Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign
Policy and Security Structures in the 20th
Century
Siegfried Beer
Andreas Gémes
Wolfgang Göderle
Mario Muigg
University of Graz
Abstract
Today’s Austria, both as a territory and as a people, has undergone several dramatic
systemic changes since 1900, in political as well as socio-economic terms. As the administrative centre of the Cisleithanian part of the Dual Monarchy, it was particularly
affected by the fall of the Habsburg dynasty. The Republic of Austria, created in 191820 as a parliamentary democracy under the watchful eye of the peacemakers in Paris,
lasted only until 1933/34, when an authoritarian regime took over. This dictatorship,
which ruled under a corporate constitution, survived until March 1938, when Austria
was incorporated into the Third Reich.
Liberation and restitution as a democratic republic followed Allied victory in May
1945, along with a long decade of quadripartite occupation. In May 1955 Austria regained its full sovereignty and continued its impressive consolidation as a successful
small, neutral state. Joining the European Union in 1995 marked the latest major institutional transition. These multiple breaks and changes are examined here in terms of
their impact on the organisational development of three important ministries – Foreign Affairs, Defence, and Interior – whose organization and membership reflected the
foreign and security policies of the various political stages under study. This analysis
reveals the existence of a far greater degree of continuity than discontinuity. Changes
in administrative structure and in elite personnel proved on the whole to be less radical
than might have been expected and, when implemented, as in 1938 and 1945, their
effects were only short-lived.
Die Bewohner Österreichs in den nach dem ersten Weltkrieg etablierten Grenzen haben im
Laufe des 20. Jahrhunderts vergleichsweise viele systemische, vorwiegend politische und so-
178
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
zio-ökonomische Umbrüche erlebt. Zu Anfang des Jahrhunderts im Zentrum der cisleithanischen Hälfte der österreichisch-ungarischen Doppelmonarchie gelegen, war es von militärischer Niederlage und darauffolgender Auflösung des Habsburgerreiches im Jahre 1918 in
besonderer Weise betroffen. Der Phase der Begründung der kleinstaatlichen Republik 191820 folgte schon 1933 der Zusammenbruch der parlamentarischen Demokratie, die 1934
von einem ständestaatlichen Regime abgelöst wurde, das wiederum im März 1938 der militärisch durchgesetzten Eingliederung Österreichs in das Dritte Reich weichen musste.
Mit dem alliierten Sieg über Hitlerdeutschland im Mai 1945 wurde die Wiedererrichtung
des Staates Österreich als Zweite Republik ermöglicht. Die endgültige staatliche Souveränität wurde freilich erst nach 10-jähriger Besatzung durch die Siegermächte des Zweiten
Weltkrieges mit der Unterzeichnung des Staatsvertrages im Mai 1955 erreicht. Es folgten
Jahrzehnte der politischen und wirtschaftlichen Konsolidierung, die durch den Beitritt zur
Europäischen Union im Jahre 1995 noch verstärkt werden konnte.
In diesem Kapitel werden die strukturellen und personellen Veränderungen in den drei für
die jeweilige Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik zuständigen Ministerien für Äußeres, Landesverteidigung und Inneres während der einzelnen Phasen der Entwicklung im 20. Jahrhundert nachgezeichnet, insbesondere auch im nachrichtendienstlichen Bereich. Sie lassen über
den ganzen Zeitraum gesehen eher ein Bild der Kontinuität als der Diskontinuität erkennen, vor allem in der Zusammensetzung der politischen und administrativen Eliten.
Austria, it has been claimed, is a nation without a history, and Austrian history is a
history without a nation. Indeed, it can be argued that there is a marked discontinuity
between the Austria and the Austrians of today and the Austria and the Austrians of
only a century ago. Austrian history from the end of the 19th century to the beginning of the 21st century has been filled with ethnic confusions, multiple paradoxes and
pervasive skepticism, which is why Austrians in the present are still insecure about and
uncomfortable with their past and heritage. Outside observers even today speak of “a
lack of national and cultural self-confidence”1.
This can also be explained by the fact that during the last century Austria was twice on
the brink of becoming a failed state: between 1918 and 1922, and again between 1945
and 1947. Both of these phases of despair and misery came after world-wide conflagrations and led to distinctive republican periods, namely, the First Austrian Republic of
1918-1934/38 and the Second Austrian Republic from 1945 until the present day. The
first republican experiment ended in failure as a consequence of internal and external
pressures. The second opportunity, provided by the victors of World War II, eventually
led to an almost miraculous recovery and a remarkable prosperity that was unforeseeable during those early years of almost total crisis. As conditions improved, particularly
during the 1950s and 1960s, Austrians developed a new identity as a small, neutral nation-state which enjoyed the advantage of being situated at the crossroads between East
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
179
and West. Throughout the long 20th century the Austrian people had to endure bitter
regime changes, which were marked by the following caesuras: 1918, 1933/34, 1938,
1945, and 1955. All these transitions brought substantial institutional changes, most of
them constitutionally grounded.
This chapter analyses these institutional changes from two crucial perspectives: foreign
policy and security structures. These two fields of public life are best represented by
three ministries, namely the Foreign, Defence, and Interior Ministries, which will be
separately discussed. It should be noted that the sources relating to these three ministries vary considerably. Regarding the field of security, that is, in the Defence and Interior Ministries, special attention will be given to the respective intelligence structures.
This is not only because these represent an interesting and under-researched area, but
also because it serves as a revealing case of institutional change. This chapter will thus
focus on (1) the institutional changes brought about by the above-mentioned caesuras
and (2) the role elites played in these transitions. We will show that despite dramatic
systemic changes in the 20th century, bureaucratic structures and their respective elites
were somewhat surprisingly marked more by continuity than discontinuity.
Austria in the 20th century: an overview
For centuries the Habsburg dynasty acquired and controlled regions of varied languages and ethnicities, thereby achieving the status of a major European power. Nevertheless, by 1900 its Dual Monarchy – created by the so-called Compromise of 1867,
when German Austrians in the western half of the empire (Cisleithania) agreed to share
power with the Hungarians in the eastern territories (Transleithania) – was in crisis. Its
proto-democratic features were consistently suppressed and politically marginalized.
The Habsburgs and their aristocratic/bureaucratic elites ruled authoritatively; and although Austria-Hungary became a constitutional monarchy in 1867 the Emperor was
reluctant to yield power to the parliamentary assembly. In August 1914, the already
aged Franz Josef I stumbled into a regional war in the Balkans which quickly became
European and then semi-global. Just over four years later, this dynasty – which had
dominated significant portions of Central Europe since the Middle Ages – vanished
along with its empire.
German-speaking Austrians found themselves, practically overnight, living in a truncated state of dramatically reduced size. It took a full generation before they were able
to absorb the mental and emotional shock. Indeed, this event brought about a severe
identity crisis. Austria’s first full-fledged democratic experiment lasted a mere fifteen
years. The German Austrian Republic was established on 12 November 1918 by representatives of the two political mass parties, the Christian Socials and the Social Democrats, both founded towards the end of the 19th century. On 4 March 1933, only
a few weeks after Hitler became the Chancellor of Germany, Austrian parliamentary
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
180
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
democracy came to an abrupt end. The conservative Chancellor, Engelbert Dollfuss,
following the resignation of all three parliamentary presidents, declared the parliament
defunct and imposed an authoritarian form of government based on Christian Social
principles. In this he was supported by fascist Italy.
Dollfuss and, following his assassination, Kurt Schuschnigg, swiftly created a Churchbacked Corporatist State with fascist features in which only one political movement,
the Fatherland-Front, was allowed. This inevitably led to a showdown between the Social Democrats on the left and the Austrian Nazis on the nationalist right. In February
1934, a fully-fledged, though short-lived, civil war broke out in major Austrian cities. It
was won by the conservative right and with it the cultural war between provincial and
urban Austria. ‘Red’ Vienna, with its Austro-Marxist-inspired municipal structures,
was again under conservative control, much like the period when Karl Lueger had been
mayor at the turn of the century.
The Corporatist State, as embodied in the constitution of 1 May 1934, was never accepted by the majority of Austrians, who considered it a throwback to the Habsburg
past. Hitler openly defied and threatened it, as the so-called July Putsch by Austrian
Nazis in 1934 demonstrated. Even the Dollfuss and Schuschnigg governments of 1933
to 1938 conceived of Austria as a German state, albeit with strong Austrian features. By
1936 international support for Austrian sovereignty and independence had withered
and Hitler moved towards a gradual subversion and absorption of his homeland. In
March 1938 Nazi Germany annexed Austria without much internal resistance or international protest. With the Anschluss of 13 March 1938, Austria, as created in 1918-20,
ceased to exist. It was renamed the Ostmark [Eastern Marches] and later Donau- und
Alpengaue [Danubian and Alpine Provinces].
The years of Nazi rule transformed not only the Austrian people, but also all aspects
of life, including the economy. Most Austrians quickly accepted the return of German
Austria to the German fatherland, even one ruled by the National Socialists, and they
willingly served in the German army or Wehrmacht during the war that followed. A
small minority known as the ‘Other Austria’ organized itself in exile and, to a lesser extent, in internal resistance. Overall, however, loyalty toward the Nazi regime remained
strong up to the day of defeat by the Allies on 8 May 1945, despite the fact that the
Third Reich brought only physical, economic, political and moral ruin. Austria was occupied by the victorious powers for ten years until – as in 1918 – the Allies once again
decided to create an independent Austrian state.
The Second Republic’s journey toward political stability and economic prosperity was
neither linear nor lacking in serious flaws and setbacks. It succeeded because Austrians
were finally able to construct a viable and independent nation-state. Today, Austrian
patriotism is a well-developed phenomenon that was practically non-existent in 1918
and in 1945. To a certain extent, this is due to the fact that Austrian neutrality – more
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
181
or less forced upon the country as a consequence of the State Treaty in 1955 – has become a central element of Austrian identity2.
