ICRP Resource Materials
The Institute for Cultural Relations Policy publishes online resource materials that might
be beneficial for students, researchers or anyone who deal with International Relations.
Calendar of international relations
A timeline of significant historical events of international relations
Summary of aims, facts and analysis of future prospects of international organisations
The Arctic Council is an intergovernmental forum, which provides means for cooperation, coordination and interaction among its eight members: Canada, United States, the Russian Federation, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark (representing Greenland and Faroe Islands). The main focus of the Arctic Council lays on common issues of sustainable development and environmental protection of Arctic region.
The first step to cooperation of member states of the Arctic Council was done in 1991, when the eight states signed the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS), sometimes also referred as Finish Initiative. APES is a non-binding agreement among the signatories on environmental protection of Arctic region. Signed by USA, Soviet Union, Canada, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark, it is considered to be a great international accomplishment in the post-Cold War era.
The Arctic council was officially established on 19th September 1996 with signing the Ottawa Declaration by its eight current member states. The Council promotes international cooperation among its member stats, Arctic indigenous communities and other inhabitants of Arctic. The Arctic Council is the only organization for cooperation on governmental level in the Arctic region.
The Arctic Council consists of eight members states and six organizations which represent Arctic indigenous people. These organizations have status of permanent participants and actively participate and consult on issues regarding the Arctic indigenous people. The permanent participants include:
- Aleut International Association – non-profit organization in Alaska focusing on environmental and cultural issues of Aleut;
- Arctic Athabaskan Council – international organization defending the rights and interests of American and Canadian Athabaskan;
- Gwich´in Council International – non-profit organization representing Gwich´in in northwest territories, Yukon and Alaska;
- Inuit Circumpolar Council – non-governmental organization which represents Inuits of Alaska, Greenland, Canada and Chukotka;
- Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North – non-governmental organization representing 41 indigenous peoples of North Russia, Siberia and Far East;
- Saami Council – international non-governmental organization including Finland, Russia, Norway and Sweden, focusing on Saami policy.
Besides member states and permanent participants, the Arctic Council includes also a status of observer. This status is open to other non-member states, non-governmental inter-governmental and global organizations. The observers countries include: Germany, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom, France, Spain, China, Italy, India, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Switzerland. The international organizations whit status of observers are for example following: International Red Cross Federation, the Nordic Council, United Nations Environment Programme, International Union for Conservation of Nature. The observers engage in the Council mainly through the Working Groups.
There are six working groups in the Arctic Council:
- The Arctic Contaminants Action Program (ACAP) – works to support national actions to reduce emissions;
- The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) – focuses on environments, ecosystems, human populations, provides scientific advices concerning the climate change;
- The Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna Working Group (CAFF) – works to ensure sustainability of Arctic’s living resources;
- The Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response Working Group (EPPR) – focuses on protection of Arctic environment from accidental release of pollutants or radionuclides;
- The Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment Working Group (PAME) – focuses on protection of Arctic marine environment;
- The Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG) – focuses on sustainable development in Arctic region.
All decisions of the Arctic Council are based on consensus of eight Member States after consultation with six permanent participants. The chairmanship of the Artic Council is based on rotating principle and changes every two years. Each Member State nominate one Senior Arctic Official (SAO) which represents the country’s interests in the Council. It is usually a representative from country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Senior Arctic Officials and Permanent Participants of the Arctic Council meet on regular basis, at least twice a year.
Activities and future prospects
The Arctic Council, mainly since 2001, devotes its attention to cooperation on the climate change and environmental issues. The studies carried by the Arctic Council draw the attention to affect of climate change in Arctic on the rest of the world. The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment was done in 2004 and 2005 by Arctic Council and Arctic Science Committee, which presented the outcomes of monitoring of arctic environment. The challenge for Arctic Council and international community regarding the environmental issue are changing living conditions for around 4 million Arctic inhabitants.
The Arctic Council is also involved in projects regarding the Arctic Ocean, more specifically to marine environment, assessment of acidification of the Arctic Ocean and the response of the ecosystem, the issue of changing climate and its effect on snow, water and permafrost and monitoring circumpolar biodiversity. Furthermore, the Arctic Council is engaged in project concerning the Arctic marine navigation.
The Arctic Council supports business activities in the Arctic region by establishing Arctic Economic Council in 2014. It provides means for cooperation and dialogue between the Arctic Council and business sector in order to promote economic development.
Currently, the chairmanship of the Arctic Council is held by Finland (2017 – 2019). The finish chairmanship set as a main focus following areas: environmental protection, connectivity, meteorological cooperation and promoting education. Finland aims to bring environmental issues of the Arctic region to the centre of the activity of the Arctic Council, invites member states to share the results of monitoring on global level and exchange of best practices.
The Caribbean Community (CARICOM), originally called the Caribbean Community and Common Market, was established under the Treaty of Chaguaramas which came into force on August 1, 1973. The first four signatories were Barbados, Jamaica, Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago. CARICOM replaced the Caribbean Free Trade Association (CARIFTA), in force between 1965 and 1972, created to provide a lasting economic relationship between the English-speaking nations in the Caribbean after the dissolution of the West Indies Federation on May 31, 1962. On 17 October 1991, it was granted observer status by the United Nations General Assembly. On July 5, 2001, a revised version of the Treaty of Chaguaramas which included in the CARICOM the CSME (Market and the unique economy of the Caricom), was signed by the heads of government of the member states during the twenty-second conference in Nassau in the Bahamas.
Currently in CARICOM there are:
- 15 members – Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Haiti, Montserrat, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname and Barbados, Guyana, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago were the four founding members.
- 5 associate members – Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and Turks and Caicos Island.
- 8 observers – Aruba, Colombia, Curaçao, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Sint Marteen and Venezuela.
In May 2016 CARICOM signed a MOU (memorandum of understanding) with the ACP Legal Association of Guadalupe in order to recognize and support the implementation of the business law framework in the Caribbean, this project is called OHADAC that is the acronym for the French “Organization pour l’Harmonisation du Droit des Affaires en les Caraïbes”. The aim is to enhance economic integration across the entire Caribbean and to increase trade and international investment.
The four major pillars of CARICOM are: economic integration, foreign policy coordination, human and social development and security. The stated objectives for CARICOM community are:
- To improve standards of living and work
- The full employment of labor and other factors of production
- Accelerated, coordinated and sustained economic development and convergence
- Expansion of ttrade and economic relations with Third States
- Enhanced levels of international competitiveness
- Organization for increased production and productivity
- Achievement of a greater measure of economic leverage
- Effectiveness of Member States in dealing with Third States, groups of States and entities of any description
- The enhanced coordination of Member States’ foreign and foreign economic policies and enhanced functional cooperation
CARICOM is the oldest surviving integration movement in the developing world. Its achievements along the way are many. Great strides have been made, particularly through functional cooperation in education, in health, in culture, in security. Its Single Market functions, and it is a respected voice in international affairs because of a coordinated foreign policy.
The Council of Europe
The Council of Europe is an international organization focused on promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law in Europe. The Council of Europe was founded on May 5, 1949 by the Treaty of London. The Treaty of London was signed in London by ten states: Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom.
10 signatory states: Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The organization was joined by central and eastern European states during the early 1990s and now covers 47 member states, all European states except Belarus, Kazakhstan, Vatican City and European territories with limited recognition such as the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Northern Cyprus, Transnistria and Kosovo.
First accession took place on August 9, 1949 with Greece and Turkey joining the organization. The following year Iceland on March 7 and Germany on July 13 joined. Between 1956 and 1989 the states of Austria, Cyprus, Switzerland, Malta, Portugal, Spain, Liechtenstein, San Marino and Finland join. After Eastern and Central European democratic transition followed Hungary in 1990, Poland in 1991, Bulgaria in 1992, Estonia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Czech Republic and Romania in 1993, Andorra in 1994, Latvia, Albania, Macedonia, Moldova and Ukraine in 1995, Russia and Croatia in 1996, Georgia in 1999. In 2001 Armenia and Azerbaijan followed from Caucasus region. In 2002, Bosnia and Herzegovina joined, in 2003-Serbia, in 2004-Monaco and with the latest accession, Montenegro became a member in 2007.
Institutions and Presidency:
1) The Secretary General nowadays is Thorbjørn Jagland from October 2009, – the 13th Secretary General of the Council of Europe. Secretary General is elected for a term of 5 years by the Parliamentary Assembly and heads the Secretariat of the Council of Europe. The Secretary General has the overall responsibility for the strategic management of the Organization. Jagland’s second term in office commenced on October 1, 2014.
2) The Committee of Ministers is Council of Europe’s decision-making body, comprising the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of all 47 member states. The Committee meets at ministerial level once a year and at Deputies’ level on a weekly basis. The Committee of Ministers performs a triple role-as the emanation of the government, as the collective forum alongside the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and as guardian of the values for which the Council of Europe exists.
3) Parliamentary Assembly comprises national parliamentarians from all member states. It elects its President for a year with the possibility of being re-elected for another year. In January 2016, Pedro Agramunt from Spain was elected President of the Parliamentary Assembly. The Assembly appoints members as rapporteurs with the mandate to prepare parliamentary reports on specific subjects. Among its main achievements are: ending the death penalty in Europe by requiring new members to abolish it; making possible, and shaping, the European Convention on Human Rights; high-profile reports exposing violations of human rights in Council of Europe member states.
4) The European Court of Human Rights is a supra-national or international court created under the European Convention on Human Rights of 1950, was established in 1959. It is composed of a judge from each member state elected for a single, non-renewable term of nine years by the Parliamentary Assembly and is headed by the elected President of the Court. The current President of the Court is Guido Raimondi from Italy. The Court takes into consideration the importance and urgency of the issues raised when deciding the order in which cases are to be dealt with.
5) The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities is the pan-European political assembly representing local and regional authorities from the forty-seven member states of the Council of Europe, established in 1994. Its role is to promote local and regional democracy, improve their governance and strengthen authorities’ self-government, according to the principles laid down in the European Charter of Local Self-Government. It is made up of two chambers, the Chamber of Local Authorities and the Chamber of Regions and holds its plenary sessions twice a year at the Palace of Europe in Strasbourg, where its permanent Secretariat is located.
6) The Commissioner for Human Rights is an independent and impartial non-judicial institution established in 1999 by the Strasbourg-based Council of Europe, to promote awareness of and respect for human rights in the 47 member states. The activities of this institution focus on three major areas: country visits and dialogue with national authorities and civil society; thematic studies and advice on systematic human rights work; awareness-raising activities. The current Commissioner is Nils Muižnieks, who began his six-year mandate on April 1, 2012. The Commissioner seeks to engage in permanent dialogue with member states, continually raising awareness about human rights issues.
7) The conference of INGOs- The Council of Europe’s work benefits extensively from contacts and co-operation with the dynamic elements of society, as represented by NGOs. They focus on Relations with international NGOs (INGOs) and Civil society programs with partner NGOs.
CoE’s Aims, Values and Achievements:
The Council was set up: Article 1(a) of the Statute states that “The aim of the Council of Europe is to achieve a greater unity between its members for the purpose of safeguarding and realizing the ideals and principles which are their common heritage and facilitating their economic and social progress.”- to protect human rights, pluralist democracy and the rule of law; to promote awareness and encourage the development of Europe’s cultural identity and diversity. Values: promoting Human rights education and professional training, democracy-protection of fundamental freedoms and rights and the rule of law. Achievements: The Council of Europe’s most famous achievement is the European Convention on Human Rights, which was adopted in 1950 following a report by the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly, and followed on from the United Nations ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ (UDHR). The Convention created the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. I’d like to mention, that there are 200 legally binding European treaties or conventions many of which are open to non-member states such as leading instruments as the Convention on Cybercrime, the Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, Conventions against Corruption and Organized Crime, the Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings.
One of the most explicit challenge that the Council of Europe faces has been expressed in recent years’ criticism for not been actively tackling the transgressions of some of its members. The organisation has been called on by both Human Rights Watch and the European Stability Initiative to carry out concrete actions for returning to its original mission to protect and ensure human rights. European Court of Human Rights tends to have the difficulty of managing controversial judgements. The CoE’s Committee of Ministers argued in the ninth annual report: “A first challenge is the continued increase of cases pending for more than 5 years. Whilst these cases accounted for some 20% of the total at the end of 2011, by the end 2015 they accounted for around 55%.” Statistical data shows that Turkey, Russia and Ukraine held the largest share of pending long-term cases with 88, 87 and 43 unresolved 5 year or longer cases respectively.
Another equally important challenge manifests itself in the management of sensitive and complex problems such as deeply rooted prejudices of a social nature involving cases of Roma and/or certain minorities in addition with the issues related to political considerations, national security and regional ‘frozen conflicts’.
Future prospects for the next decade:
Considering the challenges, criticism and feasibility of the organisation, one of the initial steps in future could and should involve elimination or unification of the number of overlapping organisations and committees existing in Europe intervening in the Council of Europe’s competence and tend to be ineffective. Another crucial step which weakens efficiency of the organisation I believe to advance in the next decade involving generalisation of principles relying on broad recommendations rather than drafting vast detailed reports on specific subjects stretching the cases without adequate results. However, it is indeed essential to underline its successful efforts put in engagement of young leaders from across the world, not only Europe, promoting equality, peace, freedom, democracy and the rule of law considering the number of projects and forums organized on yearly bases. Larger and more collaborative projects could be expected in the future focusing on mutual development of youth sector in different fields of the Council of Europe’s activities to make the organisation feel alive and more onto the higher level of justice, the rule of law and democracy.
Central European Initiative
The Central European Initiative (CEI) was born in Budapest in 1989 and is the oldest and biggest forum of regional cooperation in Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europe. It counts 18 members: Albania, Austria, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Italy, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Czech Republic, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine and Hungary.
The first step for the creation of the Central European Initiative took place on 11 November 1989: four States, (Italy, Austria, Hungary and Yugoslavia) after the fall of the Berliner wall, started to cooperate in order to re-establish unity among European countries.
