Conflict and Security in the Former Soviet Union

The Role of the OSCE

Maria Raquel Freire

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9781138707948
• eBook ISBN: 9781351773850
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Title first published in 2003. Conflict and Security in the Former Soviet Union examines the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)'s approach to post-Cold War tensions and conflicts in the former Soviet area, the extent to which the new procedures, mechanisms and instruments developed by the organization are useful, and how the OSCE's activities may reveal innovative contributions to conflict studies.

Chapter 1
Introduction

The OSCE in the Post-Cold War Scenario: Challenges and Risks

After four decades of bipolarity, the end of the Cold War left the prospect of a peaceful Europe where the values of democracy and cooperation would prevail, as stated in the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) 1990 Paris Charter.¹ New states have emerged following the collapse of the Soviet empire and Yugoslavia. New conceptions of security have taken shape, adding to politicomilitary security a socio-economic and cultural dimension. International organizations dealing with security issues in Europe have had to face up to demands to reformulate and adapt to the new conditions. But confronted with inadequate procedures, unclear task definition and the search for a place in the ‘new’ Europe, the rapid succession of events has not allowed the United Nations (UN), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the European Union (EU), the Council of Europe and the CSCE² time for the formulation of proper responses.

Events since 1990 have taken a different course from the peaceful one that was expected. Within the newly independent republics of the former Soviet Union, economic, social, political and historic factors have contributed to tense situations which, in particular in the Republics of Moldova, Georgia, Tajikistan and the Nagorno-Karabakh region, have escalated into armed conflict. Within the Russian Federation, Chechnya also became an area of conflict. Although these were not so much the result of external aggression, but rather the result of inner problems, these conflicts have had a disturbing effect in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) area and continue to do so. Although there are factors which point to a long-term optimism, such as the new republics’ commitment to democratic principles and the rule of law, as stated at the time of their accession to the CSCE, the difficulties emerging from the transition to liberal principles and market oriented economies are enormous. Social problems marked by increasing unemployment, poverty and organized crime are common. Problematic living conditions and the difficult implementation of reforms have generated feelings of discontent. These new risks have added to the emergent transfrontier problems. Drugs and arms trading, people trafficking, environmental, technological and economic imbalances are issues of concern.

The disintegration of the Soviet Union undermined predictability. ‘What we are experiencing … is not the shaping of new coherences but the world breaking into its bits and pieces, bursting like big and little stars from exploding galaxies … each one straining to hold its own small separate pieces from spinning off in their turn’.³ The new republics face a general sense of chaos and anarchy. Political parties are emerging in the former Soviet republics, but organized and effective political programs are still embryonic. The outbreak of armed conflicts has added to the new instability, deepening difficulties and demanding new answers.

The non-homogeneous character of the new republics in the former Soviet area is clear. At present, there is a diversity of regimes in the former Soviet space, including well-established democracies, such as in Estonia, newly democratic post-communist societies, such as in Moldova, and former communist Governments who have not really changed internally, such as Belarus. Their goals and expectations also vary accordingly. The European reality is diverse and economic, social, political and security differences of structures, standards of living and patterns of behavior make of it a puzzle of many different pieces.⁴

The peaceful development of the new republics is fundamental for a stable Europe, building on the general assumption that democracies do not fight each other.⁵ Many share the view that democratic development in the former Soviet area needs to be accompanied by political, economic and social measures.⁶ The active involvement of the OSCE in these countries and the promotion of these different but inter-related areas of activity are fundamental for the progressive development and implementation of democratization processes in the new republics. These developments will certainly take place at different rhythms according to the republic in question, its inner problems and its receptivity to democratic ideals. The long way still ahead for most of the new independent republics of the former Soviet Union constitutes one of the preferential areas for OSCE activity, and a test-case of the organization’s ability to implement its principles and agreed commitments in its area.

This is the general context in which this study develops, a scenario where conflict and security are fundamental concepts framing the new relationships in the former Soviet space. The role of the OSCE in the area and its reach in operational terms are the central focus of our analysis. Is the OSCE applying innovative strategies to deal with tensions and conflicts in the former Soviet Union? To what extent is the organization capable of extending its principles to such a vast area? How does the organization relate to the distinct players involved, including other international organizations in the field, and the Russian Federation, a central player in the former Soviet space? These general questions will set the tone for an in-depth analysis of the OSCE’s activities in the former Soviet Union in all its dimensions.

Conceptual Clarification: ‘Conflict’ and ‘Security’

The clarification of theoretical concepts such as ‘conflict’ and ‘security’ are fundamental aspects for the framing of this analysis. The debate is about the concept of security as a means to clarify the current discussions and the OSCE approach, and conflict as a key to the understanding of the current difficulties affecting economic, political and social developments in the former Soviet space. The analysis of the different approaches developed to deal with conflict and of the evolution of the security concept will frame the OSCE reasoning in a theoretical manner. This will provide the theoretical inputs fundamental to the analysis of the OSCE role in the former Soviet space, clarifying its nature and contribution to stability. The theoretical background inherent to the OSCE reform of procedures and instruments and the establishment of new ones, and the relationship between the organization’s principles, tools and commitments to its activities in the field, will allow a clearer understanding of the organization’s approaches to address conflict and security in the former Soviet space. At a wider level, it will permit us to make inferences about the OSCE’s contribution to the building of stability in the area.

Theorizing Conflict: An Evolving Concept

The bipolar rivalry of the Cold War era absorbed all attention and largely stifled the expression of local tensions, explained as manifestations of the existing antagonism between the two superpowers. ‘The Cold War was fought by political, economic and military means but in important areas and circumstances was a nonviolent “war”’.⁷ There was the transposition of the geopolitical rivalry to other scenarios, with military conflict occurring always outside the European theatre, as for example in the Korean or the Vietnam War where the two superpowers backed up the forces in confrontation.