Membership in the European Union since 1995 has increased Austria’s self-confidence
and international status; it has also proved highly advantageous for Austrian industry,
commerce and finance. It has, however, not significantly affected the institutional landscape of Austria’s federal, regional or local administrations.
The Foreign Ministry
Any institutional history of the Austrian Foreign Ministry3 should begin with its address since the name Ballhausplatz is often used as a synonym for the Austrian Foreign
Office and Austrian foreign policy in general. Ballhausplatz – as it is the case with Wilhelmstrasse in Berlin or Paris’ Quai d’Orsay – refers to the Austrian Foreign Office’s
address (Ballhausplatz 2) in a beautiful palace in Vienna’s First District4.
The Imperial and Royal Austro-Hungarian Foreign Ministry before and
during World War I
The Austro-Hungarian Compromise in 1867 (Ausgleich in German, kiegyezés in Hungarian) categorized the Foreign Ministry – along with the Ministries of Finance and
War – as one of “common affairs” managed by both Austria and Hungary. Also part of
the agreement was that Austria would contribute seventy percent of its revenue, while
thirty percent would be provided by Hungary. In 1908, the formula was changed to
63.6 : 36.45.
The Austrian Foreign Ministry had traditionally consisted of three very distinct
branches, namely diplomatic, consular and ministerial. Aspirants could thus pursue a
diplomatic career, a consular career, or a career in the so-called ‘higher administration’
(Höherer Dienst) in the Foreign Ministry in Vienna. While a consular career required
an applicant to pass the Consular Academy exam, the other two branches demanded a
university law degree. Potential diplomats had to master German, English and French
(plus Hungarian for applicants from Transleithania) and had to have a degree of personal wealth since they had to invest their own assets in their representative duties. It is,
therefore, no surprise that – with very few exceptions – Austro-Hungarian diplomats
were recruited from the high aristocracy. William D. Godsey even called the AustroHungarian Foreign Office the “aristocratic redoubt”6.
The Imperial and Royal Ministry of the Imperial and Royal House and of Foreign Affairs was a huge institution which, in 1900, consisted of the cabinet of the minister, a
political division and an administrative division of eleven departments7. At the turn of
the century, the Dual Monarchy was represented by eight embassies, eighteen legations,
one resident minister and three diplomatic agencies scattered around the world. At
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
182
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
the start of World War I the number of embassies had risen to ten and the number of
legations to 23, but by November 1918 these numbers had shrunk to four and twelve
respectively8. In this context the work of military attachés provided the link between
foreign and intelligence policies. They played a strategic role during the entire 20th
century, but their work was regarded as especially important during World War I9.
Times of Change: 1918-1938
In October 1918, the Provisional National Assembly constituted itself in the Lower
Austrian Diet and established a State Council composed of different State Offices,
among them a State Office of Foreign Affairs. In November, Ludwig Baron Flotow
was appointed as Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister, the last to bear this title. When
the Republik Deutsch-Österreich [Republic of German Austria] was founded on 12 November 1918, all Austro-Hungarian and Austrian Ministries were dissolved and their
powers transferred to the German-Austrian State Departments10.
Ironically, it was the task of Austrian foreign policy to liquidate the network of foreign
missions of the former Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office, along with its assets. The task
of selling off assets and palaces abroad lasted in some cases until as late as 1938. As
almost all (mostly aristocratic) ex-Austro-Hungarian senior diplomats refused to serve
the new republic they were all forced into retirement. Even in the lower echelons of the
foreign service (both diplomatic and consular corps) 216 individuals were forced into
retirement11. Nevertheless, 38 former Austro-Hungarian consuls continued their career
in the Austrian foreign service, 31 in Hungary, 10 in Czechoslovakia, 4 in Poland and 3
in the Italian Foreign Service. Since almost all of these quickly won promotion in their
respective countries, an interesting situation emerged in Central Europe in the interwar years: in all the successor states of Austria-Hungary a more or less uniform type of
diplomat directed foreign policy. They all had a common background in the ‘Austrian
school’ and many of them knew each other personally and shared common beliefs12.
In November 1920, the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Ministry in Liquidation, under
Baron Flotow, informed the Austrian State Office for Foreign Affairs and the Hungarian Legation in Vienna that its task had been concluded. The Ministry in Liquidation
had long since left the Ballhausplatz and operated from Flotow’s private apartment in
Vienna. Imperial Austrian diplomacy thus suffered a rather unspectacular end after
more than 200 years. After his resignation, Flotow settled for retirement as well13.
Even before the Republic was proclaimed in November 1918, the State Office for Foreign Affairs had been established at the Ballhausplatz under the leadership of the State
Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Victor Adler. At this time, Flotow and his Ministry in
Liquidation were still situated there. Victor Adler was soon replaced by Otto Bauer
(also from the Social Democratic party) who then took over the difficult task of diplomacy for the new Republic of Austria14.
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
183
Beginning in November 1920, the Austrian Federal Government was made up of federal ministers rather than state secretaries. In the following years, however, Austria had
no Foreign Minister in its own right (except for a short period in 1935) as this post was
taken over by other ministers, including the Federal Chancellor himself. Organizationally speaking, the Foreign Office generally followed the pre-1918 pattern, except that
the number of departments was considerably smaller. In 1923, the Austrian diplomatic
and consular organization consisted of 15 legations, 6 consulates-general, 7 consulates
and 3 passport offices, as well as numerous honorary consulates. However, the strict
distinction between a consular and a diplomatic career soon disappeared as most employees were now recruited from the lower gentry15.
Around this time, the Austrian government even debated whether Austria needed foreign missions at all and whether a form of economic representation would not do the
job as well. Eventually, it was not the network of missions which was done away with
but rather – in the context of a reorganization of several Austrian ministries – the Foreign Ministry itself. The background to this restructuring measure was that the financial
and economic situation of the country had been deteriorating and was only saved by a
loan from the League of Nations, the so-called Geneva Protocol. This loan, however,
carried conditions, such as strict control over Austria’s budget and finances by a League
of Nations Commissioner, who enforced stringent cuts in public spending. One of the
reforms the Commissioner imposed was the abolition of the Federal Ministries of the
Interior, Justice, Food Supply and Foreign Affairs. Instead, a Federal Chancellery and
six Federal Ministries were established. Although Foreign Affairs was integrated into
the Federal Chancellery, its direction was entrusted to a Federal Minister for Foreign
Affairs. After 1923 the respective Federal Chancellor assumed this post. Another result
of the League of Nations’ conditions was a considerable reduction in the network of
diplomatic representations abroad. The low point was reached in 1926, after which a
slow but steady expansion began. The dramatic development of international relations
in the early 1930s also contributed to the expansion of Austria’s presence abroad as
many Austrian ex-patriates succumbed to Nazi propaganda and demanded a greater
presence on the international stage16.
1938-1945: the Nazi period and World War II
As a consequence of the Anschluss of 12 March 1938 the Austrian Foreign Ministry
was reduced to a German Government Department, whose task was to close Austrian
diplomatic representations and to organize the transfer of buildings, assets and archives
to the new German authorities. In the following week the former Austrian missions
hoisted the flag of the former Austrian Corporatist State, as well as of the German
Reich – a practice which the German authorities ended on March 20th. With this act
Austria disappeared from the international arena. It should also be mentioned that the
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
184
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
German authorities made sure that they received the lists of Austrian citizens in all
respective host countries17. The palace of the former Foreign Office remained empty
for two years until Vienna’s Gauleiter (head of a Nazi province), Baldur von Schirach,
established his office there.
There were conspicuously few National Socialists among the Austrian diplomatic corps
and the Nazi authorities arrested and sent to concentration camps a number of its members, among them well-known diplomats and politicians such as Erich Bielka, Theodor
Hornbostel, and Richard Steidle. A number of Austrian functionaries stationed abroad,
such as Georg Alexich in The Hague, Georg Franckenstein in London and Ferdinand
Marek in Prague, refused to follow Berlin’s order to return home and preferred instead to
remain in their host countries. Other Austrian diplomats chose to continue their career in
the Nazi Foreign Service, but in general did not obtain important posts. Only 17 career
diplomats and 12 low-ranking officials were admitted to the German Foreign Office18.
1945-2005: the Second Republic
The efforts of the former diplomats Eduard Ludwig and Norbert Bischoff to re-establish Austria’s Foreign Office started even before the Second Republic was officially proclaimed on 27 April 1945. Thus, in a way, the Foreign Office is older than the Second
Republic itself19. In any case, preparations soon began to re-establish the Austrian administration and former civil servants were called back to work.
The new Chancellor of the Provisional Government, the Social Democrat Karl Renner,
took over Foreign Affairs until Karl Gruber was appointed Undersecretary for Foreign
Affairs in September 1945. Although his ‘Ministry’ was only division IV (Foreign Affairs) of the Federal Chancellery, Gruber officially received the title of Federal Minister
after the new federal government was established in late December 1945. In the immediate post-war period, this division was run by only ten people20.
Under Gruber’s direction the Foreign Service rapidly expanded. Instead of politicians,
experienced people from all professions were selected to represent Austria abroad,
among them Kurt Waldheim, the later Secretary General of the United Nations. Not
all Austrians who had served with the German Foreign Office were refused admittance
to the Austrian Foreign Service after World War II. Wilfried Platzer, for example, had
been Secretary of Legation in the Federal Chancellery in 1939 before he became a
member of the NSDAP and served in the German Foreign Office until mid-1945. He
was re-admitted in 1947 and was served as Secretary-General for Foreign Affairs from
1967 to 1970. A more telling appointment was that of Johanna Nestor, who became
Austria’s first woman diplomat in October 1947. Two other female colleagues joined
her before the end of that year21.