The first summit was in Venice in 1990 in which Czechoslovakia was admitted and after, in 1991, also Poland had a sit in the organization. In 1992 the organization became bigger with the admission of Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Slovenia and the organization was named Central European Initiative. In the following year there was the dissolution of Czechoslovakia and either Czech Republic and Slovakia were admitted. Three years later, in 1996, Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, Moldova, Romania and Ukraine took a sit as members of the organization. The last admission were Serbia and Montenegro in 2000 but after the dissolution the last was Montenegro in 2006.
CEI headquarters have been in Trieste (Italy) since 1996.
The Central European Initiative supports European Integration with cooperation between its Member States and with the European Union. It offers an important contribution to develop multilateral diplomacy and project management.
The most important objectives are:
- Support CEI Member States on their path towards European integration;
- Promote the alignment of CEI Member States to EU standards;
- Implement small and medium-sized projects.
The aim is to support the countries and their institution with a professional platform for regional cooperation, for example to prepare and support future accession to the European Union. CEI supports also projects in various areas of cooperation also with financial resources in order to support studies, national and international projects.
Areas of Cooperation: Towards a Knowledge-based Society: Research and Innovation; lifelong Education and Training; Information Society. Towards a Sustainable economy and development: Transport, Logistics and Accessibility; Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; Climate, Environment and Rural Development; SMEs and Business Development. Towards and Inclusive Society: Intercultural Cooperation; Media; Civil Society.
The CEI operates in a different and flexible manners through various structures.
It is responsible for the financial directives and provides political and economic orientation.
Annual meeting of the Heads of Government (CEI Summit)
Annual Meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs (MFA Meeting), it takes and approves decisions. The Presidency is held by a CEI Member State and rotates on an annual basis.
Regular meetings of the CEI Committee of National Coordinators (CNC), responsible for the definition, coordination, management and implementation of CEI cooperation.
The Secretariat for CEI Projects has offices either in Trieste or London on order to promote activities that support investments in CEI area; financial support for the Secretariat is provided by Italy.
The CEI conveys also Ministerial Meetings during the year according to the needs of special political agreements on a given issue. Each member can organize high level meetings in specific sectors of particular relevance.
CEI representatives of national Parliaments cooperate and meet in the framework of the Parliamentary Assembly, the Parliamentary Committee and the General Committees on political and home affairs, on economic affairs, on cultural affairs.
Business communities are promoted to be active participators fostering inputs, open discussions and recommendations for political leadership.
The Parliamentary Dimension and the Business Dimension have their own structure and rules of procedure regulated by the CEI guidelines and rules of procedures adopted by Heads of Government.
The projects made by CEI Cooperation Activities are projects of small scale and limited duration, for example seminars, workshops, short training courses or meetings. This projects are financed by the CEI Cooperation Fund to which all members contribute through annual calls for proposals and they are organized by institutions of CEI Member States.
Public and private institutions registered in a CEI Member State as international and regional organizations are invited to apply to the CEI Cooperation Fund in order to favour mobility and networking.
Plan of actions
The plan of action is oriented for the period 2018-2020, it focuses to the real needs and proposals expressed by the CEI members. It is divided in two parts: the first one concern in selecting missions, objectives and methodology, the second part outlines goals and objectives, both part take into consideration previous results achieved. The aim is to promote regional cooperation through a combination of multilateral diplomacy with political dialog in order to stimulate cohesion and integration between EU and non-EU countries.
The CEI Agenda 2018-2020 draws up the goals and objectives of the future and the results achieved in the past, the priorities are resumed in two key-words: Connectivity and Diversity.
With Connectivity CEI focuses on strengthening the capacities of the members towards good governance, sustainable economic development and improving networks and environmental stability as requisites for democracy, stability, security and prosperity in CEI’s region.
With Diversity CEI focuses on promoting intercultural cooperation in order to make stronger the democratic participation and the role of media. It focuses also on international scientific cooperation, quality education and training to develop knowledge-based societies.
One of the goals of CEI is good governance, it assures democratic stability and security, it plays a key in ensuring a good environment plan.
Another goal is to tackle the economic and social impact of current migration on CEI countries, the challenge of organising effective reception capacity for asylum seekers, as well as assistance and active cultural and social integration of migrants. An example of action is to promote exchange of practice and knowledge with the support of analysis and actions on demographic changes. It is also important to promote dialogue of the CEI members on the internal move of their people and to encourage cross-border cooperation of public authorities in fighting against the traffic of human beings.
It is important for the Member States to develop and promote e-governance in order to provide e-services to make public services more transparent, efficient and accountable and also to promote cybersecurity.
A well-organised organization can avoid corruption and achieve stability and security. Potential investors can only be attracted by transparent and responsible state organization; a weak institutions generate a lack of trust among potential investors; for this reason, it is important to support trainings for public administration officers on effective anti-corruption measures. Another important goal to achieve is the economic growth, the provision of quality jobs and decent working conditions is a requirement for socially sustainable economies. Research infrastructures and innovation delivery can further stimulate the economy and help the competitiveness of the CEI economies on the global market.
Environmental protection and climate change remain top CEI priorities for moving towards sustainable growth. The CEI fully recognises the two-way relationship between environment and security. Good environmental governance not only contributes to a sound investment climate, but can help in addressing the concerns and interests of all stakeholders, helping prevent tensions and conflicts.
Respect for cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue as well as for equal opportunities are essential elements of conflict prevention and sustainable human, social and economic development. The CEI region has a great potential in terms of traditional values, diversity of expression, artistic creations and dynamic creative sectors. Thus, fostering intercultural cooperation through constructive dialogue and cultural exchange in all their tangible and intangible components is a key factor to contribute to mutual understanding between peoples, communities and countries.
Finally pen and free media landscape with divergent opinions and ideas is a key aspect in democratic and stable societies. Media diversity is the degree to which media content is heterogeneous.
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) is a United Nations court of law dealing with war crimes that took place during the conflicts in the Balkans in the 1990’s. ICTY has spent more than 10,800 trial days, heard at least 4,650 witnesses, produced over 2.5 million pages of transcripts and indicted 161 individuals- all this to put an end to impunity for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed there.
The Court was established by Resolution 827 of the United Nations Security Council, which was passed on 25 May 1993. It has been first this kind of courts created by UN, which gave birth to other tribunals ad hoc. In Resolution that created this organisation is said: “an international tribunal shall be established for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991”, also, there was decided a calling on the Secretary-General to “submit for consideration by the Council… a report on all aspects of this matter, including specific proposals and where appropriate options… taking into account suggestions put forward in this regard by Member States”.
With the idea to launch this Court was an initiative of German Foreign Minister Klaus Kinkel. Before establishment of the Tribunal international community tried to influence and put a pressure on former Yugoslavian republics diplomacy in many different ways; using military, economic impact, politically. Unfortunately, this operations did not have enough positive effect and international community decided to take further steps and through Resolution 827 pressurise those countries by judicial means.