With the end of the Cold War, the nature of conflicts and their perception has changed. The new conflicts have to do with loss of order, lack of cohesion and attempts to build stability, which in many cases resulted from the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the end of the bipolar dichotomy. Along with the new geopolitical reality, new conflicts erupted throughout the OSCE area. Generally described as regional conflicts,⁸ they are mainly intra-state conflicts. The new threats are no longer coming from a clearly identifiable enemy, such as at the time of the Cold War, but from inner problems and sources.

Nevertheless, the intra-state denomination does not exclude from its conceptualization aspects such as refugee flows or the involvement of external players, such as the Russian Federation, in most of the conflicting areas in the former Soviet Union, factors carrying an external dimension. The conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh involving Armenia and Azerbaijan is the only conflict the OSCE is dealing with in the former Soviet space which directly involves two states. The conflicts in the OSCE area are multifaceted, entailing the combination of political, economic, social, ethnic, gender or cultural aspects. For example, territorial disputes cannot be dissociated from social or cultural fears as in the Moldovan-Transdniestrian case; political or ideological options should not exclude economic inputs as in the Estonian case; as also ethnic considerations should not exclude economic and political factors, as in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

The theoretical understanding of conflict has evolved along with the changing international order in the early 1990s. Many scholars have been searching for explanations. The reasons and motives underlying conflict, its nature and how to approach conflicting situations have been high on the agenda. Explanations have ranged from state-centric to global perspectives, from power politics to broader conceptualizations of motives, including also socio-economic and cultural aspects, and from imposition or balanced solutions to problem-solving approaches. The options offered by theory are vast and cannot certainly be understood as watertight. Theories inter-mingle and it is from the crosscutting of advantages and disadvantages that a clearer and more complete approach to conflict may develop.

Here, after the clarification of the term ‘conflict’, we will focus our attention on the main causes and ‘treatments’ for conflict situations, not excluding the players involved and their motivations. Despite not developing an in-depth analysis of conflict theories and practices, this section aims to broadly define the main aspects related to conflict studies. The objective is that when addressing the OSCE approaches, procedures and instruments, the organization’s reasoning might be clarified and any novelties and contributions by the OSCE to the area might be identified.

Deconstructing the Concept

The literature on conflict analysis offers various definitions of conflict,⁹ all of which share common aspects. Generally, conflict is defined as a clash of interests, values and incompatible goals between two or more parties. The post-Cold War conceptualization of conflict is embedded in more complexity as regards causes and means. There are several possible causes for the emergence of a conflict, including problematic relations between Governments or other major actors, not only at the inter-state level, but also as regards intra-state relations (border disputes, rivalries for regional dominance, disputes over socio-political or economic policies, internal territorial demands, etc.); and domestic conditions (political, social, economic, ethnic and military aspects within a country or with reflexion to the exterior, such as regional differences). Moreover, non-state actors are increasingly involved in these processes, and the importance of local non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has been recognized not only as acting to bring the parties together, but also at a post-conflict level.

The concept of conflict involves different phases, which generally include the emergence, and increasing of tensions, escalation into armed confrontation and de-escalation with the finding of a political settlement or resolution as goal. In the various phases of development of a conflict, there are different instruments with the aim of avoiding conflict, its permanence or re-escalation. These tools must be understood as limited according to the environment, volition of the parties and the proper characteristics of those pursuing preventive, management or post-conflict rehabilitation tasks. Despite not being definitive, this phasing of conflicts according to their chronological evolution permits a better understanding of the escalation and de-escalation sequence of a conflict, as well as of the different means to address difficulties.

Conflict prevention consists of ‘measures which contribute to the prevention of undesirable conflict behavior once some situation involving goal incompatibility has arisen’.¹⁰ Preventing conflict entails the first efforts to avoid escalation, spillover effects or, at a later stage, the re-emergence of armed hostilities. Here, the concept mingles with that of post-conflict rehabilitation. The capability to act instead of react must be developed at various levels, in order that an effective preventive response might be formulated. When the outbreak of war is inevitable, several techniques may be adopted in order to minimize its consequences. Mediation, facilitation and arbitration are available tools which may be complemented by peacekeeping activities. The final aims are the settlement or the resolution of the dispute.

Mediation is a form of third-party intervention in conflict to bring the parties together through negotiation.¹¹ It is essentially a political process, usually non-forceful and semi-public and carried out by an intergovernmental organization, non-governmental organization, a state or group of states or an individual. Mediation leaves decision-making with the parties, though providing an adequate framework for political contacts. Mediation is thus adaptive, reflecting different problems, different parties and different situations. It can be of short or long duration according to the dispute in question. The mediator(s) will seek the maintenance of communication between the parties, persuading them to make concessions and help the parties in creating alternatives. The personal characteristics of the mediator(s) are also fundamental for the proximity they manage to establish with the parties, and in particular circumstances their capacity to influence one of the parties may be advantageous. It is fundamental, though, that the mediator(s) are acceptable to the parties in dispute. The mediator(s) may also contribute...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of Abbreviations
• Dedication
• Chapter 1 Introduction
• Chapter 2 The OSCE as an Institution
• Chapter 3 Turf Wars in the Development of the European Security Architecture
• Chapter 4 Russia, its Neighbors and the OSCE
• Chapter 5 Post-Cold War Conflicts in the OSCE Area
• Chapter 6 Case-study: The OSCE in Estonia
• Chapter 7 Case-study: The OSCE in Moldova
• Chapter 8 Prospects and Conclusions
• Bibliography
• Index