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
185
In contrast to the First Republic, from 1945 on Austrian authorities attempted to establish a dense network of missions around the world. Although Austria was under the
strict control of the four Occupying Allied Powers, the so-called Zweites Kontrollabkommen [Second Control Agreement] of June 1946 granted Austria the right to establish diplomatic contacts with the United Nations and other states. Under Karl Gruber’s
tutelage (until 1953) a total of 46 Austrian representations were established. By 1948,
Austria sponsored more missions than before World War II. The first ambassadors to be
appointed since 1916 were posted to Paris and Washington in 1951, London in 1952,
and Moscow in 1953. This took place at the request of the respective occupying powers
and, in the words of the Austrian diplomat Josef Schöner, Austria hesitated to follow
the common trend to replace the “exclusive club of legations” with the “mass organization of embassies”22.
In 1953, the former Austrian Chancellor Leopold Figl took over the post of Foreign
Minister and in 1955 negotiated the Austrian State Treaty which restored Austria as
a fully sovereign country. An Austrian Foreign Ministry was finally created in the late
1950s. The reason was less the need for a Foreign Office as such, but rather a political
deal between the two coalition parties. The elections of May 1959, which resulted in a
relative victory for the Austrian Social Democrats, required the transfer of one ministry
from the Conservative Party to the socialists. Since there was no spare ministry available, a new one was created. Austrian career diplomat and future Federal Chancellor
Bruno Kreisky (1970-1983), thus became the first Foreign Minister to rule over a foreign ministry in its own right23.
The expansion of the network of foreign missions more or less came to an end by 1959,
but new missions still had to be opened thanks to new international developments,
above all decolonization in Africa and elsewhere. In 1964 a Diplomatic Academy was
established as a successor to the former Consular Academy, and served as a post-graduate training centre for Austrian and foreign diplomats. As the Foreign Ministry grew,
foreign cultural matters and economic co-operation were moved to the Ballhausplatz.
The establishment of the Austrian Development Agency (ADA) is the most recent institutional change in the Foreign Ministry. Curiously enough, the Austrian Foreign Office had to wait until 2003 to get a telephone circuit of its own. Before that it had had
to use the overloaded line of the Federal Chancellery24.
In 2005 the Austrian Foreign Ministry moved from its venerable address at Ballhausplatz
2 to Minoritenplatz 8. It was a nostalgic good-bye to the Ballhausplatz, the offices of the
Foreign Ministry of a major European power for two centuries. Today, the Ministry is officially called the Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs and was led by
from 2004 to 2008 by Ursula Plassnik, the second woman to hold this post following her
immediate predecessor Benita Ferrero-Waldner (both from the Conservative Party). At
the end of 2008 she ceded her place to the present Minister, Michael Spindelegger.
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
186
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
The Defence Ministry
Today’s Bundesministerium für Landesverteidigung [Federal Ministry of Defence] has
undergone numerous changes during the period covered by this chapter. Emanating
from the k. u. k. Reichskriegsministerium [Imperial and Royal Ministry of War], it turned
into the Staatsamt für Heereswesen [State Office for Army Affairs] in 1918 and was renamed the Bundesministerium für Heereswesen [Federal Ministry of Army Affairs] in
1920. In 1936 its name was changed again to Bundesministerium für Landesverteidigung [Federal Ministry of Defence], which in 1938 was absorbed into the German War
Ministry. After World War II, military affairs were administered by various authorities,
offices and government agencies as the occupying powers strictly disapproved of any
plans to rebuild a ministry or office dealing exclusively with military matters. It was,
therefore, only after the conclusion of the State Treaty in 1955 that a Federal Ministry
of Defence was established. It was the successor to the provisional Amt für Landesverteidigung [Provisional Defence Office], which had been administered as part of the
Bundeskanzleramt [Federal Chancellery of the Republic of Austria]25.
During the 20th century the Federal Ministry of Defence and its predecessors changed
locality three times. Before 1912 the War Ministry was situated at Am Hof 2 in the
centre of Vienna. It then moved to Stubenring 1, into the newly built Kriegsministerium [Ministry of War]26. Since the early 1990s the Ministry has been located in the
Rossau Barracks in Vienna’s 9th District. Seen from an institutional point of view, the
20th century was one of decline for a ministry which, before 1914, had been one of the
largest of the Habsburg Monarchy.
The Imperial and Royal Ministry of War
The creation of the Ministry of War in 1848 was an attempt to redefine the relation
between the military administration, the military high command, and the monarch
regarding the political architecture of the monarchy to come27. This objective was not
achieved and the beginning of the 20th century witnessed a struggle for dominance
between the Ministry of War and the General Staff, the latter being under the strong
influence of the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, Franz Ferdinand28.
The Ministry of War had become a powerful civil authority, operated by civil servants,
and directed by Hofräte [court counsellors] educated at the Theresianum (a special kind
of high school where many of their colleagues in the Ministries of Foreign and Interior
Affairs also studied). Whereas the General Staff (under Field Marshal Franz Conrad
von Hötzendorf at the beginning of the 20th century) was responsible for strategic
planning and military command in wartime, the Ministry oversaw and managed all
administrative tasks of the armed forces in peacetime. Unlike most modern armies, the
Austro-Hungarian Armed Forces General Staff was not part of the Ministry of War.
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
187
For this reason most scholarly literature focuses more on the role of the General Staff
than on that of the Ministry, which is a significant problem in researching the institutional history of the Austro-Hungarian military administration.
Up to 80 percent of top-ranking officers were educated at the Theresianische Militärakademie [Theresian Military Academy] in Wiener Neustadt, whose excellent
reputation attracted mainly young men from wealthy, urban families29. Most officers,
however, were educated at cadet schools and remained in the lower ranks. As wages in
the Austro-Hungarian armed forces were low, officers were expected to invest part of
their personal assets in their representative duties. Unlike the situation in the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, the profession of an officer was of the petite bourgeoisie and thus a
considerable number of officers were deeply in debt30. Only the leading positions were
occupied by members of the high nobility and confidants of the Emperor. The officers
were to become the reliable backbone of the Austro-Hungarian army in the First World
War and contributed to the sometimes astonishing performance of the armed forces.
Apart from the Ministry of War other authorities were in charge of military units, deployed either by the Ministry of Defence for the Hungarian half of the realm or by the
counterpart of the same name for the Austrian half. These so-called Landwehr formations
represented a militia, which in case of war was to be entrusted mainly with defensive tasks.
The fact that about 80 percent of the officers were native German speakers clearly reflects
the domination of the Germans over other national groups. This most uneven distribution of power had already become a key element of tension towards the end of the 19th
century, and was to play a central role in the disbandment of the armed forces.
The Austrian Army in the Conflict-Ridden First Republic
Chaos and confusion accompanied the disintegration of the Austro-Hungarian Empire
at the end of 1918. The army was particularly affected by the breakdown of longstanding structures and hierarchies. A Social Democrat, and military officer, Julius Deutsch,
was the key figure in bringing stabilization and consolidation during the following two
years31. He was named head of the State Office of Army Affairs in November 1918. As
the army was considered crucial to the existence of the Austrian Republic in the midst
of a deeply destabilized Central Europe, as well as to the maintenance of social peace
and political stability internally, both major political camps tried to secure influence
over it32. At the same time, the Treaty of St. Germain imposed a number of restrictions
on the young state concerning the composition of the Federal Army, which in 1921 was
superseded by the provisional Volkswehr [People’s Army].
At this time, the federal army was dominated by two rival groups: officers who had
previously served in the Austro-Hungarian Army who needed to be incorporated into
the Austrian Federal Army, and Social Democrats (mostly non-commissioned officers)
who dominated the Soldatenräte or Soldiers’ Councils.
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
188
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
The latter deeply suspected the former of being monarchist, which in most cases was
not true33. However, the K.u.K.-officers encountered huge problems adapting to the
new situation. Carl Vaugoin, the central figure in the Ministry of Defence from 1922
onwards, succeeded in turning the ‘red’ Ministry of Defence into a conservative institution, whose structure mirrored that of the old Ministry of War34. Both parties then
formed their own Parteischutzorganisationen [Party Security Organisations] as paramilitary organisations. The conservative Heimwehr and the Social Democratic Republikanischer Schutzbund faced each other down on numerous occasions, and in so doing
undermined the state’s exclusive right to wield firearms.
Other causes of friction included conservative dominance in both the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of the Interior, which did not please Vienna, the Social Democrats’ stronghold. Frequent demonstrations led to excesses of violence in which the
Federal Army could not intervene. For example, in 1927 the situation escalated to the
point that the Palace of Justice in Vienna was burned, yet the Mayor of Vienna and the
Minister of Defence refused to deploy the army. In the early 1930s the balance of power
shifted in favour of the conservatives. Federal Chancellor Dollfuss displaced Vaugoin in
September 1933 and administered the Ministry until March 1934, by which time the
Austrian Civil War had provoked some 700 casualties35. Unlike the events of 1927, the
Austrian Army was fully involved in the civil war fighting. Images of artillery firing at
the Karl-Marx-Hof, one of the most ambitious social housing projects of ‘Red Vienna’
and a working class symbol, still persist in the Austrian historical memory.
In the three years before the Anschluss, the federal army was once more reinforced. Nevertheless it surrendered practically without resistance when the far superior German
army invaded the country on 12/13 March 1938. One could hardly question that from
1934 to 1938 the Ministry of Defence served as little more than an instrument of the
respective governments.
Incorporation into the German Wehrmacht
During the final two days of the First Austrian Republic, the pro-Nazi lawyer Arthur
Seyss-Inquart took over the Ministry of Defence. Soon after the Anschluss the Federal
Army was integrated into the Wehrmacht [German Armed Forces]. Immediately afterwards, 14 generals and 50 staff officers of the federal army were removed from office, and 70 more soon followed. A total of 55 percent of all generals, 40 percent of all
colonels and 14 percent of all other officers below the rank of colonel were excluded
from service in the Wehrmacht. The rank and file, however, remained untouched by
these measures. Most units of the federal army were taken over by the Oberkommando
der Wehrmacht [Supreme Command of the Wehrmacht], which appointed new German commanders and prohibited Austrian traditions. Austria was divided into two
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
189
Wehrkreise [military districts] while Austrian military intelligence units were absorbed
by the Wehrmacht and the intelligence they had collected was confiscated.
