Breaking with Tradition: Austria’s Controversial Government Formation Amid Political Turmoil

In recent weeks, Austria has been thrust into the political spotlight following President Alexander Van der Bellen’s decision to grant the mandate to form a government to the Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP), despite the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) winning the largest share of votes in the national elections (ORF, 2024). This unprecedented choice has raised questions about the balance between respecting electoral outcomes and safeguarding democratic values. The debate has resonated across Europe, inviting scrutiny of Austria’s political practices and the broader challenges facing democracies globally.

The Landscape of Austrian Politics

The Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ), a far-right populist organisation, has garnered significant support by connecting with voters who are disenchanted with conventional political frameworks. Under the leadership of Herbert Kickl, the FPÖ advocates for a nationalist policy agenda, which includes calls for tighter immigration regulations and scrutiny of the European Union’s influence on Austrian governance. The party’s messaging stresses the importance of protecting Austrian sovereignty and cultural heritage against perceived challenges posed by globalization and multiculturalism. According to Bußjäger (2023), the FPÖ’s communications particularly resonate with rural and working-class demographics, who feel overlooked by Austria’s centrist parties and disconnected from the perceived elitism of mainstream political discourse.

The Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP), a centre-right political entity with a rich historical background, promotes pro-European and conservative principles. Its leader, Karl Nehammer, positions the ÖVP as a stabilising presence, advocating for economic development and national security while fostering strong ties with the EU. This pragmatic strategy effectively counters the FPÖ’s populist inclinations (Pelinka, 2023). Finally, the Social Democratic Party of Austria (SPÖ) adopts a centre-left stance, prioritising social welfare, progressive taxation, and workers’ rights. Its commitment to the EU promotes equity and prosperity through enhanced integration, starkly differentiating it from the FPÖ’s skepticism regarding Brussels. The European Commission (2024) identifies the SPÖ as a crucial advocate for sustainable development and social cohesion within Austria, underscoring the party’s alignment with European-wide initiatives.

The Tradition of Government Formation

Traditionally, Austria has adhered to an informal convention of assigning the government formation mandate to the political party that secures the highest proportion of votes (Welan, 1994). This practice, while not codified in law, aligns with the democratic tenets of honouring voters’ preferences and promoting government accountability. Thus, as Bußjäger (2023) argues, this custom enhances public confidence in the democratic process by ensuring that governance reflects electoral outcomes and bolsters the legitimacy of political institutions.

Nevertheless, the Austrian Constitution empowers the President to diverge from this practice under extraordinary circumstances. President Van der Bellen’s choice to overlook the FPÖ in favour of the ÖVP represents a significant deviation from established norms (Welan, 1994). Citing apprehensions regarding the FPÖ’s nationalist agenda and its potential to distance Austria from its European allies, Van der Bellen defended his decision as essential for maintaining stability: “Democracy,” he remarked, “extends beyond the results of elections; it encompasses the values that unite us as a society” (Slovencik, 2024).

Historical Context: The 2000 Coalition Crisis

The decision to exclude the FPÖ invokes memories of Austria’s 2000 coalition crisis, when the ÖVP formed a government with the FPÖ, then led by Jörg Haider. This partnership provoked international backlash, particularly from the European Union, which imposed diplomatic sanctions on Austria (Unterberger, 2001). The EU’s response underscored its commitment to democratic principles and resistance to far-right extremism within member states. Pelinka (2023) notes that the sanctions, although short-lived, conveyed a strong message about the importance of upholding democratic norms and rejecting extremist ideologies in European politics.

The 2000 crisis left a lasting imprint on Austria’s political landscape, contributing to a cautious approach toward far-right parties in governance. Bußjäger (2023) suggests that Van der Bellen’s decision reflects these historical lessons, prioritising Austria’s international reputation and long-term stability over adherence to traditional electoral practices. His pro-European stance underscores a broader commitment to aligning Austrian governance with EU values, particularly at a time when populist movements challenge democratic norms across the continent.

The Dynamics of Public Response

The growing frustration among FPÖ supporters has raised concerns about the legitimacy of the decision and deepened distrust in political institutions. Indeed, as Pelinka (2023) notes, Austria’s political landscape is becoming increasingly divided, with debates over national identity, sovereignty, and globalization exposing deeper societal rifts.

At the same time, civil society organisations, including NGOs and advocacy groups, have stepped in to channel public sentiment. Groups like Democracy Watch Austria are calling for more transparency in political decision-making, stressing the importance of respecting voters’ choices while safeguarding democratic principles. The European Commission’s 2024 report highlights how vital these organisations are in encouraging dialogue and holding leaders accountable during politically turbulent times. In the context of Austria’s ongoing political crisis, these institutions could play an important role in fostering resolution and ensuring democratic principles are upheld.

The Broader European Context

Austria’s political turmoil unfolds against the broader backdrop of European integration and the European Union’s commitment to upholding democratic governance. Strategically positioned as a bridge between Western and Eastern Europe, Austria occupies a unique place in the continent’s geopolitical landscape. This dual role often places the country at the center of critical debates about the EU’s future and the growing influence of populist movements. As Müller (2023) highlights, Austria’s history and political culture have shaped a national identity that is particularly attuned to European developments. The rising popularity of the FPÖ reflects growing public dissatisfaction with the EU, driven by concerns over national sovereignty and a perceived erosion of local decision-making. These shifting dynamics present significant challenges for Austria’s relationship with the EU, especially as nationalist sentiments gain momentum among voters (Müller, 2023, pp. 112–115).

