New European Security Architecture
A. Official Documents and Declarations
I. Security-related
Organisations for Europe
The European Security landscape during the Cold War was characterised
by the opposition of the US- led NATO and the Soviet-dominated Warsaw Pact.
This bipolar security structure ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Contrary to many peoples' expectations, this did not lead to a secure environment:
numerous conflicts erupted in the Soviet Union's successor states and in
the Balkans. During the past decade, the question of how to establish an
institutional structure to ensure security within Europe has been widely
discussed. This institutional structure, which should provide a framework
for security cooperation among European states, has come to be known as
the "New European Security Architecture" (NESA) - a denomination presumably
designed to obscure the overabundance of institutions and its resulting
overlap of competencies within the European political/institutional landscape.
This site presents a brief overview of the institutions making up the NESA,
with a particular focus upon Russia's varying relationships to them.
Organisations forming part of the NESA include:
1. The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
The former Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE),
was founded on 3 July 1973 in Helsinki. Initially the CSCE was a political
process aimed at setting out the fundamental principles needed to ease
tensions between East and West, and at building confidence among members
of the two blocs. After the end of the Cold War, it was institutionalised
into an all-inclusive European security organisation. It now counts 55
members: all European states plus Canada and the United States.
The first step in the direction towards NESA was the CSCE-Charter
of Paris of November 1990, in which the 35 signatory states declared
their recognition of representative democracy as the only acceptable political
system. Renamed to OSCE at the Budapest
Summit in December 1994, the organisation was intended to be developed
into a "primary instrument for early warning, conflict prevention and crisis
management from Vancouver to Vladivostok". The expectation existed that
the OSCE could provide a framework for security cooperation in Europe which
integrates the United States, Europe and the Russian Federation.
See the OSCE's
Lisbon Declaration from December 1996.
The OSCE-Charter
of Istanbul in November 1999 determined a security concept for Europe
in the 21st century.
The Chapter
III of the Helsinki Document from 1992 provides for co-operation with
NATO and WEU in peacekeeping operations.
The Position of Russia within the OSCE
As laid out in the Helsinki Final Act and subsequent relevant documents,
the participating states - including Russia - committed to "endeavour in
good faith and in a spirit of co-operation to reach a rapid and equitable
solution to their disputes on the basis of international law". To
this end, it undertook to allow participating countries to "use such means
as negotiation, enquiry, good offices, mediation, conciliation, arbitration,
judicial settlement or other peaceful means of their own choice, including
any settlement procedure agreed to in advance of disputes to which they
are parties". See the Conference
of Valetta.
OSCE members undertook to respect the sovereignty, independence and
territorial integrity of all members and their right to choose the means
to ensure their own security.
2. The United Nations Organisation (UNO)
The United Nations Organisation (UNO)
was founded in 1945 with the signing of the United Nations Charter. Preserving
world peace is the central purpose of the United Nations. Under the UN
Charter, member states agree to settle disputes by peaceful means and to
refrain from the use or threat of military force against other states.
See Chapter VII of the
UN Charter for the rights and obligations of UN-members. The two main
bodies of the UN are the following:
-
The General
Assembly is the main deliberating body of the United Nations, and
is composed of representatives of all member states, each of which has
one vote. Decisions on important questions, such as those of peace and
security, of the admission of new members and of budgetary concern, require
a two-thirds majority. Decisions on other questions are reached by a simple
majority.
-
The Security
Council: While the decisions of the General Assembly are not legally-binding
for participating governments, the decisions of the Security Council are.
Under the UN Charter, it has the primary responsibility for the maintenance
of international peace and security. Under international law, the Security
Council alone has the power to authorise the use of force against one state,
and such decisions are legally binding to all member states. The Security
Council consists of five permanent members and ten members elected by the
General Assembly. Only permanent members can veto Security Council resolutions.
As a permanent member of the Security Council, Russia has a veto-power.
To apply pressure on a state, the Security Council is able to use different
mandatory sanctions, like complete or partial interruption of economic
relations.
3. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)
The North
Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was set up by the Washington Treaty
of April 1949 as a collective defence alliance of ten European states along
with the US and Canada. For about 40 years NATO served to preserve the
balance of power between the two blocs. NATO's post-Cold War transformation
began with the London
Declaration of 1990, which stated that the Alliance no longer considers
the Soviet Union as an adversary. Since then, the development of the Alliance
has been characterised by two main features: its enlargement through the
admission of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic in 1999 and its
adoption of peacekeeping and crisis management functions. To follow the
development of the Alliance, compare:
Against the background of NATO's announcement that it intended to enlarge,
the Alliance signed with Russia a Founding
Act on Mutual Relations, Co-operation and Security in an attempt to
ameliorate their relationship. The creation of a Permanent Joint Council
provides for regular meetings between both parties; however, this arrangement
offers Russia a merely consultative role. The complexity of the relationship
of NATO with Russia, which lies somewhere between partnership and confrontation,
is reflected in a wide range of documents and primary sources presented
in our Formal Relations Archive. The possibility
for each party to influence the decisions of the other remains through
joint consultation and the permanent exchange of information.
4. The Western European Union (WEU)
The Western European Union
(WEU) was first established as a mutual assistance commitment with the
1948 Treaty of Brussels,
developed into a security organisation for cooperation in the defence and
security of its ten member states, all of which are both NATO and EU members.
After having served as a mere forum for consultation in the previous decades,
it experienced a period of reactivation in the mid 1980s. It was within
the context of WEU that the Petersberg Tasks were agreed upon. See the
Petersberg
Declaration of the WEU Council of Ministers, Bonn, June 19th, 1992.
WEU´s new role in European security is recorded in several documents.
See
WEU has developed relations with Russia consisting of political consultations
and practical cooperation on subjects of mutual interest. Regular consultations
are held between the Secretary-General, the Permanent Representative of
the Presidency and the Russian Ambassador.
4. The European Union (EU)
The European Union (EU),
although for a long time a civilian-only organisation, is now in the process
of developing a Common Policy on Security and Defence and therefore bears
the potential of becoming another security organisation in Europe. Within
the EU, the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), is increasingly
being developed as a tool for expressing security views and interests.
Its fundamental objectives
are listed in Title V of the Treaty of Amsterdam. In the pursuit of these
aims, the EU promotes policies that are in accordance with the UN
Charter, the OSCE Final Act and the Charter of Paris.
5. The Council of Europe
The Council of Europe was established
in 1949 by ten Western European states in the Treaty
of London. The aim of the Council of Europe is to safeguard the principles
contained in the European
Convention on Human Rights and to facilitate the economic and social
progress of its member states. Its main instrument for promoting the rule
of law and human rights is the European
Court of Human Rights.
How this institution works and what influence it is able to impose
on a particular state can be seen in the
rules of procedure before the Court and the effects
of judgements and cases.
Another instrument of the Council of Europe is the Parliamentary Assembly.
See examples of its work relevant to Russia:
II. The European Security Architecture
These institutions differ in the depth, scope and role that they
actually play within NESA. To summarize their different approaches to NESA,
this section analyses the perspectives of the main security actors in Europe:
the Russian Federation, the United States, and Europe.
III. Approaches
1. Russian Perspective
Russia promotes OSCE as the main organisation for security co-operation
in Europe, and has consistently proposed to create a system of collective
security under its aegis. See references in the Foreign
Policy Concept of the Russian Federation, Moscow, June 2000. However,
the tasks of OSCE remain limited to the non-military domain, e.g. election
monitoring, conflict prevention, and confidence building measures.
Russian politicians oppose unilateral use of force such as the Atlanctic
Alliance's intervention in Kosovo. Such use of force is regarded
by Russia as an attempt to undermine the Non-Intervention Regime, which
is the foundation of the current international law. Instead, Russian officials
promote a world order based on multilateralism, represented by a collective
security system.