When war started on 1 September 1939, former Austrian units were engaged from
the beginning. Between 1939 and 1945 a total of 1.2 million Austrians served with
the Wehrmacht; a sixth of them lost their lives. It is quite clear that they were mainly
loyal soldiers, and their dedication to Hitler was often remarkably high, as is shown by
the above-average number of decorations awarded to Austrians. They earned a total of
326 Knight’s Crosses and more than 200 men from the Ostmark reached the rank of
general36. Furthermore, the Austrian contribution to the administration of German-occupied Europe was highly influential37.
Second Austrian Republic
Immediately after the war, on 1 May 1945, the Law-Transition Act was implemented38.
This represented the legal restoration of the Austrian Republic. The provisional government that was appointed on 27 April 1945 created the Heeresamt [Army Office],
which was accepted by the Soviet Union39. The Heeresamt was governed by Undersecretary Franz Winterer, a Social Democrat and lieutenant colonel of the old Austrian
Army. In August 1945 the de-nazification of the military started and during the following months the Heeresamt prepared a new Austrian army. Different institutions were
founded, such as the Militärkommanden in Vienna and Lower Austria (Soviet zone of
occupation), the Heeresamtsstellen in Burgenland (Soviet zone of occupation), the Tyrol and Vorarlberg (French zone of occupation) and the Wehrmeldeämtern in Carinthia
(British zone of occupation). In the US zone of occupation (Salzburg, Upper Austria,
parts of Styria) no institutions of this kind were established. In Styria a Militärkommando existed, established during the brief Soviet occupation. However, when the occupying powers officially accepted the Provisional Government on 20 December 1945,
the Heeresamt was disbanded and during the following months the task of defence and
military re-organisation passed from the provisional government. The Heeresevidenz,
established in 1946 as a department of the Ministry of the Interior, had to be abandoned shortly thereafter as the occupying powers considered the question of Austrian
rearmament as a matter of top priority to be kept under their own direct control40.
The two main parties, the Social Democrats and the Conservatives, initiated a broad
discussion over the nature of the new Austrian army. This turned out to be one of the
lengthiest and most intensive political debates ever to take place in Austria. The structure and organisation of the future federal army took shape in the course of this interchange. Many issues were discussed, such as what type of army should be chosen,
how long soldiers should serve, from which pool the cadres should be recruited, and
what role political affiliations should play. The last two points deserve special attention.
Whereas both parties agreed that, to a certain extent, the skill and the experience of
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
190
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
former officers of the Wehrmacht were indispensable to the formation of a new federal
army, opinions diverged on the details. While the Conservatives opted for the suspension of the civil rights of soldiers during military service, the Social Democrats wanted
to maintain the franchise for members of the army41. This debate was deeply rooted in
the history of the First Republic, when military forces were repeatedly involved in the
violent conflicts between the two parties and their supporters. The federal army had
traditionally backed the conservatives, which led the socialists to conclude that they
had to strengthen their position in the armed forces. They decided that only with a
significant percentage of Social Democrats among the soldiers and officers could the
military’s neutrality be assured. This principle was known as Proporz [proportional representation] and became a fundamental characteristic of the federal army.
The end of the Allied Occupation in 1955 brought not only sovereignty and neutrality
but also new problems. Austria’s geopolitical position in the midst of Cold War Europe
was considered crucial by both the eastern and western camps, and permanent neutrality
on the Swiss model required adequate security measures. Neutrality had to be defended
according to the clauses of the Austrian neutrality law42, and the protection that the
former occupying powers had provided needed urgently to be replaced. However, maintaining a standing army led to unforeseen costs which in turn hindered Austrian rearmament efforts. Other limits were imposed by the State Treaty itself, which prescribed in
detail the maximum number of men at arms, tanks, heavy weapons and such like.
The Ministry of Defence was re-established on 11 July 1956, and it immediately took
control over the military units at its disposal, principally the Provisorische Grenzschutzabteilungen [Provisional Border Patrols] which had been called B-Gendarmerie
before. The first Minister of Defence, Ferdinand Graf, was a conservative politician
and former sergeant of the Wehrmacht. His Undersecretary Karl Stephani was a Social
Democrat and former lieutenant of the Wehrmacht, while the officer appointed to the
post of Generaltruppeninspektor [Inspector General of the Army] was Colonel Erwin
Fussenegger, a former member of the General Staff of the Wehrmacht43.
Fussenegger’s career had been clearly marked by the era of fascism, and his appointment behind the Social Democrats’ backs provoked conflict. A main opponent of Fussenegger was
the former general of the Federal Army of the First Republic, and activist in the Austrian
Resistance during the war, Emil Liebitzky. The latter had contributed to the deployment
of the B-Gendarmerie and to the preparation of the new Ministry of Defence44. Liebitzky
finally realised that – in line with developments in other ministries – a new beginning
which excluded the so-called ‘wartime generation’ was almost impossible45. Although Fussenegger’s power declined gradually he remained in office until the Hungarian Revolution
broke out in October 1956, after which these political debates surfaced once again46.
Scholarly literature on the Austrian Federal Army and the Ministry of Defence, scarce
as it is, refers to three periods of Austrian defence policy during the Second Republic.
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
191
The first, summarized above, saw the establishment of a new defensive force from 1956
to 1961. The second period between 1961 and 1970 witnessed consolidation and reform as the newly created structures struggled to adapt fully to the geopolitical situation of Austria47. This phase was initiated by the appointment of the conservative Karl
Schleinzer as Minister of Defence. Not only did he restrict the powers of the Inspector
General of the Army, he also initiated a strategic change. Whereas the Federal Army
had previously prepared and trained for defensive action in the case of war, Schleinzer
proposed a new doctrine centering on a single annihilating strike, aimed at indirectly
extorting support from foreign (that is NATO) forces48.
The Social Democrats’ electoral victory in 1970 led to a radical shift in direction, thus
precipitating the third phase. Austria’s inability to survive in the case of an escalation of
the Cold War shaped defence policy during the government of Bruno Kreisky (197083)49. The longstanding debate about whether to favor a professional army, or one
based on a militia, led to the hybrid which the reformed Austrian Federal Army of the
mid-1970s represented. With the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the end of
the Cold War the era of “area defence” terminated. Apart from the arguments over the
budget that had emerged in the 1960s, the Ministry of Defence faced new problems,
including securing the borders, participation in international peacekeeping missions,
and engagement in civil defence and disaster management50.
Military Intelligence
Although the end of the Monarchy was followed by the disintegration of the Evidenzbureau, a new authority by the same name was created at the State Office for Army
Affairs55. The former intelligence network, which had spanned the whole of Central
Europe, also lingered on until it was disbanded in April 1920. Official statements claim
that the St.-Germain Peace Treaty did not allow military intelligence activity, though
it is possible that the poor financial situation of the First Republic, or its diminished
importance in international affairs, was responsible for the abandonment of military
intelligence on Austrian soil by 192056. Nevertheless, a new military intelligence agency
was founded in Vienna only four years later , and was named the Abteilung 1 [Department 1]57. This new authority expanded quickly and about 200 people were working
for it by the mid 1930s. A main focus of its activities was Nazi Germany, where it operated with great success. In 1937, it managed to get a copy of the German invasion plan
concerning Austria, but this information was not properly exploited58.
When Austria became part of the Third Reich after the Anschluss its intelligence units
were disbanded, among them Abteilung 1. Its agenda was taken over by the German
Gestapo (Secret State Police) and the SD (Secret Security Service)59. The Austrian
Ernst Kaltenbrunner became chief of the RSHA (Reichssicherheitshauptamt), which
was later to incorporate the Abwehr. SS-Officer Wilhelm Höttl was another infamous
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
192
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
Austrian who worked for the SD in southeastern Europe. Höttl later worked for American intelligence during the early years of the Cold War60.
In the aftermath of the Second World War, Austria became a kind of international marketplace for intelligence concerning the two ideological blocs61. Though there existed no
Austrian military intelligence during the ten years of Allied occupation, probably more
Austrians than ever before became involved in such activities thanks to employment by
foreign intelligence organizations62. Before an Austrian military intelligence unit was again
created in 1956, the Austrian State Police (StaPo) had taken over much of its activities.
Even today very little is known about Austrian military intelligence, except for its name
and some of its structure. It consists of the Heeresnachrichtenamt (HNaA, Army Intelligence Service), which concentrates mainly on developments in neighbouring countries63. The HNaA appears to be one of the best-informed agencies at work in the region, especially in regard to the Balkans64. Since 1985 another institution has existed,
the Abwehramt [Army Defence Service], which is much smaller and concentrates on
counter-intelligence. It cooperates closely with the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz und
Terrorismusbekämpfung [Federal Agency for State Protection and Counter-Terrorism]
of the Ministry of the Interior. It is assumed that each military agency employs between
400 and 500 personnel; their aggregate budget is estimated at 50 million euros65.
As we shall see below, intelligence has not only been undertaken by the Ministry of
Defence, but also by the Ministry of the Interior. Particularly during the First Republic
responsibilities were often shared between these two authorities.
The Interior Ministry
The history of institutional change within the Austrian Federal Ministry of the Interior
in the 20th century is quite difficult to delineate. Given the absence of general accounts
one has to persevere despite the dearth of information regarding this important ministry. Detailed reports on administrative structures and alterations within the Ministry are missing. Thus this analysis of the main organizational and institutional changes
from the Habsburgs to the present day makes no claim to be complete.
