|
Only one decision was taken at the Ministerial
Council in Belgrade on 3 and 4 December 2015 – to meet again in
Hamburg the next year. Documents that would have allowed the OSCE to
move forward on issues like migration, gender, sustainable
development, water management and preventing torture failed to reach
the consensus that is required for all OSCE decisions.
However, the 2015 Ministerial Council actively
used to confer on difficult and pressing matters. Forty-two foreign
ministers attended and availed themselves of the opportunity to
conduct a multitude of bilateral and multilateral meetings. The
Russian and Turkish foreign ministers met for the first time after
the downing of the Russian fighter jet near the Syrian-Turkish
border. At an informal lunch hosted by the Chairperson-in-Office,
heads of delegation brainstormed about ways to move forward on
reconsolidating European security.
This Ministerial Council brought to the fore what
many have been saying for years: the success of the meeting that
culminates the work of the annually rotating Chairmanship each
December should not be measured by the number of new documents that
are adopted. The OSCE has a large corpus of decisions, commonly
called commitments, which guide and will continue to guide the
Organization’s work on a wide range of issues. Yes, it would have
been helpful to receive fresh guidance on account of the many new
developments. Equally, a more tangible outcome could have provided
additional motivation to OSCE experts working in the different
thematic fields and given impetus to the Organization’s work. But
there is already a lot of work to be done to support implementation
of existing commitments without adding new ones.
The Ministerial Council, first and foremost, is
about participating States coming together at a high political level
to grapple with the serious security issues facing the region. That
is why some participants came out of the 2015 OSCE Ministerial
Council more optimistic than when they went in. Below is a sampling
of expectations and reflections voiced during the meeting.
“The Organization faces difficult crisis –
all of us know that – but the good message that we have heard during
these two days here in Belgrade is that everybody realizes the
importance of the OSCE and the importance of restarting the
dialogue. This is an important element, and we will see how we are
able to develop that. On the crisis in and around Ukraine, we have
heard particularly the idea of really sticking, all of us, to the
Minsk Agreements, having them complied with by all the parties. So
this is the positive side. Another important element of the meeting
has been that many delegations, almost all of them, have
acknowledged that to face the many challenges affecting the region –
they have been speaking about terrorism, but also about migration –
we need unity among ourselves. If you put these elements together:
the situation in Ukraine, the perspective that we have with the
Minsk Agreements, and the great concern of everybody that we need to
work together, then this is what, looking to the future, allows us
to be a little more optimistic now than when we arrived here in
Belgrade.”
Ignacio Ybáñez, Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs of Spain
“This Ministerial Council is taking place in a
very complex environment, which, as you know, is marked by the
terrorist phenomenon. In addition to this we have this huge flow of
migration, of refugees, the ongoing crisis in and around Ukraine
and, of course, the persistence of the protracted conflicts in the
Black Sea area. Our expectations briefly are the following: Romania,
in its capacity as the chair of the OSCE Security Committee, has
been doing its best to facilitate adopting a decision by this
Ministerial Meeting on combating violent extremism and
radicalization that lead to terrorism. We also hope the Ministerial
Meeting will adopt a document on the OSCE’s role in Ukraine, which
should emphasize the importance of restoring respect for the
fundamental principles of Ukraine’s territorial integrity,
sovereignty and independence. Definitely we hope that this
Ministerial Meeting would mark tangible progress towards the
resolution of protracted conflicts, like the one in the Republic of
Moldova, and we do hope that on this specific conflict will be
adopted a Ministerial Statement on the negotiations in the
Transdniestrian settlement process in the “5+2” format.”
Lazăr Comănescu, Minister of Foreign Affairs of
Romania
“This is a serious and complicated time, not only
in Europe but everywhere in the world. This Ministerial Council is
showing that the OSCE has the value and credibility. It is the main
organization for security dialogue in Europe. Mongolia is an OSCE
participating State located in Asia. We believe that European and
Asian security is indivisible. Today, the OSCE is not only a
security organization for Europe, it is also a security organization
for Eurasia, including Mongolia. It is very important to continue to
address common security challenges among the Eurasian countries.
Therefore, we very much value the discussions taking place here,
also the achievements. I am not referring only to final documents,
but also to the contacts being made and the talks being held. Also
in the future, the OSCE will be for us the main forum for
international talks on security issues.”
Lundeg Purevsuren, Minister for Foreign Affairs of
Mongolia
Reinforcing efforts to counter terrorism
Two Declarations on countering terrorism were
adopted at the Ministerial Council in Belgrade: Reinforcing OSCE
Efforts to Counter Terrorism in the Wake of Recent Terrorist Attacks
(MC.DOC/3/15) and Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism and
Radicalization that Lead to Terrorism (VERLT) (MC.DOC/4/15). These
Declarations underscore the commitment of participating States to
remain united in combating terrorism and to take resolute action in
this regard. Both Declarations reaffirm the UN’s leading role in
international efforts to prevent and counter terrorism and violent
extremism.
