Transatlantic Security
Back to the main
page on Transatlantic Security
Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe
THE FUTURE OF THE OSCE
BRIEF SUMMARY OF PANEL DISCUSSION
On October 22, 2002 the British American Security Information
Council and the Royal Norwegian Embassy sponsored a discussion
on the future of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe (OSCE) at the Cannon House Office Building in Washington,
D.C.
Partial View of Panel (left to right):
Robert Barry, Jan Kubis, Kim Traavik, and Knut Vollebaek
Participants included:
- Jan Kubis, OSCE Secretary General;
- Kim Traavik, Norwegian Deputy Foreign Minister (State
Secretary);
- Steve Minikes, U.S. Representative to the OSCE;
- Knut Vollebaek, Norwegian Ambassador to the U.S. and
former OSCE Chairman in office;
- David Johnson, U.S. Coordinator of Assistance to Afghanistan
and former U.S. Representative to the OSCE; and
- Adam Kobieracki, Polish Coordinator for OSCE and former
chair of the OSCE Permanent Council.
(Brief Biographies of
Panelists)
Ambassador Robert Barry (ret.), former head of the OSCE Mission
to Bosnia and Herzegovina, moderated the discussion. The discussion
was organized around a BASIC Research Report authored by Ambassador
Barry entitled "The OSCE: A Forgotten Transatlantic Security
Organization?" The discussion focused on where the OSCE has
been and what this will mean for future priorities.
The audience of about 80 people included former heads of
OSCE field missions, representatives of the U.S. State Department
and OSCE member state embassies in Washington, and academics,
journalists and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
Partial view of audience in the Cannon
Caucus Room
KEY ISSUES DISCUSSED
The OSCE's Reputation
- Low Profile - Ambassador Minikes and others acknowledged
that the OSCE deserved more attention in the United States.
Panelists mentioned that some officials wrongly considered
NATO and the OSCE to be rivals. Some of this feeling goes
back to the time when the Soviet Union used the concept
of a conference on European security to undermine NATO,
but all agreed that this time had long passed.
- Working with Other Institutions - Ambassador
Johnson stressed that the relationship among the United
Nations, NATO, the European Union and the OSCE did not
need to be a zero-sum game. Panelists discussed the complementary
role that these organizations played in the Balkans. Many
participants pointed to the OSCE's unique coverage, including
areas of Central Asia where countries were unlikely to
become members of the EU or NATO.
Unique Contributions
- Field Missions - Panelists agreed that one of
the OSCE's strongest contributions to collective security
included its field missions. While many participating
states see Central Asia and the Caucasus as a logical
focus for the OSCE in the future, obstacles remain. Perhaps
the most serious obstacle is the tendency of host governments
to view the presence of an OSCE mission on their territory
as a malady that needs to be overcome.
- Policing - Ambassador Kubis emphasized the importance
of the organization's police activities. In Central Asia,
the OSCE has begun a program of police training in Kyrgyzstan
by sending teams to Bishkek and Osh to set up model police
stations where new techniques of policing could be demonstrated.
If successful, this project could be expanded with larger
scale police training efforts in Kyrgyzstan and elsewhere
in the region.
From Left to Right: Steve Minikes, Robert
Barry, and Jan Kubis
Reform
- Structure - Another strength of the OSCE, as
Ambassador Kubis mentioned, is that the OSCE is an operational
organization that is not "top heavy." The organization
has 19 operations with up to 4,000 people. Former Chair
in Office Vollebaek noted that there was no structure
in the Secretariat which could be used to implement Permanent
Council decisions, for example on fielding the Kosovo
Verification Mission and its successor.
- Power - Ambassador Kubis added that the devolution
of power to program managers was important. On the other
hand, Kim Traavik suggested that the OSCE should make
its secretariat stronger. Ambassador Kobieracki recommended
that the OSCE develop a "code of conduct" for the Chairperson
in Office (CiO) to produce a "predictable" chairmanship.
From Left to Right: Adam Kobieracki,
Robert Barry, Jan Kubis, Kim Traavik, David Johnson, and
Knut Vollebaek
New Endeavors
- Joint Paper - Ambassador Kubis briefly discussed
a paper that the United States and the Russian Federation
are finishing, which will outline new threats to security.
They will submit the paper to the Porto Ministerial meeting
this December.
- Countries in Conflict - Ambassador Johnson suggested
that Afghanistan be included among the OSCE Partners for
Cooperation to facilitate collaboration with member countries
bordering Afghanistan (Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan).
He believed that the lack of viable institutions in Afghanistan
has led to a concentration on individual personalities.
Traavik said that the OSCE's role in the Balkans would
be reduced, but the OSCE would increase its role in the
Caucasus and Central Asia. Panelists agreed that the OSCE
would not become involved in Iraq, but people who have
gained experience from OSCE missions, such as those in
the Balkans, would bring their experience to a post-conflict
situation in Iraq.
BASIC Publications
Other Research and Analysis
OSCE
Links
Back to the main
page on Transatlantic Security
|