In 1993, the ICTY built its internal infrastructure, 17 states have signed an agreement with the ICTY to carry out custodial sentences. In the first year of its existence, the Tribunal laid the foundations for its existence as a judicial organ. When first judges arrived to their post of work there were no rules of procedure, no cases and no prosecutor. All professionals and qualified stuff had to be employed very quickly. The differences between various countries in methods and experience that people had was another obstacle that had to be overcome to create a functioning international criminal prosecution system.
The United Nations Security Council passed resolutions 1503 in August 2003 and 1534 in March 2004, which both called for the completion of all cases at both the ICTY and its sister tribunal, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) by 2010. The final ICTY trial that was completed in the first instance was Ratko Mladić case, he was convicted on 22 November 2017. The final case to be considered by the ICTY was an appeal composed of six individuals, whose sentences were upheld on 29 November 2017.
The Tribunal was located in The Hague, Netherlands.
Its mission was to create by The Tribunal norms and rules for conflict and post-conflict resolution that are accepted around the globe, specifically that leaders suspected of mass crimes will face justice. The Tribunal wanted to prove that efficient and transparent international justice is possible. This goals hopefully were reached.
While operating, the Tribunal employed around 900 staff. It consisted of Chambers, Registry and the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP).
The duty of the Prosecutor was to investigate crimes, gather evidence and prosecute. The Prosecutor was appointed by the UN Security Council upon nomination by the UN Secretary-General and was head of the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP).
Contained judges and their aids. The Tribunal operated three Trial Chambers and one Appeals Chamber. The President of the Tribunal was also the presiding Judge of the Appeals Chamber.
At the time of the court’s termination, there were seven permanent judges and one ad hoc judge who served on the Tribunal. A total of 86 judges were appointed to the Tribunal from UN member states. The Court consisted of 51 permanent judges and 36 were ad litem judges, and one was an ad hoc judge. Is also important to know that one judge served as both a permanent and ad litem judge, and another served as both a permanent and ad hoc judge. UN member and observer states could each submit up to two nominees of different nationalities to the UN Secretary-General.
In 2004, the ICTY published a list of five accomplishments “in justice and law”:
- “Spearheading the shift from impunity to accountability”, pointing out that, until very recently, it was the only court judging crimes committed as part of the Yugoslav conflict, since prosecutors in the former Yugoslavia were, as a rule, reluctant to prosecute such crimes;
- “Establishing the facts”, highlighting the extensive evidence-gathering and lengthy findings of fact that Tribunal judgments produced;
- “Bringing justice to thousands of victims and giving them a voice”, pointing out the large number of witnesses that had been brought before the Tribunal;
- “The accomplishments in international law”, describing the fleshing out of several international criminal law concepts which had not been ruled on since the Nuremberg Trials;
- “Strengthening the Rule of Law”, referring to the Tribunal’s role in promoting the use of international standards in war crimes prosecutions by former Yugoslav republics.
“The ICTY has been the foundation for the existing international criminal justice regime. I believe it’s fair to say the ICTY can be considered the genesis of the global culture of accountability,” the Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and UN Legal Counsel, Miguel de Serpa Soares.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, also called the North Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance between several North American and European countries based on the North Atlantic Treaty that was signed on 4 April 1949. NATO is an alliance in which its 29 independent member countries have agreed to mutual defence in response to an attack by any external party. Therefore it constitutes a system of collective defence that was born as a political association until the Korean War galvanised the organisation’s member states, which opted to build an integrated military structure. NATO’s purpose is to guarantee the freedom and security of its members also through political means. NATO promotes democratic values and enables members to consult and cooperate on defence and security-related issues to solve problems, build trust and, in the long run, prevent conflict. If diplomatic efforts fail, it has the military power to undertake crisis-management operations.
The precursor of NATO was the Treaty of Brussels, which was a mutual defence treaty against the Soviet threat at the start of the Cold War. It was signed on 17 March 1948 by Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, and the United Kingdom. In 1948, European leaders met with US defence, military and diplomatic officials at the Pentagon, under U.S. Secretary of State George C. Marshall’s orders, exploring a framework for a new and unprecedented association. Talks for a new military alliance resulted in the North Atlantic Treaty, which was signed by U.S. President Harry S. Truman in Washington, D.C. on 4 April 1949. The members introduced the collective response element, agreeing that an armed attack against any one of them in Europe or North America would be considered an attack against them all. Therefore, if an armed attack occurred, each of them would assist the member being attacked, taking such action as it deemed necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
The first major NATO maritime exercises began in September 1952. This development was possible also due to the outbreak of the Korean War, which raised the apparent threat of all Communist countries working together and forced the alliance to develop concrete military plans. After that, NATO incorporated other two countries: Greece and Turkey also joined the alliance in 1952. Turkey became thereby the closest NATO country to Soviet Union borders. With the incorporation of West Germany into the organisation on 9 May 1955, the situation was described as “a decisive turning point in the history of our continent”, according to Halvard Lange, Foreign Affairs Minister of Norway at the time. Germany’s participation to the Alliance had also an important strategic meaning: with German manpower NATO would have indeed been able to tackle a hypothetical Soviet invasion. This development within NATO was the major reason of the creation of the Warsaw Pact, which was signed on 14 May 1955 by the Soviet Union, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania, and East Germany, as a formal response to this event, thereby delineating the two opposing sides of the Cold War. In 1959 NATO’s strength was undermined by the French decision to withdraw from the organisation, due to the unsatisfactory US response to France’s call for a tripartite directorate that would put France on an equal footing with the US and the UK within NATO. In 1966, all French armed forces were removed from NATO’s integrated military command, and all non-French NATO troops were asked to leave France. France announced their return to full participation only at the 2009 Strasbourg–Kehl summit.
During the Cold War, NATO countries officially defined two complementary aims of the Alliance: to maintain security and pursue détente. Pursuing security interests did mean also responding to opponent’s moves with defensive and strategic countermoves. This line of reasoning led to the deployment of US GLCM cruise missiles and Pershing II theatre nuclear weapons in Europe. The new warheads were also meant to strengthen the western negotiating position regarding nuclear disarmament. This policy was called the Dual Track policy. Similarly, in 1983–84, responding to the stationing of Warsaw Pact SS-20 medium-range missiles in Europe, NATO deployed modern Pershing II missiles tasked to hit military targets such as tank formations in the event of war.
With the fall of the Berlin Wall and the resulting end of the Cold War, NATO wondered whether its strategic position, tasks and nature were still indispensable for the security of the member countries or not. NATO’s main enemy, Soviet Union, was indeed dissolved, therefore a re-evaluation of the Alliance’s purposes was needed. This shift started with the 1990 signing in Paris of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe between NATO and the Soviet Union, which mandated specific military reductions across the continent that continued after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991. NATO began a gradual expansion to include newly autonomous Central and Eastern European nations, though. The first post-Cold War expansion of NATO came with German reunification on 3 October 1990, when the former East Germany became part of the Federal Republic of Germany and the alliance. On 8 July 1997, three former communist countries, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, were invited to join NATO, which each did in 1999. Membership went on expanding with the accession of seven more Central and Eastern European countries to NATO: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania. They were first invited to start talks of membership during the 2002 Prague summit, and joined NATO on 29 March 2004. At the April 2008 summit in Bucharest, Romania, NATO agreed to the accession of Croatia and Albania and both countries joined NATO in April 2009.