The Ministry of the Interior was founded in 1848 to replace the Austro-Bohemian
Court Chancellery founded by Empress Maria Theresa. From 1918 to 1920 it was
called the State Office of the Interior; between 1919 and 1923 it was merged with
the Ministry of Education as the State Office and Federal Ministry of the Interior and
of Education; and it was integrated into the Federal Chancellery from 1923 to 1938.
In 1945, following Austria’s liberation from National Socialism, it became the Federal
Ministry of the Interior. The Bundesministerium für Inneres [Federal Ministry of the
Interior] is located in the former Palace Modena in Vienna’s First District66.
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
193
Monarchy and First Republic
As with the other two institutions analysed in this chapter, the higher echelon of the Ministry of the Interior during the last decades of the monarchy was educated at the Theresianum, an elite school in Vienna. Almost 70 percent of the graduates of this school took
up employment in the civil service. They acted like members of a secret society, supporting
and protecting each other in order to serve the Emperor and climb the career ladder67.
They wielded a great deal of influence and became even more powerful during World War
I, when the bureaucracy intervened in the economic system to an unprecedented extent.
After the collapse of the Habsburg Monarchy in November 1918 Austria became a republic, even though the imperial administration continued to exist. In the transition period to
democracy it was of utmost importance that decision makers in the Interior Ministry and
the police force accepted the new order without hesitation. Indeed, even after the abolition of the Monarchy and the installation of the Republic there was a marked continuity
of personnel in the ranks of the bureaucracy and police68. However, ministries and central
offices based in Vienna had overseen the entire territory of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. After the demise of the Dual Monarchy the state administration had to be adapted to
the new, more straitened circumstances69.
The years 1918 to 1920 were marked by grand coalitions between the Social Democratic
Party and the Christian Social Party. Among the Ministers of the Interior in the immediate post-war cabinets were, for example, the lawyer and member of the far-right student
league Olympia, Heinrich Mataja, and the Social Democrat figurehead and first Chancellor of the Republic, Karl Renner. The collapse of the grand coalition in 1920 led to
a severe polarization between these two parties. Even on the level of the elites a noticeable estrangement took place, which constituted a growing threat to the young Austrian
democracy. Conservative and nationalist coalitions governed Austria for the most part
from 1920 to 1933. The Ministry of the Interior, which was integrated into the Federal
Chancellery from 1923 onwards, was administered in turn by the former Viennese chief
of police, Johannes Schober, the prelate and theologian, Ignaz Seipel, and the highly-decorated officer and industrialist, Ernst Streeruwitz. During the Austrian Civil War of 1934,
Emil Fey, leader of the paramilitary force Heimwehr, and Interior Minister between 1934
and 1935, played a key role in the violent suppression of the uprising. After the assassination of Chancellor Dollfuss in July 1934 by Austrian Nazis, Kurt Schuschnigg became
his successor and in 1936 Schuschnigg acted for several days as Minister of the Interior.
In the period of the Corporatist State (1934-1938) the Austrian umbrella organization
of Catholic male student fraternities (ÖCV) provided political leadership and played an
important role in the political system as a whole. The participation of ÖCV members in
boards, committees and panels was enormously high70.
In early 1938 German pressure led to the appointment of Arthur Seyss-Inquart, a prominent pro-Nazi lawyer, as Minister of the Interior. After the resignation of Schuschnigg on
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
194
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
the eve of the German invasion, he became Chancellor for a short time. German military
strength permitted the Nazis to immediately seize key positions in the bureaucracy, the
economy, the police and the armed forces. In a first round of arrests, they eliminated almost the whole ruling class of the Austrian Corporatist State71.
Nazi Period
Germany’s annexation of Austria in 1938 led to the substitution of Austria’s former elites
at virtually all levels. Nazi operatives replaced Interior Ministry civil servants, especially
senior officials or chief officers72. However, and perhaps surprisingly, Austrian Nazis did
not automatically profit from the regime change. Membership in the party was not an
automatic guarantee of employment under Nazi rule73.
Control of the Austrian police passed immediately to the German Reich and Nazi leaders established a new structure for the police and security forces based upon the German
model74. Step by step, the entire Austrian administrative structure was integrated into the
German Reich, which eliminated any trace of the former independent Austrian Republic.
Until the end of the war, all former Austrian administrative institutions, especially those
concerning internal security, were tightly under the control of Berlin.
Second Austrian Republic
With the restoration of the democratic institutions of the First Republic the old elites
returned quite quickly after the end of World War II75. In practice this meant that a small
staff of officials, who had been dismissed in 1938, returned to their former ministries,
departments, offices and administrative centres. Due to the process of de-nazification no
former members of the NSDAP remained in high-ranking positions in the Ministry of
the Interior, which was administered by the communist Franz Honner from April until
the end of 194576. From 1945 to 1966 grand coalitions between the Christian Social Party
and the Social Democratic Party ruled Austria, during which time the Federal Ministry
of the Interior was in the hands of the Social Democrats. Among the four Ministers were
Oskar Helmer and Franz Olah. Helmer, a leading socialist and Interior Minister from
1945 to 1959, had fought against communist penetration of the Austrian police force
during the occupation period. Franz Olah, who played an important role in 1950 during a
prolonged period of communist-led strikes, was quite a controversial minister from 1963
to 1964, and was even expelled from the Socialist Party in 1964.
From 1966 to 1970 the conservatives were the sole party in power and two ÖVP-Ministers administered the Federal Ministry of the Interior. In the so-called ‘Kreisky Era’ (19701983) and the following period of socialist-dominated coalition governments (until 2000)
the Ministry of the Interior had six Social Democratic Ministers. These included the former
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
195
Nazi Otto Rösch and the influential socialist politician Karl Blecha, who was forced to
resign in 1989 after his alleged involvement in illegal arms dealing and insurance fraud.
Since 2000 the conservatives have administered the Federal Ministry of the Interior. Following Ernst Strasser, who was responsible for a large police reform package and a reorganisation of departments and agencies, the first woman, Liese Prokop, headed the Ministry
from 2004 to 2006. Since July 2008, Maria Fekter has been in charge of internal affairs.
Austrian Civil Intelligence
Given the increase in the intelligence activities of foreign powers in Austria after the turn
of the 19th century, contacts between the intelligence services of the Ministry of War and
the Austrian State Police increased. Close cooperation between Colonel Max Ronge, the
last director of the Evidenzburau, and the young State Police officer Johannes Schober
(later police chief of Vienna and one of the political key figures of the First Republic)
became very important77.
A series of espionage cases were uncovered by the Spionage-Evidenzstelle [Espionage Evidence Entity], among them the famous case of Colonel Alfred Redl. The State Police reported on foreigners and nationalist movements, public opinion, and political tendencies
in the armed forces. It also tried to counter enemy propaganda. After the assassination of
Prime Minister Karl Graf Stürgkh by a socialist politician in 1916, and the Russian October Revolution of 1917, surveillance of Social Democratic leaders and Bolshevik agitation
increased visibly while the network of informers expanded78.
After the monarchy fell the young Republic of Austria was not willing to face domestic
and foreign threats without its own intelligence organization. Surveillance within Austria
became the principal duty of the Austrian State Police, which had managed the transition from monarchy to republic quite well79. The man of the hour was Johannes Schober,
police chief of Vienna, who created a central intelligence bureau in order to observe all
political groups and developments which might threaten the Republic. He managed this
despite strong reservations in the provinces against the plan, which was imbued with
Viennese centralism. He also founded in 1920 the Politische Zentralevidenzstelle bei der
Bundespolizeidirektion Wien, abbreviated as ZESt, or Political Central Intelligence Filing
and Clearing Office of the Vienna Federal Police Headquarters80.
At first the ZESt continued the principal activities of the State Police, including the domestic surveillance of monarchist, communist and national socialist organizations. But
later, as it gained more and more influence from special regulations and permits, it initiated intelligence activities abroad. Nevertheless, Schober’s plan to establish the ZESt as the
only central intelligence service and a hub of the Austrian secret service system failed. It
ran into too much resistance, money was scarce, and the reorganization of the military intelligence service in 1924 brought a noticeable restriction of the activities of the ZESt81.
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
196
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
The reorganization and rearmament of the Austrian military and intelligence services in
1933 was accompanied by a reorganization of the respective civilian services. The authoritarian government of Federal Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuß expanded State Police activities as a means of repressing political opponents. A Staatspolizeiliches Büro [State Police
Bureau] was instituted in the Federal Chancellery, which was soon transformed into the
Staatspolizeiliches Evidenzbüro [StE or State Police Evidence Bureau] of the General Directorate for Public Security. In 1934 Major-General Maximilian Ronge became its head.
Following this centralization of State Police activities under the Federal Chancellery, it
was prohibited to report any State Police matters to other authorities. This especially affected the ZESt, which became less and less significant. In 1935 the StE was reorganized
as the Zentralevidenzstelle [Central Evidence Bureau], which was in charge of the whole
country. In addition to the main tasks of political intelligence and counterespionage this
authority coordinated all military and civilian intelligence services in Austria82.
As noted above, all Austrian intelligence units ceased to exist after the Anschluss, and the
Gestapo became the Nazi regime’s instrument for fighting its opponents and executing its
racial policy. The Gestapo was a ‘state within a state’ and fully devoted to Nazi ideology
while the SD was an espionage and counterespionage service which compiled reports on
the political situation and popular opinion in the greater Reich. The division of responsibilities between Gestapo and SD was not always clearly defined83.
Although the Allied powers did not allow the formation of an Austrian army during the
occupation period, they agreed to the reestablishment of the Austrian State Police. In the
Ministry of the Interior, Maximilian Pammer was appointed as head of the Staatspolizeiliches Büro [State Police Bureau], which was a part of the General Directorate for Public
Security. However, the communist State Secretary for the Ministry of the Interior appointed his fellow party member, Heinrich Dürmayer, to be in charge of the strategically
important Viennese State Police Department. Dürmayer immediately replaced former
Nazi, Gestapo or SS members with communists. In 1947, the Social Democratic, and
strictly anti-communist, Minister of the Interior, Oskar Helmer, replaced Dürmayer with
Oswald Peterlunger.
