OSCE Essay

This essay has a total of 7869 words and 38 pages.


Chapter II
OSCE reactions to the security threats of the XXI century

§1. Combating terrorism

Al-Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center in New York and on
Pentagon in Washington, caused shock and condemnation among the population of the whole
world. Overnight, terrorists dominated international thinking. Many international bodies
had included fight against terrorism in their action programs, but now this issue became a
major priority . The United Nations Organization, the European Council, NATO, the European
Union, OSCE - all these international bodies declared their determination to fight against
terrorism and initiated counteraction measures.

UN have begun to pay special attention to the fight against terrorism since 1960. UN
adopted a series of declarations and conventions concerning the issue. The Security
Council dealt with terrorism in a more specific way, including Osama bin Laden and
Talibans from Afghanistan, etc. After September 11, UN developed a general framework for
combating terrorism. The Security Council authorized the use of force in pursuing the
responsible for attacks; a Commission for Combating Terrorism (CCT) was established, its
goals being to monitor the implementation of the measures imposed by the Security Council

Terrorism was not a new subject for the Council of Europe either. In January 1977, the EC
adopted the European Convention on Terrorism Abolishment that focused on legal and
legislative measures. After September 11, the EC appealed to the member states to ratify
the Convention regarding terrorism and other relevant documents. A multi-disciplinary
group of international action against terrorism was established to review the EC tools
used for combating terrorism, including the European Convention.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is rather a beginner in combating terrorism
. Before the terrorist attacks, NATO paid some attention to the challenges of
international terrorism, especially in the press release of the Washington Summit in 1999.
September 11 brought NATO to a new level, the Alliance deciding to consider the attacks as
an action covered by Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. Besides the fact that this step
showed political solidarity, it was also a commitment to offer military support. In
Afghanistan military campaign it was clear that the political, military, and logistical
assistance offered by NATO were of great help to the USA.

In the period preceding the attacks in New York and Washington, the European Union
undertook measures to combat terrorism, implementing sanctions imposed by UN and
strengthen the judiciary cooperation between its members. After the al-Qaeda attacks, the
EU applied new measures of restriction against Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban.

Until the attacks of September 11, 2001, OSCE did not consider terrorism problem to be a
priority, except for certain member states, like Russia and the countries of Central Asia.
After a certain period of time, the OSCE's perception of terrorism has changed.
Analytically speaking, there are four types of terrorism as they appear in the OSCE
documents: terrorism as an undermining tool of the Cold War policy; terrorism of the age
of the Cold War, but without any connection to the Eastern-Western conflict; terrorism as
a separatism tool within the OSCE region; and Islamic fundamentalism.

In the middle 90's, there was a general belief that OSCE should be used for specific
measures of combating terrorism. However, the suggestion to organize a workshop on
terrorism problems and to create a group of experts for stimulating the cooperation of the
member states in combating terrorism that was made at a meeting in November 1996, was
rejected. At the 1999 Conference the member states of the EU said again that OSCE should
neither double the work of the United Nations, nor set an operational role in this area.

The attacks of September 11 caused a dramatic increase of the attention paid by OSCE to
the problem of terrorism, including the relations of OSCE with other international
organizations. All member states of the OSCE expressed their strong condemnation of the
attacks and created a special Work Group on the issues of terrorism and an action plan.
These were adopted at the Ninth Ministerial Council, in Bucharest, on December 3-4, 2001.
In the resolution regarding terrorism combating the Ministerial Council declared that the
"terrorist acts in all their forms and manifestations, whenever, wherever, and by whoever
performed, constitute threats to international peace, security,y and stability".

According to the Action Plan adopted in Bucharest, OSCE will support all the activities
undertaken by other organizations, especially by UN, without duplicating their efforts. UN
undertakes the role of the leader in combating terrorism, while OSCE can assume the role
of coordinating interregional and intra-regional initiatives.

OSCE will also try to offer extra value to this process on the basis of the
characteristics of the Organization, its strong points, and comparative advantages: the
comprehensive concept of security that connects human, economic, and political-military
dimensions; its enormous participation; experience in the area and the expertise it
possesses in preventive forewarning, conflicts prevention, crisis management, post
conflict rehabilitation and democratic institutions. Moreover, many of the efficient
measures of combating terrorism are from the areas like police training, judiciary and
legislative reforms, and border monitoring - areas, which OSCE is already professionally
working in.

A huge list of measures used by OSCE is included in the Action Plan. However, these are
formulated in general terms and it is not clear how they are to be implemented. At a
deeper analysis, these measures do not offer OSCE a new approach to the problem. The
Organization will continue to do what it has done before, although new other measures can
be identified.

It is clear that the five states of Central Asia will benefit politically and financially
from the reactions undertaken after September 11. As a result, the international
Conference held in Bishkek on December 13-14, 2001 adopted its own Action Program. In this
program they appeal to the need for addressing economic and social problems that
terrorists take advantage of. International community is hailed to offer technical and
financial assistance to the states of Central Asia.

Portugal, which undertook the Presidency-in-Office in 2002, identified the fight against
terrorism as a major priority. On May 2, 2002, the President-in-Office of the OSCE
notified the Permanent Council about his intention to develop the "OSCE Charter for
Preventing and Fighting Terrorism" that would allow the "adoption of new measures of
preventing and combating terrorism".

On April 12, 2002, a special conference of the Permanent Council of OSCE focused on the
summary of the action maps developed by OSCE institutions as a result of the Action Plan
adopted in Bucharest. Four "strategic domains" were identified: police, border monitoring,
trafficking (of drugs, weapons and people) and financing terrorism (money laundring).

A special unit for dealing with issues on combating terrorism was created at the OSCE
Secretariate. Combating terrorism was also the subject of the 11-th yearly session of the
Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE held in Berlin, on July 6-10.

The fight against terrorism has a second side that has not been ignored by OSCE. In the
process of combating and persecution of terrorists, human rights and democratic freedoms
have to be respected. The ex-Chairman of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights (ODIHR), Stoudman repeated these concerns at the Bishkek Conference. He stated that
"we can not persecute terrorists using the same methods they do". He also added that the
comprehensive action of combating terrorism has to combine measures used by law bodies
with strategies of including all the sectors of the society in public life in order to
intensify dialog between religions and improve civil society.

Thus, the attacks of September 11 generated a huge wave of activities on the international
arena. The question is: what can each organization do and how can these various activities
achieve the desired objective? In other words, how can the duplication of efforts be
avoided? What can OSCE offer for this? The fact that the organization did not try to use
new, operational methods but continued to do what it had been doing before is not

OSCE possesses experience that is extremely valuable in annihilation of the environment,
in which terrorism can be born and exist. OSCE has to strengthen its message concerning
the fact that the democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and humanitarian
considerations must not be ignored in the present campaign for combating terrorism.

Another function, which OSCE could contribute to, is to promote the implementation of the
decisions and measures agreed upon by the member states at the various forums, especially
in UN. The United Nations are not able to do this and it depends on the cooperation of
regional organizations in the field. The absolute advantage of OSCE, in comparison with
NATO, the UE and the Council of Europe, is the fact that the organization covers all the
states from Vancouver to Vladivostok.

OSCE could promote or even organize a regular exchange of information between the member
states concerning the progress achieved and the problems that appear when implementing the
measures of combating terrorism. The second direction of the activities in this field has
already been stipulated in the Action Plan adopted in Bucharest: OSCE will help the states
to implement the efforts, in the fields they are experienced in and in the cases where it
is useful and necessary, in cooperation with the Council of Europe, the EU and maybe NATO.

The tenth OSCE Ministerial Council held in Porto ended with the adoption of the Charter
for the Fight against Terrorism, and the President-in-Office of the OSCE at that time, the
Portuguese Minister of Foreign Affairs Da Cruz, emphasized the importance of global and
regional cooperation as an pro-element of UN strategy against terrorism. He affirmed that
"no organization or state can stand up to this challenge alone". The document requires a
better border management and a better cooperation in identifying "the connections between
terrorism and trans-border criminality, money laundring, trafficking in human beings,
weapons, and drugs".