NATO Headquarters are located in Haren, Brussels, Belgium, while the headquarters of Allied Command Operations is near Mons, Belgium.
NATO has twenty-nine members, mainly in Europe and North America. These countries are: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom and the United States (1949, founding member countries), Greece and Turkey (1952), Germany (1955), Spain (1982), the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland (1999), Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia (2004), Albania and Croatia (2009), and Montenegro (2017).
The North Atlantic Treaty and other agreements outline how decisions are to be made within NATO. Each of the 29 members sends a delegation or mission to NATO’s headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. The senior permanent member of each delegation is known as the Permanent Representative and is generally a senior civil servant or an experienced ambassador. The Permanent Members form the North Atlantic Council (NAC), a body which meets together at least once a week and has effective governance authority and powers of decision in NATO. The Council has the same authority and powers of decision-making, and its decisions have the same status and validity, at whatever level it meets. The NATO Parliamentary Assembly (NATO-PA) which meets at the Annual Session, and one other time during the year, and is the organ that directly interacts with the parliamentary structures of the national governments of the member states which appoint Permanent Members, or ambassadors to NATO, is the body that sets broad strategic goals for NATO. The NATO Parliamentary Assembly is made up of legislators from the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance as well as thirteen associate members. The Assembly is the NATO’s body generating political policy agenda setting for the NATO Council. As far as the military structure is concerned, it is worth noting to analyse its evolution throughout the Cold War and its aftermath. From the 1950s to 2003, the Strategic Commanders were the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and the Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic (SACLANT). The current arrangement is to separate responsibility between Allied Command Transformation (ACT), responsible for transformation and training of NATO forces, and Allied Command Operations (ACO), responsible for NATO operations worldwide. Starting in late 2003 NATO has restructured how it commands and deploys its troops by creating several NATO Rapid Deployable Corps, including Eurocorps, I. German/Dutch Corps, Multinational Corps Northeast, and NATO Rapid Deployable Italian Corps among others, as well as naval High Readiness Forces (HRFs), which all report to Allied Command Operations.
NATO faces several challenges around the world. The Cold War has ended but Russian indirect military intervention in Ukraine and its invasion of Crimea has brought about a suspension of cooperation between NATO and Moscow. Even if political and diplomatic channels remain open, relations are at the lowest level since 1989. Therefore the first important issue NATO needs is restoring good relations with the Russian Federation, without abandoning the values that characterise the Alliance and continuing to safeguard east-European countries’ security. Hence, giving way to moderation and diplomacy rather than provocations and military actions in order to build confidence with Russia is one of NATO’s future prospects. Restarting training cooperation, expanding the suspended joint exercises and improving military collaboration to fight terrorism and prevent the spread of terrorism is on NATO’s future agenda.
As far as the relationship with EU member states is concerned, NATO’s purposes are to enhance greater cooperation with EU partners in countering terrorism (Europe for example has developed tools for both intelligence gathering and disrupting terrorist finances) and also allowing for more joint actions. Europe’s non-military resources go with the recent creation – thanks to the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon – of the post of High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, thus enhancing European external action credibility; NATO’s hard power together with EU soft power would thereby be a potent worthy combination for international security. Meanwhile NATO’s fundamental objective is that of reaffirming the importance of article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, in which it is enshrined the principle of collective defence according to which the Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them. Eastern European countries pay particularly attention to this, fearing Russian influences close to their borders.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
The OECD, short for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, aims to “promote policies that will improve the economic and social well-being of people around the world”. It is an intergovernmental economic organisation with 35 member countries, most of which are high-income economies seeking to promote economic development. More specifically, it provides a discussion forum for members to discuss policy solutions to common problems, analyses and provides data on environmental, social and economics developments as well creating economic country reports and policy recommendations.
The roots of the OECD reach back all the way to war-torn Europe after World War II where it was created in 1948 under the name the OEEC, the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation. The organisation was tasked with facilitating the Marshall Plan in rebuilding Europe after the post war destruction, and succeeded in impressing on separate governments the fact that their economies were interconnected.
As the reconstruction of post-war Europe was largely completed in the late 1950s, it was decided after some internal struggle within the organisation to make the OECD’s mandate global. The first non-European signatories to sign the convention were the US and Canada. The OECD convention came into force in 1961, marking the creation of the organisation as we know it today.
After the 1989 revolutions in Eastern Europe, the organisation focused its attention on assisting Eastern European countries which had previously been in the USSR bloc and thus not included under the Marshall plan. In particular the Visegrad Group.
After the fall of the USSR in the 1990s, the OECD experienced a new surge in membership as many countries who had recently joined the European Union also joined. In the early 2000s and later, the OECD began opening discussions for enlargement of cooperation with non-members. This enlargement is an ongoing process, where several countries have expressed interest in being included, such as Peru, Malaysia and Kazakhstan.
The OECD’s headquarters are in Paris, France, and its official working languages are French and English. The Secretariat staff is around 2500 people and is headed by Angel Gurria.
Today the OECD’s 35 permanent members are Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israël, Italy, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States.
The OECD is organised into a Council Secretariat, and Committees.
The Council has the main decision making power, consisting of one representative per member country as well as one representative from the European Commission. The meetings are chaired by the Secretary General and decisions are made on a consensus basis.
The Secretariat is the Paris based headquarters headed by Angel Gurría, which support the work of the committees.
Representatives and experts also meet in specialised committees to discuss and review issues and develop ideas in specific policy areas, such as finance, environmental protection or employment. There are around 250 committees and focus groups.
The OECD’s working method consists of data collection, followed by discussion and analysis eventually leading to peer reviews of the country’s performance in the reviewed area. Of the organisation’s many activities, the most important feature and perhaps its trademark is policy analysis and review, which is done in all its designated departments
- Development Co-operation Directorate
- Economics Department
- Directorate for Education and Skills
- Directorate for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs
- Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Local Development and Tourism
- Environment Directorate
- Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs
- Directorate for Public Governance
- Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation
- Statistics Directorate
- Centre for Tax Policy and Administration
- Trade and Agriculture Directorate
The OECD celebrated its 50 year anniversary in 2011, which the organisation used as an opportunity to reaffirm is founding goals and set out a vision for the future. The organisation needs to continue it rigorous policy analysis work as it seeks to keep promoting good practises in economic, social and environmental fields.
“As we go forward, the OECD will operate as a results-oriented, rigorous but flexible network based on high standards with the goal of developing effective and innovative policy choices for governments around the world.”
One of the biggest questions for the organisation’s future is enlargement, which is an ongoing process. The organisation has faced criticism on the basis of its membership being narrow, reserved primarily for high-income nations. This situation likely calls for closer cooperation with nations outside the OECD’s traditional interest group, something that would increase its legitimacy and give it steadier footing in what continues to be a very interconnected world. Driving an enhanced dialogue with the major nations would grant the organisation more relevance and increase its capability to tackle the problems of economic development and globalisation.
