Since Austria joined the EU, a lot of changes took place within the CFSP, which are very interesting in the light of the law of neutrality and the light of the policy of neutrality. Some of these changes are for example the incorporation of the so called ?Petersberg tasks? into the EU with the Amsterdam treaty, the incorporation of a mutual assistance clause with the Lisbon Treaty, and the development of the CFSP into ESDP, which includes a ?battle-group? concept. In my thesis, I am discussing these various changes, and point out, how the Austrian government reacted, and changed it?s neutrality to adjust it to the diverse European changes. I am showing, how the Austrian permanent neutrality came into existence, what its full content is, and how the neutrality could be changed or brought to an end. Austria tried to legitimate its accession to the EU by creating various ?Neutrality Doctrines?, such as the Neutrality Doctrine and the Neutrality Doctrine of the three military core-obligations. I am showing, that both doctrines are not grounded.The Neutrality-BVG wasn?t changed itself, but due to the incorporation of Art. 23 f B-VG, Austria was on a constitutional level allowed to participate within the CFSP. Öhlinger already sees the permanent neutrality of Austria with the accession to the EU finalized, as it was shortened by obligations and rights based on the membership. Others see the permanent neutrality finalized with the Amsterdam Treaty, as it contained the Petersberg-Tasks, which include as a ?ultima ratio? even ?tasks of combat forces in crisis management, including peacemaking?. Regarding the compatibility of the diverse changes with the Austrian neutrality, I am not only discussing the compatibility in the light of constitutional law, but also in the light of public international law and the light of policy of neutrality. I show that Austria?s neutrality policy has reached a point, where Austria can?t trust, that third states will continue to respect it.