Austria’s political developments reflect a significant crossroads for the country, as President Alexander Vander Bellen’s decision to sidestep the far-right Freedom Party (FPÖ) in government formation sends a clear signal about the future direction of leadership. Despite the FPÖ winning the most votes in the general election, the refusal of other parties to work with its leader, Herbert Kickl, reveals deeper concerns about the political and ideological landscape of Austria.

At the heart of this situation lies a fundamental question of democracy: should a party that wins the largest share of votes, but remains politically isolated, be entitled to lead the government? Austria’s president has taken a stance that challenges this idea, emphasising that electoral success is not the sole determinant of governance. The argument here is straightforward: a party unable to form a coalition or build consensus across the political spectrum lacks the legitimacy to govern effectively.

Advertisement

In this case, the FPÖ’s divisive policies ~ marked by euro-scepticism and close ties with Russia ~ have alienated potential coalition partners, leaving it isolated despite its electoral win. This decision is important not just for Austria, but for Europe. The rise of far-right parties across Europe has raised concerns about the erosion of democratic values, especially in the face of growing nationalism, anti-immigrant rhetoric, and challenges to the European Union’s core principles. In this context, Austria’s rejection of a far-right-led government sets a precedent that could resonate across the continent, offering an alternative to the wave of populism that has taken hold in many other European countries.

However, the decision to bypass the FPÖ does not come without risks. Mr Kickl has already framed the move as undemocratic, arguing that it is a betrayal of the Austrian people who voted for his party. This rhetoric plays into a broader narrative of victimhood that populist leaders across Europe have successfully used to galvanise support. The FPÖ’s exclusion from government could strengthen its base, fueling claims that the political establishment is conspiring against the will of the people. This could deepen polarisation in Austria, making future elections even more contentious.

The coalition-building process now underway between the conservative People’s Party (ÖVP) and the Social Democrats (SPÖ) presents challenges. While this centrist approach may appeal to Austrians wary of extremism, the ideological differences between the ÖVP and SPÖ are significant. Mr Nehammer, the ÖVP leader, has signalled that reforms will be necessary to ensure a stable government, but bridging the gap between the SPÖ’s calls for wealth and inheritance taxes and the ÖVP’s conservative policies could prove difficult.

The inclusion of a third party, possibly the liberal Neos, may help create balance, but it would also represent Austria’s first three-party coalition since its post-war independence. Ultimately, Austria’s political future hinges on whether its centrist parties can forge a government that not only excludes far-right extremism but also addresses the concerns of voters who turned to the FPÖ.