In the aftermath, the political outlook of administrative elites in the Staatspolizeilicher
Dienst [State Police Service] was changed by appointing, installing or promoting Peterlunger’s anti-communist cronies. An intensive exchange of information with the western
Allied powers was also established. In addition to inquiries about war criminals, the Staatspolizei [State Police] increasingly engaged in the observation of suspicious associations
and groups, in preventive surveillance and control of state enemies, and in the fight against
foreign espionage activities.
The Austrian State Police has achieved noticeable success over the last decades, but a number
of scandals have brought it into the headlines84. Since 1993, a parliamentary commission
has controlled the State Police, which was reorganized in 2002 as the Bundesamt für Ver-
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
197
fassungsschutz und Terrorismusbekämpfung [BVT, Federal Agency for Constitutional Protection and Fight against Terrorism]. The BVT also maintains regional authorities in the
provinces (the so-called LVTs) and has been headed since 2008 by Peter Gridling.
Summary and Conclusion
The evolution of institutional change in these three Austrian ministries can be understood
as one of gradual yet interrupted progression from monarchical to republican (19181934), then back to authoritarian (1934-1938) and dictatorial (1938-1945) and once
again to democratic forms of governance. In 1900 the Habsburg Empire was a democratically backward European dynasty. World War I forced modernisation in the form
of republican democracy. This regime was, however, seriously undermined by competing
internal political forces which were incapable of reaching a consensus on a viable nationstate. By the early 1930s Austria’s independence was also under pressure from abroad. Authoritarian and dictatorial experiments followed. These ended in the abolition of Austria,
from inside and outside, in 1938, and its military defeat as part of the German Reich in
1945. Only a minority of Austrians welcomed the Allied victory.
After World War II the victors insisted on a restoration of the democratic Austrian Republic. Austria’s political elites gradually developed a consociational model of reconstruction which, since 1955, has converted Austria into a mature and modern democracy, reinforced since 1995 by membership in the European Union.
On the whole, these systemic changes show more continuity than discontinuity. They
rarely led to a fundamental overhaul of bureaucratic structures or to more than temporary changes in the elites who, on the whole, have managed to maintain their positions
of influence. Even though there are differences among the patterns of change of the three
ministries examined, the common denominator is best summarized as follows: bureaucratic and political continuity despite great political upheavals, combined with intermittent down- or upsizing.
Notes
S. Beller, A Concise History of Austria, Cambridge 2006, p. 314.
1
A. Gémes, G. Ragossnig, Austria’s Neutrality and European Integration. A Conflict between International
and National Spheres of Law, in G. Lottes, E. Medijainen, J. Sigurdsson (eds.), Making, Using and Resisting
the Law in European History, Pisa 2008, pp. 235-255.
2
The best contributions on this topic are R. Agstner, Abschied vom Ballhausplatz, in “Wiener Geschichtsblätter”, 2005, 1, pp. 58-81; R. Agstner, An Institutional History. The Austrian Foreign Office in the Twentieth Century, in G. Bischof, A. Pelinka, M. Gehler (eds.), Austrian Foreign Policy in Historical Context, New
Brunswick 2006, pp. 39-57. For the inter-war years, a good overview of institutional aspects concerning
the Austrian Foreign Office can be found in A. Suppan, Jugoslawien und Österreich 1918-1938. Bilaterale
Außenpolitik im europäischen Umfeld, Vienna 1996, pp. 314-329. For the post-World War II period, several
3
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
198
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
institutional aspects are included in M. Gehler, Österreichs Außenpolitik der Zweiten Republik. Von der alliierten Besatzung bis zum Europa des 21. Jahrhunderts, Innsbruck 2006, 2 vols.
In 2005, the Ministry moved around the corner to Minoritenplatz 8. The name Ballhaus [ball house]
stems from a kind of tennis which had been played at this location in the past and not from the famous
balls of the Vienna Congress. For a history of the Ballhausplatz see A. Wandruszka, M. Reininghaus, Der
Ballhausplatz, Vienna 1984; F. Engel-Janosi, Geschichte auf dem Ballhausplatz, Graz 1963.
4
For a general treatment of institutional and foreign policy issues before 1867 see T. Fellner, Die Geschichte
der Ministerien vom Durchbruch des Absolutismus bis zum Ausgleich mit Ungarn und zur Konstitutionalisierung der österreichischen Länder 1852 bis 1866, Vienna 1970; K. Olechowski-Hrdlicka, Die gemeinsamen
Angelegenheiten der Österreichisch-Ungarischen Monarchie. Vorgeschichte - Ausgleich 1867 - Staatsrechtliche
Kontroversen, Vienna 2001.
5
W. Godsey, Aristocratic Redoubt. The Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office on the Eve of the First World War,
West Lafayette 1999, p. 18 ff; J. Schöner, Der österreichische Diplomat, in K. Braunias, G. Stourzh, Diplomatie unserer Zeit, Vienna 1959, pp. 247-264, at p. 252f; F. Bridge, The Habsburg Monarchy among the
Great Powers, 1815-1918, New York 1990, p. 14 ff. See also K. Menger, Beamte. Wirtschafts- und sozialgeschichtliche Aspekte des k.k. Beamtentums, Vienna 1985.
6
I. Diószegi, Hungarians in the Ballhausplatz: studies on the Austro-Hungarian common foreign policy, Budapest 1983.
7
Agstner, History cit., p. 39. See also the detailed accounts in Godsey, Redbout cit.; E. Matsch, Der Auswärtige Dienst von Österreich(-Ungarn) 1720-1920, Vienna 1986.
8
G. Kronenbitter, “Krieg im Frieden”. Die Führung der k.u.k. Armee und die Großmachtpolitik ÖsterreichUngarns 1906-1914, Munich 203, p. 307 f; V. Moritz, H. Leidinger, G. Jagschitz, Im Zentrum der Macht.
Die vielen Gesichter des Geheimdienstchefs Maximilian Ronge, Vienna 2007, p. 65.
9
E. Matsch, Die Auflösung des österreichisch-ungarischen Auswärtigen Dienstes 1918/1920, in MOESTA,
1977, 30, pp. 288-316; Id., November 1918 auf dem Ballhausplatz. Erinnerungen Ludwigs Freiherrn von
Flotow, dem letzten Chef des österreichisch-ungarischen Auswärtigen Dienstes, Vienna 1982; Suppan, Jugoslawien cit., p. 316.
10
Agstner, Abschied cit., p. 61; Schöner, Diplomat cit., p. 254.
11
Ibid., p. 256.
12
Agstner, History cit., p. 41.
13
Suppan, Jugoslawien cit., p. 314 ff.
14
Agstner, History cit., p. 42.
15
Id., Abschied cit., p. 62f; Schöner, Diplomat cit., p. 255.
16
Agstner, History cit., p. 64. See also: O. Rathkolb, The Austrian Foreign Service and the “Anschluss” 1938,
in “German Studies Review”, 1990, 1, 13, pp. 55-84; Id, Liquidierung des Bundeskanzleramtes, Auswärtige
Angelegenheiten durch die ‘Dienststelle des Auswärtigen Amtes in Wien’ im März ‘38, in F. Kreissler, Fünfzig
Jahre danach – Der “Anschluß” von innen und außen gesehen, Vienna 1989, pp. 174-188.
17
For their careers see M. Keipert, P. Grupp, G. Keiper, M. Kröger (eds.), Biographisches Handbuch des deutschen Auswärtigen Dienstes 1971-1945, Munich 2000-2005, 5 vols.
18
J. Schöner, Wiener Tagebuch 1944/45, Vienna 1992, p. 163; C. Wildner, Von Wien nach Wien, Vienna
1961, p. 250.
19
G. Bischof, The Making of a Cold Warrior: Karl Gruber and Austrian Foreign Policy, 1945-1953, in “Austrian History Yearbook”, 1995, 26, pp. 99-127.
20
Agstner, History cit., pp. 50f.
21
Schöner, Diplomat cit., p. 259.
22
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
199
B. Kreisky, Im Strom der Erinnerungen. Der Memoiren zweiter Teil, Berlin 1988, p. 63.
23
Agstner, Abschied cit., p. 74.
24
http://aeiou.iicm.tugraz.at/aeiou.encyclop.v/v326164.htm, accessed 8 August 2008.
25
http://www.burghauptmannschaft.at/php/detail.php?ukatnr=12186&artnr=7076, accessed 8 August 2008.
26
For most of these research fields there exists very little scholarly literature in languages other than German.
Exceptions are G.E. Rothenberg, The Army of Francis Joseph, West Lafayette 1976; E. May (ed.), Knowing
One’s Enemies. Intelligence Assessment before the two World Wars, Princeton 1984; D. Lieven, Empire. The
Russian Empire and Its Rivals from the 16th Century to the Present, London 2003.
27
P. Urbanitsch, A. Wandruszka (eds.), Die bewaffnete Macht, Vienna 1987, p. 144 f; J.C. Allmayer-Beck, E.
Lessing, Die k. (u.) k. Armee 1848-1914, Munich 1974.
28
Ibid., p. 100.
29
Ibid., p. 101f.
30
L. Jedlicka, Ein Heer im Schatten der Parteien. Die militärpolitische Lage Österreichs 1918-1938, Graz
1955, pp. 9 ff.
31
W. Aichinger, Österreichs wehrpolitische Lage in der Zwischenkriegszeit, in “ÖMZ”, 1985, 2, pp. 112 ff.
32
Bundesministerium für Heerwesen (ed.), Österreichisches Bundesheer, Vienna 1929, pp. 66 ff.
33
Jedlicka, Heer cit., p. 58 ff; E. Steinböck, Die Organisation des Österreichischen Bundesheeres von 19201938, in “Militaria Austriaca”, 1991, 7, pp. 9f.
