by Mario Krastanov

Austria-Hungary played a major part in starting World War I and, because of its actions throughout it, brought about its devastating end for the people living in the country’s territory. Austria suffered a number of setbacks as a result of the Peace Treaty of Saint-Germain of 1919: the former empire was divided into several independent states, which left Austria’s exhausted post-war economy in an even worse position. Furthermore, the First Austrian Republic was created. But why was this division necessary? What were the consequences of the creation of the First Austrian Republic for the Austrian people? How did these consequences determine Austria’s fate in the eve of World War II? Those are the questions I will attempt to answer in my research paper.

The Treaty of Saint-Germain
 

After World War I was over in November of 1918, the victorious countries (Great Britain, France, and the USA) sat together in Paris with the intention to reshape the map of Europe. The three super powers paid special attention to the states which lost the war: Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, the German Empire and the Ottoman Empire.

The Paris Peace Conference began on the 18. January 1919, the date being deliberately chosen by the French to match the date of the Unification of Germany of 1871, when France got humiliated by the newly formed German Empire. Due to the treaties of Neuilly and Sèvres, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire lost some of their territories to other states, while the Treaty of Versailles concerned Germany and the consequences it had to suffer for its actions throughout the war. But perhaps the most important treaty was the one signed in Saint-Germain, which determined Austria-Hungary’s post-war fate. The Saint-Germain treaty was of particular importance because of several reasons: firstly, it was Austria-Hungary who started the First World War. Secondly, the empire was still a big state with the capability to gather a huge army, which is why the French, the British, and the Americans were concerned that, if left in its current state, Austria-Hungary may cause further international conflicts. Last, but definitely not least, the empire proved itself unreliable during World War I: in the early stages of the war, Russia attacked Germany and Austria-Hungary in response to the latter attacking Serbia. According to the treaty of the Dual Alliance, Austria-Hungary was obliged to assist Germany to defend its territories in case it gets attacked by another country. The Austrians, however, didn’t provide sufficient military assistance to prevent the Russians from marching into Germany. This exposed Austria-Hungary as an untrustworthy ally, which was further evidence that the empire may possess a threat to international peace and security in the future. Therefore, the victorious allies were determined to prevent Austria from ever again being able to cause a big and destructive conflict such as the First World War.

The first step towards this goal was to divide the big empire into “nation states.”[1] Many minorities (Czechs, Slovaks, Slovenians, Poles, Rumanians, Hungarians, Croatians) lived in Austria-Hungary’s territories. However, according to the Wilsonian principles of self-determination, people in the empire were allowed to create their own independent states.[2] Supported by the victorious super powers, states like Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia came into existence, which left Austria with only a third of its former territories during the Habsburg empire.

As former Austrian chancellor Klemens Von Metternich feared, nationalist movements of small ethnical groups in Austrian’s territories would mean the destruction of the empire. His concerns proved to be true: the territorial division that Austria suffered after the end of World War I had a huge impact on Austria’s economy: the former empire (and Vienna in particular) relied on shipments of goods from all of its territories. When they were lost, the state still received some goods, but these were not sufficient to keep its economy strong, especially after it has been exhausted by a long and expensive war. Throughout the next several years, people starved and were unemployed. In addition, little to no investments were coming into the country because of its market instability; inflation (partly an effect of the huge reparations that Austria had to pay after the end of World War I) made the country’s currency weak.

Moreover, the formation of new countries started a number of border disputes, the most noticeable of which were about Austria’s province Carinthia and the region of Tirol. Although the Carinthian dispute was recently resolved, it led to a series of shootings between Slovenians and Austrians immediately after the end of World War I. Even today, Slovenians have their own names for cities in the province: the city of Klagenfurt is known as Celovec, and the small town of Villach is also called Beljak (one may see these names on road signs across Slovenia). The Tirol dispute, on the other hand, is still ongoing: the northern part is currently in Austria’s territory, while South Tirol is part of Italy. The Austrian government was able to keep North Tirol because of social benefits such as tax reductions for the people living there.

Another step towards preventing Austria from causing new international conflicts was a clause of the Treaty of Saint-Germain, which prohibited Austria from forming any alliances with Germany without a permission by the League of Nations to do so.[3] This measure was actually in contradiction with the Wilsonian principles of self-determination, on which the settlement was based.[4]

Lastly, the Saint-Germain treaty declared the creation of the First Austrian Republic. The provisional government of Karl Renner, which ruled Austria after the end of World War I, was removed by the first elections in the new republic, which took place on 19 February 1919.

