition negotiations suggest fierce attacks on the social achievements of workers, women, queer people and measures to combat climate change, which are already stalled. Added to this is Kickl’s promised offensive against „gender madness“, „the media of the system“ and „left-wing“ cultural workers. Broad resistance against such a government of capital and reaction is therefore urgently needed!
What is the threat?
The ÖVP (which Kickl until recently referred to as the centre of the „system“) has once again „forgotten“ all its pre-election pledges. Christian Stocker, the ÖVP’s interim leader, as the party’s general secretary, had only recently described the FPÖ as a security risk with whom forming a coalition was out of the question. The ÖVP’s Federal Chancellor, Karl Nehammer, was sacrificed because the Economic Federation and the Federation of Austrian Industries apparently wanted this right wing coalition at all costs. This was because it was only after the election, and to its full extent only in the coalition negotiations, that the „astronomical“ extent of the size of the hole in the federal budget came to light.
As with astronomy’s black holes, budget holes appear suddenly and unexpectedly, devouring everything and catapulting responsible finance ministers towards Brussels as if through a wormhole. The negotiators from the ÖVP and NEOs wanted to make up the 18 billion euro shortfall and avert the threat of EU deficit proceedings by making deep cuts to social services (sold as „overdue structural reforms“) in a relatively short period of time. The SPÖ wanted to drag out the budget restructuring over a longer period of time and, in particular, to get „stronger shoulders“ (i.e. the better off) to contribute more through tax revenues.
As its leader Andreas Babler frankly admitted after the collapse of the negotiations, the SPÖ had already cleared away the Conservative-Liberal spectre of taxes on wealth and inheritance but insisted on reversing the recent cut in corporation tax and on a bank levy on „excess profits“. The SPÖ also apparently did not accept the raising of the retirement age to 67. Since the election campaign was dominated by completely different issues (the alleged main problem being „immigration“), the real sticking points only came to light during the coalition negotiations: the costs of the current economic crisis and stagnation (which is not only affecting Austria) are to be borne by the mass of employees and the socially disadvantaged.
The ÖVP characterises the SPÖ as “still living in the 1970s“ for seeking to cushion this bottom to top redistribution. Instead, they are now going back at least to the 1920s, that is, forming a block with the hard right.
It is no secret that the FPÖ is right-wing authoritarian at its core with many links to old and new Nazis. Its strength is certainly a racist mobilisation, but at the same time it has always represented a specific wing of Austrian capital, especially in the federal states, and has in recent years gained more and more positions in the political representation of business. The FPÖ presents itself as a party of „the little people“, but it is a thoroughly neo-liberal economic and anti-union force. In this respect, it will not be a big problem for the FPÖ-ÖVP negotiations to agree on the attacks desired by the Economic Federation and the Federation of Austrian Industries.
Of course, the „People’s Chancellor“ will have difficulties selling cuts and social hardship (such as raising the retirement age) as policies „for the little people“. But there will certainly be the necessary distraction from this in the inevitable fight to ensure that „only hard-working Austrians receive social benefits“ and that the ÖVP is actually to blame for „tightening one’s belt“. The latter will certainly be coupled with „moral outrage“ over certain special benefits for migrants – and lead to all kinds of worsening of the social situation of racially oppressed people. It is also certain that anti-Muslim racism will become a central cover for the attacks that follow.
It is certainly no coincidence that Johanna Mikl-Leitner (ÖVP party leader in Lower Austria) recently, in a Freudian slip, declared the „fight against Islam“ to be one of the most important tasks of Austrian politics. Even if the FPÖ is structurally antisemitic and antisemitism is deeply rooted in the fraternities associated with it (concealed by solidarity with the right-wing extremist regime in Israel) – the central target for racist agitation in government policy in the near future will certainly be the Muslim minority in Austria, sometimes even under the guise of combatting „Israel-related antisemitism“. This will certainly also be the main approach in preparing the much-heralded deportation policy.