The importance of enhanced cooperation was emphasised in the 50 year anniversary as embedded in the vision for the organisation’s future.
In 2007 the Ministerial Council decided to cooperate more extensively with Brazil, China, South Africa and Indonesia through enhanced engagement, meaning that although they are not OECD member countries, they still participate actively in the organisation’s activities and take part in a policy dialogue. Second, the OECD is also looking for new member states, with a special focus on South East Asia. With some countries are also participating as observers and increased cooperation with other organisations like the World Bank, the OECD seems to be investing in enlarging the boundaries of its cooperation and membership.
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
Spanning the region from Vancouver to Vladivostok, the OSCE promotes security in 57 states in North America, Europe, South Caucasus and Central Asia. The participating states enjoy equal status and take decisions by consensus.
The OSCEs roots go back to the Cold War détente of the early 1990s. The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) was established, a multilateral forum to foster dialogue between East and West, which was also known as Helsinki Process. After two years of negotiation in Helsinki and Geneva, the CSCE reached agreement on the Helsinki Final Act, signed on 1 August 1975 by 35 states. The participating states made a number of commitments in this document and divided them into three CSCE areas of activity. The first covers political and military aspects of security. The second comprises economic and environmental aspects of security, including economic development, science, technology and environmental protection. And the third one involves human aspects of security. The participating states also established by that time ten fundamental principles, known as Helsinki Decalogue, governing the behaviour towards their citizens, as well as towards each other.
From its establishment until 1990, the CSCE functioned mainly as a series of meetings and conferences that extended the commitment of the participating states. With the end of the Cold War the CSCE underwent a major transformation. In the Summit of Paris in November 1990, the Paris Charter for a New Europe was adopted and CSCE was challenged upon to play its part in managing the historic change taking place in Europe and responding to the new challenges of the post-Cold War period. Moreover, this led to the establishment of CSCE permanent institutions, including the Secretariat and the Conflict Prevention Centre.
The first field operations were deployed in the Balkans in 1992.
With the institutionalization process, also the name Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) was changed to Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), in 1994 Budapest Summit of Heads of states or government.
Since its establishment the OSCE has experienced a number of challenges in attaining and maintaining regional peace, stability and democratic development. During this time the participating states recognized that conflicts within states can pose as much of a threat as conflicts between states and for this reason, in Istanbul Summit in 1999, the Leaders of the participating states adopted The Charter for European Security.
Decision-making bodies and institutions:
The Permanent Council is OSCEs regular decision-making body, as well as The Forum for Security Co-operation, where decisions are taken regarding military aspects of security. The ambassadors meet each week to make decisions. A Ministerial Council is held annually to review OSCE activities and provide overall directions. To set priorities at highest political level, the Heads of State or Government of OSCE have periodically Summits.
Chairmanship – The OSCE Chairmanship is held each year by a different participating state. That country’s foreign minister is the Chairperson-in-office and works alongside with the Troika, the previous and succeeding Chairmanships.
Secretariat – is based in Vienna (Austria). The head of Secretariat is the Secretary General, who directly supports the Chairmanship. The Secretariat comprises the Conflict Prevention Centre and departments and units focusing on economic and environmental activities, co-operation with Partner countries and organizations, gender equality, anti-trafficking, as well as transnational threats including anti-terrorism, border management and policing reform. They monitor trends, provide expert analysis and implement projects in the field.
High Commissioner on National Minorities is based in The Hague. Through quiet diplomacy seeks resolution of ethnic tensions that might endanger peace, security and stability.
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) is based in Warsaw and promotes democratic development and human rights. Areas of its work include election observation, the rule of law, promoting tolerance and non-discrimination and improving the situation of Roma and Sinti. ODIHR hosts the annual Human Dimension Implementation Meeting, the largest annual human rights conference in the OSCE region.
Representative on Freedom of the Media is based in Vienna and observes media developments and provides early warning on violations of freedom of expression and media freedom, promoting full compliance with OSCE media freedom commitments.
The Parliamentary Assembly is made up from more than 300 lawmakers from the 57 OSCE participating states. They come together to facilitate dialogue and co-operation and to promote accountability. OSCE parliamentarians also play a leading role in the Organization’s election observation activities, conduct field visits, and drive organizational reform.
The OSCE approaches security through three dimensions:
- The politico-military
- The economic and environmental and
- The Human
With the politico-military matters, the OSCE seeks to create greater openness, transparency and co-operation and has developed the world’s most advanced regime of arms control and confidence building measures. Areas of work include security sector reform and the safe storage and destruction of small arms, light weapons and conventional ammunition.
The Economic and environmental issue is also a very important factor in building security. In this area, the OSCE helps by promoting good governance, tackling corruption, environmental awareness, sharing natural resources and sound management of environmental waste.
Human rights and fundamental freedoms are very important to stable societies. The OSCE helps its participating States build democratic institutions; hold genuine and transparent democratic elections; ensure respect for human rights, media freedom, the rights of national minorities and the rule of law, and promote tolerance and non-discrimination.
Apart from the three dimensions above, OSCE has also its cross-dimension activities. Within this dimension the OSCE works towards gender equality and engages with youth across its peace and security agenda, and promotes human rights compliant, comprehensive and co-operative approaches to managing migration and refugee flows.
The OSCEs field operations assist host countries and their mandates are agreed by consensus of the participating States. The field operations support host countries in developing their capacities through projects that respond their needs. These include initiatives to support law enforcement, minority rights, legislative reform, the rule of law and media freedom, promote tolerance and non-discrimination, as well as many other areas. Some field operations also monitor and report on developments on the ground. A number of field operations, enabling them to manage crises and to play a critical post-conflict role.
The future plans to build a stronger OSCE for a secure Europe are the following:
Building on Ministerial Council Decision 3/11. The Ministerial Council Decision No 3/11 was adopted five years ago in Vilnius, on elements of the conflict cycle. Here are concrete steps needed to adapt the organization to the new and potential future challenges of multidimensional and complex conflict situations. OSCE also needs the capacity to operate complex surveillance and other technologies for monitoring, verification and early warnings.
The Rationale of the OSCE: Conflict Prevention and Conflict Resolution. The goal of OSCE activities across the entire conflict cycle is to prevent the outbreak of violent conflicts and to work towards lasting solutions to existing conflicts in the OSCE area in a peaceful and negotiated manner, within agreed formats, the equal application of agreed principles, and in full observance of the UN Charter, the Helsinki Final Act and international law.
Making the best use of existing tools: field operations, institutions, secretariat and OSCE
Parliamentary Assembly. Like other OSCE institutions and units have a wide array of tools at its disposal for providing multidimensional responses to tensions and conflicts in the OSCE area, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly’s contribution to mediation and effective response to crisis and conflicts should also be recognised and OSCE executive structures should be encouraged to make the best use of the OSCE’s parliamentary dimension when addressing the conflict cycle.