Immediate consequences of the Saint-Germain treaty

Most people didn’t want an independent Austria at first. They had the idea of German Austria – a state, where Germans and Austrians could live together: “They regarded German Austria as a stepping stone to integration into a larger German Republic.”[5] Nevertheless, not wanting a bigger Germany than the one that entered World War I, the Allies forbid this, thus making Austria an independent republic.

The result of the 1919 elections was a government, which consisted of a coalition between two parties: the Social Democrats (liberals) and the Christian Socialists (conservatives). At first, there was a surprisingly strong co-operation between the two parties, and though the first chancellor, Karl Renner, was a social democrat, the consensus between the parties remained intact for the first year of the newly formed republic.[6]

The immediate situation, which Renner found himself into, was a disastrous one: Austria’s economy was devastated, and the currency Renner needed to support it with was weak because of a rapid inflation. In addition, many people were unemployed, especially nobles and members of the bureaucracy during the rule of the Habsburgs – these were highly educated people, which, however, couldn’t find their place in the new post-war society, which was only concerned about its survival.

Following Otto von Bismarck’s example from the late 19th century, Renner introduced a series of benefits for the working class in an attempt to raise people’s satisfaction. This, however, backfired on the chancellor and his government, as such actions further drained the country’s treasury, which was not only almost empty as a result of World War I, but sufficient income through taxes couldn’t be gathered to fill it back because of the territorial cuts that Austria suffered.

Since Renner and his ideas failed to bring stability to the new republic, the next elections in 1920 went a completely different way: they were comfortably won by the Christian Socialists, who went on to become Austria’s largest party until 1945. This significant change may seem surprising at first, though it was actually quite logical because of the different views and ideologies that each party had.

The Social Democrats

After the end of World War I and the division of Austria, people of the former empire were concerned about their future, not knowing what to expect next. They turned to the Social Democrats because of two major reasons: they had a lot of political experience before and during World War I (in the period 1911-1918), when they were the strongest party in the parliament. Furthermore, the Social Democrats were the ones that ran the country immediately after the end of the war (the provisional government of Karl Renner) and had a plan for reviving Austria, which, at first, seemed to offer stability to the devastated post-war country. In addition, the Social Democrats strongly supported one very important people’s desire: the creation of German Austria and a union with Germany. Although such unification never occurred, the party’s attitude towards this matter was satisfactory to many voters.

Upon establishing the 1919-1920 government, Karl Renner and the Social Democrats tried to implement several social and tax reforms, though these measures didn’t bring the benefits that the party was counting on.

Moreover, the Social Democrats had a flaw in their political views, which proved troublesome in the long run: the party mostly favoured the people living in the big cities, especially in Vienna. They counted on their votes, though these weren’t enough for the Social Democrats to establish their own powerful government without the need of a coalition. As the new elections came in 1920, the tide started to turn in favour of their rivals.

The Christian Socialists

Before the start of World War I, the Christian Socialist (also known as the Deutsche Christen[7] among the people) were the largest party in the Austrian parliament during the period 1907-1911. They were supporters of the monarchy due to the party’s conservative views on politics. Nevertheless, the Christian Socialists managed to find their place in the new Austrian republic, realising that it would be unwise to try to bring the Kaiser back to the throne. In addition, the party also voted for an Austrian unification with Germany, but was rather passive when it came to serious talks about it.[8]

In the 1919 elections, the Christian Socialists won enough votes to enable them to form a coalition with the Social Democrats, thus slowly starting to make their way back to their previous strength.

After the 1920 elections, the Christian Socialists became the largest Austrian party and managed to preserve this superiority until 1945. This was mainly due to their conservative views, which essentially came from their affiliation with the Church. As opposed to the Social Democrats, which were supported by people living in the big cities, the Christian Socialists were relying on the voters in smaller towns and villages. These people were highly religious, thus the Christian Socialists’ friendly relations with the Church enabled them to win the votes of more people (since the number of people living in smaller towns was greater than the number of people living in the big cities).

Austria between 1920-1934

After the Social Democrats lost the 1920 elections, Austria entered a short period of political instability: in two years, the government changed three chancellors (Michael Mayr, Walter Breisky and Johann Schober, the latter of which had two short terms in office). In the meantime, the economic crisis in the country continued to cause problems for the people, most of which were unemployed and desperate about their future. In 1922, however, a glimmer a hope seemed to have appeared for the troubled Austrians – the Christian Socialists established a strong government with Ignaz Seipel as chancellor.