34
Jedlicka, Heer cit., p. 90 ff. See also L. Jedlicka, R. Neck (eds.), Vom Justizpalast zum Heldenplatz. Studien
und Dokumentationen 1927-1938, Vienna 1975.
35
On the careers of Austrian generals in the Wehrmacht: M. Stein, Österreichs Generale im Deutschen Heer
1938-1945, Bissendorf 2002. On soldiers: M.K. Sorge, The Other Price of Hitler’s War, New York, 1986,
pp. 23 ff; L. Höbelt, Österreicher in der Deutschen Wehrmacht, 1938-1945, in “Truppendienst”, 1989, 5, p.
432 ff.
36
P. Berger, Kurze Geschichte Österreichs im 20. Jahrhundert, Vienna 2007, p. 218.
37
On key problems of future defence policy see W. Blasi, E. Schmidl, F. Schneider (eds.), B-Gendarmerie,
Waffenlager und Nachrichtendienste. Der militärische Weg zum Staatsvertrag, Vienna 2005.
38
F. Schneider, Der Weg zum österreichischen Wehrgesetz von 1955, in Blasi, Schmidl, Schneider, B-Gendarmerie cit., pp. 172 ff.
39
S. Beer, E. Staudinger, Von den Anfängen des zweiten österreichischen Bundesheeres. Zu Tätigkeit und Auflösung der Heeresamtsstelle Graz 1945/46, in H. Ebner, H. Haselsteiner, I. Wiesflecker-Friedhuber (eds.),
Geschichtsforschung in Graz, Graz 1991, pp. 277-295.
40
Beer, Staudinger, Von den Anfängen cit., p. 27.
41
A. Bach, Die Entwicklung der österreichischen Streitkräfte der 2. Republik bis zur Heeresreform der Regierung
Kreisky, in “ÖMZ”, 1995, 5, pp. 515-532.
42
On the continuities and discontinuities in the careers of Austrian officers of the First Bundesheer in the
aftermath of World War II see S. Bader, General Erwin Fussenegger 1908 bis 1986, Vienna 2003, and his
An höchster Stelle, Die Generale des Bundesheeres der zweiten Republik, Vienna 2004.
43
For a good-example of how Fussenegger is remembered in the current Bundesheer: H. Pleiner, General
Erwin Fussenegger (1908-1986), in “Truppendienst”, 2004, 1, http://www.bmlv.gv.at/truppendienst/ausgaben/artikel.php?id=123 accessed 10 January 09.
44
W. Blasi, General der Artillerie Ing. Dr. Emil Liebitzky – Österreichs “Heusinger”, Bonn 2002.
45
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
200
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
A. Gémes, Austria and the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. Between Solidarity and Neutrality, Pisa 2008, pp.
31 ff.
46
M. Rauchensteiner, Das Bundesheer der Zweiten Republik (=Schriften des Heeresgeschichtlichen Museums in Wien. Band 9), Vienna 1980.
47
M. Rauchensteiner, Landesverteidigung und Außenpolitik-Feindliche Brüder?, in W. Etschmann, M.
Rauchensteiner (eds.), Schild ohne Schwert. Das österreichische Bundesheer 1955-1970, Graz - Vienna Cologne 1991, p. 132.
48
Bach, Streitkräfte cit., pp. 527 ff.
49
E. Schmidl, “In the Service of Peace...” 35 Jahre österreichischer Teilnahme an UN-Friedensoperationen, in
“ÖMZ”, 1995/5, pp. 125-134.
50
S. Beer, Die Nachrichtendienste in der Habsburgermonarchie, in “SIAK-Journal”, 2007, 3, p. 56.
51
A. Pető, Agenten für den Doppeladler. Österreich-Ungarns Geheimer Dienst im Weltkrieg, Graz 1998, pp.
48-56.
52
J. Reifberger, Die Entwicklung des militärischen Nachrichtenwesens in der k.u.k. Armee, in “ÖMZ”, 1976, 3,
pp. 213-223.
53
For a detailed study of the era of Ronge: Jagschitz, Leidinger, Moritz, Im Zentrum der Macht cit.
54
M. Muigg, Geheim- und Nachrichtendienste in und aus Österreich. 1918-1938, in: “SIAK-Journal”, 2007, 3,
p. 65.
55
Ibid., p. 66.
56
E. Steinböck, Der militärische Nachrichtendienst Österreichs 1918-1938, in “Blätter für österreichische
Heereskunde”, 1986, pp. 43-79.
57
Muigg, Geheim- und Nachrichtendienste cit., pp. 68-69.
58
U. Mindler, Nationalsozialistischer Sicherheitsdienst und Gestapo, in “SIAK-Journal”, 2007, 4, pp. 86-93.
59
S. Beer, Von Alfred Redl zum “Dritten Mann”. Österreich und Österreicherinnen im internationalen Geheimdienstgeschehen 1918-1947, in “Geschichte und Gegenwart”, 1997, 16, pp. 3-25, pp. 7 ff.
60
A. Gémes, Spionagezentrum Österreich? Nachrichtendienste in Österreich während des Kalten Krieges, in
“SIAK-Journal”, 2007, 4, pp. 94 f.
61
Ibid., Spionagezentrum Österreich? cit., p. 95.
62
S. Beer, “Bound to Cooperate”. Austria’s Little-Known Intelligence Community since 1945, in “The Journal of
Intelligence History”, 2003, 1, p. 25 f.
63
Ibid., p. 26.
64
Ibid., pp. 25-27.
65
http://aeiou.iicm.tugraz.at/aeiou.encyclop.i/i483870.htm accessed 14 July 2008.
66
E. Hanisch, Der lange Schatten des Staates. Österreichische Gesellschaftsgeschichte im 20. Jahrhundert, Vienna 1994, pp. 221-225.
67
Ibid., pp. 267 f.
68
R. Jerabek, G. Enderle-Burcel, Verwaltungseliten in Umbruchzeiten. Spitzenbeamte des Bundes 1918/1933/
1938/1945, p. 2 f (unpublished manuscript).
69
S. Neuhäuser, “Wer, wenn nicht wir?”. 1934 begann der Aufstieg des CV, in S. Neuhäuser (ed.), “Wir werden
ganze Arbeit leisten…”. Der Austrofaschistische Staatsstreich 1934, Norderstedt 2004, p. 66f.
70
Jerabek, Enderle-Burcel, Verwaltungseliten cit., pp. 7, 13.
71
H. E. Schmid, Verwaltungsreform in Österreich am Beispiel der Ministerialbürokratie. Status quo, Reformansätze und Entwicklungsperspektiven, Master Thesis, Vienna 1997, p. 15.
72
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
201
Jerabek, Enderle-Burcel, Verwaltungseliten cit., p. 22.
73
H. Hagspiel, Die Ostmark. Österreich im Großdeutschen Reich 1938 bis 1945, Vienna 1995, pp. 134-137;
H. Kadanik, NS-Verwaltung in Österreich 1938-1945, PhD Thesis, Graz 1994, pp. 150-156.
74
Hanisch, Schatten cit., pp. 395-398.
75
Jerabek, Enderle-Burcel, Verwaltungseliten cit., p. 26.
76
Beer, Nachrichtendienste cit., p. 60.
77
Ibid., p. 61.
78
Muigg, Geheim- und Nachrichtendienste cit., p. 66.
79
G. Jagschitz, Die Politische Zentralevidenzstelle der Bundespolizeidirektion Wien. Ein Beitrag zur Rolle der
politischen Polizei in der Ersten Republik, in Jahrbuch für Zeitgeschichte 1978, Vienna 1979, pp. 58-87.
80
Ibid., p. 69.
81
Ibid., p. 85.
82
U. Mindler, Nationalsozialistischer Sicherheitsdienst und Gestapo, in “SIAK-Journal”, 2007, 4, pp. 86-89.
83
Gémes, Spionagezentrum cit., pp. 98-99.
84
Bibliography
Agstner R., An Institutional History. The Austrian Foreign Office in the Twentieth Century, in Bischof G., Pelinka A., Gehler M. (eds.), Austrian Foreign Policy in Historical Context, New Brunswick NJ, 2006, pp. 39-57.
Aichinger W., Österreichs wehrpolitische Lage in der Zwischenkriegszeit, in “ÖMZ”, 1985, 2, pp. 112-121.
Allmayer-Beck J.C., Lessing E., Die k. (u.) k. Armee 1848-1914, Munich 1974.
Bach A., Die Entwicklung der österreichischen Streitkräfte der 2. Republik bis zur Heeresreform der Regierung
Kreisky, in “ÖMZ”, 1995, 5, pp. 515-532.
Bader S., An höchster Stelle, Die Generale des Bundesheeres der Zweiten Republik, Vienna 2004.
Id., General Erwin Fussenegger 1908 bis 1986, Vienna 2003.
Beer S., “Bound” to Cooperate. Austria’s Little-Known Intelligence Community since 1945, in “Journal of Intelligence History”, 2003, 3, pp, 19-31.
Id., Die Nachrichtendienste in der Habsburgermonarchie, in “SIAK-Journal”, 2007, 3, pp. 53-63.
Id., Von Alfred Redl zum “Dritten Mann”. Österreich und ÖsterreicherInnen im internationalen Geheimdienstgeschehen 1918-1947, in “Geschichte und Gegenwart”, 1997, 16, pp. 3-25.
Id., Staudinger E., Von den Anfängen des zweiten österreichischen Bundesheeres. Zu Tätigkeit und Auflösung der
Heeresamtsstelle Graz 1945/46, in Ebner H., Haselsteiner H., Wiesflecker-Friedhuber I. (eds.), Geschichtsforschung in Graz, Graz 1991, pp. 277-295.
Beller S., A Concise History of Austria, Cambridge 2006.
Berger P., Kurze Geschichte Österreichs im 20. Jahrhundert, Vienna 2007.