§2. Peace maintaining in conflict areas

Although OSCE deals with the arbitration of numberless conflicts at multidimensional
level, it has never brought peacemaking forces to the conflict areas it covers. However,
it is important to highlight and analyze the OSCE potential in this field and the possible
forms of the peacemaking operations under the auspices of OSCE. Despite the lack of direct
experience in peacemaking, OSCE developed a distinct approach to the peacekeeping process.
This approach emerges from the specific characteristics of the organization, large
participation of the states, and the decision-making mechanism.

Peacemaking can be considered as less explored and capitalized by OSCE. The implementation
by cooperation of the commitments, programs, and measures represents the key method used
by OSCE. Moreover, OSCE does not use military tools for achieving the desired objectives
and targets. However, the Helsinki Document of 1992 stipulates the preference of the
organization to perform peacekeeping operations (PKO) and to use military force as an OSCE
tool. While the Lisbon Document, called "Common and Comprehensive Security Model for
Europe for the Twenty First Century" highlights the OSCE's importance as a "forum for
improvement of the cooperation and complementation" between the member states and European
and transatlantic organizations for ensuring security in Europe, although does not make
direct references to the peacekeeping.

The history of OSCE showed that the Helsinki process had been always capable of
functioning using only loyal methods, but there were various reasons for OSCE member
states to apply tougher methods and particularly PKO. Conflicts prevention might also be
necessary on higher stages of the process of conflict settlementl. Crisis management is
also an OSCE objective. Although this is not defined in the OSCE documents, crisis
management can be considered as conflict prevention in the last stage of the process of
conflict settlement, i.e. conflicts prevention in crisis situations. The assistance
provided under these circumstances should comply with all the requirements of crisis
situations and offer enormous political investments, as well as help programs in
exceptional situations, preventive use of peacemaking troops and operations. The methods
intended for OSCE should combine the entire range of measures that could be used by OSCE.
Thus, OSCE will have the necessary flexibility for such situations.

Moreover, the pacification performed by OSEC could offer an alternative better than that
of bilateral pacification. Generally, the forces of maintaining multilateral peace in
Europe should be established on the basis of OSCE decisions or managed and organized by
OSCE. Another reason for OSCE to be more active in using peacemaking forces concerns the
fact that in this way the organization would benefit from a higher reliability in the eyes
of the entire world, which thinks of OSCE as of an inefficient arbor of political

What would be the types of peacekeeping operations OSCE could get involved in? According
to its role of conflicts prevention, there are two models of pacification operations that
could be guaranteed by OSCE, namely: preventive use of military troops, like in Macedonia,
and organization of peacekeeping operations in the post-conflict areas. The criteria
stipulated in the Helsinki Document are very useful for this type of operations. The 1992
Helsinki Document and the Decisions adopted by the Ministerial Council in Rome, 1993, draw
a substantial attention to the OSCE subject and pacification.

According to the Helsinki Document, OSCE can perform peacekeeping operations in the member
states or between those, in order to maintain peace and direct the conflicting parties
towards a political solution of the conflict. This stipulation must be analyzed in the
light of OSCE regulations as a regional organization in the context of UN Charter. Like in
the case of traditional UN operations, using peacekeeping troops under OSCE auspices is
possible only after a sustainable seize of fire, signing an agreement or a memorandum
between the parties and establishing the conditions for the security of the peacekeeping