The most difficult issue for the FPÖ-ÖVP negotiations will certainly be foreign policy. Here, the FPÖ’s closeness to Hungary’s Viktor Orbán and Russia’s Vladimir Putin and its opposition to EU policy in general are certainly a problem for the ÖVP, as well as for the majority of Austrian capital. Furthermore, the ÖVP will not be able to blame everything on the Greens and Nehammer when it comes to the total criticism of the Covid policy demanded by the FPÖ. But Stocker & Co are certainly sufficiently „situationally elastic“ as long as the Economic Association and the Federation of Austrian Industries get their main points across.
Role of the SPÖ and KPÖ
The breakdown of negotiations and the insistence on some social demands currently puts the SPÖ under Andreas Babler in the position of at least drumming up support against the threat of a „government of social austerity“. The only problem with this is that for a large part of the SPÖ, such counter-positioning goes too far. Some would like to form a coalition with the FPÖ themselves, others would have made more concessions than Babler to the ÖVP. Therefore, as in previous years, paralysis and internal power struggles are more likely to be expected from the SPÖ than a consistent opposition policy or even mobilisation.
In view of the attacks on the pension and health systems, the trade unions are more likely to be able to adopt a stronger position – which would also lead to a closer connection with the Babler wing. In particular, there are many at the grassroots of the SPÖ and the trade unions who are now very angry and looking for direction. In view of the major role played by the social democratic and trade union leaderships in mobilising, or not mobilising, large sections of the working class, leftists must address clear demands to them for struggle and breaking with the social partnership. In particular, they must now organise consistently within the trade unions and the SPÖ and demand effective protest measures from their leaders or prepare such measures themselves.
The Communist Party of Austria (KPÖ) has not been able to establish itself as a bulwark against the right in either the national or the Styrian elections, and it also refuses to specifically attack the FPÖ and its racism. With a few key points on housing and social policy, it is possible to achieve certain successes in local politics. However, these were not achieved because the party has a communist or revolutionary programme, but because the voters considered individual local social politicians to be more credible than the representatives of other parties. KPÖ federal spokesperson Tobias Schweiger has now commented on the failure of the coalition negotiations:
„In the negotiations so far, the problems of ordinary people have not played a role. If the SPÖ’s modest demands are unfulfillable for the ÖVP, it is clear how brutally a coalition between the two conservative parties will pass the national debt crisis on to the population“.
Apart from the fact that questions of retirement age are already among the problems of „normal people“, the KPÖ’s explanations generally lack a perspective on how „normal people“ can take their fate into their own hands, except by voting for the KPÖ. Nevertheless, the KPÖ is now announcing that it wants to organise social resistance „together with the population“.
Action
The fact that the first demonstrations took place in front of the Hofburg on 6 January, when Kickl went to see the Federal President, is a good sign and follows on from the mobilisations immediately after the national elections. Unfortunately, these have also shown the limited character of this form of protest. In many cases, the main focus of the organisers was on ensuring that no Palestinian flags or similar were seen in the press, or on how to keep alleged „left-wing antisemites“ out of the demonstration. This divisive attitude does not bode well for building a broad united front, especially in view of the expected main thrust of the reactionary government in the „fight against Islam“.
It is necessary to build a united front that encompasses all aspects of the impending attacks – anti-racism, defence of LGBTQ rights, anti-climate change measures, defence of women’s rights and cultural and press freedom but, above all, it must also focus on the expected social cuts. Here, trade unions, the left wing of SPÖ and the KPÖ must be pressed to participate in the organisation of mobilisations and, in particular, to prepare actions in the workplaces. In the face of impending attacks on pension rights, the health system or the Chamber of Labour, the political strike must also be considered the only truly effective counter-action.
In addition to calling for participation in the upcoming demonstrations, we therefore propose a broad discussion of further mobilisations. In Vienna, LINKS has the potential to provide the impetus and to approach other organisations, especially the KPÖ, for such a broader organisation. This would increase the mobilisation capacity of individual organisations and at the same time promote the necessary political exchange for the resistance. As activists from a workers‘ point of view who are active in LINKS, we want to advocate such a process in order to advance effective resistance against the reactionary attacks that are already planned.