To reinforce the OSCE’s efforts to counter
terrorism participating States have agreed to continue to fully
implement their commitments in this area, including those related to
the phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters, to preventing and
suppressing terrorism financing and recruitment of members of
terrorist groups, eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists,
as well as comply with their obligations under international law.
These include the UN Charter, UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR)
2170 condemning the abuse of human rights by extremist groups in
Iraq and Syria, UNSCR 2178 on foreign terrorist fighters, UNSCR 2199
on the illicit financing of terrorist organizations, UNSCR 2249 on
preventing and suppressing terrorist acts and other obligations
under international human rights law, international refugee law and
international humanitarian law.
Countering VERLT following a multi-dimensional approach is now a
strengthened strategic focus area for OSCE counter-terrorism
efforts. Participating States have recognized that the OSCE's
comprehensive and co-operative approach to security provides
comparative advantages in combating terrorism by identifying and
addressing the conditions conducive to terrorism, including violent
extremism, through all relevant OSCE instruments and structures. In
particular, this consensus ensures a visible profile of the OSCE
following the high level discussion on countering violent extremism
in the margins of the UN General Assembly and the expected adoption
of a UN Action Plan on preventing violent extremism in 2016.
Tackling the World Drug Problem
The Ministerial Council Declaration on the OSCE
Activities in Support of Global Efforts in Tackling the World Drug
Problem (MC.DOC/2/15) underscores the OSCE participating States’
broad consensus to continue working together in addressing threats
to their security and stability posed by illicit drugs. The
Declaration reconfirms the OSCE Concept for Combating the Threat of
Illicit Drugs and the Diversion of Chemical Precursors (PC.DEC/1048)
and sends an important political message on the OSCE’s role in
complementing the UN in preparation for the forthcoming UN General
Assembly Special Session on the world drug problem. It reaffirms the
role of implementation of the three UN International Drug Control
Conventions (1961, 1971 and 1988) and the willingness of
participating States to achieve targets and goals set out in the UN
Political Declaration and Plan of Action on International
Cooperation towards an Integrated and Balanced Strategy to Counter
the World Drug Problem, adopted in Vienna in 2009.
In 2016 the OSCE executive structures will
continue to facilitate strengthening further international
co-operation to achieve the goals set out in these Declarations, as
well as to provide necessary assistance to interested participating
States.
Youth and Security
The members of the Ministerial Council took note
of the efforts of the current and previous OSCE Chairmanships and
stressed the importance of promoting the implementation of the OSCE
commitments on youth, particularly in the area of education and the
role young people can play to support participating States in
implementing OSCE commitments.
For a New Start on Resolving the Transdniestrian
Conflict
Talks to resolve the conflict between Moldova and
the breakaway region Transdniestria were first held in the “5+2”
format in 2005. The format includes the sides (Transdniestria and
Moldova) as well as the OSCE, Russia and Ukraine as mediators and
the European Union and the United States as observers. The OSCE
chairs the negotiations.
Despite the best efforts of the Chairmanship and
the Mission to Moldova, no “5+2” meeting could be organized in 2015.
The Ministerial Statement on the Negotiations on the Transdniestrian
Settlement Process in the "5+2" Format, however, marks a
reconfirmation of the willingness to engage in further meaningful
dialogue aimed at the ultimate resolution of the Transdnistrian
conflict. As such, it provides a solid basis for the German
Chairmanship and the Special Representative of the
Chairperson-in-Office, Cord Meier-Klodt, to continue these efforts
in 2016.
OSCE Parallel Civil Society Conference
Chairmanship Self-Evaluation, a New Tradition
The OSCE Parallel Civil Society Conference that
meets annually on the eve of the Ministerial Council to hold up a
mirror to participating States’ implementation of human dimension
commitments has become a tradition. The first one was held in 2010
on the occasion of the OSCE Summit in Astana. Meeting again in
Vilnius the following year, a core group of civil society
organizations (CSOs) formed the Civic Solidarity Platform, which
since has grown to 80 CSOs and conducts not only the annual meetings
but also other events and campaigns throughout the year.
Unfortunately, this time round in Belgrade, the
list of alarming trends was again long. Activists discussed the
shrinking space for civil society, the challenges posed by
migration, preventing torture and enforced disappearances, and
freedom of expression – with OSCE Representative on Freedom of the
Media Dunja Mijatović joining as a guest speaker. They presented
their recommendations, including the “Belgrade Declaration: Freedom
of Expression under Threat” to representatives of the OSCE Troika
for consideration by the Ministerial Council.
Another tradition began in 2014 under the Swiss
OSCE Chairmanship. In 2014, Switzerland was the first to act upon
the Civic Solidarity Platform’s proposal that the Chairmanship
conduct a self-evaluation of its own performance in the area of
human rights. Serbia agreed to follow suit when it took on the
leadership of the Organization in 2015.
According to the methodology applied by
Switzerland and followed by Serbia, the process of self-evaluation
consists of three parts: reports by independent institutions,
comments by CSOs and responses by the relevant ministries and
government offices. At the Belgrade meeting, the coalition of
Serbian CSOs responsible for monitoring of Serbia’s Chairmanship,
led by the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia, presented
its written comments, completing the second step of the process.
The Serbian Foreign Ministry used the same
criterion as Switzerland for determining in which areas the
self-evaluation was to be conducted: they should be topics on which
OSCE reports had been published in the last five years. The Ministry
chose gender equality, elections, freedom of assembly and the status
of Roma. The CSO coalition added another three topics it deemed
important: freedom of expression, the situation of national
minorities and the protection of human rights defenders.
The assessments and recommendations to the Serbian
government in the 131-page CSO report are detailed and many. To name
just a few: changes in the election law to enable members of ethnic
minorities to represent their interests and, in general, a
comprehensive minority integration policy; a law on freedom of
assembly (currently Serbia has none); new measures for social
inclusion of Roma using the effective health mediation mechanism as
a model; a media scene free from pressures on media owners, editors
and journalists; and an environment in which human rights defenders
can act without fear of reprisals.
The CSO coalition also comments on the
self-evaluation process itself. It recommends not to limit topics to
those covered by OSCE reports, as others may be more urgent. And it
suggests completing the CSO feedback already at the start of a
Chairmanship, so that the year of the mandate can be used to
implement recommendations and begin monitoring them. Responses from
the relevant government ministries are to come.
Read more:
Outcome documents of the 2015 OSCE Parallel Civil
Society Conference, including Feedback by the CSO Coalition for the
Monitoring of Serbia’s OSCE Chairmanship:
www.helsinki.org.rs/hrights_t12.html
More information on the Civic Solidarity Platform:
www.civicsolidarity.org
Panel of Eminent Persons on European Security as a
Common Project
Rebooting European Security
It was at the Ministerial Council in Basel in
December 2014 that the then Chairperson-in-Office, Swiss Foreign
Minister Didier Burkhalter, in the name of the OSCE Troika, called
into being the Panel of Eminent Persons on European Security as a
Common Project. A year later, the final report of the deliberations
by the group of seasoned statespersons and experts from across the
OSCE region, entitled “Back to Diplomacy”, attracted strong interest
at the Ministerial Council hosted by the Serbian Chairmanship in
Belgrade. Launched on the first day of the meeting, it was discussed
at the traditional Ministerial luncheon and the subject of a special
side event and press conference. Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger, who
chaired the panel, summarized the main takeaways of the report:
“Every single panel member agreed that the current
situation is actually the most serious and dangerous challenge to
European security we have seen since the disintegration of the
Soviet Union over the last 25 years. Our first, short-term
recommendation is that we should try to make the situation as it
stands less dangerous. We feel very strongly that measures to avoid
misunderstanding, misinterpretation or accidental escalation need
urgently to be concluded between all concerned parties. One
particular aspect of this refers to updating the Vienna Document
[the OSCE's major document on military confidence- and
security-building measures].
Secondly, we found in our discussions that the
narratives which we have on the western side are so diametrically
opposed to the narrative in Russia that these narratives in and of
themselves aggravate the situation. They make rapprochement, they
make trust building an even bigger challenge. This is why we set out
in such detail in our report three different narratives.
Thirdly, any fundamental effort to reconsolidate
European security needs to be built on the basis of more progress in
the negotiations in Minsk to resolve the crisis in and around
Ukraine. Our report stresses the importance of this and we even
suggest, as we move forward, an enlargement of the so-called
Normandy format (which brings together Russia, Ukraine France and
Germany), to include, for example, the United States and the United
Kingdom.
Finally, in the larger strategic dimension, we
propose that a robust, long-term diplomatic process be started to
bring the parties to the table again. We need to figure out a way to
talk to each other again; we need to set in motion a diplomatic
machine, based on the Helsinki principles – not intending to change
or soften or weaken Helsinki but to strengthen and to reaffirm these
principles. I will conclude by suggesting that if such a diplomatic
process is set in motion, beginning hopefully with the German OSCE
Chairmanship this coming year, we would like to consider this a
long-term process, the ultimate aim of which should be a summit
meeting. Such a summit, if it is to be successful, to lead to
strengthening European security, needs careful preparation,
bilateral consultations in small groups, confidential discussions.
Sitting at a table together, working out diplomatic solutions based
on Helsinki is better than fighting in Donbas. This is why I hope
our report will make a difference. I hope it will be taken up, as
the OSCE, as the countries involved, move forward.”
Read more:
Back to Diplomacy: Final Report and
Recommendations of the Panel of Eminent Persons on European Security
as a Common Project:
www.osce.org/networks/205846
Lessons Learned for the OSCE from its Engagement
in Ukraine: Interim Report and Recommendations of the Panel of
Eminent Persons on European Security as a Common Project:
www.osce.org/networks/164561
Reviving Co-operative Security in Europe through
the OSCE Contribution of the OSCE Network of Think Tanks and
Academic Institutions to the Panel of Eminent Persons 2015:
www.osce.org/networks/188176
“Rethinking the OSCE and Security in Europe” by
Fred Tanner in Security Community, Issue 1, 2015:
www.osce.org/magazine
More information at:
www.osce.org/networks/pep
|