Russia feels particularly threatened by the enlargement of NATO. As
the Atlantic Alliance proceeds to admit new members and is moving
its borders closer to the former Soviet Republics, Russia increasingly
perceives this action as invading its former sphere of influence or even
encircling its territory.
2. U.S. Perspective
The United States have been sponsoring NATO as the central organisation
within NESA. In 1994 NATO established Partnership for Peace (PfP) within
the framework of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council. Russia joined
in 1996. This programme comprises joint planning, training, and exercises
aimed at strengthening the ability of individual members in undertaking
missions within the fields of peacekeeping, search and rescue, and humanitarian
operations.
In the realm of security, U.S. strategy towards the Russian Federation
has three major goals which should be pursued through both bilateral and
multilateral channels.
See Strengthening
Transatlantic Security - A U.S. Strategy for the 21st Century,
US Department of Defense, December 2000.
For a detailed description of the official US position on NESA, see
relevant excerpts of the United
States Security Concept for Europe and NATO, Department of Defense
- Office of International Security Affairs, 2001.
3. European Perspective
In the aftermath of the Cold War, countries within both Western and
Eastern Europe shared the common goal of establishing a security arrangement
that would overcome their division. Instead of simplying the Cold War security
structure by suppressing organisations with an exclusively Western membership,
Western countries decided to expand their organisations to include former
socialist states, which were also keen to join. A decade on, NATO has admitted
three new member states, while the European Union's expansion is still
pending.
The creation of the Common European Security and Defence Policy (CESDP)
by the EU an autonomous security component has not caused the EU to step
away from NATO. Western European states continue to regard NATO as the
primary provider of collective defence. Instead of making a choice between
the existing organisations, Western European countries opted to forge links
between those that already existed. One of the means conceived to this
aim was the 'double-hatting' of national forces, which means that the same
troops were assigned for the use of both NATO and WEU. 'Double hatting'
is made possible by NATO's concept of Combined Joint Task Forces - see
information provided by NATO
on CJTF.
The European Member States of NATO are still unwilling to loosen
their bond of security with the United States. Obviously, U.S. influence
constrains relations between the Russian Federation and the EU. Security
issues are included within the political dialogue prescribed in by "Title
II of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement". As the European Union
has a strong interest in the stability of the Russian Federation due of
their geographic proximity, cooperation will likely evolve through dialogue
and coordination in the realm of security as well as economics.
The interests of the Central and Eastern European countries are almost
identical to those of Western Europe. With the exception of Russia-oriented
Belarus, all states have an interest in close co-operation or even integration
into Western structures, i.e., the European Union and NATO. Some former
Soviet republics also fear that Russian influence could threaten their
security.
The real chances of being admitted into these organisations vary from
country to country. In view of Russia's strong opposition to the admission
of former Soviet republics into NATO, further enlargement of the Alliance
could prove to be highly delicate.
B.