Besides the changes above, OSCE also plans to further develop early warning, to further strengthen the mediation, to increase confidence-building and reconciliation, to build on the OSCE’s civilian and comprehensive approach, to establish an effective crisis-funding mechanism, to improve command and control, to develop a flexible mechanism for in-house planning capacity, to build on international cooperation, as well as to prevent violence against women in conflict situations.
As OSCE plays a key role in the European Security, in March 2016 a panel discussion took place in Rome, where the EU and OSCE members defined clearly the long-term objectives and visions.
The result was:
- “The crisis in and around Ukraine illustrated that the OSCE continues to play a crucial role in the European security architecture. Its comprehensive toolbox, large and well-established field presence, and its role as a forum for inclusive security dialogue as well as a platform for joint action remain key comparative advantages of the Organization.
- The EU-OSCE partnership should be more strategic. The EU member states need to have a joint vision of long-term objectives they would like to achieve by acting in and with the OSCE. They should empower the OSCE and clearly and consistently articulate what role and added value the OSCE has from the EU’s perspective.
- The forthcoming EU Global Strategy should express strong support for the OSCE, including its normative foundations and its model of co-operative security.
- Strengthening the EU’s engagement within the OSCE would be beneficial for both organizations. The EU should use the OSCE’s capacities and expertise more actively (“smart multilateralism”), in particular the OSCE’s Field Operations in Eastern Europe, the Western Balkans and Central Asia.
- The EU needs to find a new modus vivendi for dealing with Russia that should be based on pragmatic co-operation in areas of common interest, including both global and European issues (e.g., infrastructure, energy sector, research, Arctic).
- From a long-term perspective, Europe’s primary goal should be reaching a sustainable political settlement with Russia through a robust diplomatic process as recommended by the Panel of Eminent Persons on European Security.
- Some findings and recommendations of the Panel of Eminent Persons on European Security could serve as an important source of inspiration for efforts to return to a climate of co-operative security within Europe.”
Shanghai Cooperation Organisation
The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is a regional, intergovernmental collaboration between Eurasian state actors in the fields of economy and politics, with an extended focus on security policies. The involved countries are China, Russia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, and Pakistan. The SCO was founded on 15 June 2001 and has its current seat in Beijing, China. With its biggest members being Russia and China, the SCO’s official languages are Chinese and Russian. The following report will give a brief introduction in the organisation’s history, missions, and structure, as well as internal challenges. In the end, the future prospect and potential development of the SCO will be evaluated.
Historical Background & External Relations
The SCO originally emerged from the “Shanghai Five”, a cooperation between China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan starting in 1996, and transformed into the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in 2001 with the admission of Uzbekistan into the organisation. The Charter of the SCO, containing regulations, aims, and structural formalities, was signed in June 2002 and enacted on 19 September 2003. By that, the organisation also embedded itself in international law.
The Shanghai Five started their collaboration based on security policies, facing their newly established, shared borders after the end of the Soviet Union. In 1996, the five founding countries China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan signed the Treaty of Deepening Military Trust in Border Regions, followed by the Treaty on Reduction of Military Forces in Border Regions in 1997. The initial aim was to secure each other’s geographical and political sphere and cooperate in terms of a peaceful coexistence.
Ever since, the participating head of states gather in annual summits to widen the prospects of the cooperation and add new political dimensions. In 2000, the Shanghai Five took first efforts to work jointly beyond security policies and extended their cooperative scope for the protection of human rights, each other’s sovereignty, “territorial integrity” as well as political independence and stability. With the admission of Uzbekistan in 2001, the organisation transformed into the “Shanghai Six”, before eventually signing the Declaration of Shanghai Cooperation Organisation on 15 June 2001.
Four years later, external state representatives attended the annual summit of the SCO, namely the prospective members India and Pakistan, as well as Iran and Mongolia. In 2017, after the yearslong accession procedures, India and Pakistan finally joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, thereby becoming their latest members. The SCO also started to engage in international, external relations in 2004, when it developed ties with the United Nations. In the following years, the organisation created bonds with ASEAN (2005), the Commonwealth of Independent States (2005), the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (2015), and many others. Besides the 8 permanent members, there are several other states, as Afghanistan, Iran, Mongolia, and Belarus, seeking for a membership and functioning as “observer states”.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation perceived its core responsibilities initially in the fields of military defence cooperation and mutual security protection. By now, the organisation additionally engages in joint collaborations in diplomacy, trade, culture, and humanitarian aid. According to the SCO, recent years fortified their shared efforts in fields of technology, education, energy, transportation, banking as well as environmental protection and the preservation of the “neighbourliness among the member states”. The superior mission since the beginning of the organisation is the maintenance of “peace, security and stability” in their Eurasian sphere of influence. The SCO member states hereby official share values of a democratic world order.
Another key aspect of the cooperation is described as “mutual trust, mutual benefit, […] mutual consultations”, referring to the equal involvement of all member states in the decision-making processes of the SCO. The main decision-making body is hereby the Heads of State Council, which determines the SCO’s external relations and the general activities and priorities of the organisation. The Heads of Government Council holds annual submits to discuss the economic collaborations and the SCO’s budget plan. The daily activities and regular meetings are coordinated by the Foreign Ministers Council. Below these three hierarchical pillars, there are several sublevels of coordination, divided by topics and the regularity of meetings. The permanent bodies of the SCO are the Secretariat in Beijing and the Executive Committee of the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS). The representatives in each of those bodies change every three years.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation became increasingly active in more diverse fields of policy-making. Nevertheless, the SCO requires a facilitation of cooperation on the levels of decision-making procedures and its economic, internal and external relations. Besides its various achievements, the organisation reportedly lacks some efficiency in the execution of declared policies and displayed a slow implementation of its decisions in the past.
These current challenges can be explained by the higher number of participating countries, and their disagreements due to the different traditions and natures of each’s policy making. With the current 8 members of the SCO, 8 different kinds of political, historical, and cultural understanding encounter each other, occasionally causing tensions in the day-to-day decisions of the organisation.
Besides the internal structural challenges, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation also faces contemporary, external obstacles for an efficient collaboration, such as international terrorism and religious extremism. Especially in prospect member countries, like Afghanistan, the latter poses a challenge to the political stability and peace-keeping efforts of the Eurasian organisation. The SCO requires a more precise guidance in regards to handling and coordinating international disputes among their own members and external partners. The coordination of transboundary challenges, like illegal immigration and drug trafficking, poses a further challenge to the competences in decision-making procedures among the members.
Experts as well as critics demand a stronger leadership position from China and Russia, the SCO’s biggest members. However, to achieve a more balanced leadership behaviour, these two founding states firstly need to improve the political relations between each other. The SCO generally requires a strengthened trust and commitment among its members to facilitate their cooperation in security politics and economic collaboration. One way to achieve these aims might be the enhancement of mutual cultural understanding and the balancing of each’s different governing styles.