Under the pressure of the Russian Federation, the discussions concerning peacekeeping
organized at OSCE moved towards the methods of peacekeeping used by the third parties. In
1993, the Ministerial Council in Rome established the standards of monitoring the
peacekeeping operations assigned to the third countries, by OSCE. According to the
decisions made in Rome, OSCE "can consider, upon occasion, and according to some specific
conditions, the establishment of some cooperation arrangements with OSCE in order to
ensure that the role and functions of military forces of a third party in the conflict
zone comply with the OSCE principles and objectives". The procedures for the
implementation of such arrangements reflected the traditional approach used by UN, which
supposes the consent of the conflicting parties, impartiality, transparency, lucidity of
the mandate, and multinational structure. OSCE procedures also requested the compliance
with the territorial sovereignty and integrity of the corresponding states and highlighted
the need for a connection between these arrangements and the process of political
settlement of the conflict. These severe procedures were aimed at ensuring the legitimacy
of OSCE as an instrument of authorization of peace keeping by a third party. These
principles would maintain the consensus of impartiality and legitimacy that exists within

Certainly, OSCE does not possess a fixed planning and an organizational system for
dislocating peacekeeping operations. OSCE documents do not stipulate clear procedures for
this type of operations. However, in some cases OSCE can act as authorization institutions
for implemented operations. For example, of NATO, the UE or CIS, because OCSE is
impartial, while the CSI, NATO, the UE are not, or are not recognized as impartial
organizations. In order to receive such a blessing from OSCE, certain preconditions and
measures need to be accomplished. It is worth mentioning that PKO under Russian command
still do not comply with all the general principles of PKO, especially with regard to the
commitment of the involved parties. OSCE must insist for PKO under its auspices to be
organized only in compliance with the named principles.

The emphasis of OSCE on traditional approaches to pacification should not be considered
weak points of the organization. UN experience clearly proved that peacekeeping
difficulties in internal conflicts are inevitable for organizations, which deal not only
with joint defense. Moreover, these traditional principles of peacekeeping comply with the
comprehensive and consensual approach to the security used by OSCE.

The Common and Comprehensive Security Model for Europe developed in Lisbon in 1996
requires the continuation of the work for defining the cooperation models between OSCE and
other organizations with regard to maintaining peace and security in Europe. Within a
seminar held in 1997 in Vienna they emphasized the need to define these methods and to
determine the areas of joint influence between these organizations. Thus, the security
Model could offer a flexible framework for cooperation and coordination between the member
states and European and transatlantic bodies, in the fields of peacekeeping and securing
the crisis in the region. This model could help moving from what Madleine Albright called
"pacification in the area of influence" .

It is important to analyze the pacification potential of OSCE with a view of dealing with
the process of peace maintaining by Russia. Finally, if OSCE dislocates PKO, it would be
in the Area, which is self-declared by Russia as a sphere of vital interest. Beginning
with the collapse of the USSR, Russia dislocated PKO in four zones: Republic of Moldova,
Tajikistan, Southern Osetia, and Abkhazia in Georgia. The Russian government was largely
implicated in the arbitration efforts of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

In all these states post-soviet conflicts seriously affected the consolidation and
transition opportunity of these states, leaving behind thousands of victims and millions
of refugees and displaced persons. These operations were dominated by the forces of the
Russian Federation and the conflicting parties were included as peacekeeping forces. The
policy of these operations makes them absolutely distinctive in international practice.
The peacekeeping forces of Russian Federation were dislocated in conflict zones after the
direct implication of the Russian soldiers in these conflict zones. Within 1992-1996, the
Russian Government had referred to the special responsibility it carries regarding the
ex-Union. Under these circumstances, the visions of Russia are justified by UN Charter and
the regional agreement of the CIS. Moreover, Russia tries to secure the stability at its
borders with the help of these operations. Also, within this period, the Russian
Government considered OSCE as an important tool of influencing the future structure of the
European security, but not of solving the problems that threatened Russia's security in
the former Soviet Union. Russia's suggestions regarding the approach as a third party
clearly reflected Russia's insistence on a limited international involvement in the
operations managed by Russia.

Since 1996, Russia's policy regarding OSCE has changed. Russia was already insisting on a
definite division of labor between European institutions and on defining the methods of
their interaction in such specific fields like peace keeping.