Bischof G., Austria in the First Cold War, 1945-1955. The Leverage of the Weak, New York 1999.
Bischof G., Pelinka A., Gehler M. (eds.), Austrian Foreign Policy in Historical Context, New Brunswick NJ
2006.
Bischof G., The Making of a Cold Warrior: Karl Gruber and Austrian Foreign Policy, 1945-1953, in “Austrian
History Yearbook”, 1995, 26, pp. 99-127.
Blasi W., Schmidl E., Schneider F. (eds.), B-Gendarmerie, Waffenlager und Nachrichtendienste. Der militärische Weg zum Staatsvertrag, Vienna 2005.
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
202
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
Blasi W., General der Artillerie Ing. Dr. Emil Liebitzky – Österreichs “Heusinger”, Bonn 2002.
Braunias K., Stourzh G., Diplomatie unserer Zeit, Vienna 1959.
Bridge F.R., The Habsburg Monarchy among the Great Powers, 1815-1918, New York 1990.
Bukey E.B., Hitler’s Austria. Popular Sentiment in the Nazi Era, 1938-1945, Chapel Hill 2000.
Bundesministerium für Heerwesen (ed.), Österreichisches Bundesheer, Vienna 1929.
Diószegi I., Hungarians in the Ballhausplatz: Studies on the Austro-Hungarian Common Foreign Policy, Budapest 1983.
Engel-Janosi F., Geschichte auf dem Ballhausplatz, Graz 1963.
Fellner T., Die Geschichte der Ministerien vom Durchbruch des Absolutismus bis zum Ausgleich mit Ungarn und
zur Konstitutionalisierung der österreichischen Länder 1852 bis 1866, Vienna 1970.
Fiesinger K., Ballhausplatz-Diplomatie 1945-1949: Reetablierung der Nachbarschafts-Beziehungen und Reorganisation des Auswärtigen Dienstes als Formen außenpolitischer Reemanzipation Österreichs, Munich 1993.
Gehler M., Österreichs Außenpolitik der Zweiten Republik. Von der alliierten Besatzung bis zum Europa des 21.
Jahrhunderts, Innsbruck 2006, 2 vols.
Gémes A., Austria and the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. Between Solidarity and Neutrality, Pisa 2008.
Gémes A., Ragossnig G., Austria’s Neutrality and European Integration. A Conflict between International and
National Spheres of Law, in Lottes G., Medijainen E., Sigurdsson J. (eds.), Making, Using and Resisting the Law
in European History, Pisa 2008, pp. 235-255.
Gémes A., Spionagezentrum Österreich? Nachrichtendienste in Österreich während des Kalten Krieges, in
“SIAK-Journal”, 2007, 4, pp. 94-101.
Godsey W., Aristocratic Redoubt. The Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office on the Eve of the First World War, West
Lafayette, 1999.
Hagspiel H., Die Ostmark. Österreich im Großdeutschen Reich 1938 bis 1945, Vienna 1995.
Hanisch E., Der lange Schatten des Staates. Österreichische Gesellschaftsgeschichte im 20. Jahrhundert, Vienna
1995.
Höbelt L., Österreicher in der Deutschen Wehrmacht, 1938-1945, in “Truppendienst”, 1989, 5.
Jagschitz G., Die Politische Zentralevidenzstelle der Bundespolizeidirektion Wien. Ein Beitrag zur Rolle der politischen Polizei in der Ersten Republik, in Jahrbuch für Zeitgeschichte 1978, Vienna 1979, pp. 49-95.
Jagschitz G., Leidinger H., Moritz V., Im Zentrum der Macht: Die vielen Gesichter des Geheimdienstchefs Maximilian Ronge, Vienna 2007.
Jedlicka L., Neck R. (eds.), Das Jahr 1934: 12. Februar, Vienna 1975.
Id. (eds.), Vom Justizpalast zum Heldenplatz. Studien und Dokumentationen 1927-1938, Vienna 1975.
Jedlicka L., Ein Heer im Schatten der Parteien. Die militärpolitische Lage Österreichs 1918-1938, Graz 1955.
Jerabek R., Enderle-Burcel G., Verwaltungseliten in Umbruchzeiten. Spitzenbeamte des Bundes
1918/1933/1938/1945 (unpublished manuscript).
Kadanik H., NS-Verwaltung in Österreich 1938-1945, PhD Thesis, Graz 1994.
Keipert M., Grupp P., Keiper G., Krogër M. (eds.), Biographisches Handbuch des deutschen Auswärtigen Dienstes 1871-1945, Munich 2000-2005, 5 vols.
Kicker R., Kohl A., Neuhold H. (eds.), Außenpolitik und Demokratie in Österreich. Strukturen – Strategien
– Stellungnahmen, Salzburg 1983.
Kreisky B., Im Strom der Erinnerungen. Der Memoiren zweiter Teil, Berlin 1988.
Institutional Change in Austrian Foreign Policy and Security Structures in the 20th Century
203
Kronenbitter G., “Krieg im Frieden”. Die Führung der k.u.k. Armee und die Großmachtpolitik Österreichs-Ungarns 1906-1914, Munich 2003.
Lieven D., The Russian Empire and Its Rivals from the 16th Century to the Present, London 2003.
Matsch E., Der Auswärtige Dienst von Österreich(-Ungarn) 1720-1920, Vienna 1986.
May E. (ed.), Knowing One’s Enemies. Intelligence Assessment before the two World Wars, Princeton 1984.
Mindler U., Nationalsozialistischer Sicherheitsdienst und Gestapo, in “SIAK-Journal”, 2007, 4, pp. 86-93.
Muigg M., Geheim- und Nachrichtendienste in und aus Österreich 1918-1938, in “SIAK-Journal”, 2007, 3, pp.
64-72.
Neuhäuser S. (ed.), “Wir werden ganze Arbeit leisten…”. Der Austrofaschistische Staatsstreich 1934, Norderstedt
2004.
Olechowski-Hrdlicka K., Die gemeinsamen Angelegenheiten der Österreichisch-Ungarischen Monarchie. Vorgeschichte - Ausgleich 1867 - staatsrechtliche Kontroversen, Vienna 2001.
Pauley B.F., The Habsburg Legacy, 1867-1939, New York 1972.
Pelinka A., Austria. Out of the Shadow of the Past, Boulder CO 1998.
Pető A., Agenten für den Doppeladler. Österreich-Ungarns Geheimer Dienst im Weltkrieg, Graz 1998.
Pleiner H., General Erwin Fussenegger (1908-1986), in “Truppendienst”, 2004, 1.
Popp G., CV in Österreich 1864-1938. Organisation, Binnenstruktur und politische Funktion, Vienna 1984.
Rathkolb O. (ed.), 250 Jahre. Von der Orientalischen zur Diplomatischen Akademie in Wien, Innsbruck 2004.
Id., Die paradoxe Republik. Österreich 1945 bis 2005, Vienna 2005.
Id., Liquidierung des Bundeskanzleramtes, Auswärtige Angelegenheiten durch die ‘Dienststelle des Auswärtigen
Amtes in Wien’ im März ‘38, in Kreissler F., Fünfzig Jahre danach - Der „Anschluß” von innen und außen gesehen, Vienna 1989, pp. 174-188.
Rauchensteiner M., Das Bundesheer der Zweiten Republik (=Schriften des Heeresgeschichtlichen Museums
in Wien. Band 9), Vienna 1980.
Id., Landesverteidigung und Außenpolitik-Feindliche Brüder?, in Etschmann W., Rauchensteiner M. (eds.),
Schild ohne Schwert. Das österreichische Bundesheer 1955-1970, Graz - Vienna - Cologne 1991.
Reifberger J., Die Entwicklung des militärischen Nachrichtenwesens in der k.u.k. Armee, in “ÖMZ”, 1976, 3,
pp. 213-223.
Robertson R., Timms E. (eds.), The Habsburg Legacy, Edinburgh 1994.
Rothenberg G.E., The Army of Francis Joseph, West Lafayette IN 1976.
Schmid H.E., Verwaltungsreform in Österreich am Beispiel der Ministerialbürokratie. Status quo, Reformansätze
und Entwicklungsperspektiven, MA Thesis, Vienna 1997.
Schmidl E., “In the Service of Peace...” 35 Jahre österreichischer Teilnahme an UN-Friedensoperationen, in
“ÖMZ”, 1995, 5, pp. 125-134.
Schöner J., Wiener Tagebuch 1944/45, Vienna 1992.
Sorge M.K., The Other Price of Hitler’s War, New York 1986.
Stein M., Österreichs Generale im Deutschen Heer 1938-1945, Bissendorf 2002.
Steinböck E., Die Organisation des Österreichischen Bundesheeres von 1920-1938 (=Militaria Austriaca 7),
Vienna 1991.
Id., Der militärische Nachrichtendienst Österreichs 1918-1938, in “Blätter für österreichische Heereskunde”,
1986, pp. 43-79.
Steininger R., Bischof G., Gehler M. (eds.), Austria in the Twentieth Century, New Brunswick NJ 2002.
Institutionalizing Diplomacy
204
Siegfried Beer, Andreas Gémes, Wolfgang Göderle, Mario Muigg
Stimmer G., Eliten in Österreich 1848-1970, Vienna 1997.
Suppan A., Jugoslawien und Österreich 1918-1938. Bilaterale Außenpolitik im europäischen Umfeld, Vienna
1996.
Thaler P., The Ambivalence of Identity. The Austrian Experience of Nation-Building in a Modern Society, West
Lafayette 2001.
Urbanitsch P., Wandruszka A. (eds.), Die bewaffnete Macht, Vienna 1987.
Wandruszka A., Reininghaus M., Der Ballhausplatz, Vienna 1984.
Wildner C., Von Wien nach Wien, Vienna 1961.
Zöllner E. (ed.), Diplomatie und Außenpolitik Österreichs. 11 Beiträge zu ihrer Geschichte, Vienna 1977.