Future Prospects for the next decade
Similar to the current challenges of the SCO, its future development is potentially marked by its issues of decision-making, implementation, and the region’s representation. Contemporary challenges as international terrorism are expected to continue in following years which will require the SCO to find new ways to coordinate transboundary problems among their current and prospect member states. Additionally, the Shanghai Organisation Cooperation is expected to grow regarding its members, as more and more countries apply for the observer’s or dialogue partner’s positions. Since 2012, 12 more states signalled their interest in becoming affiliated with the organisation. Among them are Armenia, Azerbaijan, Syria, Egypt, and the Ukraine. The expansion of the SCO might be accompanied by further issues of coordination and decision-making. Also in regards of stability in regions as Syria, Egypt, and the Ukraine, the SCO might have to reconsider their role of balancing, or withdrawing from the political upheavals of the Middle Eastern and East European regions. To determine its own role and guiding power, as well as peace-building and -keeping abilities in new areas, the SCO first must understand its positions within its current formation.
In addition to these upcoming challenges, prospect member countries as the Ukraine might potentially cause more tensions among the SCO relations, especially with Russia. It remains to be seen if the collaboration within the framework of the SCO facilitates Ukraine-Russian relations or, on the contrary, inhibits the efficiency of the organisation itself.
In regards to its relations to the West, the SCO might take efforts to counter-balance organisations as the United Nations or the NATO, to benefit from its own geopolitical position, and utilise its large military and economic capacity. The SCO displays a great potential of self-empowerment, but must therefore solve a variety of internal issues and structural unevenness first by developing a stronger unity in a joint action guideline.
The SCO might hereby benefit from the European Union as a role model in terms of its historical emergence. As the EU in its beginning as the EEC, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation could foster its economic collaboration, as well as continue its common security mission. As a result, the organisation and its members might approach each other more easily within political cohesion and a joint coordination of internal and external politics. The SCO is already following this path by engaging more in trade and technology development with one another in recent years. Also, projects of cultural exchange and education have been fostered by the members of the SCO. With years to come, the SCO inherits the potential to create stronger diplomatic ties and a joint political policy-making within its internal spheres. As for external relations, the SCO requires this internal stability and unity before its enlargement may lead to a coherent representation of the Eurasian region and beyond.
Lisa Maria Kuke
World Trade Organization
The World Trade Organization is designed for opening trade opportunities across countries through negotiations. Based on trade rules accepted commonly by member countries, WTO creates a framework in which countries economical aspirations can be served. It is a worldwide intergovernmental organization, regulating trade between 164 member countries.
The WTO was officially established in 1995 under the Marrakesh agreement signed by 123 nations on 15 April 1994, after taking over the principles of the former GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) agreement. Its current work originates from certain previous trade arrangements, such as the Urugay Round from 1986-1994. Currently, it is attempting to complete negotiations on the Doha Development Round (launched in 2001) emphasizing the importance of growth in developing countries. It is located in Geneva, Switzerland.
In the period of GATT, which began its work in 1947, the idea was to create an environment for trade talks, but without materialising. Eight trade talk rounds took place during this time, each focused on tariff reduction and on other trade barriers. The last one was the Urugay Round, starting in 1986, at a summit in Punta del Este, and concluded in 1994, Marrakesh. The Urugay Round is best known about establishing WTO. Beyond this, it was also dealing with ending textile quotas, agriculture subsidies, and two agreements (Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights and the General Agreement on Trades in Services).
After the establishment of WTO, for many years trade talks can’t be noticed, as members could not agree on such agendas for a new round. There were several attempts though, such as in Singapore, 1996, but rich countries could not agree with developing ones in case of the nature of implications. Developed countries delighted the importance of investor rights, competition policy, while developing ones would ensure their growth with other types of measures. Similar endeavours were expressed on the next two meetings in 1988 and 1999, but those were not successful either. Moreover, several civil organisations expressed their concerns about the predominance of the interests of rich countries, but these were misleading, as all members have to agree in order to implement such rules.
In the 2000s, health issues erupted in Brazil, Thailand and South Africa, as these countries urgently needed low cost medication in order to treat AIDS/HIV. Pharma patents, due to TRIPS, were protected, but during the Doha Round officially launched in 2001, rulers made an exception, by making the health patents breakable, allowing developing countries to get medications at a lower price, as essential medication is often not affordable due to intellectual property rights.
Beyond these issues, the Doha Round is also designed for reducing agricultural subsidies, allowing better circumstances for developing countries which are dependent on agriculture. However, rich nations put Singapore issues on the agenda again, knowing that developing countries will refuse trade talks on these matters, the topic of intellectual property still belongs to the issues on negotiation. During the talks, lower trade rules and trade barriers are also revised, to achieve better trade circumstances for nations.
The Ministerial Conference is the top decision making body, meeting in every two years. All members can took part in the Conference, having authority to take decisions on all matters in the coverage of any multilateral trade agreement. The latest Ministerial Conference took place in Nairobi in December 2015. The result of the conference was the so-called “Nairobi package”, focusing on issues related to least-developed countries and agriculture.
On the second level, three bodies are operating beyond the Conferences, in order to maintain a day-to-day work. One of the functional bodies is the General Council, designed to act on behalf of the ministerial conferences, allowing ambassadors to represent their countries. Ambassador Harald NEPLE from Norway fills the current chair position. The general Council meets regularly in Geneva with the other two bodies, The Dispute Settlement Body and The Trade Policy Review Body, to analyse trade trends and allow disputes between member states.
On the third level, we can find numerous councils, representing each area of trade, such as The Council for Trade in Goods (Goods Council), The Council for Trade in Services (Services Council), and The Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Council). All of them are preparing reports directly to the General Council, such as six more Committee bodies, but with less extent, delivering issues in connection with environment, regional trading arrangements, development, trade negotiation etc. All countries are represented in these bodies. At this level, there are two plurilateral bodies as well, including not all of the members, but informing the General Council of their work.
Any state having the authority to operate with its trade have the right to join the WTO, but after concluding a process of negotiations, in which all countries agree on particular terms. The Accessions Intelligence Portal is established to follow through and help in these negotiation processes.
Since the 2008 crisis, WTO is facing several challenges, such as though criticism about the non-respect of deadlines and default negotiations. However, according to International trade expert Thomas Cottier, the organization is not less significant, as trade negotiations and dispute settlement carry an important role. It also presents the world court regarding international and more special trade agreements.
Cottier picks coordination as a possible fault, due to the fact that fragmentation trot out by preferential trade agreements, such as Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) or the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) are making WTO’s work less extensive. In order to overcome the fragmentation, this problem can be treated by future changes in the arrangement, such as stronger ties with other Partnerships and informing future negotiations inside the WTO.
More several threats can be noticed, such as the shift in balance of power and different visions of the future aspects. Referring to historical dissidence, the differences between developing and developed nations are still existing. The vision supported by developing countries emphasize the process of catching up by avoiding negotiation opportunities due to the fear of putting too much pressure on these countries, while the other vision focuses on development and modern trade, including global value chains. Regarding the shift in balance, emerging markets in world trade and investment (China) can move the North and West balance to the East and South, damaging the western structure.