Peacekeeping operations under OSCE auspice in the Russian zone of influence has to comply
with several circumstances. The possibility to include the troops of other states -
members of OSCE - beside Russia would increase the OSCE status to a central forum of
coordination in Europe and would reduce the accusations against Russian interests in this
region. The given opportunity would represent an important step for Russia towards
integration in the structures of European security, where Russia will not perceive OSCE
just as a "diversion", but as a significant organization for solving Russia's personal
dilemmas in the ex-USSR.

After the end of the Cold War, UN and Russian Government assigned very different parallel
models of conception of peacekeeping operations. An international peacekeeping operation
under OSCE auspice in the former Soviet Union represents an important challenge for this
organization. But the constructive and consensus framework that prevails in OSCE can serve
as a range for applying the already learned lessons about peace maintaining and for
testing the new counteracting model of the peacekeeping operations with the support from
Russia and UN.

§3 Combating trafficking of human beings

Trafficking of human beings, especially trafficking of children and women represents,
above all, a serious violation of human rights, but also refers to the field of activity
of law authorities. This phenomenon is a major and complex concern related to the
protection of human rights and affects almost all the member states of OSCE, be they
origin, transition, or destination states. The modern trafficking in human beings is a
global phenomenon that comprises all ages and genders, but the biggest part suffering from
trafficking are children and women. The victims are trafficked using numberless means of
compulsion or deceiving methods for a lot of abusive and exploiting purposes. Looking at
the trafficking in human beings in Central and Eastern European countries to destination
countries of Southern and Western Europe and in North America and Asia, the number of
women trafficked for forced prostitution prevails among the number of victims of the
trafficking in human beings. The trafficking for other purposes than prostitution, like
forced marriage and house work does not attract all the attention of the police forces and
the victims of such cases do not have the possibility to ask for help.

"Trafficking of human beings" means recruiting, transporting, transferring, and sheltering
people by using threats or force or any other forms of compulsion, kidnapping, fraud,
deceiving, power abuse or vulnerable position, or else, giving or receiving payments in
order to obtain an approval of a person that controls another person that needs to be
exploited. (UN Protocol, Palermo)

Because this plague dramatically increased in Europe, OSCE rapidly and determinately
responded to this insolence. There are several commitments of OSCE stipulated in the
documents adopted at Summits and Ministerial Councils.

OSCE demands from the participating states:
- eliminating all forms of violence against women, as well as all forms of women trafficking (Moscow, 1991)
- undertaking the necessary measures concerning the elimination of discrimination and
violence against women as well as … of all the forms of trafficking in human beings
(Istanbul, 1999)

- signing and ratifying the UN Palermo Protocol (Vienna 2000)
- taking up a quibble responsibility for trafficking of human beings and undertaking
adequate measures of trafficking prevention, protection of victims, and criminal pursuit
of traffickers (Bucharest 2001, AP OSCE, 2002)

- combating trafficking of human beings in any form (Porto Ministerial Council, 2002)

The main objectives of the anti-trafficking activities organized by OSCE are: monitoring
the anti-trafficking activity and strengthening the coordination between governmental
authorities, civil society, and international bodies; increasing the trafficking
prevention, offering assistance to the victims and facilitating criminal pursuit of

The anti-trafficking activities of OSCE are based on the OSCE principles and the regional
framework of the Action Group for Combating Human Beings Trafficking of the Stability

The policies and the laws of many countries have the tendency to shrink the perspective
regarding the phenomena of trafficking for the purpose of forced prostitution. However,
within the last 10 years, at international debates and especially in the UN documents
there appeared the belief that even if the purposes of trafficking in human beings differ
and change, the basic elements of it remain the same. That is why they reached a consensus
regarding the large definition of trafficking, including that of men and women and
concerning the definition of a large variety of abusive and forced purposes. The first
international definition of trafficking in human beings was developed in the UN Convention
Against Transnational Organized Crime; the Protocol of Prevention, Impediment, and
Punishment of Human Trafficking, Particularly Children and Women, adopted by the General
Assembly in November 2000.

Continues for 19 more pages >>