— PRESS RELEASE
The Civilitas Foundation
One Northern Ave. Suite 30
Yerevan, Armenia
Telephones: +37494.800754; +37410.500119
email: [email protected]
web:
Vartan Oskanian, Founder of the Civilitas Foundation, submitted this article
to the European Voice newspaper on the eve of the annual OSCE Meeting of
Ministers in Helsinki, later this week.
Europe needs a new security structure
By Vartan Oskanian
01.12.2008
A former foreign minister argues that the French and Russian presidents are
right to advocate a summit on a new security arrangement for Europe.
Yerevan — Two events of great consequence – one throughout the globe and
the other in our region – rattled the world¹s assumptions in the second half
of this year.
The first – the global financial shake-up – was so broad and so deep that
already this week, the leaders of the world¹s 20 largest economies held an
unprecedented meeting in Washington to discuss cures. Even George Bush¹s
lame duck presidency was no obstacle.
Today, what started as a local loan crisis is hampering development
worldwide and already promises to lead to a global recession.
Now, everyone is already wondering whether the Bretton Woods 1940s-era
system of international institutions is indeed, as Gordon Brown observed,
incapable of handling the financial challenges of the 21st century.
No one foresaw the potential calamity when the glut of Middle Eastern oil
cash flowed into the US, although in the 1980s and mid-1990s such extra cash
had come to South America and Asia, and there, too, it led first to bubbles
and later, of course, an eruption. When a similar bubble and eruption shook
the US this summer, the response was lots of finger-pointing, even by those
who should have known better.
The response was the same when the other significant event – the
Russia-Georgia conflict – broke out in August. Although it was the Georgians
and South Ossetians who were most immediately and directly affected, the
repercussions have indeed spread beyond our region. The long-term effects of
this first of its kind clash, the first instance of use of force at this
scale, between states, will continue to reverberate. Although accumulated
tensions between Moscow and Tbilisi set off the explosion, the underlying
trigger was the issue of NATO expansion. Talk about bringing NATO¹s borders
to Russia¹s frontier, in a region with great strategic, historic and
economic significance for Russia, had raised alarm signals.
But just as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank were not equipped
to supervise, stop, mitigate international imbalances in revenue and cash
accumulation, so it seems the existing post-Cold War security institutions
are unable to override old security frontiers, or prevent the exercise of
prerogatives to prevent other clashes.
Over the past 400 years from the Peace of Westphalia, to the Concert of
Europe, World War I and World War II, the world went through at least four,
perhaps five significant transformations. After each major war and conflict,
a new system emerged, new mechanisms and new institutions were created to
regulate state relationships.
But at the end of the Cold War, the very institutions that contributed to
the defeat of the USSR remained the main pillars of the so-called new world
order. That situation was tolerated at the time of the collapse, when Russia
was weak, in shock and distracted. Insisting that those same institutions,
particularly those dealing with security, operate the way they used to is
neither realistic nor sustainable.
Because the long, expensive, casualty-ridden Cold War ended without a shot
being fired, we have been more complacent, less thoughtful, less strategic
and farsighted about the critical post-war period. That has meant an
expansion, almost by-default, of a security alliance which was born to
contain an assertive, expansionist, aggressive empire that no longer exists.
That has meant a Russian proposal to place missiles in Kaliningrad in
response to a US proposal for a missile shield based in the heart of Europe.
That has meant Russia suspending its participation in the Conventional
Forces in Europe treaty and with it suspending any promise of balance. This
is an untenable formula of a future that is only imagined in terms of a
divided past.
Nearly one hundred years ago, after the first European flare-up of the 20th
century, the Europeans wanted to continue to shape the world in its old
form, and it was the Americans who pioneered their own, new vision of old
geopolitical relationships of power. As a result, America¹s strength and
influence stretched throughout what has been called the American Century.
>From the League of Nations to the Helsinki Final Act, American idealism and
future vision shaped the world.
Today, America is renewing itself again, and reaffirming its commitment to
remaining strong and influential. At the same time, thankfully,
President-Elect Obama has indicated he will be attentive to what Europe is
saying and to forge an indispensable Europe-America partnership. We expect
that he will indeed go forward with a review of missile deployment, the
Iranian showdown, the Iraqi and Afghanistan engagements, and even NATO
expansion.
Presidents Sarkozy and Medvedev have even shown the way. Just as Europeans
convinced President Bush to host last week¹s precedent-setting gathering,
now Europe and Russia have proposed a Summit meeting of the member states of
the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, this time on this
other far-reaching matter of global significance: security issues and
structures. When ministers from the OSCE meet in Helsinki on 4 December,
they should set the process in motion.
The change that candidate Obama promised the Americans is a change that can
include a vision of a truly new order for an interdependent world.
Vartan Oskanian, Armenia¹s Minister of Foreign Affairs from 1998 until
April 2008, is the founder of the Yerevan-based Civilitas Foundation.