In the “Krone” interview, the Chief of Planning of the Armed Forces, Major General Bruno Hofbauer, explains what “Sky Shield” has in store for us. And experts classify whether the joint protection of airspace violates neutrality.
Crown newspaper: Major General, we are in the very early stages of the Sky Shield initiative. Potential Member States are currently being sought. How long do you think it will be before a European anti-missile shield is in place?
Bruno Hofbauer: First of all, the systems have to be purchased together, so we are talking about long delivery times. In addition, the necessary personnel must be trained. I assume several years.
Do you already know which anti-aircraft weapons the army wants to acquire?
After signing the letter of intent next Friday, we would start purchasing together with the other participating states. I can cite two systems as examples, the German IRIS-T SLM and the British CAMM.
Where do you see the biggest challenges in setting up such a multinational protection shield?
From the point of view of the armed forces, it’s about a new weapon system that we haven’t worked with in this way before. In international interaction, we must ensure that not every country orders its own weapon variant when purchasing.
Who decides on a murder?
Austria would decide sovereignly on the use of weapons, we are already exchanging pure radar data. It remains unclear what an enemy overflight towards Germany means for us. In any case, the decision must also be taken nationally.
Thank you very much for the interview.
Comments on Sky Shield: (no) touchstone for Austria’s neutrality
The joint protection of the airspace is causing a stir. Experts classify and discuss the problem areas:
Peter Bussjoger, Professor of constitutional law from Innsbruck: “We don’t know that much yet. If it is true that it mainly concerns the joint purchase of material and software to fend off any attacks from the air, as well as the provision of information about this, then I see no problem with the right of neutrality having a duty of assistance, which according to the current information is not. However, one should wait with a final assessment “until everything is on the table”.
Also an expert in international law Ralph Janek considers the purchase of software and the like no problem at all for neutrality. The limit has been reached when it comes to a military airspace alliance, “that is how we also protect the airspace of other countries. And our fighter jets operate in other countries and vice versa.” Another question is whether Austria can and wants to have an independent, capable air defense system at all. “But how we deal with neutrality is up to us. Everything that comes under joining NATO is not a problem in terms of neutrality policy.”
From the liberal ex-OGH president Irmgard Griss comes the suggestion to discuss and reinterpret neutrality. Peter Bußjäger: “Then you have to say honestly that you want to ‘abolish’ them. If you really want to abolish neutrality, then I advise you to be very careful.” Those who want that must also say that they want NATO membership. “But I think that something like that is constitutionally only possible with a referendum.”
Source: Krone
I am Wallace Jones, an experienced journalist. I specialize in writing for the world section of Today Times Live. With over a decade of experience, I have developed an eye for detail when it comes to reporting on local and global stories. My passion lies in uncovering the truth through my investigative skills and creating thought-provoking content that resonates with readers worldwide.
