Nehammer was the first EU leader to visit the Russian president since the war began more than six weeks ago. The conversation took place at Putin’s official residence in Novo-Ogaryovo and lasted about an hour. After the meeting, the Chancellor spoke of a “direct, open and tough” conversation that left a pessimistic impression. On Tuesday he defended on ORF radio that it was important to him to confront Putin with the “facts of the war”.
The Kremlin itself was reluctant to comment or did not comment on the content at all. “The meeting was not particularly long by recent standards,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov. President Putin did not mention Nehammer’s visit at an appointment on Tuesday, but said that Russia cannot be isolated from the West.
Nehammer reported on the visit to Federal President Alexander Van der Bellen on Tuesday, as announced by the Federal Chancellery. No details of the conversation were published – it was interesting in that it was rumored behind closed doors that Nehammer should not have informed the Federal President of his travel plans to Moscow or his green coalition partner before the whole thing became known in the media. Van der Bellen tweeted in the evening that Nehammer had been with him in the Hofburg. “Peace in Ukraine is and will remain our common goal,” the Federal President posted.
Telephone with Selenskyj
The meeting with Putin was also the subject of a telephone call between the Chancellor and the Ukrainian President. According to the Chancellery, Nehammer emphasized that the meeting was “not a friendly visit”. According to the Chancellor’s office, Nehammer said he spoke to Putin “very clearly” about the suffering caused by the Russian war of aggression. “In war there are only losers,” the head of government was quoted as saying.
Mayer-Bohusch (ORF) on Nehammer’s visit to Putin
Andreas Mayer-Bohusch comments on Chancellor Karl Nehammer’s (ÖVP) visit to Russia’s President Putin.
The Russian attacks had to end and war crimes like in Bucha had to be completely cleared up. He also told Putin that the “EU sanctions against Russia will remain in place and will be tightened further as long as people in Ukraine are dying in this conflict,” Nehammer said, according to the broadcast in the phone conversation with Zelenskyi. Nehammer also spoke to US Ambassador Victoria Kennedy on Tuesday. The head of government said that “more than ever the unity of the West as a community of values for human rights and peace” is needed.
Much criticism from the opposition
Nehammer received a lot of criticism from the political competition. “The trip to Moscow was obviously a solo effort and ultimately completely fruitless,” said SPÖ vice club boss Jörg Leichtfried. Talks are important, but Nehammer’s visit to Putin was “rushed and not well coordinated”. The talks could have been an opportunity, but remained “completely fruitless” – no ceasefire, no humanitarian corridors.
According to Herbert Kickl, the head of the FPÖ, the trip served “only for his macho self-portrayal and distraction from the notorious domestic political calamities of the ÖVP”. It seems as if Nehammer was “remotely controlled from Ukraine” and not self-determined. Kickl missed words about possible peace negotiations or the future of energy supply, instead Nehammer only delivered a “transfiguration of his own appearance with empty words”.
Vice Chancellor Kogler cautious – NEOS with criticism
The Greens, who obviously found out about the coalition partner’s travel plans to Putin from the media, were still extremely cautious. After the meeting between Nehammer and Putin, the Chancellor informed the Chancellor “promptly”, it said only from the office of Vice Chancellor Werner Kogler (Greens). Previously, only the party’s foreign policy spokeswoman, Ewa Ernst-Dziedzic, had criticized the visit.
NEOS had criticized on Twitter that Nehammer, according to his own statements, had told Putin “that the sanctions against Russia will remain in place and will be further tightened as long as people are dying in Ukraine”. Rather, the sanctions should “remain in place until the territorial integrity of Ukraine is restored,” said NEOS boss Beate Meinl-Reisinger. “Everything else invites Putin to take further steps.”
Russia expert: “See no discernible effect”
The Innsbruck Russia expert Gerhard Mangott was particularly critical of the meeting. In an interview with “Spiegel” he said that Nehammer had “achieved nothing”. “I see neither a discernible nor a conceivable effect on Vladimir Putin’s actions. This visit brought nothing to Ukraine and the West except for political upheavals within the European Union.”
In addition, only the Chancellor knows whether he “really spoke so openly and harshly with Putin,” said Mangott. While the Kremlin’s propaganda cannot put on a show without photos, it is still possible to spread the message that Putin is not isolated. In the evening, a short report about the meeting was shown on Russian TV, saying it seemed like “a bit of normality despite the war”. “You really shouldn’t have done the Kremlin that favor.”
Nehammer on visiting Putin
After his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chancellor Karl Nehammer (ÖVP) “generally did not gain any positive impressions”. Nehammer said this to the media on Monday evening. The Chancellor said that he went to Moscow without any expectations.
The Hungarian Russia expert Zoltan Sz. Biro made a similar statement. The talks with Putin would only have made sense if Nehammer had delivered “a very sensitive, confidential message”. According to the Chancellor, however, since an interpreter was present, the visit was “completely pointless”, according to the historian from Budapest’s Corvinus University.
Russian media reluctant
In the absence of information from the Kremlin, the media in Russia reported rather cautiously about Nehammer’s visit. “It was the first trip of a representative of an unfriendly European state to the Russian Federation after the start of the special operation (war, ed.) in Ukraine,” wrote the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper. Nehammer is not a “permanent figure,” wrote the newspaper, whose editor-in-chief Pawel Gusev has been on an EU sanctions list since the end of last week.
In its reporting, the newspaper avoided quotations from Nehammer in which the word “war” appeared. This also applied to the daily newspaper “Isvestia”, which quoted selectively from the press release of the Chancellery. The medium quoted experts who also recalled Austria’s dependence on Russian natural gas. Nehammer’s foreign policy is more balanced than Germany’s, Moscow lecturer Vadim Truchatschow commented in the newspaper. The article was titled “Viennese Chance” – in Russian an obvious allusion to “Viennese Waltz”.
“Kommersant” played with the meaning of “Vena”, which is not only the Russian name of the Austrian capital, but also means vein. In addition to the history of bilateral relations and the role of Russian gas imports, the newspaper reported in more detail from the Federal Chancellery’s broadcast. Despite censorship, which practically criminalizes the use of the term “war”, the talk was of “immeasurable suffering” caused by the “Russian war of aggression”.
“Conversation direct, open and tough”
Former Austrian ambassador in Moscow, Emil Brix, mentioned that it was “definitely worth a try”. He was surprised that Moscow had agreed to the visit. “Of course you have to say that there hasn’t been any progress in terms of content, but nobody expected that,” said Brix on Ö1.
The Federal Chancellery had previously announced that it was not a “friendly visit”. The conversation was “direct, open and tough”. Nehammer also addressed the war crimes in Bucha and other places in Ukraine. “My most important message to Putin was (…) that this war must finally end, because in a war there are only losers on both sides.”
“Putin has massively arrived at the logic of war and is acting accordingly,” said the Chancellor. Initially, Putin did not accept the term “war”, but towards the end of the conversation the Russian President said that he hoped that it would end soon. But that could also mean that the offensive in eastern Ukraine would begin quickly and that could become brutal and violent for the civilian population.