The political divide in Austria is not an isolated phenomenon but part of a larger trend across Europe, where traditional political parties face increasing pressure from populist movements advocating for greater national control over issues like immigration, security, and economic policy (Heller, 2022). As Euroscepticism grows, the EU has responded by intensifying efforts to safeguard democratic norms through initiatives such as the Rule of Law Mechanism. This mechanism, as outlined by the European Commission (2024), aims to address breaches of democratic principles and enhance accountability among member states.

Austria’s approach to resolving its current political crisis will be a litmus test of its commitment to these principles. The FPÖ’s nationalist agenda, which challenges Austria’s obligations to the EU, appeals to a segment of the electorate increasingly skeptical of globalization. Conversely, the ÖVP and SPÖ emphasize the importance of continued European integration, acknowledging its necessity in addressing transnational issues such as migration and climate change.

International Reactions and Implications

The international response to Austria’s political crisis has been heterogeneous. Some European leaders have cautiously backed President Van der Bellen’s decision, saying it aligns with democratic values, whilst recognising the risk of upsetting FPÖ supporters. French President Emmanuel Macron called it a “principled stance against extremism” (Macron, Lenhartz, 2024) and applauded the effort to stand firm against divisive politics. Meanwhile, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán had a very different take, slamming it as a step too far that disrespects the voters’ choice (Jenne, Keaten. 2024).

This split in reactions highlights bigger issues facing Europe right now. Populist movements, as Pelinka (2023) points out, are shaking the foundations of the EU. Member states are caught between wanting to assert their independence and working together as part of a united Europe. Austria’s situation shows how tricky it is to strike that balance while maintaining institutions strong and people’s trust intact: it’s a lesson in how complex politics can get when ideals clash with reality.

Challenges and Opportunities for Austria

The ÖVP now faces the dual challenge of forming a stable government while addressing the grievances of FPÖ voters. Key priorities include economic recovery, rising energy costs, and immigration policy—all of which require nuanced solutions that reconcile national and European interests.

Failure to address these challenges could exacerbate political fragmentation, hindering effective governance and fuelling further discontent. Conversely, fostering dialogue and collaboration among diverse political factions offers an opportunity to rebuild trust and strengthen Austria’s democratic fabric. Bußjäger (2023, pp. 60–62) emphasises that inclusive governance, characterised by transparency and responsiveness, is crucial for restoring public confidence and bridging societal divides.

Conclusion: A Test of Democratic Resilience

Austria’s current political crisis exemplifies the complex interactions between populism, democratic principles, and institutional authority. By endorsing the ÖVP for government formation, President Van der Bellen has demonstrated a dedication to upholding democratic values amidst escalating nationalist sentiments. Nevertheless, this decision prompts significant discussions regarding electoral representation, public trust, and the equilibrium of power within democratic frameworks.

The broader implications of Austria’s predicament extend beyond its national context, offering critical insights into the dilemmas confronting democracies in the EU and worldwide. From Hungary to the United States, nations are struggling with similar conflicts between populist ideologies and established democratic norms. Austria’s situation highlights the necessity of maintaining institutional integrity while responding to citizen concerns in an age marked by political division.

By addressing this crisis with transparency and inclusivity, Austria has the potential to reaffirm its dedication to democratic principles and set a precedent for resilience amid populist pressures. The insights gained from this pivotal juncture will not only influence Austria’s political trajectory but also enrich the global conversation on the importance of preserving democracy in an increasingly unpredictable landscape.

References

Bußjäger, P. (2023). The role of tradition in Austrian politics: Government formation in context. Austrian Political Review, 15(2), 45–67.

European Commission. (2024). Rule of law mechanism: Ensuring democratic governance in EU member states. Brussels: European Union Publications.

Jenne, P., Keaten, J. (2024).  A far-right leader could soon take the helm in EU member country Austria. Here’s why it matters. Vienna, Austria. https://apnews.com/article/austria-nehammer-kickl-chancellor-european-union-d5de1b28909f9e469d8151a057dbb4ed 

Lenhartz, S. (2024). Die Anti-Europäer triumphieren, weil Europa keine Antworten findet. Berlin, Germany. https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article251943724/Europawahl-Die-Anti-Europaeer-triumphieren-weil-Europa-keine-Antworten-findet.html 

Macron, E. (2024). Statement on Austrian political developments. Retrieved from www.welt.de (see above)

Pelinka, A. (2023). Populism and the crisis of democracy in Austria: Lessons from the 2000 coalition. Vienna, Austria. Leykam Buchverlag

Slovencik, M. (2024). Regierungsbildungsauftrag an Nehammer. Vienna, Austria. https://orf.at/stories/3373551/ 

Unterberger, A. (2001). Österreich und die Europäische Union nach den Sanktionen. Vienna, Austria. Jahrbuch für internationale Sicherheitspolitik 2001

Welan, M. (1994). Regierungsbildung, WPR-Discussion Paper Nr. 26-R-94. Vienna, Austria. 5-26

Julia Schurz (EST Ambassador to Austria)