One of Seipel’s first actions was to ask the newly formed League of Nations for a loan. The chancellor would use the money to strengthen Austria’s economy and improve social life. Members of the League of Nations did not hesitate to help Austria – European countries such as France were concerned that, if left in a situation of a deep crisis, Austria may become an easy victim to the spread of communism.

When Seipel received the loan, he quickly used it to enforce several key sectors – healthcare was improved, which was widely appreciated by the public, and tax reforms satisfied people even further. But perhaps the most important benefit from the loan was that it managed to significantly reduce unemployment in a really effective way: many people were hired and put in projects for the constructions of houses and residential communities. Killing two birds with one stone was a boost for Seipel’s and his party’s image: as seen on videos from that time, people were happy to once again find employment, especially when building their own future homes.[9]

This success, however, was politically not well appreciated by the Social Democrats – they were seeing their rival party building a better life for the Austrian people and perhaps felt threatened for their own survival. In addition, because of the extremely different ideologies and views of both parties, they were unable to tolerate each other in a constructive way. They didn’t trust each other, and this led to a chain of events, which caused a blow to Austrian society and left its mark on the political scene of the country. The Social Democrats had a private militia (known as the Schutzbund) as early as 1923, which consisted of extreme party supporters. Its goal was to protect the party’s interests and members. Upon hearing about this, the Christian Socialists established their own militia called the Heimwehr.

In spite of the initial consensus between Social Democrats and Christian Socialists (during the government of Karl Renner in the period 1919-1920), the extremely different ideologies and views of both parties caused major political tensions: “Between the to groups there was not much ground for normal ‘civil society,’ and what remained was fractured.”[10] The existence of the militias was a proof of this claim and an event, which occurred in January of 1927, showed the climax of the conflict. In the small village of Schattendorf in Burgenland, the two militias engaged in a short shooting, which resulted in the killing of a man and a child by Heimwehr members. These were arrested and brought to trial, but were ultimately not found guilty. This was the spark, which caused a major strike by Social Democrats supporters and the Schutzbund – they wanted to see their rivals suffer for their mistake. During these riots (on the 15 of July, 1927), the demonstrates set the Justice Ministry on fire. Members of the police were called by the Christian Socialist government in order to put the demonstrations down. Although policemen actually shared the Social Democrats’ political views, they stood up against them, professionally executing their orders, thus proving themselves as reliable force.

The incident of Schattendorf had much deeper consequences then street fights in Vienna: the people, which were just starting to get over World War I and its devastating consequences, were burdened with a new crisis. “The republic [and especially its citizens] suffered a body blow from which [they] never fully recovered.”[11]

After Ignqz Seipel’s death in 1932, Engelbert Dollfuss became chancellor of the Christian Socialist government. Following his predecessor’s idea for bringing stability, he asked the League of  Nations for another loan. He used the money to again try to prevent the spread of unemployment, which, by 1932, had reached the half million mark. In addition, an Austrian Nazi party was becoming more aggressive in its attempt to propagandise German National Socialist ideas. Because people were once again desperate about their future, they were bound to become an easy victim to this new threat. People were starting to see Nazi ideas as a possible salvation from their current misery, and were considering the possibility of unifying with Germany, which, in 1933, was turned to an authoritarian state by Adolf Hitler.

A possible Anschluss with Germany was the last thing Dollfuss wanted for Austria. Therefore, he decided to completely transform the country’s governing system. This, however, required a series of well planned and well executed steps.

First and foremost, Dollfuss decided to get rid of the Schutzbind, which helped him get a dominant position over the Social Democrats. Dollfuss also banned Austria’s Communist party, and although it wasn’t a powerful rival at that time, the chancellor wanted to have as fewer opponents as possible.

Dollfuss also created the so-called Fatherland Front, which was supposed to be a rally organization for every conservative and religious Austrian. By signing a concordat with the Pope, Dollfuss won himself the formal support of the Catholic Church, which, in the eyes in the Austrians, meant that the chancellor’s actions had to be right.

In May of 1933, Dollfuss announced the creation of the Ständestaat – a form of government, which had many similarities with Benito Mussolini’s Fascism in Italy: all parties rival to the Christian Socialists were banned, and Dollfuss proclaimed himself leader of Austria. These actions were backed up by a constitution.

The Ständestaat was a curious outcome of the constant post-war crisis in Austria. It seemed that people were so desperate for some stability that they were ready to give up anything for it, including a democratic Austria. The quick shifting between democracy and authoritarianism, however, didn’t bring anything positive to the Austrians in the long run.