Speeches and Statements
-
US President G.W. Bush: Speech
at the NATO Headquarter, Brussels, 13 June 2001
-
Joint Statement from the EU-Russia
Summit, 17 May 2001
-
Russian Foreign Minister I. Ivanov: Russian
Foreign Policy at Contemporary Stage, First Russian International Studies
Association Convention, 20 April 2001
-
Russian Foreign Minister I. Ivanov: Remarks
on the Talks with the Secretary General of the Council of the European
Union, Javier Solana, Moscow, 5 April 2001
-
SG/HR J. Solana: Intervention,
EU-Russia Forum for Foreign and Security Policy, 15 February 2001
-
Russian Foreign Minister I. Ivanov: Global
and regional security at the beginning of the 21st century, 3 February
2001
-
Secretary General of NATO G. Robertson: European
Security in the 21st Century, 25 January 2001
-
SG/HR J. Solana: NATO
and European Security into the 21st Century, Oxford University Union
Society, 13 May 1998
-
Russian President B. Yeltsin: Russia'
Place and role in the period of multipolar world formation, Speech
at the Russian Foreign Ministry on 12 May 1998
-
Afanassievsky, A.: Building
European Security Globally, XIIth NATO Workshop On Political-Military
Decision Making, Dresden, Germany 18-22 June 1995
-
Secretary General of NATO Claes, W.: NATO
and the Evolving Euro-Atlantic Security Architecture, NATO Review,
December 1994/January 1995
-
Russian President B. Putin:
Speech at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 26 January 2001
C. Research Studies
-
Bordachev, T.: Russia
and the "Expanded Europe": New Risks and New Opportunities, Carnegie
Center Moscow, December 2000
-
Nazarkin, Yuri: Russian
Perception of European Security, Geneva Centre for Security Policy,
August 2000
-
Trenin, D.: Russia-NATO
relations: Time to pick up with pieces, NATO Review, Spring - Summer
2000
-
Blank, S.: Threats to Russian Security.
The View from Moscow, US-Army War College, July 2000 (pdf)
-
Perovic, J.: Internationalization of Russian
Regions and the Consequences for Russian Foreign and Security Policy,
April 2000
-
Arbatov, A.:
The Transformation of Russian Military Doctrine: Lessions learned from
Kosovo and Chechnya, Marshall Center, (without year)
-
Blank, S. / Johnsen, W. T. / Young, T.: European
Security: Washington's Shaping Strategy in Action, US-Army War College,
March 2000 (in pdf)
-
Van Heuven, M.: Where
will NATO be Ten Years from now?, ZEI Discussion Paper C 67, 2000
-
Dunay, Pal: Coping
with Uncertainty: The Vienna and Berlin Mechanisms in light of the Experience
of their First Decade, Geneva Centre for Security Policy, 2000
-
Smith, M. A.: Russian
Thinking on European Security After Kosovo, Conflict Studies Research
Center, August 1999
-
Rodman, P.: Drifting
Apart? Trends in US-European Relations, Nixon Center, June 1999
-
Petrov, N.: Russia's
Regions or Region's Russia? Prospective Realignment of the Nation's Political
Subdivisions, Carnegie Center Moscow, March 1999
-
Blackwill, R.D.: The
Future of Transatlantic Relations, Council on Foreign Relations Task
Force Report, February 1999
-
Papasotiriou, H.: The
Problem of European Security. The Russian Factor, Article in the book
"Security Dilemmas in Eurasia", Athens 1999
-
Kober, S.: NATO
Expansion Flashpoint No. 3: Kaliningrad, Cato Foreign Policy Briefing
No. 46, February 1998
-
Dunay, Pal: How
Will the European Union Meet the 21st Century or In What Shape Will the
21st Century Find the European Union, Geneva Centre for Security Policy,
August 1998
-
Tanner, Fred: Conflict
Management and European Security: The Problem of Collective Solidarity,
Geneva Centre for Security Policy, August 1998
-
Blank, S.: European
Security and NATO Enlargement: A View from Central Europe, Strategic
Studies Institute, April 1998
-
Conetta, C.: America's New
Deal with Europe: NATO Primacy and Double Expansion, Project on Defense
Alternatives, October 1997
-
Højberg, A. E.: The
European Security Structure, NATO Review, November 1995
D. Parliamentary
Reports
-
Stabilising and Securing
Europe: The EU's Contribution, NATO Parliamentary Assembly, Draft General
Report, 12 October 2000
-
European Security: The Debate
in NATO and the European Union, Congressional Research Service (CRS),
25 April 2000
-
On
Relations with the Russian Federation, NATO Parliamentary Assembly,
1999 Annual Session
-
EU,
WEU, and NATO: Towards a European Security and Defence Identity, NATO
Parliamentary Assembly, 6 October 1999
-
Europe in Russia's foreign
policy concept, WEU-Assembly, 5 December 2000
|