Austria and KAICIID
By Scott Nelson
26 June 2019
Many people must have slept better after the recent collapse of the right-wing coalition (ÖVP and FPÖ) in Austria. These same people might flatter themselves to think that populism has been vanquished for the moment, or at least until ÖVP leader Sebastian Kurz likely snatches another victory in the elections this September. For now the country has taken a page from the well-worn Italian playbook of interim technocratic governments and is being led by the first ever female chancellor. It would appear that Austria is moving in a more liberal direction.
Not necessarily. One of the strange casualties of the fallen government seems to be any shred of common sense among some of the politicians who didn’t even have a hand in that government. On 13 June Peter Pilz – in what will surely be the second major accomplishment of his political career (the first being the notoriety visited upon him due to several accusations of sexual harassment) – submitted a proposal to parliament, which passed with the support of the Social Democratic Party (SPÖ), Green Party, and Freedom Party (FPÖ), that the seat agreement between Austria and the KAICIID Dialogue Centre be ended, and that Austria should withdraw its membership from the Centre. KAICIID is an international intergovernmental organization whose mandate is to foster interreligious and intercultural dialogue in order to strengthen understanding, peaceful coexistence, and provide for better conditions leading to reconciliation in areas of conflict around the world. Its status in Vienna has always been a point of contention for various reasons. For one, it is funded primarily by Saudi Arabia (one of the four member states, the others being Austria, Spain, and the Vatican, which is an observer). Even though the organization’s programmes are determined by a multi-religious Board, critics of Saudi Arabian domestic policy have found it convenient to pillory the organization instead of directing their ire at the Saudi embassy.
The migration question has hardly helped matters. Since 2015 Austria’s annual refugee intake compared to its population (8.5 million) is one of the highest in the EU. This fact, combined with the terror attacks over the past few years in France and Germany, has put the question of religion and Islam at the forefront of political debate. Where one might have hoped that increased scrutiny of religion would have led to greater appreciation for KAICIID’s efforts, it would seem that suspicion of the organization has brought about the exact opposite. While this is not the first time that attempts (by the Green Party, of which Pilz used to be a member) have been made to shut down the Centre, it is the first time that the proposal was accepted by a majority in parliament. Parliament will have to vote in favour of shutting down the Centre again in July, and once that is signed by President Alexander Van der Bellen, it is likely that the organization will move cities, perhaps to Geneva, Bonn, or Madrid, all of which have been bidding to increase their international organization count and would probably be more hospitable to KAICIID.
KAICIID and the international community are wading through murky waters on how a lot of this would play out, as this would be the first time that an international organization has been ousted from a member state. Is it possible according to international law for a single member state to break the seat treaty between Austria and KAICIID? What say, if any, do the other member states have in this matter? What are the political consequences of this move? For instance, would Saudi Arabia make good on its past threat to pull OPEC and OFID from Vienna if KAICIID goes?
Austria is a small alpine country whose modern history has been shaped by its declaration of neutrality on 26 October 1955, marking the end of American, Soviet, British, and French occupation. Vienna has hosted a number of peace talks and is home to 40 international and 320 bilateral and multilateral organizations. The city presents itself as a “hub of international diplomacy”. It decided to welcome the Central European University (CEU) after Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán moved to push it out of Budapest. With some of the international community already up in arms about Austria’s recent treatment of the KAICIID Dialogue Centre, what do the politicians hope to gain with this Orbán-esque manoeuvre? Next month we will find out whether the parliament wishes to put an end to dialogue.
Or it might let the dialogue continue. The pretext for Pilz’s proposal in parliament was Saudi Arabia’s decision to execute an 18-year old who has been in prison for the last five years for partaking in a human rights demonstration when he was ten years old. Saudi Arabia reneged on the execution – a reversal for which Pilz may wish to take credit, even though international pressure had already been mounting against the Saudi government. In any case, as the Austrian people appear not to care much about the presence of KAICIID in Vienna, it may be more convenient for Austria’s political elite to keep the Centre around and play political football with it whenever it wants to. Until Saudi Arabia, along with Spain and the Vatican, get fed up and decide to move the Centre anyway.