Austrofascism and the Anschluss

“At no time during the short history of the First Republic had Austria’s existence as an independent state been so clearly defended and officially propagandised as it was during the period when Dollfuss’ government first dismantled parliamentary democracy, then destroyed it, and finally created a dictatorship”[12]: this quote shows that people weren’t able to see through the chancellor’s propaganda and, slowly and unconsciously, they accepted the new direction of the country’s governance.

Using demonstrations of Social Democrats supporters, Dollfuss ordered the police to arrest former Schutzbund members, accusing them of stockpiling weapons and planning a revolution against the new government. The Social Democrats supporters, however, didn’t give up without a fight, and the result was the February 12 – February 16 Austrian Civil War of 1934. As a result, the few remaining forces of the Schutzbund were completely defeated, and the last supporters of the Social Democrats were brought to trial, effectively ending the party’s influence on Austrian politics for the next eleven years.

This conflict reflected on people’ desperation yet again – was there ever going to be peace and security in Austria? The successful coup against Dollfuss, which led to his death, was another blow to people’s moral and brought about their further uncertainty for their future.

As Kurt Schuschnigg took over Dollfuss’ place as chancellor in 1934, he was immediately being pressured by Germany – Hitler still wanted an Anschluss with Austria, which Engelbert Dollfuss has cleverly managed to avoid. Finding himself against the wall, Schuschnigg agreed with Hitler’s demands from the 1938 meeting in Munich under the threat of a German military offensive against Austria.

Nevertheless, the chancellor saw one last chance, which might help him prevent an Anschluss – through a referendum. If people voted against a unification with Germany, Hitler would have to quit his attempts to include Austria in German territories, otherwise he would go against the principles of self-determination, thus causing the western powers to intervene.

The German dictator, however, would not be denied “[…] on March 11 Hitler ordered operation Otto, the invasion of Austria, to go ahead.”[13] This brought about Schuschnigg’s resignation. Seizing this opportunity, Hitler (through figureheads) did a referendum of his own. Hearing about German progress (through Hitler’s propaganda, of course) after the Führer came to power, the Austrians were desperate enough to give up their own independent country by voting with “yes” to an Austrian Anschluss with Germany, hoping it will finally stabilise economical and political crisis in Austria and through that – achieve a better social life.

Conclusion

Over the course of the Second World War, Austrian soldiers would die for Hitler’s causes, and Austrian citizens would suffer the consequences of the Anschluss in the devastated, occupied post- World War II Second Austrian Republic.

In the end, it was the stubbornness of both Social Democrats and Christian Socialists to work together and solve the post-World War I crisis in favor of the Austrian people that brought desperation and uncertainty among Austrians. The constant fightings for power and the will to bring the “rival party” down led to many conflicts, which backfired on society and made it take the wrong choices when it had to determine Austria’s fate: the emergence of Fascism in the country and its Anschluss to Germany are two clear examples of this. Nevertheless, the violent history of the First Austrian Republic would prove to serve as a valuable lesson for future governments in Austria after World War II.

Works cited:

Beller, Steven. A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge University Press. 2007.

Boyer, John. Christlichsoziale Politik als Beruf. Vienna, 2010

Encyclopaedia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/517198/Treaty-of-Saint-Germain

Moser, Karen et al. Österreich Box 1896-1995.Filmarchiv Austria, Vienna. Austria, 2010.

Segar, Kenneth; Warren, John. Austria in the Thirties: Culture and Politics. Riverside, CA, USA. Ariadne. 1991

Schindler, Franz. Die soziale Frage der Gegenwart, vom Standpunkte des Christemtums. Vienna. 1905

[1] Beller, Steven. A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge University Press. 2007. p198

[2] Beller, Steven. A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge University Press. 2007. p199

[4] Beller, Steven. A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge University Press. 2007. p199

[5] Beller, Steven. A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge University Press. 2007. p200

[6] Beller, Steven. A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge University Press. 2007. p203

[7] Schindler, Franz. Die soziale Frage der Gegenwart, vom Standpunkte des Christemtums. Vienna. 1905

[8] Boyer, John. Christlichsoziale Politik als Beruf. Vienna, 2010

[9] Moser, Karen et al. Österreich Box 1896-1995.Filmarchiv Austria, Vienna. Austria, 2010.

[10] Beller, Steven. A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge University Press. 2007. p209

[11] Beller, Steven. A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge University Press. 2007. p212

[12] Segar, Kenneth; Warren, John. Austria in the Thirties: Culture and Politics. Riverside, CA, USA. Ariadne. 1991

[13] Beller, Steven. A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge University Press. 2007. p239