Reform will enhance the OSCE's relevance

The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe was created as a forum for political dialogue and collective decision-making. Its advantages included its broad membership and comprehensive approach to security based on a balance between military and political, economic and humanitarian dimensions.

But the OSCE has deviated from its original objectives and is gradually losing its comparative advantage. The balance between the three dimensions has been lost. The military and political track is stagnating.

The OSCE has been postponing, on farfetched pretexts, implementation of the Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, signed in 1999, which is crucial to stability and security. It has also failed to make a meaningful contribution to the solution of economic problems.

The OSCE's emphasis is increasingly drifting towards the humanitarian area - but according to its peculiar interpretation. Work in that area is essentially confined to the monitoring of the political situation in individual countries, all of them "east of Vienna", even though they are not the only ones facing problems. That has created another - geographical - imbalance.

Unfortunately, some countries' approach to the OSCE's work is increasingly based on obvious double standards. The OSCE participating states are arbitrarily divided into "mentors" and "pupils". It is taken for granted that the former are ideal in every respect while the latter, on the contrary, are mistaken in everything they do.

That scheme seems automatically to predetermine the deployment of OSCE field missions and the verdicts of OSCE election observers, as well as the conclusions of individual case studies. As a result, the OSCE is losing credibility, has stopped being a forum uniting states and peoples and is starting to contribute to their division.

There is no doubt that agreed OSCE standards and obligations should be strictly observed. But the observance process should not be tailored to the interests of any individual group of states. Cultural, national and other differences must be taken into account.

Given that various European bodies duplicate each others' work, the very survival of the OSCE will depend on its ability to capitalise on its comparative advantages. It must prove it is capable of adding value in the field of security and cooperation between states.

Russia is offering a clear-cut programme for OSCE reform, supported by a number of partners. It is set out in the July 3, 2004 statement by the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States and in their September 15 address to the OSCE partners. The OSCE philosophy should consist of providing practical assistance to all participating states in the implementation of specific projects across the range of OSCE tasks, rather than intrusive tutoring focused on a few of them. OSCE mechanisms should serve the interests of the participating states and help meet their real needs.

We do not wish to detract from the importance of the humanitarian dimension to OSCE activities. It should not be underestimated. There are many urgent tasks in that area and the OSCE is better placed than many other bodies to work to ensure freedom of movement and contacts between people. Constant attention must also be paid to the protection of the rights of national minorities in Latvia and Estonia. Their status does not meet the generally accepted European standards.

As for election monitoring, it should be carried out on a firmer basis, to minimise the risk that assessments are motivated by cheap politics. We support the idea of common objective criteria to assess electoral processes throughout the OSCE countries.

Finally, institutional reform is particularly important. The OSCE's rules of procedure must be streamlined to eliminate gaps and grey areas and make it a full legal entity. Decision-making should be carried out by consensus, as a token of the sovereign equality of all members of the organisation and of its democratic character.

The initial role of the OSCE in military, political and economic fields should be restored. Field missions should be redirected to specific projects at the request of host states. OSCE budgeting and scales of contributions by countries should be revised and based on the principle of capacity to pay and United Nations methodology. Rules on extra-budgetary spending must be improved.

Next year, we will celebrate the 30th anniversary of the signature of the Helsinki Final Act, which led to the creation of the OSCE. It is a perfect time to consider the organisation's future.

Next week's ministerial council in Sofia will be a good opportunity for this. It is important to find solutions that will enhance the OSCE's role in preventing the emergence of new dividing lines in Europe and will transform it into an effective instrument serving the interests of all members.

The writer is Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation.