International organizations: educational manual

Citation preview


F. T. Kukeeva S. M. Nurdavletova D. Q. Zhekenov


Almaty «Qazaq university» 2017 1

UDC 327 (075.8) LBC 66.4 я 73 K 89 Recommended for publication by the decision of the International Relations Faculty, RISO of the Kazakh National University named after Al-Farabi (Protocol №1 dated 29.09.2017)

Reviewer Candidate of Historical Sciences A.K. Nursha

K 89

Kukeeva F.T. International organizations: educational manual / F.T. Kukeeva, S.M. Nurdavletova, D.Q. Zhekenov. – Almaty: Qazaq university, 2017. – 220 p. ISBN 978-601-04-2901-7 In the textbook is intended as a starting point for research on International Organizations. The textbook is addressed to a wide range of specialists in international relations, security, geopolitics and political science. The textbook is recommended as a textbook for the faculties and departments of international relations and political science. Publishing in authorial release.

UDC 327 (075.8) LBC 66.4 я 73 ISBN 978-601-04-2901-7

© Kukeeva F.T., Nurdavletova S.M., Zhekenov D.Q., 2017 © Al-Farabi KazNU, 2017



INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 5 SECTION 1 1. INTEGRATION ASSOCIATIONS OF A WIDE PROFILE .................................................................................... 8 1.1. The United Nations Organization (UN) .............................................. 8 1.1.1. The United Nations Family .............................................................. 14 1.1.2. The United Nations works for International Peace and Security...... 25 1.2. Organization of American States (OAS) ............................................. 31 1.3. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) ........................................... 40 1.4. The African Union (AU) ..................................................................... 44 1.5. The World Trade Organization (WTO). ............................................. 46 1.6. The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) ............................... 58 1.7. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) ...................................................................................... 64 1.8. The European Union (EU) .................................................................. 84 2. POLITICAL UNIONS AND CONFEDERATIONS ............................. 100 2.1. The Group of 77 (G-77) ...................................................................... 100 2.2. The Group of 8 (G8) ........................................................................... 107 2.3. The Group of 20 (G-20) ...................................................................... 115 SECTION 2 3. MILITARY-POLITICAL ASSOСIATIONS ....................................... 121 3.1. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)............................... 121 3.1.1. Military Operations .......................................................................... 132 3.2. The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) ........................ 144 4. POLITICAL AND CULTURAL ASSOCIATIONS.............................. 150 4.1. The International Organization of Turkic Culture (TURKSOY) ........ 150 4.2. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)................................. 152 5. INTEGRATION IN ASIA-PACIFIC REGION..................................... 159 5.1. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) ..................... 159 5.2. Asia Europe meeting (ASEM) ........................................................... 1656 6. THE MAIN ORGANIZATIONS FOR CENTRAL ASIAN STATES .......171 6.1. The Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) ................................................ 171 3

6.2. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) ................................. 179 6.3. Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA)........................................................................................... 189 7. THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS ROLE IN THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD ..................................................... 196 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................... 201 TESTS ....................................................................................................... 207



The twenty-first century of the third millennium is the century of regional and global integration. The concept of «integration» will become the leitmotif of international relations of the new century. Integration is a natural process of human development. This naturalness is explained by the rapid development of science and technology, production (industry, agriculture, services), the narrow framework of national markets, the uneven distribution of natural resources, the desire to diversify national currencies, the joint study of outer space, the irreversible trend towards the democratization of political systems in most countries of the world, The expansion of the rule of the principles of protecting human rights and, finally, the desire to resolve all conflicts not by military but by peaceful means. The purpose of this course is to familiarize you with the study of international organizations – we will examine why they are created, how they are organized and what they try to accomplish. The study of international organization focuses on the question of how members of the international community organize themselves cooperatively to address issues of mutual concern. This course explores both the theory and the practice of international organization. We will look at formal institutions (intergovernmental and non-governmental) created to facilitate cooperation as well as more informal arrangements such as norms, rules and practices and evaluate the effectiveness of these cooperative arrangements. By the end of the semester, students should be familiar with the role of international organization in the world system as well as the analytical tools used to analyze them. This course is divided into two major sections. The first section introduces the student to the study of international organization. We begin with an historical overview of the field and then turn to an examination of two formal international organizations (IGOs), the United Nations (UN) and the European Union (EU), focusing on their 5

historical origins, organizational structures and decision-making processes. Additionally, we will survey the major theoretical approaches in the field. The second part of the course looks at the role of international organization in a number of issue areas within broad categories of international security, international political economy, and social welfare. We will conclude the course with an examination of the strengths and weaknesses of international organization, both as a field of study and as it is practiced in the world today. Required Texts and Readings: Diehl, Paul F. ed. 2010. The Politics of Global Governance: International Organizations in an Interdependent World, 4th edition. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Press. (D) The Politics of Global Governance helps students of international organizations understand the major themes, theories, and approaches central to the subject. This edition has fourteen new essays to reflect the current concerns of the global system. Peacekeeping and collective security, finance and trade, and social and humanitarian issues are among the key topics covered. McCormick, John. 2011. Understanding the EU: A Concise Introduction, 5th edition. New York: Palgrave. (M) Understanding the European Union provides a broad-ranging but concise introduction to the EU, covering all major aspects of European integration. This revised and updated new edition includes fuller coverage of policy and policy making and of theoretical approaches to the study of the EU. Mingst, Karen A. and Margaret P. Karns. 2011. The United Nations in the Post-Cold War Era, 4th edition. Boulder, CO. Westview Press. (M & K) This book provides a comprehensive yet introduction to the United Nations, exploring the historical, institutional, and theoretical foundations of the UN as well as the political processes and issues facing the organization today. The fourth edition focuses on major events since 2006, including the influence of emerging powers such as China, India, and Brazil, the crisis in UN peacekeeping, and the continuing decline of the UN’s relevance in international economic relations. 6

Pease, Kelly-Kate S. 2012. International Organizations: Perspectives on Governance in The Twenty-First Century, 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. (P) Drawing on mainstream and critical theoretical approaches, International Organizations offers a comprehensive examination of international organizations’ political and structural role in world politics.



1.1. The United Nations Organization An introduction to the United Nations – The United Nations has four purposes: to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to cooperate in solving international problems and in promoting respect for human rights; and to be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations. Cooperating in this effort are more than 30 affiliated organizations, known together as the UN system. – The United Nations is not a world government, and it does not make laws. It does, however, provide the means to help resolve international conflicts and formulate policies on matters affecting all of us. – At the UN, the entire Member States – large and small, rich and poor, with differing political views and social systems – have a voice and a vote in this process. The United Nations gives the opportunity for countries to balance global interdependence and national interests when addressing international problems. – The UN system works to promote respect for human rights, reduce poverty, fight disease and protect the environment. The United Nations leads international campaigns against drug trafficking and terrorism. – Throughout the world, the UN and its agencies help expand food production, assist refugees, lead the fight against AIDS and set up programs to clear landmines, among others. 8

What is the United Nations? The United Nations is a unique organization of independent countries that have come together to work for world peace and social progress. The Organization formally came into existence on 24 October 1945, with 51 countries considered founding Members. By the end of 2008, the membership of the UN had grown to 192 countries. Since its inception, no country has ever been expelled from membership. Indonesia temporarily quit the UN in 1965 over a dispute with neighboring Malaysia, but returned the following year. So, the United Nations is like a world government. Wrong. Governments represent countries and peoples. The United Nations represents neither a particular government nor any one nation. It represents all its Members and does only what the Member States decide that it should do. Is there a set of rules or principles that guides the United Nations in its work? Yes, the Charter of the United Nations. It is a set of guidelines that explains the rights and duties of each Member country, and what needs to be done to achieve the goals they have set for themselves. When a nation becomes a Member of the UN, it accepts the aims and rules of the Charter. How did the United Nations begin? The idea of the United Nations was born during World War II (1939-1945). World leaders who had collaborated to end the war felt a strong need for a mechanism that would help bring peace and stop future wars. They realized that this was possible only if all nations worked together through a global organization. The United Nations was to be that Organization. Where did the name «United Nations» come from? The name «United Nations» was suggested by United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt. It was first officially used in 1942, when representatives of 26 countries signed the Declaration by United Nations. As a tribute to President Roosevelt, who died a few weeks before the signing of the Charter, all those present at the San Francisco Conference agreed to adopt the name «United Nations». 9

these goals�

Was this the first time that such an organization had been created? A similar organization, the League of Nations, was set up in 1919, following World War I. Its main objective was to keep world peace. However, not every country joined the League. The United States, for example, was never a member. Others that had joined later quit, and the League often failed to take action. Though it did not succeed, the League ignited a dream for an universal organization. The result was the United Nations. Who owns the United Nations Headquarters? The United Nations Headquarters is an international zone. This means that the land on which the UN sits does not belong to just the United States, the host country, but to all the Members of the United 10

Nations. The UN has its own flag and its own security officers who guard the area. It also has its own post office and issues its own stamps. These stamps can be used only from UN Headquarters or from UN offices in Vienna and Geneva. Who pays for the work of the United Nations? The 192 Members of the United Nations pay for everything that the Organization does. It has no other source of income. There are two types of budgets at the UN: – The regular budget includes the core functions at its Headquarters in New York and field offices around the world; – The peacekeeping budget pays for various operations, often in «hot spots» around the world. Payments to the UN for both budgets are compulsory. Members pay according to a scale of assessments agreed upon by all. This scale is based on a country’s ability to pay, national income and population. How does a country become a Member of the United Nations? Membership in the Organization, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, «is open to all peace-loving States that accept the obligations contained in the United Nations Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able to carry out these obligations». States are admitted to membership in the United Nations by decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. How is the United Nations structured? The work of the United Nations is carried out almost all over the world and is done by six main organs: 1. General Assembly 2. Security Council 3. Economic and Social Council 4. Trusteeship Council 5. International Court of Justice 6. Secretariat All these organs are based at UN Headquarters in New York, except for the International Court of Justice, which is located at The Hague, Netherlands. Related to the United Nations are 15 specialized agencies that coordinate their work with the UN but are separate, autonomous organizations. They work in areas as diverse as health, 11

agriculture, telecommunications and weather. In addition, there are 24 programs, funds and other bodies with responsibilities in specific fields. These bodies, together with the UN proper and its specialized programs, compose the United Nations system. What is a Permanent Observer? Non-Member States of the United Nations, which are members of one or more specialized agencies, can apply for the status of Permanent Observer. The status of a Permanent Observer is based purely on practice, and there are no provisions for it in the United Nations Charter. The practice dates from 1946, when the SecretaryGeneral accepted the designation of the Swiss Government as a Permanent Observer to the United Nations. Observers were subsequently put forward by certain States that later became United Nations Members, including Austria, Finland, Italy, and Japan. Switzerland became a UN Member on 10 September 2002. Permanent Observers have free access to most meetings and relevant documentation. Many regional and international organizations are also observers in the work and annual sessions of the General Assembly. What are the official languages of the United Nations? The official languages used at the United Nations are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The working languages at the UN Secretariat are English and French. A delegate may speak in any of the official languages, and the speech is interpreted simultaneously into the other official languages. Most UN documents are also issued in all six official languages. At times, a delegate may choose to make a statement using a non-official language. In such cases, the delegation must provide either an interpretation or a written text of the statement in one of the official languages. Originally, English and French were established as working languages at the UN. Later, Arabic, Chinese, Russian and Spanish were added as working languages in the General Assembly and in the Economic and Social Council. English, French, Chinese, Russian and Spanish are the working languages of the Security Council. How does a new State or Government obtain recognition by the United Nations? The recognition of a new State or Government is an act that only other States and Governments may grant or withhold. It generally 12

implies readiness to assume diplomatic relations. The United Nations is neither a State nor a Government, and therefore does not possess any authority to recognize either a State or a Government. As an organization of independent States, it may admit a new State to its membership or accept the credentials of the representatives of a new Government. Membership in the Organization, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, «is open to all peace-loving States which accept the obligations contained in the United Nations Charter] and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able to carry out these obligations». States are admitted to membership in the United Nations by decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. The procedure is briefly as follows: 1. The State submits an application to the Secretary-General and a letter formally stating that it accepts the obligations under the Charter. 2. The Security Council considers the application. Any recommendation for admission must receive the affirmative votes of 9 of the 15 members of the Council, provided that none of its five permanent members – China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America – have voted against the application. 3. If the Council recommends admission, the recommendation is presented to the General Assembly for consideration. A two-thirds majority vote is necessary in the Assembly for admission of a new State. 4. Membership becomes effective the date the resolution for admission is adopted. At each session, the General Assembly considers the credentials of all representatives of Member States participating in that session. During such consideration, which routinely takes place first in the nine-member Credentials Committee but can also arise at other times, the issue can be raised whether the Government actually in power has accredited a particular representative. This issue is ultimately decided by a majority vote in the Assembly. It should be noted that the normal change of Governments, as through a democratic election, does not raise any issues concerning the credentials of the representative of the State 13

concerned. From 51 member states in 1945 to 193 member states in 2017. 1.1.1. The United Nations Family Some achievements by the UN System – The UN was a promoter of the great movement of decolonization, which led to the independence of more than 80 nations. – The UN system is a major purchaser of goods and services, totaling over $6.4 billion a year. UNICEF buys half the vaccines produced worldwide. – UN relief agencies together provide aid and protection to more than 23 million refugees and displaced persons worldwide. – The UN system defines technical standards in telecommunication, aviation, shipping and postal services, which make international transactions possible. – UN campaigns for universal immunization against childhood diseases have eradicated smallpox and reduced cases of polio by 99 percent. – The World Food Programme, the UN’s front-line food aid organization, ships over 5 million tonnes of food annually, feeding some 113 million people in 80 countries. The UN Charter establishes six main organs of the United Nations. This is a summary of their composition and functions: The General Assembly All members of the United Nations (currently 193) are represented in the General Assembly. Each nation, rich or poor, large or small, has one vote. Decisions on such issues as international peace and security, admitting new members and the UN budget are decided by a two thirds majority. Other matters are decided by simple majority. In recent years, a special effort has been made to reach decisions through consensus, rather than by taking a formal vote. The General Assembly’s regular session begins each year in September and continues throughout the year. At the beginning of each regular session, the Assembly holds a general debate at which 14

Heads of State or Government and others present views on a wideranging agenda of issues of concern to the international community, from war and terrorism to disease and poverty. In 2005, world leaders gathered at UN Headquarters in New York for the General Assembly High Level Summit and to commemorate the Organization’s 60th birthday. Each year, the Assembly elects a president who presides over–that is, runs–the meetings. Functions: – To discuss and make recommendations on any subject (except those being dealt with at the same time by the Security Council); – To discuss questions related to military conflicts and the arms race; – To discuss ways and means to improve the state of children, youth, women and others; – To discuss the issues of sustainable development and human rights; – To decide how much each Member country should pay to run the Unite Nations and how this money is spent. Main Committees: Most discussions in the General Assembly take place in its six main committees: – First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) – Second Committee (Economic and Financial) – Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) – Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) – Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) – Sixth Committee (Legal) Some recent actions by the General Assembly In 2006, United Nations Member States agreed on a process of reforming the work of the Assembly that involves speeding up the decision-making process, streamlining the Assembly’s agenda, and strengthening the role and authority of the Assembly President. In 2006, the Assembly approved the establishment of the new, strengthened Human Rights Council to replace the much criticized UN Human Rights Commission. The new Council that was inaugurated on 19 June 2006 in Geneva has a higher status in the UN system as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly. 15

The Assembly designated 2001-2010 as Roll Back Malaria decade in developing countries, particularly in Africa. The Roll Back Malaria movement helps prevent disease and improves lives. It is estimated that malaria kills up to 2.7 million persons each year; 90 per cent of these deaths occur in Africa, and children under the age of five years are the most vulnerable. Malaria kills more than 3,000 African children every day. At the United Nations Summit in 2000, and reconfirmed in 2005, world leaders set goals in a landmark Millennium Declaration to make the world of the twenty-first century a safer and better place. The Security Council While the General Assembly can discuss any world concern, the Security Council has primary responsibility for questions of peace and security. Membership The Security Council has fifteen members. Five are permanent members: China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. The other ten non-permanent members are elected by the General Assembly for two-year terms and are chosen on the basis of geographical representation. Functions: – To investigate any dispute or situation which might lead to international conflict; – To recommend methods and terms of settlement; – To recommend actions against any threat or act of aggression; – To recommend to the General Assembly who should be appointed Secretary-General of the United Nations. Meetings The Security Council, unlike the General Assembly, does not hold regular meetings. It can be called to meet at any time on short notice. The members take turns at being President of the Council for a month at a time. They serve in the English alphabetical order of the names of their countries. To pass a resolution in the Security Council, nine members of the Council must vote «yes», but if any of the five permanent members votes «no», it is called a veto, and the resolution does not pass. 16

Some recent actions by the Security Council In July 2007, the Council voted unanimously to deploy a 26,000strong joint United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) in an attempt to quell the violence in Sudan’s western Darfur region, where fighting between pro-Government militias and rebel guerillas has killed more than 250,000 people since 2003. The Council established two international criminal tribunals to prosecute crimes against humanity in the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda. Following the terrorist attacks on the United States on 11 September 2001, the Council established its Counter-Terrorism Committee to help States increase their capability to fight terrorism. Is it fair that only five major Powers have the right to veto? At the end of World War II, China, France, the Russian Federation (originally the USSR), the United Kingdom and the United States played key roles in the establishment of the United Nations. The creators of the UN Charter conceived that these five countries would continue to play important roles in the maintenance of international peace and security. So the «big five» were given a special voting power known as the «right to veto». It was agreed by the drafters that if any one of the «big five» cast a negative vote in the 15-member Security Council, the resolution or decision would not be approved. The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) The Economic and Social Council is the forum to discuss economic problems, such as trade, transport, economic development, and social issues. It also helps countries reach agreement on how to improve education and health conditions and to promote respect for and observance of universal human rights and freedoms of people everywhere. Functions: – Serves as the main forum for international economic and social issues; – Promotes higher standards of living, full employment and economic and social progress; – Advances solutions to international economic, social and health-related problems, as well as international cultural and educational cooperation. 17

Membership The Council has 54 members, who serve for three-year terms. Voting in the Council is by simple majority; each member has one vote. Each year, the Council holds several short sessions with regard to the organization of its work, often including representatives of civil society. The Economic and Social Council also holds an annual fourweek substantive session in July, alternating the venue between Geneva and New York. Subsidiary bodies ECOSOC has many commissions to administer the wide range of issues that fall within its purview. Among them, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, the Commission for Social Development, the Commission on Population and Development, the Commission on the Status of Women, the Statistical Commission, the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, the Commission on Sustainable Development, the Commission on Science and Technology for Development and the United Nations Forum on Forests. The Council also directs 5 regional commissions: the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), the Economic Commission for Europe (ECE), the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), and the Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA). Some UN Specialized Agencies, Funds and Programs The Economic and Social Council considers reports from several specialized agencies, funds and programs, each of which is a separate organization with its own membership, budget and headquarters. A partial list follows. UNDP The United Nations development Programme is the UN’s global development network, advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. UndP is on the ground in 166 countries, working with them on their own solutions to global and national development challenges. 18

UNICEF The United Nations Children’s Fund is the main Un organization defending, promoting and protecting children’s rights. It also works towards protecting the world’s most disadvantaged children. UNEP The United Nations environment Programme provides leadership and encourages partnership in caring for the environment. It supports environmental monitoring, assessment and early warning. UNFPA The United Nations Population Fund promotes the right of women, men and children to enjoy a healthy life. UnFPa supports countries in using population data for policies and programmes to reduce poverty and to ensure that every pregnancy is wanted, every birth is safe and every girl and woman is treated with dignity and respect. UNHCR The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees provides legal protection for refugees and seeks durable solutions to their problems, either by helping them to return voluntarily to their homes or to settle in other countries. ILO The International Labour organization formulates policies and programs to promote basic human rights of workers, improve working and living conditions and enhance employment opportunities. IMF The International Monetary Fund ensures that the global monetary and financial system is stable. It advises on key economic policies, provides temporary financial assistance and training, promotes growth and alleviates poverty. FAO The Food and agriculture organization works to eradicate hunger and malnutrition and to raise levels of nutrition. It also assists its 19

Member states in the sustainable development of their agricultural sector. UNESCO The United Nations educational, scientific and Cultural organization promotes international cooperation and facilitates the exchange of information in the fields of education, science, culture and communications. WHO The World Health organization directs and coordinates international health work. It also promotes and coordinates research on preventing disease. World Bank www.worldbank. org The World Bank provides low-interest loans, interest-free credits, grants to developing countries for education, health, infrastructure, communications, and other purposes. ICAO The International Civil aviation organization assures the safe, secure, orderly and sustainable development of international air transport while minimizing the adverse effect of global civil aviation on the environment. IMO The International Maritime organization is responsible for safe, secure and efficient shipping on clean oceans and the prevention of marine pollution from ships. ITU The International telecommunications Union works with governments and the private sector to coordinate the operation of global telecommu- nications networks and services. From broadband internet to latest-gen- eration wireless technologies, from aeronautical and maritime navigation to radio astronomy and satellite-based meteorology, from phone and fax services to television broadcasting, ItU helps the world communicate. 20

UPU The Universal Postal Union fosters the sustainable development of quality universal, efficient, accessible postal services in order to facilitate communication among the people of the world. WMO The World Meteorological organization coordinates global scientific activity on the state and behavior of the earth’s atmosphere, its interaction with the oceans, the climate it produces and the resulting distribution of water resources. WIPO The World Intellectual Property organization ensures that the rights of creators and owners of intellectual property are protected worldwide and that inventors and authors are, thus, recognized and rewarded for their ingenuity. IFAD The International Fund for agricultural development provides direct funding and mobilizes additional resources for programs designed to promote the economic advancement of the rural poor. 800 million women, children and men live in rural areas and depend on agriculture and related activities for their livelihoods. UNIDO The United Nations Industrial development organization helps countries improve their national development policies and regulatory frameworks. Its tailor-made programs support market access and access to finance for micro, small and medium scale agro-industrial development. UNODC The United Nations office on drugs and Crime assists countries in their struggle against illicit drugs, crime and terrorism. It seeks to increase understanding of drug and crime issues and to assist countries 21

in developing domestic legislature and implementing international treaties. UNIFEM The United Nations development Fund for Women provides financial and technical assistance to innovative programmes and strategies to foster women’s empowerment and gender equality, and acts as a catalyst to ensure the appropriate involvement of women in mainstream development activities. WFP The World Food Programme supplies food to sustain victims of man- made and natural disasters, improves the nutrition and quality of life of the most vulnerable people at critical times in their lives, and promotes self-reliance of people and communities. UNHABITAT The United Nations Human settlements Programme promotes socially and environmentally sustainable towns and cities with the goal of ensuring adequate shelter for all. The Trusteeship Council In 1945, when the United Nations was established, eleven territories (mostly in Africa and in the Pacific Ocean) were placed under international supervision. The major goals of the Trusteeship System were to promote the advancement of the inhabitants of Trust Territories and their progressive development towards selfgovernment or independence. Membership The Trusteeship Council is composed of the permanent members of the Security Council (China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States). Each member has one vote, and a simple majority makes decisions. Meetings Since the last Trust Territory - Palau, formerly administered by the United States – achieved self-government in 1994, the Council has formally suspended operations after nearly half a century. It will meet only as the need arises. 22

The International Court of Justice The International Court of Justice (ICJ) was established in 1946 as the main UN organ for handing down legal judgments. Only countries, not individuals, can take cases before the Court. Once a country agrees to let the Court act on a case, it must agree to comply with the Court’s decision. In addition, other organs of the UN may seek an advisory opinion from the Court. As of June 2006, the ICJ had delivered 92 judgments on disputes between states, including cases on territorial boundaries, diplomatic relations, not interfering in countries’ domestic affairs, and hostage taking. Composition The Court sits at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands. It has fifteen judges who are elected by the General Assembly and the Security Council. No two judges can come from the same country. Nine judges have to agree before a decision can be made. All the judgments passed by the Court are final and without appeal. If one of the states involved fails to comply with the decision, the other party may take the issue to the Security Council. On 6 February 2006, Judge Rosalyn Higgins (United Kingdom), the sole woman Member of the Court, was elected the first female President of the International Court for a term of three years. The Secretariat The Secretariat, headed by the Secretary-General, consists of an international staff working at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, and all over the world. It carries out the day-to-day work of the Organization. Its duties are as varied as the problems dealt with by the United Nations. These range from administering peacekeeping operations to mediating international disputes or surveying social and economic trends and problems. The Secretariat is responsible for servicing the other organs of the United Nations and administering the programs and policies laid down by them. Who it serves The United Nations Headquarters was designed to serve four major groups: delegations, who represent the 192 current Member States and who send more than 5,000 persons to New York each year for the annual sessions of the General Assembly; the international staff or Secretariat, numbering about 5,478 persons in New York; visitors, 23

estimated at about 1 million in 2007; and journalists, close to 2,000 of whom are permanently accredited while nearly 5,000 are present during major meetings. There are also more than 3,000 nongovernmental organizations accredited to the United Nations, many of whom attend meetings at Headquarters. The aggregate annual income to New York resulting from the UN presence is estimated at $3.3 billion. Functions: – To gather and prepare background information on various problems so that the government delegates can study the facts and make their recommendations; – To help carry out the decisions of the United Nations; – To organize international conferences; – To interpret speeches and translate documents into the UN’s official languages. Composition The Secretary-General is the chief officer of the United Nations. A staff of international civil servants assists him or her. Unlike diplomats, who represent a particular country, the civil servants work for all 192 Member countries and take their orders not from governments, but from the Secretary-General. How is the UN Secretary-General appointed? The Secretary-General is appointed for a period of five years by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council. There have been eight Secretaries-General since the UN was created. The appointment of the Secretary-General follows a regional rotation. – Trygve Lie (Norway) 1946-1952; – Dag Hammarskjцld (Sweden) 1953-1961; – U Thant (Myanmar) 1961-1971; – Kurt Waldheim (Austria) 1972-1981; – Javier Pйrez de Cuйllar (Peru) 1982-1991; – Boutros Boutros-Ghali (Egypt) 1992-1996; – Kofi Annan (Ghana) 1997-2006; – Ban Ki-moon (South Korea) 2007-for today. Some functions of the Secretary-General The UN Charter describes the Secretary-General as the «chief administrative officer» of the Organization, who shall act in the 24

capacity and perform «functions as are entrusted» to him or her by the General Assembly, Security Council, Economic and Social Council and other United Nations organs. The Charter also empowers the Secretary-General to bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter that threatens international peace and security. – To propose issues to be discussed by the General Assembly or any other organ of the United Nations; – To bring to the attention of the Security Council any problem which the Secretary-General feels may threaten world peace; – To act as a «referee» in disputes between Member States; – To offer his or her «good offices». 1.1.2. The United Nations works for International Peace and Security UN peacemaking efforts – UN peacebuilding in post-conflict situations often includes overseeing the collection and destruction of hundreds of thousands of weapons and facilitating the reintegration of former combatants into civil society. – The UN played a crucial role in encouraging countries to support the 1997 Ottawa Convention – which provides for the total ban on the production, export and use of landmines – and continues to promote universal adherence to this treaty. – UN support has resulted in a wide range of agreements, including the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, and treaties to establish nuclear-free zones. – During the 1990s, more than 2 million children were killed and 6 million seriously injured in conflicts involving revolvers, assault rifles, mortars, hand grenades and portable missile launchers. At a UN Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Lights Weapons in 2001, States agreed on measures to strengthen international cooperation in curbing this illegal arms trade. 25

The UN was created to keep peace. How does it do that? The United Nations serves as a global forum where countries can raise and discuss the most difficult issues, including problems of war and peace. When government leaders talk to each other face-to-face, a dialogue is established. This can result in agreement on how to peacefully settle disputes. When many countries speak with one voice – or by consensus – it creates a global pressure on all. The SecretaryGeneral, either directly or through a representative, may also advance a dialogue between and among nations. Who commands the peacekeeping operations? Peacekeeping operations are established by the Security Council and directed by the Secretary-General, often through a special representative. When a threat to peace is brought before the Council, it usually first asks the parties to reach agreement by peaceful means. If fighting breaks out or persists, the Council tries to secure a ceasefire. It may then send peacekeeping missions to troubled areas to restore peaceor call for economic sanctions and embargoes. Has the UN stopped any war? The UN has helped prevent many conflicts from flaring up into full-scale wars. It has also negotiated the peaceful settlement of conflicts. On many occasions, the UN has provided a mechanism to help defuse hostilities, for example, the Berlin crisis (1948-1949), the Cuban missile crisis (1962) and the 1973 Middle East crisis. In each of these cases, UN intervention helped prevent war between the superpowers. The UN also played a major role in ending wars in the Congo (1964), between Iran and Iraq (1988), and in El Salvador (1992) and Guatemala (1996). The UN led the way to a peace that has brought sustained economic growth in Mozambique (1994); independence to Timor-Leste (2002) and in December 2005, the Organization successfully completed its peacekeeping mandate in Sierra Leone. Other accomplishments include: – The UN Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG) supervised Namibia’s first free and fair elections, leading to its independence. – In Cambodia, the UN Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) monitored a ceasefire and withdrawal of foreign 26

forces, supervised various government offices and organized a free and fair election. – In the former Yugoslavia, the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) worked to protect the civilians in demilitarized zones and to enable the delivery of humanitarian assistance. What happens when a country ignores the decisions of the Security Council? When decisions of the Security Council are not complied with, the Council may take several actions to ensure their implementation. Should a country threaten or breach the peace or commit an act of aggression, it may impose economic and trade sanctions, or other specific measures such as arms and travel ban and diplomatic restrictions. It can also authorize the use of force in certain instances. But, these measures are usually a last resort, to be used only if peaceful means of settling a dispute have been exhausted. The Security Council can authorize a coalition of Member States to use «all necessary means», including military action, to deal with a conflict as for example: – in 1991 to restore the sovereignty of Kuwait after its invasion by Iraq; – in 1992 to secure the environment for humanitarian relief to be delivered in Somalia; – in 1994 to restore the democratically-elected government in Haiti; – in 1999 to restore peace and security in East Timor. Does the UN have an army? No, the United Nations has no standing international police or military force. Troops who serve in the UN peacekeeping operations are voluntarily contributed by the Member States. Civilians, often drawn from the UN itself, also play a key role in forming such operations. What, then, is a peacekeeping operation? Peacekeeping has traditionally been defined as the use of multinational forces, under UN command, to help control and resolve conflicts between countries. Peacekeeping operations fulfill the role of a neutral third party to help create and maintain a ceasefire and form a buffer zone between warring parties. They also provide electoral 27

assistance and help in clearing deadly landmines. As peacekeepers maintain peace on the ground, mediators from the United Nations meet with leaders from the disputing parties or countries and try to reach a peaceful solution. There are two types of peacekeeping operations: observer missions and peacekeeping forces. Observers are not armed. Soldiers of UN peacekeeping forces carry light weapons, which they may use only in self-defence. The UN peacekeepers are easily identifiable by the UN insignia and the blue beret they wear when on duty. The blue helmet, which has become the symbol of UN peacekeepers, is carried during all operations and is worn when there is danger. Peacekeepers wear their own national uniforms. Governments that volunteer personnel retain ultimate control over thei own military forces serving under the UN flag. Why does the UN have so many peacekeeping operations? Peacekeeping operations are created in response to serious military or humanitarian crises. In the past, peacekeepers were mainly involved in keeping peace between warring nations. But now many nations are at war with themselves. Due to civil strife and ethnic conflicts, some governments are unable to exercise authority over their own territory, causing great human suffering. In such situations, the United Nations is often asked, on the one hand, to negotiate a settlement and, on the other, to provide emergency relief to the people affected by the conflict. Working under difficult conditions, the United Nations integrates humanitarian assistance with efforts to resolve the crisis. Disarmament Humankind has so far avoided a second nuclear war, due in large part to United Nations activities for disarmament, in particular, the elimination of weapons of mass destruction. But the world remains a dangerous place: weapon supplies continue to grow; more people train for war every day; and the costs of the arms race continue to mount. Consider this: In 1945, after two atomic bombs were dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, the Second World War (19391945) was over. Since then, the world has witnessed some 150 wars. These conflicts have cost more than 20 million lives, more than 80 per cent of them civilians. Though nobody has used nuclear weapons 28

again, we now have at least seven «nuclear Powers». The total stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world now amounts to some 15,000 megatons, roughly equivalent to more than 1 million Hiroshima bombs. Now consider this: Take a minute to count from 1 to 60. By the time you finish, the world has lost about 25 to 30 children, most of them in the developing countries, to malnutrition, hunger and curable diseases. During the same time, the world has spent some $2.3 million for military purposes – or about $800 billion annually. Arms transfers to developing countries are estimated at some $30 billion a year. The accumulation of arms and economic development both require largescale human and material resources. But, since resources are limited, pursuing either process tends to be at the expense of the other. There is growing agreement that, in the long run, the world can either continue to pursue the arms race or achieve and sustain social and economic development for the benefit of all, but it will not be able to do both. General and complete disarmament – or gradual elimination of weapons of mass destruction – is one of the goals set by the United Nations. Its immediate objectives are to eliminate the danger of war, particularly nuclear war, and to implement measures to halt and reverse the arms race. Some UN actions for disarmament – The Partial Test-Ban Treaty, 1963, prohibits nuclear tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water. – The Non-Proliferation Treaty, 1968, prohibits the spread of nuclear weapons from nuclear to non-nuclear countries. – The Chemical Weapons Convention, 1992, prohibits use, manufacturing and stockpiling of such weapons. – The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, 1996, bans all underground nuclear-test explosions. – The Anti-Personnel Landmines Convention, 1997, prohibits the use, stock-piling, production and transfer of such mines. How can individuals support the UN? Can they join the Organization as members? No, only independent countries with international recognition can become members of the UN. However, individuals can support the 29

work of the United Nations through international and local nongovernmental organizations. Some of them collaborate with the UN Department of Public Information and provide the UN with valuable links to people around the world. There are United Nations Associations (UNA-USA and WFUNA) in more than 100 countries, often with many local chapters. The UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has national committees in many countries, spreading awareness about UNICEF’s programs and raising the funds to help make them a reality. Some 3,600 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural organization (UNESCO) clubs, centers and associations (associated with UNESCO) in over 90 countries undertake activities in the areas of education, science, culture and communication. Major contact points are the UN information centers and services all over the world. If you have a skill in such fields as agriculture, medicine, education, information technology, vocational training, the promotion of human rights, industry and population – as well as the necessary flexibility and commitment – the UN Volunteers (UNV) program may place you, for a one-to two-year period, with an appropriate UN development project in a developing country. I want to continue my studies at a foreign university. Can the UN provide me with financial assistance? The United Nations does not provide financial assistance to students. You can find some information about scholarships offered by higher education institutions and international organizations in a guide published by UNESCO, entitled «Study Abroad». Does the UN accept student interns? The United Nations offers an unpaid internship programme for graduate students only at its New York Headquarters. It consists of three two-month periods throughout the year. Where can I get information about a UN Member country’s position on various current issues? You can obtain such information from the Permanent Mission to the United Nations of the country concerned. The list of websites for the Member States can be found at: 30

What is United Nations Day? It is the birthday of the United Nations. It falls on 24 October, the day that the Organization came into being in 1945 after a majority of its original Members formally accepted their membership by agreeing to the Charter of the United Nations. Thus, 24 October is celebrated all over the world as United Nations Day. Does the UN have an anthem? The UN does not have an official anthem or hymn. The General Assembly recognized the need for an official song and reserved the right to select and adopt one. So far, no decision has been taken. In 1970, Maestro Pablo Casals of Spain set music to a hymn written in honour of the UN by English poet W. H. Auden. This hymn was performed on UN Day in 1971 at UN Headquarters. 1.2. Organization of American States Organization of American States (OAS), organization formed to promote economic, military, and cultural cooperation among its members, which include almost all of the independent states of the Western Hemisphere. The OAS’s main goals are to prevent any outside state’s intervention in the Western Hemisphere and to maintain peace between the various states within the hemisphere. The Organization of American States is a multilateral regional organization focused on human rights, electoral oversight, social and economic development, and security in the Western Hemisphere. While the organization is recognized by many foreign policy experts as an important forum for regional diplomacy, critics say ideological divisions among its members have hampered its efforts to promote democratic principles. The OAS came under renewed focus in 2017 as the group sharpened its criticism of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his attempts to consolidate power and suppress political opposition. Background Information The Organization of American States was established in 1948 by 21 nations of the hemisphere. Since its creation, the OAS has 31

expanded to include all 35 independent countries of the Americas. Cuba remains a member, but its government has been excluded from participation since 1962. The four official languages of the OAS are English, Spanish, French and Portuguese. Its predecessors are the International Bureau of the American Republics and the Pan American Union. The OAS serves as a political forum for multilateral dialogue and action. In broad terms, its major concerns have been the promotion of democracy, human rights, security, trade, and development. Its impact has been most crucial on specific events or regional developments such as the Alliance for Progress, the Cuban Revolution, the Nicaraguan Revolution, and more recently, as mediator between political factions in Venezuela. The OAS is the umbrella and governing body for many inter-American committees and specialized organizations, including the Pan American Health Organization, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and the InterAmerican Agency for Cooperation and Development. History The founding of the OAS was based on the general acceptance of the principles of the U.S. Monroe Doctrine (Dec. 2, 1823) by the countries of the Western Hemisphere, especially the principle that an attack upon one American state would be considered as an attack upon all. The OAS attempted to «continentalize» the Monroe Doctrine, creating obligations for the other states without restricting the right of the United States to take immediate action in self-defense. The OAS grew out of an earlier U.S.-sponsored international organization for the Western Hemisphere, the Pan-American Union, which held a series of nine Pan-American conferences from 1889–90 to 1948 to reach agreement on various commercial and juridical problems common to the United States and Latin America. In World War II most Latin American nations sided with the United States and declared war against the Axis powers. After this global conflict, all 21 independent nations of the Western Hemisphere agreed in 1947 on a formal mutual-defense pact called the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance. The OAS was established just a year after the Rio Pact was signed. The Rio Pact set up a defensive military alliance 32

between the United States and the nations of Latin America. The Latin American republics, however, wanted something more substantial than a mere military alliance. In response to Latin American demands for a summit to discuss economic and political relations with the United States, American delegates traveled to an Inter-American Conference in Bogota, Colombia in April 1948. Among other things, the Latin American delegates wanted a political institution to deal with intra-hemispheric disputes-this request was based on the fear that the United States, intent on its anticommunist crusade, might engage in unilateral interventions against suspected Latin American governments. The United States grudgingly gave its assent to the establishment of the OAS, but insisted that the charter include a statement condemning «international communism or any totalitarianism» as «irreconcilable with the tradition of the American countries». For the Latin American delegates, the key article of the OAS charter stated that, «No State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State». By 1948, with the start of the Cold War, it had become apparent that a stronger security system was needed in the Western Hemisphere to meet the perceived threat of international communism. At the urging of the United States, the OAS Charter was signed on April 30, 1948, at the conclusion of the Ninth Pan-American Conference, held in Bogotá, Colom. The aims of the organization were to strengthen the peace and security of the Western Hemisphere, to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes between member states, to provide for collective security, and to encourage cooperation in economic, social, and cultural matters. Most of the newly independent nations of the Caribbean joined the OAS in the 1960s, and the last major holdout, Canada, joined in 1990. After the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, the OAS became more active in encouraging democratic government in member states, and it became a leader in observing and monitoring elections to safeguard against fraud and irregularities. In the economic and social field, its most notable achievement was its adoption of the Charter of Punta del Este (1961), establishing the Alliance for Progress. The 33

Inter-American Court of Human Rights was established at San José, C.Rica, in 1979. The United States and 20 Latin American nations sign the charter establishing the Organization of American States (OAS). The new institution was designed to facilitate better political relations between the member states and, at least for the United States, to serve as a bulwark against communist penetration of the Western Hemisphere. The OAS never truly functioned as either the United States or the Latin American members had hoped. For the United States, the OAS proved a disappointment since the other member states did not seem to share its own Cold War zeal. In a number of cases–most notably Castro’s Cuba–the OAS refused to give its approval of direct action to remove what the United States felt were «communist threats». In other cases, such as the U.S. intervention in the Dominican Republic in 1965, the OAS gave only grudging support after the fact. For their parts, the Latin American member states have also been disappointed in the OAS. The U.S.-orchestrated overthrow of the government of Guatemala in 1954, the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba in 1961, the intervention in the Dominican Republic in 1965, and other examples of the unilateral use of force by the United States indicate that it had not given up its «gunboat diplomacy» in Latin America. The OAS continues to function, though the end of the Cold War has dramatically lessened its importance in intra-hemispheric affairs. Structure The General Secretariat is the administrative backbone of the OAS and is headed by a secretary-general elected to a five-year term. The chief policy-making body of the OAS is the General Assembly, which holds annual meetings at which member states are represented by their foreign ministers or chiefs of state. The General Assembly controls the OAS’s budget and supervises various specialized organizations. In case of attack or an act of aggression within or between member states, the Permanent Council, composed of an ambassador from each member state, acts as the provisional organ of consultation until all the member states’ ministers of foreign affairs can assemble. At this consultation meeting of foreign ministers, collective action cannot be undertaken without the approval of two34

thirds of the foreign ministers present. The General Secretariat and the Permanent The OAS is headed by Secretary-General. The organization comprises three main bodies: the General Assembly, the principal decision-making organ, which meets annually; the Permanent Council, which manages day-to-day affairs; and the General Secretariat, which implements policies made by the other two bodies. The OAS is headquartered in Washington, DC, and has seven hundred employees throughout the region. It convenes a Summit of the Americas every three years, during which national leaders discuss multilateral initiatives and work to reinforce diplomatic ties. The main activity The organization serves several functions within the region: overseeing elections, coordinating security and law enforcement operations, providing technical and financial assistance for disaster management and development projects, and monitoring human rights through the inter-American legal system. In 2016, the OAS sent election observation missions to Colombia, Haiti, and the United States, among other countries. Other recent initiatives include assisting the governments of Chile, Colombia, Jamaica, Panama, Paraguay, and Trinidad and Tobago to adopt national cybersecurity plans; the Universal Civil Identity Program in the Americas (PUICA), a program to encourage members to issue birth certificates and other forms of identification; and a 2016 forum to organize against child marriage in the region. Several autonomous institutions carry out OAS functions, including the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and the Inter-American Juridical Committee. In 2017, the IACHR issued statements on state repression of protests in Venezuela, rising violence in rural Brazil, and attacks on union members in Honduras. The budget The OAS has a regular fund that supports the General Secretariat, and a special fund geared toward specific programs and initiatives. The General Assembly finances the regular fund by setting country 35

quotas, which are based on members’ capacities to pay. The OAS's 2017 budget allocates approximately $73 million to the regular fund, to which the United States supplied $51 million, nearly 60 percent of the regular budget (In 2016-2017, the United States contributed more than $20 million to the specific fund, accounting for more than a third of donations for that year). What are its strengths? The OAS's role as a forum for regular high-level discussions on issues facing the hemisphere is one of its major strengths, says CFR Senior Fellow Shannon K. O'Neil. Several other analysts have praised the IAHRC as a crucial, objective platform for human rights litigation. For instance, the commission played an important role in uncovering rights abuses committed during several of the region's military dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s. The OAS «took forceful stands to defend democracy in Haiti, Peru, Guatemala, and Paraguay» in the 1990s, writes Inter-American Dialogue President Michael Shifter. Many policymakers from member states have criticized the OAS for institutional shortcomings. Experts say the region's polarized politics have made it difficult for the OAS to make quick, decisive calls to action. «When an incumbent president is accused of violating democratic principles, the OAS tends to be very hesitant to act», says Javier Corrales, a professor of political science at Amherst College. Corrales says OAS members tend to shy away from imposing economic sanctions because many governments fear that down the road they could become targets for such measures. When an incumbent president is accused of violating democratic principles, the OAS tends to be very hesitant to act. Javier Corrales, Professor, Amherst College Moreover, many members are reluctant to empower independent monitoring agencies. In 2016, the IAHRC announced layoffs and suspended hearings due to budget cuts, which Shifter says were largely due to members’ failing to meet their financial responsibilities. «For a number of governments, bolstering a genuinely autonomous body that would enhance scrutiny of their human rights records is hardly a high priority», he writes. Election monitoring is also constrained: OAS observers can deploy only to countries that have invited them. «They can't condemn a country unless that country 36

wants to be condemned», O'Neil says. Nevertheless, she adds, it has become a norm in many member countries to accept OAS monitors, which she says has been helpful in ensuring the legitimacy of elections. The OAS has played an important role in promoting democracy since most of the hemisphere returned to civilian rule toward the end of the Cold War. In 1992, the OAS amended its charter to allow the suspension of states whose democratic governments are overthrown by force, and in 2001, members signed the Inter-American Democratic Charter, which declared that American states have a «right to democracy» and an «obligation to promote and defend it». In 2009, members suspended Honduras following a military coup; the country was readmitted two years later after officials there held elections. But many experts say the organization has been slow to act as Venezuela's government has grown increasingly autocratic over the last two decades. Experts say many Latin American governments were hesitant to criticize Caracas because they were ideologically aligned with its socialist government or relied on low-interest oil imports from Venezuela. Secretary-General Almagro has taken a stronger stance against the government of Nicolas Maduro in recent years. In 2016, he issued a report outlining grounds for Venezuela's censure, and in March 2017 he called on Maduro's government to hold elections or face suspension. In 2017, Venezuela announced it would pull out of the OAS, making it the first country to leave the group voluntarily. In April, Venezuela announced it would pull out of the OAS, making it the first country to leave the group voluntarily. The seemingly preemptive move, which may take two years, will likely further isolate Venezuela from its neighbors. The organization's history with Cuba The only country in the Western Hemisphere that is not a member of the OAS is Cuba, which has long been a wedge between member states. At the urging of the United States, the OAS suspended Cuba in 1962 on the grounds that its self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninist government was «incompatible with the principles and objectives of the inter-American system». Fourteen states, including the United 37

States, voted in favor of the motion; Cuba was the only vote against. Six members – Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, and Mexica – abstained. In 2009, the OAS voted unanimously to lift the suspension on the condition that Cuba submit to a «process of dialogue» on OAS principles. In 2015, U.S. President Barack Obama met Cuban President Raul Castro on the sidelines of the Summit of the Americas (it was the first time a Cuban leader had attended the summit), part of a rapprochement many observers said could warm ties between Washington and much of Latin America. However, Cuban officials have said they are not interested in rejoining the OAS. The Trump administration response to the OAS In an April 2017 statement, U.S. President Donald J. Trump called the OAS an «enduring organization for the promotion of democracy, security, human rights, and economic development». However, OAS officials fear that deep budget cuts to the U.S. State Department proposed by Trump could affect funding to the organization. Meanwhile, many Latin American leaders have expressed concerns over his stances on immigration, trade, and Cuba. In a 2017 op-ed, Corrales wrote that Trump's policies toward Latin America risk alienating an increasingly pro-trade, U.S.-friendly region. U.S. protectionism, he said, may paradoxically encourage Latin American countries to be more open to trade with one another. The regional alternatives to the OAS A handful of other regional groupings have emerged over the last two decades with different goals. Some sought to counter Washington's perceived influence over the OAS, others aimed to streamline decision-making, and some formed to pursue economic agendas. CELAC. The Community of Latin American and Caribbean States is an organization that excludes the United States and Canada, and was widely seen as a potential alternative to the OAS when it was founded in 2010. One of its signature achievements came when members traveled to Beijing in 2015 and secured a pledge from Chinese 38

President Xi Jinping to invest $500 billion in the region over the next decade. UNASUR. The Union of South American Nations was founded in 2008 and is regarded by many observers as a means for Brazil to assert its power in the region. The organization mediated a diplomatic crisis between Ecuador and Colombia in 2008, and participated in Vaticanled talks between Venezuela's government and opposition leaders in 2016. ALBA. The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America was founded in 2004 by Venezuela’s late President Hugo Chavez and then Cuban President Fidel Castro. It comprises eleven governments from the region and seeks economic and political integration based on leftist ideals. But experts say its influence has diminished amid Venezuela's economic and political disintegration. Pacific Alliance. The Pacific Alliance, an economic bloc comprising Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru, was created in 2011. Twelve other countries in the Western Hemisphere, including the United States, hold observer status. It primarily serves to integrate member economies and expand their trade with the Asia-Pacific region. Mercosur. Mercosur was formed in 1991 and comprises Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela (although Venezuela was suspended in late 2016). Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, and Suriname are associate members. Like the Pacific Alliance, Mercosur aims to integrate member economies. Relations with member countries The OAS has settled border conflicts between various member countries since the late 1940s. For example, it provided the framework for a truce and subsequent resolution of the Soccer War (1969) between Honduras and El Salvador. The OAS also supported the United States’ unilateral military intervention in the Dominican Republic in 1965 to prevent a left-wing government from coming to power. In the wake of the U.S. invasion, the OAS created an interAmerican military force that kept the peace in the Dominican Republic until new elections were held there in 1966. The left-wing Sandinista movement that held power in Nicaragua between 1979 and 1990 was 39

not opposed by the OAS, however, because the organization believed that the Sandinista government did not offer any potential for Soviet intervention in the Western Hemisphere, despite the United States’ claims to the contrary. Because the OAS was strongly anticommunist in its orientation, it suspended Cuba’s membership in the group in 1962; that country had declared itself Marxist-Leninist in 1961. The OAS then supported U.S. Pres. John F. Kennedy in the quarantine against the shipment of Soviet missiles to Cuba. In the face of Cuban attempts to subvert neighbouring countries, the OAS ordered trade sanctions and the breaking of diplomatic ties with that nation from 1964 to 1975. By the early 21st century, however, the OAS looked toward Cuba’s reentry into the group. In June 2009 OAS’s foreign ministers voted to lift the suspension of Cuba’s membership, but Cuba declined to rejoin the organization. In July 2009, following a coup that ousted Pres. Manuel Zelaya from the Honduran presidency, the interim government of Honduras announced its departure from the OAS. Because the OAS did not recognize the government as a legitimate one, it refused to accept the withdrawal. In a show of support for Zelaya, the OAS then unanimously voted to suspend Honduras from the group. 1.3. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) is an organization of fifteen Caribbean nations and dependencies whose main objective is to promote economic integration and cooperation among its members, to ensure that the benefits of integration are equitably shared, and to coordinate foreign policy. History The organization was established in 1973. Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM), organization founded by the Treaty of Chaguaramas (Trinidad; 1973, revised 2001) and including Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti (suspended 2004–6), Jamaica, Montserrat, 40

Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. Anguilla, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, and the Turks and Caicos Islands are associate members. Its major activities involve coordinating economic policies and development planning; devising and instituting special projects for the less-developed countries within its jurisdiction; operating as a regional single market for many of its members (Caricom Single Market); and handling regional trade disputes. The secretariat headquarters is in Georgetown, Guyana. CARICOM is an official United Nations Observer. In 2001, the heads of government signed a revised Treaty of Chaguaramas that cleared the way to transform the idea of a common market CARICOM into a Caribbean (CARICOM) Single Market and Economy. Part of the revised treaty establishes and implements the Caribbean Court of Justice. In 2005 the organization established the Caribbean Court of Justice, which functions as a final court of appeals for participating nations and as a court of original jurisdiction for settling disputes among CARICOM nations. In 2006 Caricom inaugurated its single market and economy when six of its members participated in the establishment of a CARICOM single market. Since 2013, the CARICOM-bloc and the Dominican Republic have been tied to the European Commission via an Economic Partnership Agreements known as CARIFORUM signed in 2008. The treaty grants all members of the European Union and CARIFORUM equal rights in terms of trade and investment. Within the agreement under Article 234, the European Court of Justice also carries dispute resolution mechanisms between CARIFORUM and the European Union states. Membership. Currently CARICOM has 15 full members, 5 associate members and 8 observers. All of the associate members are British overseas territories, and it is currently not established what the role of the associate members will be. The observers are states which engage in at least one of CARICOM's technical committees. Members: Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago. 41

Organizational structure. Structures comprised by the overall Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Under Article 4 CARICOM breaks its 15 member states into two groups: Less Developed Countries (LDCs) and More Developed Countries (MDCs). Chairmanship. The post of Chairman (Head of CARICOM) is held in rotation by the regional Heads of State (for the republics) and Heads of Government (for the realms) of CARICOM's 15 member states. Heads of government. CARICOM contains a quasi-Cabinet of the individual Heads of Government. These heads are given specific specialised portfolios of responsibility for overall regional development and integration. Secretariat. – Secretariat of the Caribbean Community, The term of office of the Secretary-General is five years, which may be renewed. (Chief Administrative Organ) – Secretary-General of the Caribbean Community, the CARICOM Secretary General (Chief Executive) handles foreign and community relations. – Deputy Secretary-General of the Caribbean Community, handles human and social Development. – General Counsel of the Caribbean Community, handles trade and economic integration. The goal statement of the CARICOM Secretariat is: To provide dynamic leadership and service, in partnership with Community institutions and Groups, toward the attainment of a viable, internationally competitive and sustainable Community, with improved quality of life for all. Haiti invasion. In March 2004, tensions became strained between member-state Haiti and the rest of the Caribbean Community bloc. Democratically elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide phoned other CARICOM heads of government and stated that he had been kidnapped by France and the United States and taken out of the country. CARICOM announced that no democratically elected government in CARICOM should have its leader deposed. The fourteen other heads of government sought to have Aristide visit Jamaica and share his account of events with them. The move to fly 42

Jean-Bertrand Aristide to Jamaica from where he was in Africa infuriated the unelected interim Haitian prime minister, Gérard Latortue. Latortue announced he would take steps to take Haiti out of CARICOM. CARICOM announced it would vote on suspending recognition of Latortue's régime before he could do so. They did; Haitian officials were suspended from the councils of CARICOM. This did not stop Latortue, who announced that he would continue a part of his plan to suspend Haiti from CARICOM. Haiti's membership remained effectively suspended from 29 February 2004 through early June 2006. Following the democratic election of René Préval as President of Haiti, he gave the opening address at the Council of Ministers meeting in July. Association of Caribbean States. CARICOM was instrumental in the formation of the Association of Caribbean States (ACS) on 24 July 1994. The original idea for the Association came from a recommendation of the West Indian Commission, established in 1989 by the CARICOM heads of state and government. The Commission advocated both deepening the integration process (through the CARICOM Single Market and Economy) and widening it through a separate regional organization encompassing all states in the Caribbean. CARICOM accepted the commission's recommendations and opened dialogue with other Caribbean states, the Central American states and the Latin American nations of Colombia, Venezuela and Mexico which border the Caribbean, for consultation on the proposals of the West Indian Commission. At an October 1993 summit the heads of state and government of CARICOM and the presidents of the then-Group of Three (Colombia, Mexico and Venezuela) formally decided to create an association grouping all states of the Caribbean basin. A work schedule for its formation was adopted. The aim was to create the association in less than a year, an objective which was achieved with the formal creation of the ACS. Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. CARICOM was also involved in the formation of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) on 3 December 2010. The idea for CELAC originated at the Rio Group–Caribbean Community Unity Summit on 23 February 2010 in Mexico 43

1.4. The African Union The African Union (AU) is a continental union consisting of all 55 countries on the African continent. It was established on 26 May 2001 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and launched on 9 July 2002 in South Africa, with the aim of replacing the Organisation of African Unity (OAU). The most important decisions of the AU are made by the Assembly of the African Union, a semi-annual meeting of the heads of state and government of its member states. The AU's secretariat, the African Union Commission, is based in Addis Ababa. The objectives of the AU are: to achieve greater unity and solidarity between the African countries and Africans, to defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of its Member States, to accelerate the political and social-economic integration of the continent, to promote and defend African common positions on issues of interest to the continent and its peoples, to encourage international cooperation, taking due account of the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to promote peace, security, and stability on the continent, to promote democratic principles and institutions, popular participation and good governance , to promote and protect human and peoples' rights in accordance with the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and other relevant human rights instruments, to establish the necessary conditions which enable the continent to play its rightful role in the global economy and in international negotiations, to promote sustainable development at the economic, social and cultural levels as well as the integration of African economies, to promote co-operation in all fields of human activity to raise the living standards of African peoples, to coordinate and harmonize the policies between the existing and future Regional Economic Communities for the gradual attainment of the objectives of the Union, to advance the development of the continent by promoting research in all fields, in particular in science and technology, to work with relevant international partners in the eradication of preventable diseases and the promotion of good health on the continent. Structure. The African Union is made up of both political and administrative bodies. The highest decision-making organ is the 44

Assembly of the African Union, made up of all the heads of state or government of member states of the AU. The Assembly is chaired by Idriss Déby, President of Chad. The AU also has a representative body, the Pan African Parliament, which consists of 265 members elected by the national legislatures of the AU member states. Its president is Roger Nkodo Dang. The AU Commission, the secretariat to the political structures, is chaired by Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma of South Africa. On 15 July 2012, Ms. Dlamini-Zuma won a tightly contested vote to become the first female head of the African Union Commission, replacing Jean Ping of Gabon. The main administrative capital of the African Union is in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, where the African Union Commission is headquartered. A new headquarters complex, the AU Conference Center and Office Complex (AUCC), was inaugurated on 28 January 2012, during the 18th AU summit.[5] The complex was built by China State Construction Engineering Corporation as a gift from the Chinese government, and accommodates, among other facilities, a 2,500-seat plenary hall and a 20-story office tower. The tower is 99.9 meters high to signify the date 9 September 1999, when the Organization of African Unity voted to become the African Union. The AU's first military intervention in a member state was the May 2003 deployment of a peacekeeping force of soldiers from South Africa, Ethiopia, and Mozambique to Burundi to oversee the implementation of the various agreements. AU troops were also deployed in Sudan for peacekeeping during Darfur conflict, before the mission was handed over to the United Nations on 1 January 2008 UNAMID. The AU has also sent a peacekeeping mission to Somalia, of which the peacekeeping troops are from Uganda and Burundi. The AU has adopted a number of important new documents establishing norms at continental level, to supplement those already in force when it was created. These include the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (2003), the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance (2007), the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) and its associated Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance 45

Membership All UN member states based in Africa and African waters are members of the AU, as is the disputed Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR). Morocco, which claims sovereignty over the SADR's territory, withdrew from the Organisation of African Unity, the AU's predecessor, in 1984 due to the admission of the SADR as a member. However, on 30 January 2017 the AU admitted Morocco as a member state. Members: Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial, Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (disputed state), São Tomé and Príncipe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia South, Africa South Sudan, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe. 1.5. The World Trade Organization The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an intergovernmental organization that regulates international trade. The WTO officially commenced on 1 January 1995 under the Marrakesh Agreement, signed by 123 nations on 15 April 1994, replacing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which commenced in 1948. It is the largest international economic organization in the world. The WTO deals with regulation of trade between participating countries by providing a framework for negotiating trade agreements and a dispute resolution process aimed at enforcing participants' adherence to WTO agreements, which are signed by representatives of member governments and ratified by their parliaments. Most of the issues that the WTO focuses on derive from previous trade negotiations, especially from the Uruguay Round (1986-1994). 46

The WTO is attempting to complete negotiations on the Doha Development Round, which was launched in 2001 with an explicit focus on developing countries. As of June 2012, the future of the Doha Round remained uncertain: the work programme lists 21 subjects in which the original deadline of 1 January 2005 was missed, and the round is still incomplete. The conflict between free trade on industrial goods and services but retention of protectionism on farm subsidies to domestic agricultural sector (requested by developed countries) and the substantiation of fair tradeon agricultural products (requested by developing countries) remain the major obstacles. This impasse has made it impossible to launch new WTO negotiations beyond the Doha Development Round. As a result, there have been an increasing number of bilateral free trade agreements between governments. As of July 2012, there were various negotiation groups in the WTO system for the current agricultural trade negotiation which is in the condition of stalemate. The WTO's current Director-General is Roberto Azevêdo, who leads a staff of over 600 people in Geneva, Switzerland. A trade facilitation agreement, part of the Bali Package of decisions, was agreed by all members on 7 December 2013, the first comprehensive agreement in the organization's history. History The WTO's predecessor, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), was established after World War II in the wake of other new multilateral institutions dedicated to international economic cooperation – such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. A comparable international institution for trade, named the International Trade Organization never started as the treaty was not approved by the U.S. and other signatories, and so GATT slowly became a de facto international organization. GATT negotiations before Uruguay Seven rounds of negotiations occurred under GATT. The first real GATT trade rounds concentrated on further reducing tariffs. Then, the Kennedy Round in the mid-sixties brought about a GATT antidumping Agreement and a section on development. The Tokyo Round 47

during the seventies was the first major attempt to tackle trade barriers that do not take the form of tariffs, and to improve the system, adopting a series of agreements on non-tariff barriers, which in some cases interpreted existing GATT rules, and in others broke entirely new ground. Because these plurilateral agreements were not accepted by the full GATT membership, they were often informally called «codes». Several of these codes were amended in the Uruguay Round, and turned into multilateral commitments accepted by all WTO members. Only four remained plurilateral (those on government procurement, bovine meat, civil aircraft and dairy products), but in 1997 WTO members agreed to terminate the bovine meat and dairy agreements, leaving only two. Despite attempts in the mid-1950s and 1960s to create some form of institutional mechanism for international trade, the GATT continued to operate for almost half a century as a semi-institutionalized multilateral treaty regime on a provisional basis. Uruguay round Well before GATT's 40th anniversary, its members concluded that the GATT system was straining to adapt to a new globalizing world economy. In response to the problems identified in the 1982 Ministerial Declaration (structural deficiencies, spill-over impacts of certain countries' policies on world trade GATT could not manage etc.), the eighth GATT round – known as the Uruguay Round – was launched in September 1986, in Punta del Este, Uruguay. It was the biggest negotiating mandate on trade ever agreed: the talks were going to extend the trading system into several new areas, notably trade in services and intellectual property, and to reform trade in the sensitive sectors of agriculture and textiles; all the original GATT articles were up for review. The Final Act concluding the Uruguay Round and officially establishing the WTO regime was signed 15 April 1994, during the ministerial meeting at Marrakesh, Morocco, and hence is known as the Marrakesh Agreement. The GATT still exists as the WTO's umbrella treaty for trade in goods, updated as a result of the Uruguay Round negotiations (a distinction is made between GATT 1994, the updated parts of GATT, and GATT 1947, the original agreement which is still the heart of GATT 1994). GATT 1994 is not however the only legally binding 48

agreement included via the Final Act at Marrakesh; a long list of about 60 agreements, annexes, decisions and understandings was adopted. The agreements fall are in six main parts, the Agreement Establishing the WTO, the Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods, the General Agreement on Trade in Services, the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Dispute settlement and reviews of governments' trade policies. In terms of the WTO's principle relating to tariff «ceilingbinding«, the Uruguay Round has been successful in increasing binding commitments by both developed and developing countries, as may be seen in the percentages of tariffs bound before and after the 1986–1994 talks. Ministerial Conference The highest decision-making body of the WTO is the Ministerial Conference, which usually meets every two years. It brings together all members of the WTO, all of which are countries or customs unions. The Ministerial Conference can take decisions on all matters under any of the multilateral trade agreements. Some of these such as the inaugural ministerial conference in Singapore and the Cancun conference in 2003 involved arguments between developed and developing economies referred to as the «Singapore issues« such as agricultural subsidies while others such as the Seattle conference in 1999 created large demonstrations. The fourth ministerial conference in Doha in 2001 approved China's entry to the WTO and launched the Doha Development Round which was supplemented by the sixth WTO ministerial conference (in Hong Kong. when agricultural export subsidies were agreed to be phased out and adoption of the European Union's Everything but Arms initiative to phase out tariffs for goods from the Least Developed Countries. Doha round (Doha Agenda) The WTO launched the current round of negotiations, the Doha Development Round, at the fourth ministerial conference in Doha, Qatar in November 2001. This was to be an ambitious effort to make globalization more inclusive and help the world's poor, particularly by slashing barriers and subsidies in farming. The initial 49

agenda comprised both further trade liberalization and new rulemaking, underpinned by commitments to strengthen substantial assistance to developing countries. Progress stalled after over differences between developed nations and the major developing countries on issues such as industrial tariffs and non tariff barriers to trade particularly against and between the EU and the US over their maintenance of agricultural subsidies – seen to operate effectively as trade barriers. Repeated attempts to revive the talks were without success although adoption of the Bali Ministerial Declaration in 2013 addressed bureaucratic barriers to commerce although the future of the Doha Round remains uncertain. Functions Among the various functions of the WTO, these are regarded by analysts as the most important: – It oversees the implementation, administration and operation of the covered agreements. – It provides a forum for negotiations and for settling disputes. Additionally, it is WTO's duty to review and propagate the national trade policies, and to ensure the coherence and transparency of trade policies through surveillance in global economic policymaking. Another priority of the WTO is the assistance of developing, least-developed and low-income countries in transition to adjust to WTO rules and disciplines through technical cooperation and training. 1. The WTO shall facilitate the implementation, administration and operation and further the objectives of this Agreement and of the Multilateral Trade Agreements, and shall also provide the frame work for the implementation, administration and operation of the multilateral Trade Agreements. 2. The WTO shall provide the forum for negotiations among its members concerning their multilateral trade relations in matters dealt with under the Agreement in the Annexes to this Agreement. 3. The WTO shall administer the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes. 4. The WTO shall administer Trade Policy Review Mechanism. 5. With a view to achieving greater coherence in global economic policy making, the WTO shall cooperate, as appropriate, 50

with the international Monetary Fund (IMF) and with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and its affiliated agencies. The above five listings are the additional functions of the World Trade Organization. As globalization proceeds in today's society, the necessity of an International Organizationto manage the trading systems has been of vital importance. As the trade volume increases, issues such as protectionism, trade barriers, subsidies, violation of intellectual property arise due to the differences in the trading rules of every nation. The World Trade Organization serves as the mediator between the nations when such problems arise. WTO could be referred to as the product of globalization and also as one of the most important organizations in today's globalized society. The WTO is also a centre of economic research and analysis: regular assessments of the global trade picture in its annual publications and research reports on specific topics are produced by the organization. Finally, the WTO cooperates closely with the two other components of the Bretton Woods system, the IMF and the World Bank. Principles of the trading system The WTO establishes a framework for trade policies; it does not define or specify outcomes. That is, it is concerned with setting the rules of the trade policy games. Five principles are of particular importance in understanding both the pre-1994 GATT and the WTO: 1. Non-discrimination. It has two major components: the most favoured nation (MFN) rule, and the national treatment policy. Both are embedded in the main WTO rules on goods, services, and intellectual property, but their precise scope and nature differ across these areas. The MFN rule requires that a WTO member must apply the same conditions on all trade with other WTO members, i.e. a WTO member has to grant the most favourable conditions under which it allows trade in a certain product type to all other WTO members. «Grant someone a special favour and you have to do the same for all other WTO members». National treatment means that imported goods should be treated no less favourably than domestically produced goods (at least after the foreign goods have entered the market) and was 51

introduced to tackle non-tariff barriers to trade (e.g. technical standards, security standards et al. discriminating against imported goods). 2. Reciprocity. It reflects both a desire to limit the scope of freeriding that may arise because of the MFN rule, and a desire to obtain better access to foreign markets. A related point is that for a nation to negotiate, it is necessary that the gain from doing so be greater than the gain available from unilateral liberalization; reciprocal concessions intend to ensure that such gains will materialise. 3. Binding and enforceable commitments. The tariff commitments made by WTO members in a multilateral trade negotiation and on accession are enumerated in a schedule (list) of concessions. These schedules establish «ceiling bindings»: a country can change its bindings, but only after negotiating with its trading partners, which could mean compensating them for loss of trade. If satisfaction is not obtained, the complaining country may invoke the WTO dispute settlement procedures. 4. Transparency. The WTO members are required to publish their trade regulations, to maintain institutions allowing for the review of administrative decisions affecting trade, to respond to requests for information by other members, and to notify changes in trade policies to the WTO. These internal transparency requirements are supplemented and facilitated by periodic country-specific reports (trade policy reviews) through the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM). The WTO system tries also to improve predictability and stability, discouraging the use of quotas and other measures used to set limits on quantities of imports. 5. Safety values. In specific circumstances, governments are able to restrict trade. The WTO's agreements permit members to take measures to protect not only the environment but also public health, animal health and plant health. There are three types of provision in this direction: 1. Articles allowing for the use of trade measures to attain noneconomic objectives; 2. Articles aimed at ensuring «fair competition»; members must not use environmental protection measures as a means of disguising protectionist policies. 52

3. Provisions permitting intervention in trade for economic reasons. Exceptions to the MFN principle also allow for preferential treatment of developing countries, regional free trade areas and customs unions. Organizational structure The General Council has the following subsidiary bodies which oversee committees in different areas: Council for Trade in Goods There are 11 committees under the jurisdiction of the Goods Council each with a specific task. All members of the WTO participate in the committees. The Textiles Monitoring Body is separate from the other committees but still under the jurisdiction of Goods Council. The body has its own chairman and only 10 members. The body also has several groups relating to textiles. Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Information on intellectual property in the WTO, news and official records of the activities of the TRIPS Council, and details of the WTO's work with other international organizations in the field. Council for Trade in Services The Council for Trade in Services operates under the guidance of the General Council and is responsible for overseeing the functioning of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). It is open to all WTO members, and can create subsidiary bodies as required. Trade Negotiations Committee The Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) is the committee that deals with the current trade talks round. The chair is WTO's directorgeneral. As of June 2012 the committee was tasked with the Doha Development Round. The Service Council has three subsidiary bodies: financial services, domestic regulations, GATS rules and specific commitments. 53

The council has several different committees, working groups, and working parties. There are committees on the following: Trade and Environment; Trade and Development (Subcommittee on LeastDeveloped Countries); Regional Trade Agreements; Balance of Payments Restrictions; and Budget, Finance and Administration. There are working parties on the following: Accession. There are working groups on the following: Trade, debt and finance; and Trade and technology transfer. Decision-making The WTO describes itself as «a rules-based, member-driven organizationall decisions are made by the member governments, and the rules are the outcome of negotiations among members». The WTO Agreement foresees votes where consensus cannot be reached, but the practice of consensus dominates the process of decisionmaking. Richard Harold Steinberg (2002) argues that although the WTO's consensus governance model provides law-based initial bargaining, trading rounds close through power-based bargaining favouring Europe and the U.S., and may not lead to Pareto improvement. Dispute settlement The WTO's dispute-settlement system «is the result of the evolution of rules, procedures and practices developed over almost half a century under the GATT 1947». In 1994, the WTO members agreed on the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) annexed to the «Final Act» signed in Marrakesh in 1994. Dispute settlement is regarded by the WTO as the central pillar of the multilateral trading system, and as a «unique contribution to the stability of the global economy». WTO members have agreed that, if they believe fellow-members are violating trade rules, they will use the multilateral system of settling disputes instead of taking action unilaterally. The operation of the WTO dispute settlement process involves case-specific panels appointed by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), the Appellate Body, The Director-General and the WTO Secretariat, arbitrators, and advisory experts. 54

The priority is to settle disputes, preferably through a mutually agreed solution, and provision has been made for the process to be conducted in an efficient and timely manner so that «If a case is adjudicated, it should normally take no more than one year for a panel ruling and no more than 16 months if the case is appealed... If the complainant deems the case urgent, consideration of the case should take even less time. WTO member nations are obliged to accept the process as exclusive and compulsory. Accession and membership The process of becoming a WTO member is unique to each applicant country, and the terms of accession are dependent upon the country's stage of economic development and current trade regime. The process takes about five years, on average, but it can last longer if the country is less than fully committed to the process or if political issues interfere. The shortest accession negotiation was that of the Kyrgyz Republic, while the longest was that of Russia, which, having first applied to join GATT in 1993, was approved for membership in December 2011 and became a WTO member on 22 August 2012. Kazakhstan also had a long accession negotiation process. The Working Party on the Accession of Kazakhstan was established in 1996 and was approved for membership in 2015. The second longest was that of Vanuatu, whose Working Party on the Accession of Vanuatu was established on 11 July 1995. After a final meeting of the Working Party in October 2001, Vanuatu requested more time to consider its accession terms. In 2008, it indicated its interest to resume and conclude its WTO accession. The Working Party on the Accession of Vanuatu was reconvened informally on 4 April 2011 to discuss Vanuatu's future WTO membership. The reconvened Working Party completed its mandate on 2 May 2011. The General Council formally approved the Accession Package of Vanuatu on 26 October 2011. On 24 August 2012, the WTO welcomed Vanuatu as its 157th member. An offer of accession is only given once consensus is reached among interested parties. A 2017 study argues that «political ties rather than issue-area functional gains determine who joins» and shows «how geopolitical alignment shapes the demand and supply sides of membership». The 55

«findings challenge the view that states first liberalize trade to join the GATT/WTO. Instead, democracy and foreign policy similarity encourage states to join». Accession process A country wishing to accede to the WTO submits an application to the General Council, and has to describe all aspects of its trade and economic policies that have a bearing on WTO agreements. The application is submitted to the WTO in a memorandum which is examined by a working party open to all interested WTO Members. After all necessary background information has been acquired, the working party focuses on issues of discrepancy between the WTO rules and the applicant's international and domestic trade policies and laws. The working party determines the terms and conditions of entry into the WTO for the applicant nation, and may consider transitional periods to allow countries some leeway in complying with the WTO rules. The final phase of accession involves bilateral negotiations between the applicant nation and other working party members regarding the concessions and commitments on tariff levels and market access for goods and services. The new member's commitments are to apply equally to all WTO members under normal non-discrimination rules, even though they are negotiated bilaterally. When the bilateral talks conclude, the working party sends to the general council or ministerial conference an accession package, which includes a summary of all the working party meetings, the Protocol of Accession (a draft membership treaty), and lists («schedules») of the member-to-be's commitments. Once the general council or ministerial conference approves of the terms of accession, the applicant's parliament must ratify the Protocol of Accession before it can become a member. Some countries may have faced tougher and a much longer accession process due to challenges during negotiations with other WTO members, such as Vietnam, whose negotiations took more than 11 years before it became official member in January 2007. 56

Members and observers The WTO has 164 members and 22 observer governments. Liberia became the 163rd member on 14 July 2016, and Afghanistan became the 164th member on 29 July 2016. In addition to states, the European Union, and each EU Country in its own right, is a member. WTO members do not have to be fully independent states; they need only be a customs territory with full autonomy in the conduct of their external commercial relations. Thus Hong Kong has been a member since 1995 (as «Hong Kong, China» since 1997) predating the People's Republic of China, which joined in 2001 after 15 years of negotiations. The Republic of China (Taiwan) acceded to the WTO in 2002 as «Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu« (Chinese Taipei) despite its disputed status. The WTO Secretariat omits the official titles (such as Counsellor, First Secretary, Second Secretary and Third Secretary) of the members of Chinese Taipei's Permanent Mission to the WTO, except for the titles of the Permanent Representative and the Deputy Permanent Representative. As of 2007, WTO member states represented 96.4% of global trade and 96.7% of global GDP. Iran, followed by Algeria, are the economies with the largest GDP and trade outside the WTO, using 2005 data. With the exception of the Holy See, observers must start accession negotiations within five years of becoming observers. A number of international intergovernmental organizations have also been granted observer status to WTO bodies. 12 UN member states have no official affiliation with the WTO. Agreements The WTO oversees about 60 different agreements which have the status of international legal texts. Member countries must sign and ratify all WTO agreements on accession. A discussion of some of the most important agreements follows. The Agreement on Agriculture came into effect with the establishment of the WTO at the beginning of 1995. The AoA has three central concepts, or «pillars»: domestic support, market access and export subsidies. The General Agreement on Trade in Services was created to extend the multilateral trading system to service sector, in the same way as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) provided such a system for 57

merchandise trade. The agreement entered into force in January 1995. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights sets down minimum standards for many forms of intellectual property (IP) regulation. It was negotiated at the end of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1994. The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures – also known as the SPS Agreement – was negotiated during the Uruguay Round of GATT, and entered into force with the establishment of the WTO at the beginning of 1995. Under the SPS agreement, the WTO sets constraints on members' policies relating to food safety (bacterial contaminants, pesticides, inspection and labelling) as well as animal and plant health (imported pests and diseases). The Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade is an international treaty of the World Trade Organization. It was negotiated during the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and entered into force with the establishment of the WTO at the end of 1994. The object ensures that technical negotiations and standards, as well as testing and certification procedures, do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade». The Agreement on Customs Valuation, formally known as the Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of GATT, prescribes methods of customs valuation that Members are to follow. Chiefly, it adopts the «transaction value» approach. In December 2013, the biggest agreement within the WTO was signed and known as the Bali Package. 1.6. Commonwealth of Independent States The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), is a confederation of 9 member states and 2 associate members that are located in Eurasia, formed during the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and which were all former Soviet Republics. Georgia withdrew its membership in 2008, while the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), which regard their membership in the Soviet Union as an illegal occupation, chose not to participate. 58

The CIS has few supranational powers but aims to be more than a purely symbolic organization, nominally possessing coordinating powers in the realms of trade, finance, lawmaking, and security. It has also promoted cooperation on cross-border crime prevention. Furthermore, eight of the nine CIS member states participate in the CIS Free Trade Area. Three organizations are under the overview of the CIS, namely the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union (alongside subdivisions, the Eurasian Customs Union and the Eurasian Economic Space, which comprises territory inhabited by over 180 million people), and the Union State. While the first and the second are military and economic alliances, the third aims to reach a supranational union of Russia and Belarus with a common government, flag, currency, etc. History In March 1991, Mikhail Gorbachev, the president of the Soviet Union, proposed a federation by holding a referendum to preserve the Union as the Union of Sovereign States. The new treaty signing never happened as the Communist Party hardliners staged an attempted coup in August that year. Following the events of August, the republics had declared their independence fearing another coup. A week after the Ukrainian independence referendum was held, which kept the chances of the Soviet Union staying together low, the Commonwealth of Independent States was founded on 8 December 1991 by the Byelorussia SSR, the Russian SFSR, and the Ukraine SSR, when the leaders of the three republics, met in the Belovezhskaya Pushcha Natural Reserve, about 50 km (31 mi) north of Brest in Belarus and signed the «Agreement Establishing the Commonwealth of Independent States», known as the Creation Agreement (Russian: Соглашение, Soglasheniye), on the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the creation of CIS as a successor entity to it. At the same time they announced that the new alliance would be open to all republics of the former Soviet Union, and to other nations sharing the same goals. The CIS charter stated that all the members were sovereign and independent nations and thereby effectively abolished the Soviet Union. 59

On 21 December 1991, the leaders of eight additional former Soviet Republics – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan – signed the Alma-Ata Protocol which can either be interpreted as expanding the CIS to these states or the proper foundation or refoundation date of the CIS, thus bringing the number of participating countries to 11. Georgia joined two years later, in December 1993. At this point, 12 of the 15 former Soviet Republics participated in the CIS. The three Baltic states did not, reflecting their governments' and people's view that the post-1940 Soviet occupation of their territory was illegitimate (in 2004 they joined NATO and the European Union). Between 2003 and 2005, three CIS member states experienced a change of government in a series of colour revolutions: Eduard Shevardnadze was overthrown in Georgia; Viktor Yushchenko was elected in Ukraine; and Askar Akayev was toppled in Kyrgyzstan. In February 2006, Georgia withdrew from the Council of Defense Ministers, with the statement that «Georgia has taken a course to join NATO and it cannot be part of two military structures simultaneously», but it remained a full member of the CIS until August 2009, one year after officially withdrawing in the immediate aftermath of the Russo-Georgian War. In March 2007, Igor Ivanov, the secretary of the Russian Security Council, expressed his doubts concerning the usefulness of the CIS, emphasising that the Eurasian Economic Community was becoming a more competent organisation to unify the largest countries of the CIS. Following the withdrawal of Georgia, the presidents of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan skipped the October 2009 meeting of the CIS, each having their own issues and disagreements with the Russian Federation. In May 2009, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine joined the Eastern Partnership, a project which was initiated by the European Union (EU). Membership There are nine full member states of the Commonwealth of Independent States. The Creation Agreement remained the main constituent document of the CIS until January 1993, when the CIS Charter was adopted. The 60

charter formalised the concept of membership: a member country is defined as a country that ratifies the CIS Charter (sec. 2, art. 7). Turkmenistan has not ratified the charter and changed its CIS standing to associate member as of 26 August 2005 in order to be consistent with its UN-recognised international neutrality status. Although Ukraine was one of the founding countries and ratified the Creation Agreement in December 1991, Ukraine chose not to ratify the CIS Charter[15][16] as it disagrees with Russia being the only legal successor to the Soviet Union. Thus it does not regard itself as a member of the CIS. In 1993 Ukraine became an «Associate Member» of CIS. On 14 March 2014, a bill was introduced to Ukraine's parliament to denounce their ratification of the 1991 Agreement Establishing the CIS, following the Russian military intervention in Ukraine and annexation of Crimea, but was never approved. Following the 2014 parliamentary election, a new bill to denounce the CIS agreement was introduced. In September 2015 the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed Ukraine will continue taking part in CIS «on a selective basis». Since that month Ukraine has had no representatives in the CIS Executive Committee building. In light of Russia’s support for the independence of breakaway regions within Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine, as well as its violation of the Istanbul Agreement (see Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty), legislative initiatives to denounce the agreement on the creation of CIS were tabled in Moldova's parliament on 25 March 2014, though they were not approved. Member states Country

Agreement/protocol ratified

Charter ratified


18 February 1992

16 March 1994


24 September 1993

24 September 1993


10 December 1991

18 January 1994


23 December 1991

20 April 1994


6 March 1992

12 April 1994


8 April 1994

15 April 1994



Agreement/protocol ratified

Charter ratified


12 December 1991

20 July 1993


26 June 1993

4 August 1993


4 January 1992

9 February 1994

Associate states Country

Agreement/protocol ratified


26 December 1991


10 December 1991

Interparliamentary Assembly The Interparliamentary Assembly was established in 27 March 1992 in Kazakhstan. On 26 May 1995 CIS leaders signed the Convention on the Interparliamentary Assembly of Member Nations of the Commonwealth of Independent States eventually ratified by nine parliaments. Under the terms of the Convention, the IPA was invested with international legitimacy and is housed in the Tauride Palace in St Petersburg and acts as the consultative parliamentary wing of the CIS created to discuss problems of parliamentary cooperation and reviews draft documents of common interest and passes model laws to the national legislatures in the CIS (as well as recommendations) for their use in the preparation of new laws and amendments to existing legislation too which have been adopted by more than 130 documents that ensure the convergence of laws in the CIS to the national legislation. The Assembly is actively involved in the development of integration processes in the CIS and also sends observers to the national elections. The Assembly held its 32nd Plenary meeting in Saint Petersburg on 14 May 2009. Ukraine participates, but Uzbekistan does not. Human rights Since its inception, one of the primary goals of the CIS has been to provide a forum for discussing issues related to the social and economic development of the newly independent states. To achieve 62

this goal member states have agreed to promote and protect human rights. Initially, efforts to achieve this goal consisted merely of statements of good will, but on 26 May 1995, the CIS adopted a Commonwealth of Independent States Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Even before the 1995 human rights treaty, the Charter of the CIS that was adopted in 1991 created, in article 33, a Human Rights Commission sitting in Minsk, Belarus. This was confirmed by decision of the Council of Heads of States of the CIS in 1993. In 1995, the CIS adopted a human rights treaty that includes civil and political as well as social and economic human rights. This treaty entered into force in 1998. The CIS treaty is modeled on the European Convention on Human Rights, but lacking the strong implementation mechanisms of the latter. In the CIS treaty, the Human Rights Commission has very vaguely defined authority. The Statute of the Human Rights Commission, however, also adopted by the CIS Member States as a decision, gives the Commission the right to receive inter-state as well as individual communications. CIS members, especially in Central Asia, continue to have among the world's poorest human rights records. Many activists point to the 2005 Andijan massacre in Uzbekistan, or the cult of personality around President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow of Turkmenistan (though not a CIS member), to show that there has been almost no improvement in human rights since the collapse of the Soviet Union in Central Asia. The consolidation of power by President Vladimir Putin has resulted in a steady decline in the modest progress of previous years in Russia. The Commonwealth of Independent States continues to face serious challenges in meeting even basic international standards. Military The CIS Charter establishes the Council of Ministers of Defense, which is vested with the task of coordinating military cooperation of the CIS member states. To this end, the Council develops conceptual approaches to the questions of military and defense policy of the CIS member states; develops proposals aimed to prevent armed conflicts on the territory of the member states or with their participation; gives 63

expert opinions on draft treaties and agreements related to the questions of defense and military developments; issues related suggestions and proposals to the attention of the CIS Council of the Heads of State. Also important is the Council's work on approximation of the legal acts in the area of defense and military development. An important manifestation of integration processes in the area of military and defense collaboration of the CIS member states is the creation, in 1995, of the joint CIS Air Defense System. Over the years, the military personnel of the joint CIS Air Defense System grew twofold along the western, European border of the CIS, and by 1.5 times on its southern borders. When Boris Yeltsin became Russian Defence Minister on 7 May 1992, Yevgeny Shaposhnikov, the man appointed as Commander-inChief of the CIS Armed Forces, and his staff, were ejected from the MOD and General Staff buildings and given offices in the former Warsaw Pact Headquarters at 41 Leningradsky Prospekt on the northern outskirts of Moscow. Shaposhnikov resigned in June 1993. In December 1993, the CIS Armed Forces Headquarters was abolished. Instead, 'the CIS Council of Defence Ministers created a CIS Military Cooperation Coordination Headquarters (MCCH) in Moscow, with 50% of the funding provided by Russia.' 1.7. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Background The Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) convened on 3 July 1973 in Helsinki. The Helsinki Final Act was signed by 35 States on 1 August 1975. It was renamed the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in 1994. Participating States 57 states – Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Holy See, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, 64

Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America, and Uzbekistan. Partners for Cooperation fall into two groups: The Mediterranean Partners for Co-operation (Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Morocco and Tunisia) and the Asian Partners for Co-operation (Afghanistan, Japan, Republic of Korea and Thailand). The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is the largest regional security organization in the world. It is engaged in early warning, conflict prevention, crisis management, and post-conflict rehabilitation. The OSCE maintains a cooperative and comprehensive approach to security, dealing with a variety of securityrelated matters, including arms control, preventive diplomacy, confidence- and security-building measures, human rights, democratization, election monitoring, and economic and environmental security. Agreements Major agreements and documents in an OSCE context: «Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe» (CFE), 19 November 1990; «Charter of Paris for a New Europe», adopted on 21 November 1990; «Vienna Document on Confidence- and Security- Building Measures», 4 March 1992; «Declaration on the Treaty on Open Skies», 24 March 1992; Helsinki Summit Document «The Challenges of Change», 10 July 1992; Budapest Summit Document «Towards a Genuine Partnership in a New Era», 6 December 1994; Lisbon Summit Declaration «A Common and Comprehensive Model for Europe for the Twentieth Century», adopted 3 December 1996; Istanbul Summit Document, «Charter for European Security», adopted 19 November 1999. Structure and Institutions Summits of Heads of States or Governments Meetings set priorities and provide orientation for OSCE work at the highest level. The most recent summit took place in Istanbul from 65

18-19 November 1999, and concluded the «Istanbul document». Since 1975, there have been six CSCE (OSCE) summits. Ministerial Council (Formerly the CSCE Council) The council comprises the foreign ministers of the OSCE Member States. It is the central decision making and governing body of the OSCE. It holds meetings once a year. Senior Council (which replaced the Committee of Senior Officials) The Senior Council is responsible for the overview, management, and coordination of OSCE activities. It is the central body for consultation on current political issues, and OSCE members are encouraged to be represented at the level of political directors. It meets twice a year in Prague and once a year as the Economic Forum. Permanent Council (formerly the Permanent Committee) The Permanent Council is responsible for the day-to-day operational tasks of the OSCE. Its members are permanent representatives of OSCE Member States. The Permanent Council takes decisions on all issues pertinent to the OSCE. It holds weekly meetings and is based in Vienna. Forum for Security Cooperation (FSC) The Forum meets weekly in Vienna and negotiates and consults on concrete measures aimed at strengthening security and stability throughout Europe. Its main objectives are negotiations on arms control, disarmament and confidence- and security-building measures; regular consultations and intensive cooperation on matters related to security; and the further reduction of the risks of conflict. It is also responsible for the implementation of confidence-and securitybuilding measures (CSBMs), the preparation of seminars on military doctrine, the holding of annual implementation assessment meetings, and for the provision of a forum for discussion and clarification of information exchanged under agreed CSBMs. Chairman-in-Office (CIO) The CIO is responsible for executive action. This function is performed by the foreign minister of the state who hosted the last meeting of the Ministerial Council. The CIO for 2009 is the Greek foreign minister Dora Bakoyannis. The CIO is assisted by: 66

Troika The delegation comprises the preceding, present, and succeeding chairs (the 2008 Troika consists of Finland, Greece, and Kazakhstan); ad hoc steering groups may be established as needed to assist the CIO, particularly in the field of conflict prevention and crisis management; personal representatives are designated by the CIO, with clear mandates for assisting the CIO in dealing with a crisis or conflict. Secretary General The secretary general acts as the representative of the CIO and supports the chair's activities. The secretary general is the OSCE's chief administrative officer, appointed by the council for a period of three years. The current secretary general is Ambassador Marc Perrin de Brichambaut (France). Secretariat The secretariat is under the direction of the secretary general. In addition to the Office of the Secretary General, it consists of the Conflict Prevention Centre (CPC), the Department for Administration and Operations, and the Coordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities, as well as the Prague Office of the Secretariat. The secretariat services an Open Skies Consultative Commission (OSCC) established under the 1992 Treaty on Open Skies for consideration of all questions related to compliance with the treaty. Verification and Compliance The OSCE is founded on the principle that all participating States are accountable to each other with respect to their relations vis-à-vis other participating States and also with respect to the way they treat their own citizens. Cooperative security and arms control issues are dealt with by the Vienna Forum for Security Cooperation (FSC). Of critical importance is the issue of implementing and verifying existing agreements (confidence- and security-building measures –CSBMs– in accordance with the Vienna Document of 1999 and the 1994 Code of Conduct on politico-military aspects of security). Furthermore, the arms control regime defined by the 1995 Dayton Accords (Annex 1B on regional stabilization) is implemented under the auspices of the FSC. Through continued negotiation, confidence-building measures have been extended, and higher expectations for treaty compliance and verification have been set. 67

Developments 1992 The CSCE Helsinki Summit Document of 1992 spelled out these major objectives with respect to arms control and nonproliferation: to give impetus to the process of arms control, disarmament and confidence and security-building, to enhance consultation and cooperation on security matters and to the further the process of reducing the risk of conflict; to take further steps to stop the proliferation of weapons; to ensure the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons and relevant technology and expertise; and to intensify cooperation in the field of effective export controls applicable to nuclear materials, conventional weapons, and other sensitive goods and technologies. 1993 The 49th Plenary meeting of the FSC held in Vienna on 25 November, adopted several important documents. The «Principles Governing Conventional Arms Transfers» document introduced principles designed to guide arms transfers and determine whether certain arms transfers should be avoided. The Military Contact and Cooperation Program dealt with exchanges and visits between members of armed forces, joint military exercises and training, visits to military facilities, seminars on co-operation, etc. The Document on Defense Planning required States to provide information about their defense policies and doctrines, force planning, budgets, etc. The Forum also conducted negotiations on the development of the CSBM regime, resulting in the adoption of the Vienna Document of 1994. The participants at the Fourth CSCE Ministerial Council meeting held in Rome on 30 November-1 December underlined the importance of the work of the FSC. They encouraged completion of the Program for Immediate Action, including the proposal to establish a Code of Conduct. 1994 The Budapest Summit Document of 1994 stated that, in view of the new threats posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the Heads of State or Governments agreed on basic principles to guide their national policies in support of common nonproliferation objectives and stated that they are strongly committed 68

to the full implementation and indefinite and unconditional extension of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The participating States reaffirmed their commitment to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons; to prevent the acquisition, development, production, stockpiling, and use of chemical and biological weapons; to control the transfer of missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction and their components and technology. The participants stated that the OSCE would be a primary instrument for early warning, conflict prevention, and crisis management in the region. They may, in exceptional circumstances, jointly decide that a dispute will be referred to the UN Security Council on behalf of the Forum on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The Summit participants also adopted the Code of Conduct on politico-military aspects of security, which reaffirmed and reiterated their determination to act in solidarity in case of violation of the CSCE norms and commitments and to facilitate the concerted response to security challenges. The Code also broke new ground by formulating norms regarding the role of armed forces in democratic societies. 1995 On 1 January, pursuant to the decision of the 1994 Budapest Summit Document of 1994, the new name, the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), became effective to reflect the dramatic growth of its role in shaping the European common security area. The participants of the Fifth OSCE Ministerial Council meeting, held in Budapest on 7-8 December, discussed and welcomed the OSCE's intensive, ongoing work on a common and comprehensive security model for Europe for the 21st century. They decided on objectives, guidelines, and organization for future work on a security model. The chair noted that the OSCE Forum for Security Cooperation worked on an Arms Control Framework outlining future arms control priorities. In spite of expectations that the Framework would be concluded by the time of the Ministerial Council meeting, he said, further negotiations were required. 1996 The Lisbon Summit Document of 1996 stated that arms control constitutes an important element of common security and that the CFE 69

would remain critical to security and stability. The FSC adopted two decisions defining new directions for further work, «A Framework for Arms Control», which aimed to create a web of interlocking and mutually reinforcing arms control obligations that would give expression to the principle of indivisible security. It also provided guidelines for future arms control negotiations, including sufficiency, transparency through information exchange, verification, and where necessary, limitation on forces. 1997 The provisions of the Principles Governing Conventional Arms Transfers document adopted at the November 1993 FSC meeting were reinforced by the introduction of an annual exchange of information of transfers of weapons and equipment systems. In September, the follow-up conference to review possible ways and means of bringing about the improved implementation of the Code of Conduct on politico-military aspects of security was held. At the conference, the participating States reported on their process of implementation of the Code's provisions and discussed means to strengthen its implementation and enhance its wider and more consistent application. The Sixth OSCE Ministerial Council meeting, held in Copenhagen on 18-19 December, confirmed the importance of implementation of existing arms control and confidence and security-building measures as well as their adaptation to the new security environment. 1998 The Seventh Ministerial Council meeting of the OSCE, held in Oslo on 2-3 December, reaffirmed the participating States' commitment to arms control as an important element of their common security. They also reaffirmed the importance of the CFE treaty as a cornerstone of European security, stressed that full implementation of the treaty and its adaptation to the changing security environment in Europe would be an essential contribution to their common and indivisible security and welcomed the commitment made by the States Parties to complete the adaptation process by the time of the OSCE Summit in 1999. The States Parties reaffirmed the significance of the Open Skies Treaty and the necessity of its entry into force without delay. 70

1999 On 16 November, the FSC adopted the Vienna Document of 1999 dealing with regional security issues. In that document, the FSC encouraged participating States to complement the CSBM regime with measures tailored to specific regional needs. The Vienna Document improved current CSBM and emphasized the importance of regional cooperation. The Istanbul Summit Document of 1999 welcomed the successful adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, which would provide for a stricter system of limitations, increased transparency, and lower levels of conventional armed forces and adoption of the 1999 Vienna Document on CSBM. The participants also welcomed the decision of the FSC to launch a broad and comprehensive discussion on all aspects of the problem of the spread of small arms and light weapons and to study concrete measures to deal with this issue. 2000 On 3-5 April, the OSCE Forum for Security Cooperation (FSC) organized a seminar on small arms and light weapons. This seminar, which was attended by more than 220 participants from OSCE participating States, as well as a number of international organizations and NGOs, has produced a significant number of proposals and suggestions. At its 308th Plenary Meeting on 24 November, the OSCE FSC adopted a Document on Small Arms and Light Weapons, in which the participating States agreed to cooperate on the issue of the excessive and destabilizing accumulation and uncontrolled spread of small arms and to develop norms, principles, and measures covering all aspects of the issue. 2001 From 2-4 December, the Ninth Meeting of the Ministerial Council was held in Vienna. The meeting concluded with agreement on a Ministerial Declaration and the adoption of a broad-ranging Action Plan on counter-terrorism measures. Within the declaration, the participating States affirm their determination to address the threats to security and stability in the 21st century: «We request that the Permanent Council (of the OSCE) develop a strategy for the OSCE to 71

do its part to counter these threats». The declaration also expresses the determination of Member States to protect citizens from new challenges to their security, while at the same time safeguarding the rule of law, individual liberties, and the right to equal justice under the law. Other decisions made at the Ministerial Council included confirming that the Netherlands would assume the OSCE Chairmanship in 2003 (after Portugal, which took over the chair on 1 January 2002), the agreement to hold the next Ministerial Council in Porto, Portugal in autumn 2002, and the extension of Secretary General Jan Kubis' term of office for an additional three years. 2002 On 17 January, the new CIO of the OSCE, Portuguese foreign minister Jaime Gama, announced in his first speech to the Permanent Council that the fight against terrorism would be one of OSCE's priorities during the Portuguese Chairmanship in 2002. He announced his plan to appoint a Personal Representative on Terrorism and to elaborate a draft proposal for a possible OSCE Charter on Terrorism. On 25 March, the OSCE, in cooperation with the French Foreign Ministry, held a two-day seminar on the socio-economic impact of disarmament in Paris. The three main topics of the seminar were 1) measurement of the macroeconomic impact of disarmament, and the related question of evaluation of peace dividends; 2) the question of conversion to peaceful purposes in its different aspects; and 3) management of the process. On 12 June, senior officials from the UN, NATO, the EU, and the Council of Europe met at the invitation of the OSCE Chairmanship to discuss coordinating international efforts in the fight against terrorism. The high-level representatives addressed cooperation in preventing and combating terrorism at the international level, as well as the promotion and protection of human rights and strengthening the rule of law. 2003 From 20 to 23 May, the OSCE held its 11th Economic Forum on «Trafficking in Human Beings, Drugs, Small Arms and Light Weapons: National and International Impact» in Prague. The forum addressed the New Strategy Document on economic and 72

environmental challenges and the preparation for a «practical, organizational response to the pervasive, OSCE-wide problem of trafficking». Personal representative of the CIO, H.E. Daan Everts, summarized issues discussed at the forum, including government policies, the need for signing and ratifying the UN Convention against organized crime, the appointment of a Special Representative on trafficking, and the role of the business community in the fight against trafficking and terrorism. Other issues addressed were the role of both large and small NGOs and the relationship between economic and environmental challenges facing the OSCE region. On 5-9 July, the OSCE held its 12th Annual Session of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly in De Doelen, Rotterdam. The Assembly adopted the Rotterdam Declaration, which focuses on the political, economic and human rights aspects of the central theme of the session: «The Role of the OSCE in the New Architecture of Europe». Resolutions that were adopted included Combating Anti-Semitism in the 21st Century, prisoners detained by the United States at the Guantanamo Base, the International Criminal Court as well as resolutions on Belarus and Moldova. From 1-2 December, the OSCE Eleventh Meeting of the Ministerial Council was held in Maastricht, the Netherlands. The ministers laid out a «Strategy to Address Threats to Security and Stability in the Twenty-First Century». In it, they stressed the need for a comprehensive security approach and the role of human rights and environmental and socio-economic factors as a means to stability. The strategy noted that the threat of inter- and intra-State conflict may «pose a risk to neighboring areas and may give rise to instability and other types of threats, such as terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, excessive and destabilizing accumulation and uncontrolled spread of small arms and light weapons», among other things. It described terrorism as demanding «a global approach, addressing its manifestations as well as the social, economic and political context in which it occurs». The OSCE's field missions during 2003 included a presence in Albania, missions to Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro, and a monitor mission to Skopje. The 73

organization was chaired by Jaap de Hoop Scheffer and, later, Bernard Rudolf Bot of the Netherlands during 2003. 2004 During the first half of the year the OSCE, under the chairmanship of Bulgarian foreign minister Solomon Passy, attended to concerns surrounding possible terrorist activity and arms control. On 11-12 March, the OSCE, in conjunction with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, held a follow-up conference to the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Committee Special Meeting in Vienna. Discussion focused on current issues of global terrorism, including MANPADS and narco-terrorism. Participants, who included counterterrorism experts from around the world, also adopted a Special Declaration expressing sympathy and solidarity in light of the terrorist attacks in Madrid, Spain on 11 March. In addition, they issued a Vienna Declaration, pledging to «seek ways in which to enhance the effectiveness of our efforts against terrorism» and implement UN Resolution 1373, among other commitments. The OSCE held its 12th Economic Forum, «New Challenges for Building up Institutional and Human Capacity for Economic Development and Co-operation», in Prague from 31 May to 4 June. Discussions centered mainly on economic development and cooperation and, specifically, the OSCE's earlier adoption of a «Strategy Document for the Economic and Environmental Dimensions». Those in attendance advocated greater interaction between State governments and the business community as a means to fostering cooperation and prosperity and preventing conflict. The Thirteenth Annual Session of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, themed «Co-operation and Partnership: Coping with New Security Threats», convened in Edinburgh, Scotland from 5-9 July. Representatives from 42 OSCE States adopted the «Edinburgh Declaration», a statement dealing with various aspects of this theme. Specifically, the Declaration addresses and condemns terrorism and its implications, and urges the international community to assist in carrying out the fight against terrorism while conforming to international laws of human rights and refugee protection. The Declaration also addresses other issues, and reaffirms principles outlined in the 2003 Rotterdam Declaration. 74

2005 On 10 June, Ambassador Marc Perrin de Brichambaut was appointed as OSCE secretary general for a three-year term. Later that month, on 27 June, the Panel of Eminent Persons presented its report, «Common Purpose«, on strengthening the effectiveness of the OSCE to the Slovenian CIO. The report includes numerous recommendations in the following categories: strengthening the OSCE's identity and profile, improving consultative and decision-making processes, clarifying the roles of the CIO and secretary general, enhancing field operations, and strengthening operational capacities. 2006 The 14th Economic Forum met twice throughout the year. On 23 and 24 January, representatives met in Vienna, Austria to discuss the theme of «Transportation in the OSCE area: Secure transportation networks and transport development to enhance regional economic cooperation and stability». The meeting addressed important issues of the 2006 Belgian chairmanship including improving economic integration between Europe and Asia, combating corruption, and assisting landlocked countries. Representatives stressed the importance of transportation for international cooperation, economic development, and conflict resolution. The 14th Economic Forum reconvened 22-24 May in Prague with 370 representatives from 60 countries. The forum continued its discussion on transportation issues in the OSCE region, especially in the South Caucuses, the Transdniestran region of Moldova, and the landlocked countries of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. Other issues addressed included security and environmental issues. Participants stressed the importance of transportation development as a means of increasing economic efficiency and improving trade relations with Asia. The 15th Annual Session of the Parliamentary Assembly convened in Brussels on 4-7 of July. The assembly passed the Brussels Declaration, a document that makes proposals on a variety of issues including security, economics, the environment, and human rights violations including «crimes of honour». The declaration also called for increasing support of OSCE field site operations in the Balkans. 75

A report of the OSCE Audited Final Statements, published by an External Auditor on 10 July 2007, assessed that for the FY 2006 the total income of the Organization totaled to €188.7 million and the total expenditures to €180.9 million. The professional staff positions amounted to 1,415 and the General Service position to 2,147, which means a total staff of 3,562. 2007 The 15th Economic and Environmental Forum (formally known as the Economic Forum) met for the first of two meetings on 22-23 January. The theme «Key challenges to ensure environmental security and sustainable development in the OSCE area: Land degradation, soil contamination, and water management» analyzed the link between environmental change and security. The forum discussed how climate change, desertification, resource scarcity, pollution, and other environmental problems can lead to poverty and environmentally induced migration. The meeting also addressed the balance between environmental protection and economic growth. The second meeting of the Economic and Environmental Forum convened in Prague from 21-23 May. The forum continued the discussion from the January meeting on the topic of environment and security. The Extraordinary Conference of the States Parties to the CFE Treaty was held in Vienna on 12-15 June. Russia officially requested the meeting on 28 May. According to article XXI of the treaty, any state party can request an extraordinary conference under «exceptional circumstances». The Russian government stated that the «exceptional circumstances» included the expansion of NATO and «NATO footdragging on ratification of the Agreement on the Adaptation of the CFE Treaty». 2008 The Forum for Security Co-operation convened on 16 January in Vienna and decided that its work for this year would be guided by the Madrid Ministerial Decision of November 2007. The focus was on arms control, disarmament, confidence and security-building measures, conflict prevention, new security challenges, and implementation of the UNSCR 1540. 76

The 17th Annual Session of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly was held in Astana from 29 June to 3 July. The theme was «Transparency in the OSCE» and the meetings brought together 227 parliamentarians. They debated issues ranging from water management to trade to cyber-security to migration and concluded the Astana Declaration (link in Russian) with calls for more transparency in the organization of, and access to, political and historical archives. It also urges participating States to increase transparency in the use of private military contractors and to ensure that these contractors operate under international law. 2009 On 12 February, the OSCE Permanent Council agreed to extend the mandate of the OSCE military monitoring officers in Georgia only to 30 June. On that date, the OSCE's observer mission shut down and the monitors departed. The mission in Georgia had been active since 1992. On 27-28 June, the OSCE Foreign Ministers met in Corfu, Greece. In their concluding statement, the Ministers identified five major sets of security issues facing them. They were: 1) «protracted conflicts, ethnic tensions and unresolved border disputes», 2) the CFE Treaty's continued state in limbo, 3) democracy and rule of law, 4) the deepening economic crisis, and 5) «energy security, illegal migration, human trafficking, terrorism and fundamentalism, cybercrime and rising instability» in regions adjacent to OSCE states. From 9 to 12 October, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly met in Athens, Greece for the Fall Meeting held under the theme: «Energy Security and Environment». Nearly 200 members from 50 OSCE States were in attendance. The meeting included three focuses sessions centered on regional cooperation in energy security, climate and environmental policy, and the optimal utilization of natural resources for security. 2010 On 18-19 February the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly met for the 9th Winter Meeting in Vienna, Austria. After discussing whether improvements were being made in Afghanistan, OSCE delegations present reaffirmed their dedication to promoting stability in Afghanistan. Kazakhstan's Foreign Minister Kanat Saudabayev also 77

called for improved cooperation between OSCE parliamentarians in order to strengthen the European arms control regime. On 8-11 October, over 200 parliamentarians from 50 countries participated in the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly's 9th Fall Meetings in Palermo, Italy. The event was hosted by the Italian Parliament and included a conference entitled «The Fight against Transnational Organized Crime and Corruption». From 1-2 December, representatives from 56 States met for an OSCE Summit in Astana, Kazakhstan. During this event, the Astana Commemorative Declaration was adopted, which reaffirms the OSCE's reliance on trust and transparency. The document also calls for the revitalization and modernization of existing conventional arms control and security building regimes. 2011 On 27-28 January, the OSCE Forum for Security Co-operation and the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs held a workshop in Vienna, Austria, to address the implementation of UNSCR 1540 and how OSCE can facilitate the process. The OSCE Permanent Council Chairperson, Ambassador Renatas Norkus of Lithuania stated, «As the most inclusive and comprehensive security organization within its region, the OSCE is well-placed to make an added-value contribution to an expanding international non-proliferation regime». The workshop agreed that regional organizations such as OSCE have a «comparative advantage through their knowledge of regional specificities» and can be of great assistance to the 1540 Committee. On 15 June, OSCE Secretary General Marc Perrin de Brichambaut signed an extension of a contract for the safe disposal of 9,500 tons of melange, a toxic rocket fuel liquid, stored across Ukraine. The disposal will start later this year. Deposit sites located near the stadiums hosting the 2012 European Football Championship will be cleaned before the championship begins. On 10 July, parliamentarians from 53 countries voted to pass the Belgrade Declaration, a document that contains recommendations on nuclear safety, human rights, and cyber security, among other important issues. Part of the declaration that addresses nuclear safety calls for a construction of a global system that will: 78

Forecast and promptly notify governments of natural disasters; Organize international assistance to affected areas; Initiate foreign investment to reconstruct affected communities; Investment in energy-saving technologies and environmentally friendly industries; and, – Achieve greater economic co-operation and information sharing in the field of cyber security. President Petros Efthymiou of Greece was re-elected as president of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. On 7 September, Kazakhstan’s Defence Minister Adilbek Dzhaksybekov addressed the FSC, inaugurating Kazakhstan’s Chairmanship of the FSC in the third trimester of 2011. He listed modernizing the Vienna Document 1999, addressing issues related to the implementation of OSCE documents on small arms and light weapons, and on conventional ammunition, as well as nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction as among the key priorities of Kazakhstan as the new Chair of the OSCE Forum for Security Co-operation (FSC). In October 2011, the OSCE Secretariat and the United Nations signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) agreeing to work together on preventing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and increase technical collaboration in implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1540. The OSCE Secretariat’s Conflict Prevention Center and the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs will together insure the fulfillment of the terms of the Memorandum. The two organizations recently held a joint workshop for Central Asian States on the implementation of Resolution 1540. On 22 December, the Forum for Security Cooperation published the Vienna Document 2011 on Confidence and Security Building Measures. This updates the Vienna Document 1999 on Confidence and Security Building Measures. 2012 On 24 January, the OSCE held a regional workshop in Valletta, Malta for customs and licensing officers with Mediterranean Partners on military and dual-use goods. The regional workshop focused on helping to combat the trafficking of strategic dual-use commodities and conventional weapons. – – – –


On 21 September, the annual OSCE human rights conference opened in Warsaw. Speakers of this conference stressed that security is not possible unless there is respect for human rights and democracy. On 8 November, the Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group presented their annual report in Vienna. The representatives from the United States, France and Russia outlined their activities over the last year and discussed how to best manage times of tension and avoid violence. The three representatives also meet with the Swiss and Ukrainian delegation for future chairmanship. 2013 On 7 May, the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Leonid Kozhara, briefed the United Nations Security Council. He spoke about Ukraine’s OSCE Chairmanship priorities, especially working with the UN to promote international security. Specifically, he highlighted joint work on preventing and resolving conflicts, disarmament and non-proliferation initiatives, transnational security threats, human trafficking and the need to develop new trade and transport routes. Additionally, Kozhara emphasized facilitating the Helsinski +40 dialogue. On 23 May, OSCE Secretary General Lamberto Zannier addressed high-level dignitaries in Moscow, Russia, to discuss the approach of the OSCE for conventional arms control in Europe. On 29 June, the OSCE assisted in the transfer of 410 tons of toxic rocket fuel, stored in deteriorating containers, from Kazakhstan to a safe chemical disposal facility in Russia. On 19 August, the OSCE facilitated an expert meeting to discuss the technical aspects of implementation of UNSC Resolution 1540 on non-proliferation of WMDs in Uzbekistan. On 4 September, seven hundred and sixty tons of mélange, a Soviet era toxic rocket fuel component, was shipped from Ukraine to Russia for destruction. With this, East Ukraine is now free of substance from propelling short and medium range missiles. On 10 October, OSCE convened a conference in Kyiv regarding terrorism issues. The conference will discuss the challenges, latest concerns and initiatives in the fields of countering violent extremism and radicalization that lead to terrorism; encouraging public-private partnerships in countering terrorism, as well as promoting law 80

enforcement co-operation and the protection of human rights and the rule of law in the context of counter-terrorism. 2014 On 25 July, the OSCE held a meeting in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan looking at export controls, transshipment of weapons of mass destruction, and broader implementation of UNSCR 1540. The twoday event brought together about twenty-five participants representing the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Defence, Internal Affairs, National Security, the Ministry of Economy and Development, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Trade and Foreign Economic Affairs, as well as the State Customs and Border Services and the Ministry of Healthcare and Medical Industry of Turkmenistan. On 10-25 September, the OSCE assisted in training Moldovan armed forces on the physical security and stockpile management of small arms, light weapons and conventional ammunition. Austrian, Swedish, Canadian and German specialists participated in the training. On 18 December, the OSCE and Kyrgyzstan signed five agreements on the management and control of small arms and light weapons in Kyrgyzstan, regarding improvement of the regulatory and legal framework, security management, construction of new warehouse, training for Defense Ministry personnel, as well as destruction of surplus stockpiles. 2015 On 12 March, the OSCE held a roundtable on management and control of small arms and light weapons with Kyrgyzstan. Representatives discussed the final draft law on the Regulation on Disposal of Small Arms and Light Weapons. On 24 April, the OSCE concluded a ten-day training course on detection and prevention of trafficking of dual-use chemicals and improvised explosive devices. Experts from the World Customs Organization (WCO) delivered the course. On 27 May, the OSCE assisted Albania in disposal of 116 tons of highly toxic chemicals. The OSCE has been assisting Albania in demilitarization in recent years. 2016 On 7 February, OSCE Chairperson Frank-Walter Steinmeier condemned the DPRK’s ballistic missile test, calling it «openly 81

defiant» of the UNSC, and encouraged the international community to react to the test with further consequences. On 26 February, Tajikistan’s government approved the OSCE’s National Action Plan to implement UNSCR 1540. On 22 April, the OSCE office in Dushanbe, Tajikistan concluded a week-long workshop on radiation safety, including topics such as nuclear terrorism, nuclear trafficking, and radiation detection techniques. On 26 April, OSCE Chairperson Frank-Walter Steinmeier commemorated the 30th Anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, noting that further international cooperation is required to «alleviate [its] consequences». On 29 April, Tajikistan presented its OSCE-supported National Action Plan to implement UNSCR 1540 to the international community. On 1 July, 16 OSCE member states participated in an OSCEorganized training session regarding implementation of UNSCR 1540. Participants discussed legislation, trafficking, and export controls. On 2 July, the Parliamentary Assembly’s 25th Session began in Tbilisi, Georgia. The topics discussed included transnational terrorism, energy, and the refugee crisis. On 5 July, President of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Ilkka Kanerva and Chairman of the Georgian Parliament David Usupashvili used their opening statements to urge the United Kingdom to avoid isolationist policies in light of the recent «Brexit» vote and departure from the EU. On 5 August, representatives from Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan met at OSCE: Minsk to discuss implementation progress for UNSCR 1540. On 9 September, Germany, as OSCE Chair, denounced the most recent nuclear test by the DPRK, and urged them to adhere to UNSC resolutions. On 16 September, Kyrgyzstan and the OSCE concluded a twoday roundtable discussing the National Action Plan to implement UNSCR 1540 in Issyk-Kul, Kyrgyzstan. The topics discussed included import/export control, biosecurity, and materials surveillance. 82

OSCE tomorrow Given the security context prevailing in Europe and the world today, globalization, transition and wandering in politics, it is clear that the states alone, without the help and cooperation of the Great Powers through cooperative security, will not be able to counter the contemporary security challenges, risks and threats. As noted by professor Dragan Simic»,... regardless of truly democratic and peaceful efforts of the OSCE, the cooperative security concept has, regrettably, both for this initially ‘Conference in continuity’ and then an international organization, remained largely a normative vision, unattained in reality and insufficiently clear in the theoreticalphilosophical sense». Also, in the coming period the OSCE may also face the challenges which will be brought about by the «EU enlargement» that could cause the overlapping of functions of the two organizations, or create an opportunity to deepen cooperation. Despite these observations, the OSCE’s role through preventive diplomacy, field operations and other mechanisms should in the coming period gain even greater importance. The OSCE of tomorrow should enhance the dialogue with all international actors with a view to restoring peace and stability in Europe. However, it is necessary to increase the transparency of the OSCE, primarily of its capabilities for rapid and effective action on the ground, and for achieving results. It seems that the current crisis in Ukraine encourages states and other security actors to more significantly pay attention to the Organization. They now actively use the OSCE as a mediator in conflict resolution, while on the other hand, as mentioned above, there is still very little understanding for the OSCE’s potential capabilities and its readiness to influence the revitalization of dialogues related to European security. Also, the OSCE should enhance cooperation and partnership with the United Nations, which is crucial for addressing security challenges, risks and threats to the Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian space. «The OSCE is engaged in political dialogue, coordination and exchange of information with the UN on thematic and regional issues both on the political and expert level. All OSCE structures cooperate with a wide range of UN bodies and organizations in order to 83

strengthen security in all three dimensions in the OSCE area and in the neighboring regions. We highly appreciate this close cooperation. We are ready to make it more operational and more results-oriented by reviving talks with the staff, targeted exchange of staff and pragmatic implementation of the existing institutional framework». In addition to promoting cooperation with the United Nations, based on the 1999 Istanbul Platform for Security Cooperation, the OSCE’s priority should be to develop cooperation with other relevant regional and international organizations that share the OSCE goals and values in order to capitalize on synergies for preserving security. 1.8. The European Union The European Union (EU) is a political and economic union of 28 member states that are located primarily in Europe. It has an area of 4,475,757 km2 (1,728,099 sq mi), and an estimated population of over 510 million. The EU has developed an internal single market through a standardised system of laws that apply in all member states. EU policies aim to ensure the free movement of people, goods, services, and capital within the internal market, enact legislation in justice and home affairs, and maintain common policies on trade, agriculture, fisheries, and regional development. Within the Schengen Area, passport controls have been abolished. A monetary union was established in 1999 and came into full force in 2002, and is composed of 19 EU member states which use the euro currency. The EU traces its origins from the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and the European Economic Community (EEC), established, respectively, by the 1951 Treaty of Paris and 1957 Treaty of Rome. The original members of what came to be known as the European Communities, were the Inner Six; Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany. Over the following decades many new members joined them while at the same time integration of economic, cultural, judicial and so forth would then deepen the relationships distinct European entity. The Communities and its successors have grown in size by the accession of new member 84

states and in power by the addition of policy areas to its remit. While no member state has left the EU or its antecedent organisations, the United Kingdom enacted the result of a membership referendum in June 2016 and is currently negotiating its withdrawal. The Maastricht Treaty established the European Union in 1993 and introduced European citizenship. The latest major amendment to the constitutional basis of the EU, the Treaty of Lisbon, came into force in 2009. The European Union accumulated a higher portion of GDP as a form of foreign aid than any other economic union. Covering 7.3% of the world population, the EU in 2016 generated a nominal gross domestic product (GDP) of 16.477 trillion US dollars, constituting approximately 22.2% of global nominal GDP and 16.9% when measured in terms of purchasing power parity. Additionally, 27 out of 28 EU countries have a very high Human Development Index, according to the United Nations Development Programme. In 2012, the EU was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Through the Common Foreign and Security Policy, the EU has developed a role in external relations and defence. The union maintains permanent diplomatic missionsthroughout the world and represents itself at the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the G7, and the G20. Because of its global influence, the European Union has been described as an emerging superpower. History Preliminary (1945-57) After World War II, European integration was seen as an antidote to the extreme nationalism which had devastated the continent. The 1948 Hague Congress was a pivotal moment in European federal history, as it led to the creation of the European Movement International and of the College of Europe, where Europe's future leaders would live and study together. 1952 saw the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community, which was declared to be «a first step in the federation of Europe». The supporters of the Community included Alcide De Gasperi, Jean Monnet, Robert Schuman, and Paul-Henri Spaak. These men and others are officially credited as the Founding fathers of the European Union. 85

Treaty of Rome (1957-1992) In 1957, Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germanysigned the Treaty of Rome, which created the European Economic Community(EEC) and established a customs union. They also signed another pact creating the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) for co-operation in developing nuclear energy. Both treaties came into force in 1958. The EEC and Euratom were created separately from the ECSC, although they shared the same courts and the Common Assembly. The EEC was headed by Walter Hallstein (Hallstein Commission) and Euratom was headed by Louis Armand(Armand Commission) and then Étienne Hirsch. Euratom was to integrate sectors in nuclear energy while the EEC would develop a customs union among members. During the 1960s, tensions began to show, with France seeking to limit supranational power. Nevertheless, in 1965 an agreement was reached and on 1 July 1967 the Merger Treaty created a single set of institutions for the three communities, which were collectively referred to as the European Communities. Jean Rey presided over the first merged Commission (Rey Commission). In 1973, the Communities were enlarged to include Denmark (including Greenland, which later left the Communities in 1985, following a dispute over fishing rights), Ireland, and the United Kingdom. Norway had negotiated to join at the same time, but Norwegian voters rejected membership in a referendum. In 1979, the first direct elections to the European Parliament were held. Greece joined in 1981, Portugal and Spain following in 1986. In 1985, the Schengen Agreement paved the way for the creation of open borders without passport controls between most member states and some non-member states. In 1986, the European flagbegan to be used by the EEC and the Single European Act was signed. In 1990, after the fall of the Eastern Bloc, the former East Germany became part of the Communities as part of a reunified Germany. A close fiscal integration with the introduction of the euro was not matched by institutional oversight making things more troubling. Attempts to solve the problems and to make the EU more efficient and coherent had limited success. With further enlargement 86

planned to include the former communist states of Central and Eastern Europe, as well as Cyprus and Malta, the Copenhagen criteria for candidate members to join the EU were agreed upon in June 1993. The expansion of the EU introduced a new level of complexity and discord. Maastricht Treaty (1992-2007) The European Union was formally established when the Maastricht Treaty – whose main architects were Helmut Kohl and François Mitterrand – came into force on 1 November 1993. The treaty also gave the name European Community to the EEC, even if it was referred as such before the treaty. In 1995, Austria, Finland, and Sweden joined the EU. In 2002, euro banknotes and coins replaced national currencies in 12 of the member states. Since then, the eurozone has increased to encompass 19 countries. The euro currency became the second largest reserve currency in the world. In 2004, the EU saw its biggest enlargement to date when Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia joi ned the Union. Lisbon Treaty (2007 - present) In 2007, Bulgaria and Romania became EU members. The same year, Slovenia adopted the euro, followed in 2008 by Cyprus and Malta, by Slovakia in 2009, by Estonia in 2011, by Latvia in 2014 and by Lithuania in 2015. On 1 December 2009, the Lisbon Treaty entered into force and reformed many aspects of the EU. In particular, it changed the legal structure of the European Union, merging the EU three pillars system into a single legal entity provisioned with a legal personality, created a permanent President of the European Council, the first of which was Herman Van Rompuy, and strengthened the position of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. In 2012, the EU received the Nobel Peace Prize for having «contributed to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy, and human rights in Europe». In 2013, Croatiabecame the 28th EU member. 87

From the beginning of the 2010s, the cohesion of the European Union has been tested by several issues, including a debt crisis in some of the Eurozone countries, increasing migration from the Middle East and the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the EU. A referendum in the UK on its membership of the European Union was held on 23 June 2016, with 51.9% of participants voting to leave. This is referred to in common parlance throughout Europe as Brexit. The UK formally notified the European Council of its decision to leave on 29 March 2017 initiating the formal withdrawal procedure for leaving the EU, slating the UK to leave the EU on 29 March 2019. Member states Through successive enlargements, the European Union has grown from the six founding states (Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands) to the current 28. Countries accede to the union by becoming party to the founding treaties, thereby subjecting themselves to the privileges and obligations of EU membership. This entails a partial delegation of sovereignty to the institutions in return for representation within those institutions, a practice often referred to as «pooling of sovereignty». To become a member, a country must meet the Copenhagen criteria, defined at the 1993 meeting of the European Council in Copenhagen. These require a stable democracy that respects human rights and the rule of law; a functioning market economy; and the acceptance of the obligations of membership, including EU law. Evaluation of a country's fulfilment of the criteria is the responsibility of the European Council. No member state has yet left the Union, although Greenland (an autonomous province of Denmark) withdrew in 1985. The Lisbon Treaty now contains a clause under Article 50, providing for a member to leave the EU. There are six countries that are recognised as candidates for membership: Albania, Iceland, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Turkey, though Iceland suspended negotiations in 2013. Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo are officially recognised as potential candidates, with Bosnia and Herzegovina having submitted a membership application. 88

The four countries forming the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) are not EU members, but have partly committed to the EU's economy and regulations: Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, which are a part of the single market through the European Economic Area, and Switzerland, which has similar ties through bilateral treaties. The relationships of the European microstates, Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, and the Vatican include the use of the euro and other areas of co-operation. The following 28 sovereign states (of which the map only shows territories situated in and around Europe) constitute the European Union: Institutions The EU operates through a hybrid system of supranational and intergovernmental decision-making. EU policy is in general promulgated by EU directives, which are then implemented in the domestic legislation of its member states, and EU regulations, which are immediately enforceable in all member states. The EU's seven principal decision making bodies – known as the Institutions of the European Union are: – the European Council, which sets the general political directions and priorities of the Union by gathering together its member states' heads of state/government (elected chief executives). The conclusions of its summits (held at least quarterly) are adopted by consensus. – the European Commission, the «Guardian of the Treaties» consists of an executive cabinet of public officials, led by an indirectly elected President. This College of Commissioners manages and directs the Commission's permanent civil service. It turns the consensus objectives of the European Council into legislative proposals. – the Council of the European Union is an executive meeting of ministers of member states governments' departments, which meets to amend, approve or reject proposed legislation from the Commission. It forms the upper house of the EU's essentially bicameral legislature. Its approval is required for any proposal to enter into law. 89

the European Parliament consists of 751 directly elected representatives, forming the EU's lower house of its bicameral legislature. It shares with the Council of the EU equal legislative powers to amend, approve or reject Commission proposals for most areas of EU legislation. Its powers are limited in areas where member states' view sovereignty to be of primary concern (i.e. defence). It elects the Commission's President, must approve the College of Commissioners, and may vote to remove them collectively from office. – the Court of Justice of the European Union ensures the uniform application of EU law and resolves disputes between EU institutions and member states, and against EU institutions on behalf of individuals. – the European Central Bank is responsible for monetary stability within member states. – the European Court of Auditors investigates the proper management of finances within both the EU entities and EU funding provided to its member states. As well as providing oversight and advice, it can refer unresolved issues to the European Court of Justice to arbitrate on any alleged irregularities. –

Relation to the Council of Europe Beyond the EU institutions is the Council of Europe (CoE) which is a wider international organisation with 47 member states whose stated aim is to uphold human rights, democracy and the rule of law in Europe. Its legislative principles are promulgated by the European Convention on Human Rights and its judicial agent is the European Court of Human Rights. These ethical institutions are distinct from the legislative European Union institutions mentioned above, although ECHR decisions are enforcable upon the EU institutions and upon the several judiciaries of sovereign member states of the EU The Venice Commission formally The European Commission for Democracy through Law provides advise regarding constitutional matters in order to improve functioning of democratic institutions and the protection of human rights in member states of the Council of Europe. 90

Relations between the EU and its electorate Apart from the national political structures within member states and the directly elected European Parliament the EU also encourages citizen participation via development projects such as CORDIS (the EU Community Research and Development Information Service) and the ERASMUS (The European Region Action Scheme for the Mobility of University Students). Lobbying at EU level by special interest groups is regulated to try to balance the aspirations of private initiatives with public interest decision-making process The Five Presidents (in 2017) were led by: – the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, indirectly elected by EU citizens via the European Parliament for a 5-year renewable term following European Parliamentary elections, together with, – the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, who chairs the gatherings of the EU's 28 national heads of government/state and is elected by them for a 2.5 year once renewable term, – Eurogroup President, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, who chairs informal meetings of finance ministers from EU member states that use the euro as their currency, and is elected from amongst them, by them, for a 2.5 year renewable term, – the European Central Bank President, Mario Draghi, elected de facto by the European Council members who represent eurozone states, for an eight-year non-renewable term, – the European Parliament President, Antonio Tajani, elected from amongst the 751 directly elected Members of the European Parliament, by them, for a 2.5 year renewable term. By working together, they seek provide a forward policy consideration nucleus for the various European «think-tanks» which discuss various possible future social and economic scenarios that will eventually require ratification by the EU electorate. Political system of the European Union The classification of the EU in terms of international or constitutional law has been much debated. It began life as an 91

international organisation and gradually developed into a confederation of states. However, since the mid-1960s it has also added several of the key attributes of a federation, such as the direct effect of the law of the general level of government upon the individual and majority voting in the decision-making process of the general level of government, without becoming a federation per se. Scholars thus today see it as an intermediate form lying between a confederation and a federation, being an instance of neither political structure. For this reason, the organisation is termed sui generis (incomparable, one of a kind), although some argue that this designation is no longer valid. The organisation has traditionally used the terms «Community» and later «Union» to describe itself. The difficulties of classification involve the difference between national law (where the subjects of the law include natural persons and corporations) and international law (where the subjects include sovereign states and international organisations). They can also be seen in the light of differing European and American constitutional traditions. Especially in terms of the European tradition, the term federation is equated with a sovereign federal state in international law; so the EU cannot be called a federation – at least, not without qualification. It is, however, described as being based on a federal model or federal in nature; and so it may be appropriate to consider it a federal union of states, a conceptual structure lying between the confederation of states and the federal state. The German Constitutional Court refers to the EU as a Staatenverbund, an intermediate structure between the Staatenbund (confederation of states) and the Bundesstaat (federal state), consistent with this concept. This may be a long-lived political form. Professor Andrew Moravcsik claims that the EU is unlikely to develop further into a federal state, but instead has reached maturity as a constitutional system. Governance The European Union has seven institutions: the European Council, the Council of the European Union, the European Parliament, the European Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Central Bank and the European Court of 92

Auditors. Competence in scrutinising and amending legislation is shared between the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament, while executive tasks are performed by the European Commission and in a limited capacity by the European Council (not to be confused with the aforementioned Council of the European Union). The monetary policy of the eurozone is determined by the European Central Bank. The interpretation and the application of EU law and the treaties are ensured by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The EU budget is scrutinised by the European Court of Auditors. There are also a number of ancillary bodies which advise the EU or operate in a specific area. Institutions of the EU European Council The European Council gives political direction to the EU. It convenes at least four times a year and comprises the President of the European Council (currently Donald Tusk), the President of the European Commission and one representative per member state (either its head of stateor head of government). The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (currently Federica Mogherini) also takes part in its meetings. It has been described by some as the Union's «supreme political authority». It is actively involved in the negotiation of treaty changes and defines the EU's policy agenda and strategies. The European Council uses its leadership role to sort out disputes between member states and the institutions, and to resolve political crises and disagreements over controversial issues and policies. It acts externally as a «collective head of state« and ratifies important documents (for example, international agreements and treaties). Tasks for the President of the European Council are ensuring the external representation of the EU, driving consensus and resolving divergences among member states, both during meetings of the European Council and over the periods between them. The European Council should not be mistaken for the Council of Europe, an international organisation independent of the EU based in Strasbourg. 93

Council of the European Union The Council of the European Union (also called the «Council» and the «Council of Ministers», its former title) forms one half of the EU's legislature. It consists of a government minister from each member state and meets in different compositions depending on the policy area being addressed. Notwithstanding its different configurations, it is considered to be one single body. In addition to its legislative functions, the Council also exercises executive functions in relations to the Common Foreign and Security Policy. European Parliament The European Parliament forms the other half of the EU's legislature. The 751 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are directly elected by EU citizens every five years on the basis of proportional representation. Although MEPs are elected on a national basis, they sit according to political groups rather than their nationality. Each country has a set number of seats and is divided into sub-national constituencies where this does not affect the proportional nature of the voting system. The European Union council, the Council of Ministers, and the Commission fulfilled the duties as the executive for the parliament. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union pass legislation jointly in nearly all areas under the ordinary legislative procedure. This also applies to the EU budget. The European Commission is accountable to Parliament, requiring its approval to take office, having to report back to it and subject to motions of censure from it. The President of the European Parliament (currently Antonio Tajani) carries out the role of speaker in Parliament and represents it externally. The President and Vice-Presidentsare elected by MEPs every two and a half years. European Commission The European Commission acts as the EU's executive arm and is responsible for initiating legislation and the day-to-day running of the EU. The Commission is also seen as the motor of European integration. It operates as a cabinet government, with 28 94

Commissioners for different areas of policy, one from each member state, though Commissioners are bound to represent the interests of the EU as a whole rather than their home state. One of the 28 is the President of the European Commission (currently Jean-Claude Juncker) appointed by the European Council. After the President, the most prominent Commissioner is the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, who is ex-officioa Vice-President of the Commission and is also chosen by the European Council. The other 26 Commissioners are subsequently appointed by the Council of the European Union in agreement with the nominated President. The 28 Commissioners as a single body are subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament. Budget The EU had an agreed budget of €120.7 billion for the year 2007 and €864.3 billion for the period 2007–2013, representing 1.10% and 1.05% of the EU-27's GNI forecast for the respective periods. In 1960, the budget of the then European Economic Community was 0.03% of GDP. In the 2010 budget of €141.5 billion, the largest single expenditure item is «cohesion & competitiveness« with around 45% of the total budget. Next comes «agriculture« with approximately 31% of the total. «Rural development, environment and fisheries» takes up around 11%. «Administration» accounts for around 6%. The «EU as a global partner» and «citizenship, freedom, security and justice» bring up the rear with approximately 6% and 1% respectively. The Court of Auditors is legally obliged to provide the Parliament and the Council with «a statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions». The Court also gives opinions and proposals on financial legislation and anti-fraud actions. The Parliament uses this to decide whether to approve the Commission's handling of the budget. The European Court of Auditors has signed off the European Union accounts every year since 2007 and, while making it clear that 95

the European Commission has more work to do, has highlighted that most of the errors take place at national level. In their report on 2009 the auditors found that five areas of Union expenditure, agriculture and the cohesion fund, were materially affected by error. The European Commission estimated in 2009 that the financial effect of irregularities was €1,863 million. Competences EU member states retain all powers not explicitly handed to the European Union. In some areas the EU enjoys exclusive competence. These are areas in which member states have renounced any capacity to enact legislation. In other areas the EU and its member states share the competence to legislate. While both can legislate, member states can only legislate to the extent to which the EU has not. In other policy areas the EU can only co-ordinate, support and supplement member state action but cannot enact legislation with the aim of harmonising national laws. That a particular policy area falls into a certain category of competence is not necessarily indicative of what legislative procedure is used for enacting legislation within that policy area. Different legislative procedures are used within the same category of competence, and even with the same policy area. Legal system The EU is based on a series of treaties. These first established the European Community and the EU, and then made amendments to those founding treaties. These are power-giving treaties which set broad policy goals and establish institutions with the necessary legal powers to implement those goals. These legal powers include the ability to enact legislation which can directly affect all member states and their inhabitants. The EU has legal personality, with the right to sign agreements and international treaties. Under the principle of supremacy, national courts are required to enforce the treaties that their member states have ratified, and thus the laws enacted under them, even if doing so requires them to ignore conflicting national law, and (within limits) even constitutional provisions. 96

Courts of Justice The judicial branch of the EU – formally called the Court of Justice of the European Union – consists of two courts: the Court of Justiceand the General Court. The Court of Justice primarily deals with cases taken by member states, the institutions, and cases referred to it by the courts of member states. The General Court mainly deals with cases taken by individuals and companies directly before the EU's courts, and the European Union Civil Service Tribunal adjudicates in disputes between the European Union and its civil service. Decisions from the General Court can be appealed to the Court of Justice but only on a point of law. Fundamental rights The treaties declare that the EU itself is «founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities ... in a society in which pluralism, nondiscrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail». In 2009, the Lisbon Treaty gave legal effect to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The charter is a codified catalogue of fundamental rights against which the EU's legal acts can be judged. It consolidates many rights which were previously recognised by the Court of Justice and derived from the «constitutional traditions common to the member states». The Court of Justice has long recognised fundamental rights and has, on occasion, invalidated EU legislation based on its failure to adhere to those fundamental rights. Although signing the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is a condition for EU membership, previously, the EU itself could not accede to the Convention as it is neither a state nor had the competence to accede. The Lisbon Treaty and Protocol 14 to the ECHR have changed this: the former binds the EU to accede to the Convention while the latter formally permits it. Although, the EU is independent from Council of Europe, they share purpose and ideas especially on rule of law, human rights and 97

democracy. Further European Convention on Human Rights and European Social Charter, the source of law of Charter of Fundamental Rights are created by Council of Europe. The EU also promoted human rights issues in the wider world. The EU opposes the death penalty and has proposed its worldwide abolition. Abolition of the death penalty is a condition for EU membership. Acts The main legal acts of the EU come in three forms: regulations, directives, and decisions. Regulations become law in all member states the moment they come into force, without the requirement for any implementing measures, and automatically override conflicting domestic provisions. Directives require member states to achieve a certain result while leaving them discretion as to how to achieve the result. The details of how they are to be implemented are left to member states. When the time limit for implementing directives passes, they may, under certain conditions, have direct effect in national law against member states. Decisions offer an alternative to the two above modes of legislation. They are legal acts which only apply to specified individuals, companies or a particular member state. They are most often used in competition law, or on rulings on State Aid, but are also frequently used for procedural or administrative matters within the institutions. Regulations, directives, and decisions are of equal legal value and apply without any formal hierarchy. Literature 1. Hanhimaki J. 2015, The United Nations: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford, OUP. 2. Mingst, K. Karns M. and Lyon L. 2016, The United Nations in the 21st Century, or 2012 version The United Nations and Changing World Politics. Eighth Edition (or use last edition, if not arrived yet). 3. Weiss T. and Daws S., eds., 2008, The Oxford Handbook on the United Nations, Oxford, OUP. 4. Koops J. et al, 2016, Oxford Handbook of UN Peace-Keeping, Oxford, OUP, Weiss T. et al, 2016, The United Nations and Changing World Politics, Boulder, Westview. 5. Herz, Mônica Organization of American States. – University of Manchester, 2015. 6. SICE/OAS: 98

7. MERCOSUR: 8. Brian Frederking and Paul F. Diehl, eds., The Politics of Global Governance: International Organizations in an Interdependent World, fifth edition (Lynne Rienner, 2015). 9. Margaret P. Karns, Karen A. Mingst, and Kendall W.Stiles, International Organizations: The Politics and Processes of Global Governance, third (Lynne Rienner, 2015). 10. Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence, fourth edition (Longman, 2012). 11. Thomas G. Weiss, David P. Forsythe, Roger A. Coate, and Kelly – Kate ease The United Nations and Changing World Politics, seventh edition (Westview, 2014). 12. Frederic L., Jr. Kirgis, International Organizations in Their Legal Setting, West; 2nd edition (American Casebook Series), ISBN: 0314016430. 13. The Challenges to the World Trade Organization: It’s All About Legitimacy THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION, Policy Paper 2011-04 14. Steinberg, Richard H. «In the Shadow of Law or Power? Consensus-based Bargaining and Outcomes in the GATT/WTO». International Organization. Spring 2002. pp. 339–74. 15. Overview of the WTO Secretariat». WTO official website. Retrieved 2 September2013. 16. Interfax, 22 December 1993, via Zbigniew Brzezinski, Paige Sullivan, 'Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States' CSIS, 1997, – P. 464 via Google Books 17. Kupchinsky, Roman. «CIS: Monitoring The Election Monitors». Retrieved 23 July 2013. 18. Commonwealth of Independent States Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms». 1995. Retrieved 24 March 2013.Wolfgang Zellner & Frank Evers, The Future of OSCE Field Operations, OSCE Network of Think Tanks and Academic Institutions, 2012. 19. The Role of OSCE Field Operations in Transition Countries, Original research paper, Belgrade, 2011. 20. European Union: The BasicsBy Alex Warleigh-LackRoutledge, 2009 (2nd edition). 21. The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces, 19501957 (revised edition). By Ernst B. Haas. University of Notre Dame Press, 2004. 22. The Institutionalization of Europe. Edited by Neil Fligstein, Wayne Sandholtz, and Alec Stone Sweet. Oxford University Press, 2001. 23. The European Union Explained: Institutions, Actors, Global ImpactBy Andreas StaabIndiana University Press, 2013 (3rd edition). 24. Small States in the European Union: Coping with Structural Disadvantages By Diana PankeRoutledge, 2016. 25. Rethinking European Union Foreign Policy By Ben Tonra; Thomas ChristiansenManchester University Press, 2004. 99


2.1. The Group of 77 The Group of 77 (G77) at the United Nations is a coalition of developing nations, designed to promote its members' collective economic interests and create an enhanced joint negotiating capacity in the United Nations. There were 77 founding members of the organization, but by November 2013, the organization had since expanded to 134 member countries. Since China participates in the G77 but does not consider itself a member, all official statements are issued in the name of The Group of 77 and China. Ecuador holds the Chairmanship for 2017. The group was founded on 15 June 1964, by the «Joint Declaration of the Seventy-Seven Countries» issued at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development(UNCTAD). The first major meeting was in Algiers in 1967, where the Charter of Algiers was adopted and the basis for permanent institutional structures was begun. There are Chapters of the Group of 77 in Geneva (UN), Rome (FAO), Vienna (UNIDO), Paris (UNESCO), Na irobi (UNEP) and the Group of 24 in Washington, D.C. (International Monetary Fund and World Bank). Policies The group has been credited with common stance against apartheid and for supporting global disarmament. It has been supportive of the New International Economic Order. It has been subject to criticism for its lackluster support, or outright opposition, to pro-environmental initiatives, which the group considers secondary to economic development and poverty-eradication initiatives.


Members As of July 2017, the group comprises all of the UN member states (along with the State of Palestine), excluding the following countries: 1. Members of the Council of Europe, except for Bosnia Herzegovina 2. Members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, except for Chile 3. Members of the Commonwealth of Independent States Free Trade Area, except for Tajikistan 4. Two Pacific microstates: Palau and Tuvalu. Structure The functioning and operating modalities of the work of the G-77 in the various Chapters have certain minimal features in common such as a similarity in membership, decision-making and certain operating methods. A Chairman, who acts as its representative, coordinates the Group’s action in each Chapter. The Chairmanship, which is the highest political body within the organizational structure of the Group of 77, rotates on a regional basis (between Africa, Asia-Pacific and Latin America and the Caribbean) and is held for one year in all the Chapters. Currently the Republic of Ecuador holds the Chairmanship of the Group of 77 in New York for the year 2017. The South Summit is the supreme decision-making body of the Group of 77. The First and the Second South Summits were held in Havana, Cuba, on 10 – 14 April 2000 and in Doha, Qatar, on 12 –16 June 2005, respectively. In accordance with the principle of geographical rotation, the Third South Summit is due to be held in Africa. The Annual Meeting of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Group of 77 is convened at the beginning of the regular session of the General Assembly of the United Nations in New York. Periodically, Sectoral Ministerial Meetings in preparation for UNCTAD sessions and the General Conferences of UNIDO and UNESCO are convened. Special Ministerial Meetings are also called as needed such as on the occasion of the Group’s 25th anniversary (Caracas, June 1989), 30th anniversary (New York, June 1994), and 40th anniversary (Sao Paulo, Brazil, June 2004). Other Sectoral Ministerial Meetings in various 101

fields of cooperation of interest to the Group are convened, in order to pursue South-South cooperation. Starting in 1995, the Group convened a series of sectoral meetings in the following fields: – Sectoral Review Meeting of the Group of 77 on Energy, Jakarta, Indonesia, 5-7 September 1995; – Sectoral Meeting of the Group of 77 on Food and Agriculture, Georgetown, Guyana, 15-19 January, 1996; – South-South Conference on Trade, Investment and Finance, San Jose, 13-15 January 1997; – High-level Conference on Subregional and Regional Economic Cooperation among Developing Countries, Bali, Indonesia, 2-5 December 1998; – South-South High-level Conference on Science and Technology of the Group of 77, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 27-30 October 2002; – High-level Conference on South-South Cooperation, Marrakech, Morocco, 16-19 December 2003; – High-level Forum on Trade and Investment, Doha, Qatar, 5-6 December 2004; – Open-ended Intergovernmental Study Group Workshop on the Trade and Development Bank, New York, 2-3 May 2005; – Group of Experts Meeting on Development Platform for the South, Kingston, Jamaica, 29-30 August 2005; – Meeting of the Ministers of Science and Technology of the Member States of the Group of 77, Angra dos Reis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3 September 2006; – Group of 77 Panel of Eminent Experts on a Development Platform for the South, New York, 18-19 October 2007; – Group of 77 Panel of Eminent Experts on a Development Platform for the South, St. John's, Antigua and Barbuda, 29-30 April 2008; – Ministerial Forum on Water, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman, 23-25 February 2009; – Meeting of the Ministers of Science and Technology of the Member States of the Group of 77 held in Budapest, Hungary, on 4 November 2009 on the occasion of the World Science Forum organized by UNESCO. 102

In addition to the Sectoral Meetings, the Intergovernmental Follow-up and Coordination Committee on South-South Cooperation (IFCC), which is a plenary body consisting of senior officials, meets once every two years to review the state of implementation of the Caracas Programme of Action (CPA) adopted by the Group of 77 in 1981 and the progress made in the implementation of the outcomes of the South Summits in the field of South-South cooperation. To date IFCC has held twelve sessions: IFCC-I (Manila, Philippines, 23-28 August 1982); IFCC-II (Tunis, Tunisia, 5 – 10 September 1983); IFCC-III (Cartagena, Colombia, 3-8 September 1984); IFCC-IV (Jakarta, Indonesia, 19-23 August 1985); IFCC-V (Cairo, Egypt, 18-23 August 1986); IFCC-VI (Havana, Cuba, 7-12 September 1987): IFCC-VII (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 31 July – 5 August 1989); IFCC-VIII (Panama City, Panama, 30 August – 03 September 1993); IFCC-IX (Manila, Philippines, 8-12 February 1996); IFCC-X (Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran, 18-23 August 2001); IFCC-XI (Havana, Cuba, 2123 March 2005); IFCC-XII (Yamoussoukro, Côte d'Ivoire, 10-13 June 2008). Finance The activities of the Group of 77 are financed through contributions by Member States in accordance with the relevant decisions of the First South Summit. Activities Besides resolution and decisions initiated by the Group of 77 in the UN General Assembly and its Committees as well as various UN bodies and specialized agencies, the Group of 77 produces joint declarations, action programmes and agreements on development issues. The Group adopted the following declarations/documents since its first Ministerial Meeting held in Algiers in 1967: – The Charter of Algiers, Algiers, 10 – 25 October 1967; – Lima Declaration, Lima, 25 October – 7 November 1971; – Manila Declaration, Manila, 26 January – 7 February 1975; – Report on the Conference on Economic Cooperation among Developing Countries, Mexico City, 13 – 22 September 1976; 103

– – –

– – – – – –

– – – – –

– –

Arusha Programme for Self-Reliance and Framework for Negotiations, Arusha, 12 – 16 February, 1979; Communiqué on the Special Ministerial Meeting of the Group of 77, New York, 11 – 14 March 1980; Report on the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Group on Economic Cooperation among Developing Countries in Continuation of the Ministerial Meeting of the Group of 77, New York, March 1980, and Vienna, 3 – 7 June 1980; Communiqué on the Special Ministerial Meeting of the Group of 77, New York, 21 – 22 August 1980; The Caracas Programme of Action on Economic Cooperation among Developing Countries, Caracas, 13 – 19 May 1981; Ministerial Declaration on the Global System of Trade Preferences among Developing (GSTP), 8 October 1982; The Buenos Aires Platform, Buenos Aires, 5 – 9 April 1983; Declaration on the Global System of Trade Preferences (GSTP), New Delhi, July 1985; Brasilia Declaration on the Launching of the First Round of Negotiations within the Global System of Trade Preferences among Developing Countries, Brasilia, 22 – 23 May 1986; The Cairo Declaration on Economic Cooperation among Developing Countries (ECDC), Cairo, 18 – 23 August 1986; Havana Declaration, Havana, 20 – 25 April, 1987; Agreement on a Global System of Trade Preferences among Developing Countries (GSTP), Belgrade, 11 – 13 April 1988; Caracas Declaration on the ccasion of the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the Group of 77, Caracas, 13 – 23 June 1989; Recommendations and conclusions of the Group of Experts on the Review and Evaluation of the Implementation of the Caracas Programme of Action (New York, 5 – 9 August 1991); Tehran Declaration, Tehran, 19 – 23 November 1991; Tehran Declaration on the Second Round of the Global System of Trade Preferences among Developing Countries (GSTP), Tehran, 21 November 1991; Ministerial Declaration adopted on the occasion of the Thirtieth Anniversary of the Group of 77, New York, 24 June 1994; 104

– –

– –

– –

– – – –

Ministerial Statement on «An Agenda for Development», New York, 24 June 1994; Conclusions and recommendations of the Sectoral Review Meeting of the Group of 77 on Energy (Jakarta, Indonesia, 5 – 7 September 1995); The Midrand Declaration, Midrand, South Africa, 28 April 1996; Conclusions and recommendations of the Sectoral Meeting on Food and Agriculture of the G-77 (Georgetown, Guyana, 15 – 19 January 1996); The San Jose Declaration and Plan of Action on South-South Trade, Investment and Finance, San Jose, Costa Rica, 13 – 15 January 1997; The Bali Declaration and Plan of Action on High-level Meeting on Subregional and Regional Economic Integration, Bali, Indonesia, 2 – 5 December 1998; Recommendations and conclusions of the High-level Advisory Meeting on the South Summit (Jakarta, Indonesia, 10 – 11 August 1998); The Marrakech Declaration (Marrakech, Morocco, 16 September 1999); Final Report on the Group of 77 Meeting of Eminent Personalities to advise on the preparations for the First South Summit (Georgetown, Guyana, 6 – 7 December 1999); Declaration and the Havana Programme of Action adopted by the First South Summit (Havana, 10 – 14 April 2000); Tehran Consensus adopted by IFCC-X (Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran,18 – 23 August 2001); Declaration by the Group of 77 and China on the Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference (Doha, Qatar 9 – 14 November 2001); Agreed conclusions and recommendations of the Meeting of the High-level Advisory Group of Eminent Personalities and Intellectuals on Globalization and its Impact on Developing Countries: (Geneva, Switzerland, 12 – 14 September 2001); The Dubai Declaration for the Promotion of Science and Technology in the South (Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 27 – 30 October 2002); 105

– –

Declaration by the Group of 77 and China on the Fifth WTO Ministerial Conference (Cancun, Mexico, 10 – 14 September 2003); The Marrakech Declaration on South-South Cooperation and the Marrakech Framework of the Implementation of SouthSouth Cooperation (Marrakech, Morocco, 16 – 19 December 2003); The Sao Paulo Declaration (Sao Paulo, Brazil, 11 – 12 June 2004); Ministerial Declaration adopted on the occasion of the Fortieth Anniversary of the Group of 77 (Sao Paulo, Brazil, 11 – 12 June 2004); Conclusions and recommendations of the Ad-hoc Group on the Performance, Mandates and Operating Modalities of the G-77 Chamber of Commerce and Industry (G-77 CCI) (New York, 3 November and Doha, 3 – 4 December 2004); Conclusions and recommendation on the Group of 77 Highlevel Forum on Trade and Investment (Doha, Qatar, 5 – 6 December 2004); Conclusions and recommendations of the Open-ended Intergovernmental Study Group Workshop on the Trade and Development Bank (New York, 2 – 3 May 2005); Doha Declaration and Doha Plan of Action adopted by the Second G-77 South Summit (Doha, Qatar, 12 – 16 June 2005); Conclusions and recommendations of the Group of Experts Meeting on the Development Platform for the South (Kingston, Jamaica, 29 – 30 August 2005); Declaration by the Group of 77 and China in preparation of the Sixth WTO Ministerial Conference (Hong Kong, China, 13 – 18 December 2005). Conclusions and Recommendations on the Ministers of Science and Technology of the Members States of the Group of 77 (Angra dos Reis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3 September 2006); Yamoussoukro Consensus on South-South Cooperation adopted by the Twelfth Session of the Intergovernmental 106

Follow-up and Coordination Committee on Economic Cooperation among Developing Countries (IFCC-XII) (Yamoussoukro, Côte d'Ivoire, 10 – 13 June 2008); – Declaration on Water adopted by the First Ministerial Forum on Water of the Group of 77 (Muscat, Sultanate of Oman, 23 – 25 February 2009); – Declaration «For a new world order for living well» adopted by the Summit of Heads of State and Government on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the Group of 77 (Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Plurinational State of Bolivia, 14-15 June 2014). The Group of 77 also makes statements at various Main Committees of the General Assembly, ECOSOC and other subsidiary bodies, sponsors and negotiates resolutions and decisions at major conferences and other meetings held under the aegis of the United Nations dealing with international economic cooperation and development as well as the reform of the United Nations. Furthermore, the Group of 77 sponsors projects on South-South cooperation through funding from the Perez-Guerrero Trust Fund for South-South Cooperation (PGTF). 2.2. The G8 The G8 (reformatted as G7 from 2014 due to Russia's suspension) was an inter-governmental political forum from 1997 until 2014, with participation from the world′s major highly industrialized economies in countries that viewed themselves as democracies. The forum originated with a 1975 summit hosted by France that brought together representatives of six governments: France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States, thus leading to the name Group of Six or G6. The summit came to be known as the Group of Seven, or G7, in 1976 with the addition of Canada. Russia was added to the political forum from 1997, which the following year became known as the G8. In March 2014 Russia was suspended following the annexation of Crimea, whereupon the 107

group's name reverted to the G7. The European Union was represented at the G8 since the 1980s as a «nonenumerated» participant, but originally could not host or chair summits. The 40th summit was the first time the European Union was able to host and chair a summit. Collectively, in 2012 the G8 nations comprised 50.1% of 2012 global nominal GDP and 40.9 percent of global GDP (PPP). «G7» can refer to the member states in aggregate or to the annual summit meeting of the G7 heads of government. The former term, G6, is now frequently applied to the six most populous countries within the European Union. G7 ministers also meet throughout the year, such as the G7 finance ministers (who meet four times a year), G7 foreign ministers, or G7 environment ministers. Each calendar year, the responsibility of hosting the G8 was rotated through the member states in the following order: France, United States, United Kingdom, Russia (suspended), Germany, Japan, Italy, and Canada. The holder of the presidency sets the agenda, hosts the summit for that year, and determines which ministerial meetings will take place. In 2005, the UK government initiated the practice of inviting five leading emerging markets – Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa – to participate in the G8 meetings that came to be known as G8+5; but this practice was short-lived.[5]With the G-20 major economies growing in stature since the 2008 Washington summit, world leaders from the group announced at their Pittsburgh summit in September 2009 that the group would replace the G8 as the main economic council of wealthy nations. Nevertheless, the G7 retains its relevance as a «steering group for the West«, with special significance appointed to Japan. The Group of Eight (G8) is a group made up of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia (suspended), the United Kingdomand the United States. The European Commission is also represented in the committee. The group has conferences or meetings throughout the year, it researches policies, and has a summit meeting once a year. The heads of government of each G8 country attend the summit meeting. Each year a different country takes over the presidency of the group for the duration of the year. The country that holds the presidency sets the agenda for the year and hosts the summit for that 108

year. The first G6 meeting was in 1975. Canada joined in 1975, making G7. Russia made it G8 in 1997. David Cameron, the ex-Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, has indicated that the organization's official 2014 summit will not be held, which was previously planned to take place in Russia. As of March 24, 2014, all seven member nations voted to suspend Russia from the G-8. As of March 2014, the G8 will be called G7 since there are now seven leaders. Overview The G8 is not considered an international organization because it does not have administrative structure. This means that besides the president, there are no official titles for the members, they are all considered equal. Their meetings are not formal. The goal is to talk about global topics and problems in a relaxed manner. There are many global problems and issues that can be discussed at meetings. Some common topics of discussion include: health, law enforcement, labor, economic and social development, energy, environment, foreign affairs, justice, terrorism, and trade. History The concept of a forum for the world's major industrialized countries emerged prior to the 1973 oil crisis. On Sunday, March 25, 1973, the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, George Shultz, convened an informal gathering of finance ministers from West Germany (Helmut Schmidt), France (Valéry Giscard d'Estaing), and Britain (Anthony Barber) before an upcoming meeting in Washington, D.C. When running the idea past President Nixon, he noted that he would be out of town and offered use of the White House; the meeting was subsequently held in the library on the ground floor. Taking their name from the setting, this original group of four became known as the «Library Group». In mid-1973, at the World Bank-IMF meetings, Shultz proposed the addition of Japan to the original four nations, who agreed. The informal gathering of senior financial officials from the United States, the United Kingdom, West Germany, Japan, and France became known as the «Group of Five». During 1974 the heads of state 109

or government of the top 10 industrial nations fell due to illness or scandal: There were two elections in the UK, three chancellors of West Germany, three presidents of France, three prime ministers of Japan and Italy, and two U.S. presidents; moreover, Canadian prime minister Pierre Trudeau was forced into an early election. Of the members of the Group of Five, all were new to the job with the exception of Pierre Trudeau. As 1975 dawned, Schmidt and Giscard d'Estaing were heads of government in their respective countries, and since they both spoke fluent English, it occurred to them that they, and British Prime Minister Harold Wilson and U.S. President Gerald Ford could get together in an informal retreat and discuss election results and the issues of the day. In late spring, Giscard invited the heads of government from West Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States to a summit in Château de Rambouillet; the annual meeting of the six leaders was organized under a rotating presidency, forming the Group of Six (G6). In 1976, with Wilson out as prime minister of Britain, Schmidt and Gerald Ford felt an English speaker with more experience was needed, so Canada's Pierre Trudeau was invited to join the group [17] and the group became the Group of Seven (G7). Since first invited by the United Kingdom in 1977 the European Union has been represented by the president of the European Commission, and the leader of the country that holds the presidency of the Council of the European Union and the Council President now also regularly attends. Until the 1985 Plaza Accord no one outside a tight official circle knew when the seven finance ministers met and what they agreed. The summit was announced the day before and a communiqué was issued afterwards. Following 1994's G7 summit in Naples, Russian officials held separate meetings with leaders of the G7 after the group's summits. This informal arrangement was dubbed the Political 8 (P8) – or, colloquially, the G7+1. At the invitation of UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and U.S. President Bill Clinton, President Boris Yeltsin was invited first as a guest observer, later as a full participant. It was seen as a way to encourage Yeltsin with his capitalist reforms. Russia formally joined the group in 1998, resulting in the Group of Eight, or G8. 110

Russia′s participation suspension (2014) On 24 March 2014, the non-Russian G8 members cancelled the planned G8 summit that was to be held in June that year in the Russian city of Sochi, and suspended Russia′s membership of the group, due to Russia's annexation of Crimea; nevertheless, they stopped short of outright permanent expulsion. Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrovdownplayed the importance of the decision by the U.S. and its allies, and pointed up that major international decisions were taken by the G20 countries. Later on, the Italian Foreign Affairs minister Federica Mogherini and other Italian authorities, along with the EastWest Institute board member Wolfgang Ischinger, suggested that Russia may restore its membership in the group. In April 2015, the German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said that Russia would be welcomed to return to G8 provided the Minsk Protocol was implemented.[31] In 2016, he added that «none of the major international conflicts can be solved without Russia», and the G7 countries will consider Russia's return to the group in 2017. The same year, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzō Abe called for Russia's return to G8, stating that Russia's involvement is «crucial to tackling multiple crises in the Middle East». In January 2017, the Italian foreign minister Angelino Alfano said that Italy hopes for «resuming the G8 format with Russia and ending the atmosphere of the Cold War». On 13 January 2017, Russia announced that it would permanently leave the G8 grouping. Structure and activities By design, the G8 deliberately lacks an administrative structure like those for international organizations, such as the United Nations or the World Bank. The group does not have a permanent secretariat, or offices for its members. The presidency of the group rotates annually among member countries, with each new term beginning on 1 January of the year. The rotation order is: France, the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia (suspended), Germany, Japan, Italy, and Canada. The country holding the presidency is responsible for planning and hosting a series of ministerial-level meetings, leading up to a mid-year summit 111

attended by the heads of government. The president of the European Commission participates as an equal in all summit events. The ministerial meetings bring together ministers responsible for various portfolios to discuss issues of mutual or global concern. The range of topics include health, law enforcement, labor, economic and social development, energy, environment, foreign affairs, justice and interior, terrorism, and trade. There are also a separate set of meetings known as the G8+5, created during the 2005 Gleneagles, Scotland summit, that is attended by finance and energy ministers from all eight member countries in addition to the five «outreach countries» which are also known as the Group of Five – Brazil, People's Republic of China, India, Mexico, and South Africa. In June 2005, justice ministers and interior ministers from the G8 countries agreed to launch an international database on pedophiles. The G8 officials also agreed to pool data on terrorism, subject to restrictions by privacy and security laws in individual countries. Global energy At the Heiligendamm Summit in 2007, the G8 acknowledged a proposal from the EU for a worldwide initiative on efficient energy use. They agreed to explore, along with the International Energy Agency, the most effective means to promote energy efficiency internationally. A year later, on 8 June 2008, the G8 along with China, India, South Korea and the European Communityestablished the International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation, at the Energy Ministerial meeting hosted by Japan holding 2008 G8 Presidency, in Aomori. G8 Finance Ministers, whilst in preparation for the 34th Summit of the G8 Heads of State and Government in Toyako, Hokkaido, met on the 13 and 14 June 2008, in Osaka, Japan. They agreed to the «G8 Action Plan for Climate Change to Enhance the Engagement of Private and Public Financial Institutions». In closing, Ministers supported the launch of new Climate Investment Funds (CIFs) by the World Bank, which will help existing efforts until a new framework under the UNFCCC is implemented after 2012. The UNFCCC is not on track to meeting any of its stated goals. 112

Annual summit The annual G8 leaders summit is attended by the heads of government. The member country holding the G8 presidency is responsible for organizing and hosting the year's summit. The serial annual summits can be parsed chronologically in arguably distinct ways, including as the sequence of host countries for the summits has recurred over time, series, etc. Member facts – 7 of the 7 top-ranked advanced economies with the largest GDP and with the highest national wealth (United States, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Canada) last century also known as G7 – 7 of the 15 top-ranked countries with the highest net wealth per capita (United States, France, Japan, United Kingdom, Italy, Canada, Germany) – 8 of 12 top-ranked leading export countries. – 6 of 10 top-ranked countries with the largest gold reserves (United States, Germany, Italy, France, Russia, Japan). – 8 of 10 top-ranked economies (by nominal GDP), according to latest (2016 data) International Monetary Fund's statistics. – 5 countries with a nominal GDP per capita above US$40,000 (United States, Canada, Germany, France, United Kingdom). – 5 countries with a sovereign wealth fund, administered by either a national or a state/provincial government (Russia, United States, France, Canada, Italy). – 8 of 30 top-ranked nations with large amounts of foreignexchange reserves in their central banks. – 4 out of 9 countries having nuclear weapons (France, Russia, UK, United States), plus 2 countries that have nuclear weapon sharing programs (Germany, Italy). – 7 of the 9 largest nuclear energy producers (United States, France, Japan, Russia, Germany, Canada, UK), although Germany announced in 2011 that it will close all of its nuclear power plants by 2022. Following the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami, Japan shut down all of its nuclear reactors. 113

– – –

However, Japan restarted several nuclear reactors, with the refueling of other reactors underway. 8 of the 10 top donors to the UN budget for the 2016 annual fiscal year. 4 countries with a HDI index for 2013 of 0.9 and higher (United States, Germany, Japan, Canada). 2 countries with the highest credit rating from Standard & Poor's, Fitch, and Moody's at the same time (Canada and Germany). 2 countries that retain the death penalty in law and practice (Japan and the United States; Russia retains the death penalty, but the regulations of the Council of Europe prohibit it from carrying out any executions). 2 countries consist of islands and have left-hand traffic (Japan and the United Kingdom; in the US Virgin Islands, they have left-hand traffic to remain compatible with the British Virgin Islands, but the rest of the United States has right-hand traffic). In the G8 states, 6 languages have official status: English in 3 countries (Canada, United Kingdom and US), French in 2 countries (Canada and France), German, Italian, Japanese, and Russian in 1 country each (Germany, Italy, Japan, and Russia).

Influence of member nations The G7/G8 is considered an informal forum of countries deserving the status of Great Powers. Together the eight countries making up the G8 represent about 14% of the world population, but they represent about 60% of the World wealth and 60% of the gross world product as measured by gross domestic product, all eight nations being within the top 12 countries according to the CIA World Factbook, the majority of global militarypower (seven are in the top 8 nations for military expenditure), and almost all of the world's active nuclear weapons. In 2007, the combined G8 military spending was US$850 billion. This is 72% of the world's total military expenditures. Four of the G8 members, the United Kingdom, United States, France and Russia, together account for 96-99% of the world's nuclear weapons. 114

2.3. The G-20 The G20 (or Group of Twenty) is an international forum for the governments and central bank governors from 20 major economies. Currently, these are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, and the European Union. Founded in 1999, the G20 aims to discuss policy issues pertaining to the promotion of international financial stability. It seeks to address issues that go beyond the responsibilities of any one organization. The G20 heads of government or heads of state have periodically conferred at summits since their initial meeting in 2008, and the group also hosts separate meetings of finance ministers and foreign ministers due to the expansion of its agenda in recent years. Membership of the G20 consists of 19 individual countries plus the European Union (EU). The EU is represented by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank. Collectively, the G20 economies account for around 85% of the gross world product (GWP), 80% of world trade (or, if excluding EU intra-trade, 75%), two-thirds of the world population, and approximately half of the world land area. With the G20 growing in stature after its inaugural leaders' summit in 2008, its leaders announced on 25 September 2009 that the group would replace the G8 as the main economic council of wealthy nations. Since its inception, the G20's membership policies have been criticized by numerous intellectuals, and its summits have been a focus for major protests by left-wing groups and anarchists. The heads of the G20 nations met semi-annually at G20 summits between 2009 and 2010. Since the November 2011 Cannes summit, all G20 summits have been held annually. History Founding. The G20 is the latest in a series of post–World War II initiatives aimed at international coordination of economic policy, which include institutions such as the «Bretton Woodstwins», the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and what is now the World Trade Organization. 115

The G20 was foreshadowed at the Cologne Summit of the G7 in June 1999, and formally established at the G7 Finance Ministers' meeting on 26 September 1999 with an inaugural meeting on 15-16 December 1999 in Berlin. Canadian finance minister Paul Martin was chosen as the first chairman and German finance minister Hans Eichelhosted the inaugural meeting. A 2004 report by Colin I. Bradford and Johannes F. Linn of the Brookings Institution asserted the group was founded primarily at the initiative of Eichel, the concurrent chair of the G7. However, Bradford later described then-Finance Minister of Canada (and future Prime Minister of Canada) Paul Martin as «the crucial architect of the formation of the G-20 at finance minister level», and as the one who later «proposed that the G-20 countries move to leaders level summits». Canadian academic and journalistic sources have also identified the G20 a project initiated by Martin and then-US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, as has Dawn Nakagawa of the Berggruen Institute. All acknowledge, however, that Germany and the United States played a key role in bringing their vision into reality. Martin and Summers conceived of the G20 in response to the series of massive debt crises that had spread across emerging markets in the late 1990s, beginning in Mexico and followed by the 1997 Asian financial crisis, an economic collapse in Russia, and eventually impacting the United States, most prominently in the form of the collapse of the prominent hedge fund Long-Term Capital Management in the autumn of 1998. It illustrated to them that in a rapidly globalizing world, the G7, G8, and the Bretton Woods system would be unable to provide financial stability, and they conceived of a new, broader permanent group of major world economies that would give a voice and new responsibilities in providing it. The G20 membership was decided by Eichel's deputy Caio KochWeser and Summers' deputy Timothy Geithner. According to the political economist Robert Wade: Geithner and Koch-Weser went down the list of countries saying, Canada in, Portugal out, South Africa in, Nigeria and Egypt out, and so on; they sent their list to the other G7 finance ministries; and the invitations to the first meeting went out. 116

Early topics The G20's primary focus has been governance of the global economy. Summit themes have varied from year to year. The theme of the 2006 G20 ministerial meeting was «Building and Sustaining Prosperity». The issues discussed included domestic reforms to achieve «sustained growth», global energy and resource commodity markets, reform of the World Bank and IMF, and the impact of demographic changes due to an aging world population. In 2007, South Africa hosted the secretariat with Trevor A. Manuel, South African Minister of Finance as chairperson of the G20. In 2008, Guido Mantega, Brazil's Minister of Finance, was the G20 chairperson and proposed dialogue on competition in financial markets, clean energy, economic development and fiscal elements of growth and development. On 11 October 2008 after a meeting of G7 finance ministers, US President George W. Bush stated that the next meeting of the G20 would be important in finding solutions to the burgeoning economic crisis of 2008. Summits The G20 Summit of the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, who prepare the leaders' summit and implement their decisions, was created as a response both to the financial crisis of 2007-2010 and to a growing recognition that key emerging countries were not adequately included in the core of global economic discussion and governance. Additionally, the G20 Summits of heads of state or government were held. After the 2008 debut summit in Washington, DC, G20 leaders met twice a year: in London and Pittsburgh in 2009, and in Toronto and Seoul in 2010. Since 2011, when France chaired and hosted the G20, the summits have been held only once a year. The 2016 summit was held in China, and 2017 summit was held in Hamburg, Germany. G20 Summit Information wave statistics A number of other ministerial-level G20 meetings have been held since 2010. Agriculture ministerial meetings were conducted in 2011 and 2012; meetings of foreign ministers were held in 2012 and 2013; 117

trade ministers met in 2012 and 2014, and employment ministerial meetings have taken place annually since 2010. In March 2014, the Australian foreign minister Julie Bishop, as host of the 2014 G20 summit in Brisbane, proposed to ban Russia from the summit over its role in the 2014 Crimean crisis. The BRICS foreign ministers subsequently reminded Bishop that «the custodianship of the G20 belongs to all Member States equally and no one Member State can unilaterally determine its nature and character». In July 2017, Germany hosted the 2017 Summit. The 2018 Summit will be in Argentina, 2019 in Japan, and 2020 in Saudi Arabia. Organization The G20 operates without a permanent secretariat or staff. The group's chair rotates annually among the members and is selected from a different regional grouping of countries. The chair is part of a revolving three-member management group of past, present and future chairs, referred to as the «Troika». The incumbent chair establishes a temporary secretariat for the duration of its term, which coordinates the group's work and organizes its meetings. The role of the Troika is to ensure continuity in the G20's work and management across host years. The current chair of the G20 is Germany, which is hosting the 2017 Summit in Hamburg. Proposed permanent secretariat In 2010, President of France Nicolas Sarkozy proposed the establishment of a permanent G20 secretariat, similar to the United Nations. Seoul and Paris were suggested as possible locations for its headquarters. Brazil and China supported the establishment of a secretariat, while Italy and Japan expressed opposition to the proposal. South Korea proposed a «cyber secretariat» as an alternative. It has been argued that the G20 has been using the OECD as a secretariat. Role of Asian countries A 2011 report released by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) predicted that large Asian economies such as China and India would play a more important role in global economic governance in the 118

future. The report claimed that the rise of emerging market economies heralded a new world order, in which the G20 would become the global economic steering committee. The ADB furthermore noted that Asian countries had led the global recovery following the late-2000s recession. It predicted that the region would have a greater presence on the global stage, shaping the G20's agenda for balanced and sustainable growth through strengthening intraregional trade and stimulating domestic demand. G-20 Agenda Financial focus The initial G20 agenda, as conceived by US, Canadian and German policy makers, was very much focused on the sustainability of sovereign debt and global financial stability, in an inclusive format that would bring in the largest developing economies as equal partners. During a summit in November 2008, the leaders of the group pledged to contribute $1.1 trillion to international finance organizations, including the World Bank and IMF, mainly for reestablishing the global financial system. Since inception, the recurring themes covered by G20 summit participants have related in priority to global economic growth, international trade and financial marketregulation. Inclusive growth After the adoption of the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015, more «issues of global significance« were added to the G20 agenda: migration, digitisation, employment, healthcare, the economic empowerment of women and development aid. Literature 1. Satpathy (2005). Environment Management. Excel Books India. p. 30. ISBN 978-81-7446-458-3. 2. Malgosia Fitzmaurice; David M. Ong; Panos Merkouris (2010). Research Handbook on International Environmental Law. Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 567–. ISBN 978-1-84980-726-5. 3. Presiding Countries of the Group of 77 in New York». The Group of 77 at the United Nations. 119

4. Hajnal, Peter I. (1999). The G8 System and the G20: Evolution, Role and Documentation, p. 30. 5. «Halifax G7 Summit 1995». 2000-05-28. Retrieved 201006-27. 6. Jump up↑ Kirton, John. «A Summit of Substantial Success: The Performance of the 2008 G8»; page 88 and 89 G8 Information Centre – University of Toronto July 17, 2008. 7. G8: The Most Exclusive Club in the World, Thomas S. Axworthy, The Canadian Encyclopedia, Historica Foundation of Canada, Toronto, Undated. Accessed 07-23-2015. 8. Bosco, David (19 April 2012). «Who would replace Argentina on the G20?». Foreign Policy. Retrieved 24 April 2012. 9. «What is the G20?». University of Toronto. 2010. Retrieved 12 November 2014. 10. Bradford, Colin I. (23 June 2010). «Web Chat: Previewing the G-20 Summit». Brookings Institution. Retrieved 7 July 2017.



3.1. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), also called the North Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance between several North American and European states based on the North Atlantic Treaty that was signed on 4 April 1949. NATO constitutes a system of collective defence whereby its member states agree to mutual defence in response to an attack by any external party. Three NATO members (the United States, France and the United Kingdom) are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council with the power to veto and are officially nuclearweapon states. NATO Headquarters are located in Haren, Brussels, Belgium, while the headquarters of Allied Command Operations is near Mons, Belgium. NATO is an alliance that consists of 29 independent member countries across North America and Europe. An additional 21 countries participate in NATO's Partnership for Peace program, with 15 other countries involved in institutionalized dialogue programs. The combined military spending of all NATO members constitutes over 70% of the global total. Members' defense spending is supposed to amount to at least 2% of GDP. NATO was little more than a political association until the Korean War galvanized the organization's member states, and an integrated military structure was built up under the direction of two US Supreme Commanders. The course of the Cold War led to a rivalry with nations of the Warsaw Pact, that formed in 1955. Doubts over the strength of the relationship between the European states and the United States ebbed and flowed, along with doubts over the credibility of the NATO defense against a prospective Soviet invasion – doubts that led to the 121

development of the independent French nuclear deterrent and the withdrawal of France from NATO's military structure in 1966 for 30 years. After the fall of the Berlin Wall in Germany in 1989, the organization became involved in the breakup of Yugoslavia, and conducted its first military interventions in Bosnia from 1992 to 1995 and later Yugoslavia in 1999. Politically, the organization sought better relations with former Warsaw Pact countries, several of which joined the alliance in 1999 and 2004. Article 5 of the North Atlantic treaty, requiring member states to come to the aid of any member state subject to an armed attack, was invoked for the first and only time after the September 11 attacks, after which troops were deployed to Afghanistan under the NATOled ISAF. The organization has operated a range of additional roles since then, including sending trainers to Iraq, assisting in counterpiracy operations and in 2011 enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya in accordance with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973. The less potent Article 4, which merely invokes consultation among NATO members, has been invoked five times: by Turkey in 2003 over the Iraq War; twice in 2012 by Turkey over the Syrian Civil War, after the downing of an unarmed Turkish F-4 reconnaissance jet, and after a mortar was fired at Turkey from Syria; in 2014 by Poland, following the Russian intervention in Crimea; and again by Turkey in 2015 after threats by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant to its territorial integrity. Since its founding, the admission of new member states has brought the alliance from the original 12 countries to 29. The most recent member state to be added to NATO is Montenegro on 5 June 2017. NATO currently recognizes Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Macedonia as aspiring members. History The Treaty of Brussels 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. It was the precursor to NATO. The Soviet threat became immediate with the Berlin Blockade in 1948, leading to the creation of the Western European Union's Defence Organization in 122

September 1948. However, the parties were too weak militarily to counter the military power of the USSR. In addition the 1948 Czechoslovak coup d'état by the Communists had overthrown a democratic government and British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevinreiterated that the best way to prevent another Czechoslovakia was to evolve a joint Western military strategy. He got a receptive hearing in the United States, especially considering American anxiety over Italy (and the Italian Communist Party). In 1948, European leaders met with U.S. defense, 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 Truman in Washington, D.C. on 4 April 1949. It included the five Treaty of Brussels states plus the United States, Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland. The first NATO Secretary General, Lord Ismay, stated in 1949 that the organization's goal was «to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down». Popular support for the Treaty was not unanimous, and some Icelanders participated in a pro-neutrality, antimembership riot in March 1949. The creation of NATO can be seen as the primary institutional consequence of a school of thought called Atlanticism which stressed the importance of trans-Atlantic cooperation. The members agreed that an armed attack against any one of them in Europe or North America would be considered an attack against them all. Consequently, they agreed that, if an armed attack occurred, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective selfdefence, 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 treaty does not require members to respond with military action against an aggressor. Although obliged to respond, they maintain the freedom to choose the method by which they do so. This differs from Article IV of the Treaty of Brussels, which clearly states that the response will be military in nature. It is nonetheless assumed that NATO members will aid the attacked member militarily. The treaty was later clarified to 123

include both the member's territory and their «vessels, forces or aircraft» above the Tropic of Cancer, including some overseas departments of France. The creation of NATO brought about some standardization of allied military terminology, procedures, and technology, which in many cases meant European countries adopting US practices. The roughly 1300 Standardization Agreements (STANAG) codified many of the common practices that NATO has achieved. Hence, the 7.62×51mm NATO rifle cartridge was introduced in the 1950s as a standard firearm cartridge among many NATO countries. Fabrique Nationale de Herstal's FAL, which used the 7.62mm NATO cartridge, was adopted by 75 countries, including many outside of NATO. Also, aircraft marshalling signals were standardized, so that any NATO aircraft could land at any NATO base. Other standards such as the NATO phonetic alphabet have made their way beyond NATO into civilian use. Cold War The outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950 was crucial for NATO as it raised the apparent threat of all Communist countries working together, and forced the alliance to develop concrete military plans. Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) was formed to direct forces in Europe, and began work under Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower in January 1951. In September 1950, the NATO Military Committee called for an ambitious buildup of conventional forces to meet the Soviets, subsequently reaffirming this position at the February 1952 meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Lisbon. The Lisbon conference, seeking to provide the forces necessary for NATO's Long-Term Defence Plan, called for an expansion to ninety-six divisions. However, this requirement was dropped the following year to roughly thirty-five divisions with heavier use to be made of nuclear weapons. At this time, NATO could call on about fifteen ready divisions in Central Europe, and another ten in Italy and Scandinavia. Also at Lisbon, the post of Secretary General of NATO as the organization's chief civilian was created, and Lord Ismay was eventually appointed to the post. 124

In September 1952, the first major NATO maritime exercises began; Exercise Mainbrace brought together 200 ships and over 50,000 personnel to practice the defence of Denmark and Norway. Other major exercises that followed included Exercise Grand Slam and Exercise Longstep, naval and amphibious exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, Italic Weld, a combined air-naval-ground exercise in northern Italy, Grand Repulse, involving the British Army on the Rhine (BAOR), the Netherlands Corps and Allied Air Forces Central Europe (AAFCE), Monte Carlo, a simulated atomic airground exercise involving the Central Army Group, and Weldfast, a combined amphibious landing exercise in the Mediterranean Sea involving American, British, Greek, Italian and Turkish naval forces. Greece and Turkey also joined the alliance in 1952, forcing a series of controversial negotiations, in which the United States and Britain were the primary disputants, over how to bring the two countries into the military command structure. While this overt military preparation was going on, covert stay-behind arrangements initially made by the Western European Union to continue resistance after a successful Soviet invasion, including Operation Gladio, were transferred to NATO control. Ultimately, unofficial bonds began to grow between NATO's armed forces, such as the NATO Tiger Association and competitions such as the Canadian Army Trophy for tank gunnery. In 1954, the Soviet Union suggested that it should join NATO to preserve peace in Europe. The NATO countries, fearing that the Soviet Union's motive was to weaken the alliance, ultimately rejected this proposal. On 17 December 1954, the North Atlantic Council approved MC 48, a key document in the evolution of NATO nuclear thought. MC 48 emphasized that NATO would have to use atomic weapons from the outset of a war with the Soviet Union whether or not the Soviets chose to use them first. This gave SACEUR the same prerogatives for automatic use of nuclear weapons as existed for the commander-inchief of the US Strategic Air Command. The incorporation of West Germany into the organization on 9 May 1955 was described as «a decisive turning point in the history of our continent» by Halvard Lange, Foreign Affairs Minister of 125

Norway at the time. A major reason for Germany's entry into the alliance was that without German manpower, it would have been impossible to field enough conventional forces to resist a Soviet invasion. One of its immediate results was 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. Three major exercises were held concurrently in the northern autumn of 1957. Operation Counter Punch, Operation Strikeback, and Operation Deep Water were the most ambitious military undertaking for the alliance to date, involving more than 250,000 men, 300 ships, and 1,500 aircraft operating from Norway to Turkey. French withdrawal NATO's unity was breached early in its history with a crisis occurring during Charles de Gaulle's presidency of France. De Gaulle protested against the USA's strong role in the organization and what he perceived as a special relationship between it and the United Kingdom. In a memorandum sent to President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Prime Minister Harold Macmillan on 17 September 1958, he argued for the creation of a tripartite directorate that would put France on an equal footing with the US and the UK. Considering the response to be unsatisfactory, de Gaulle began constructing an independent defence force for his country. He wanted to give France, in the event of an East German incursion into West Germany, the option of coming to a separate peace with the Eastern bloc instead of being drawn into a larger NATO – Warsaw Pact war. In February 1959, France withdrew its Mediterranean Fleet from NATO command, and later banned the stationing of foreign nuclear weapons on French soil. This caused the United States to transfer two hundred military aircraft out of France and return control of the air force bases that it had operated in France since 1950 to the French by 1967. Though France showed solidarity with the rest of NATO during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, de Gaulle continued his pursuit of an independent defence by removing France's Atlantic and Channel 126

fleets from NATO command. In 1966, all French armed forces were removed from NATO's integrated military command, and all nonFrench NATO troops were asked to leave France. US Secretary of State Dean Rusk was later quoted as asking de Gaulle whether his order included «the bodies of American soldiers in France's cemeteries?» This withdrawal forced the relocation of SHAPE from Rocquencourt, near Paris, to Casteau, north of Mons, Belgium, by 16 October 1967. France remained a member of the alliance, and committed to the defence of Europe from possible Warsaw Pact attack with its own forces stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany throughout the Cold War. A series of secret accords between US and French officials, the Lemnitzer–Ailleret Agreements, detailed how French forces would dovetail back into NATO's command structure should East-West hostilities break out. France announced their return to full participation at the 2009 Strasbourg-Kehl summit. Détente and escalation During most of the Cold War, NATO's watch against the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact did not actually lead to direct military action. On 1 July 1968, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons opened for signature: NATO argued that its nuclear sharingarrangements did not breach the treaty as US forces controlled the weapons until a decision was made to go to war, at which point the treaty would no longer be controlling. Few states knew of the NATO nuclear sharing arrangements at that time, and they were not challenged. In May 1978, NATO countries officially defined two complementary aims of the Alliance, to maintain security and pursue détente. This was supposed to mean matching defences at the level rendered necessary by the Warsaw Pact's offensive capabilities without spurring a further arms race. On 12 December 1979, in light of a build-up of Warsaw Pact nuclear capabilities in Europe, ministers approved 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 Trackpolicy. Similarly, in 1983–84, responding to the 127

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. This action led to peace movement protests throughout Western Europe, and support for the deployment wavered as many doubted whether the push for deployment could be sustained. The membership of the organization at this time remained largely static. In 1974, as a consequence of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, Greece withdrew its forces from NATO's military command structure but, with Turkish cooperation, were readmitted in 1980. The Falklands War between the United Kingdom and Argentina did not result in NATO involvement because article 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty specifies that collective self-defence is only applicable to attacks on member state territories north of the Tropic of Cancer. On 30 May 1982, NATO gained a new member when the newly democratic Spain joined the alliance; Spain's membership was confirmed by referendum in 1986. At the peak of the Cold War, 16 member nations maintained an approximate strength of 5,252,800 active military, including as many as 435,000 forward deployed US forces, under a command structure that reached a peak of 78 headquarters, organized into four echelons. After the Cold War The Revolutions of 1989 and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991 removed the de facto main adversary of NATO and caused a strategic re-evaluation of NATO's purpose, nature, tasks, and their focus on the continent of Europe. 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. At that time, European countries accounted for 34% of NATO's military spending; by 2012, this had fallen to 21%. NATO also began a gradual expansion to include newly autonomous Central and Eastern European nations, and extended its activities into political and humanitarian situations that had not formerly been NATO concerns. 128

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. This had been agreed in the Two Plus Four Treaty earlier in the year. To secure Soviet approval of a united Germany remaining in NATO, it was agreed that foreign troops and nuclear weapons would not be stationed in the east, and there are diverging views on whether negotiators gave commitments regarding further NATO expansion east. Jack Matlock, American ambassador to the Soviet Union during its final years, said that the West gave a «clear commitment» not to expand, and declassified documents indicate that Soviet negotiators were given the impression that NATO membership was off the table for countries such as Czechoslovakia, Hungary, or Poland. HansDietrich Genscher, the West German foreign minister at that time, said in a conversation with Eduard Shevardnadze that «[f]or us, however, one thing is certain: NATO will not expand to the east». In 1996, Gorbachev wrote in his Memoirs, that «during the negotiations on the unification of Germany they gave assurances that NATO would not extend its zone of operation to the east» and repeated this view in an interview in 2008. According to Robert Zoellick, a State Department official involved in the Two Plus Four negotiating process, this appears to be a misperception, and no formal commitment regarding enlargement was made. As part of post-Cold War restructuring, NATO's military structure was cut back and reorganized, with new forces such as the Headquarters Allied Command Europe Rapid Reaction Corps established. The changes brought about by the collapse of the Soviet Union on the military balance in Europe were recognized in the Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty, which was signed in 1999. The policies of French President Nicolas Sarkozy resulted in a major reform of France's military position, culminating with the return to full membership on 4 April 2009, which also included France rejoining the NATO Military Command Structure, while maintaining an independent nuclear deterrent.


Enlargement and reform Between 1994 and 1997, wider forums for regional cooperation between NATO and its neighbors were set up, like the Partnership for Peace, the Mediterranean Dialogue initiative and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. In 1998, the NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council was established. 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, shortly before the 2004 Istanbul summit. At that time the decision was criticised in the US by many military, political and academic leaders as a «a policy error of historic proportions». According to George F. Kennan, an American diplomat and an advocate of the containment policy, this decision «may be expected to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking». New NATO structures were also formed while old ones were abolished. In 1997, NATO reached agreement on a significant downsizing of its command structure from 65 headquarters to just 20. The NATO Response Force (NRF) was launched at the 2002 Prague summit on 21 November, the first summit in a former Comecon country. On 19 June 2003, a further restructuring of the NATO military commands began as the Headquarters of the Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic were abolished and a new command, Allied Command Transformation(ACT), was established in Norfolk, United States, and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) became the Headquarters of Allied Command Operations (ACO). ACT is responsible for driving transformation (future capabilities) in NATO, whilst ACO is responsible for current operations. In March 2004, NATO's Baltic Air Policing began, which supported the sovereignty of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia by providing jet fighters to react to any unwanted aerial intrusions. Eight multinational jet fighters are based in Lithuania, the 130

number of which was increased from four in 2014. Also at the 2004 Istanbul summit, NATO launched the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative with four Persian Gulf nations. The 2006 Riga summit was held in Riga, Latvia, and highlighted the issue of energy security. It was the first NATO summit to be held in a country that had been part of the Soviet Union. 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. Ukraine and Georgia were also told that they could eventually become members. The issue of Georgian and Ukrainian membership in NATO prompted harsh criticism from Russia, as did NATO plans for a missile defence system. Studies for this system began in 2002, with negotiations centered on anti-ballistic missiles being stationed in Poland and the Czech Republic. Though NATO leaders gave assurances that the system was not targeting Russia, both presidents Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev criticized it as a threat. In 2009, US President Barack Obama proposed using the shipbased Aegis Combat System, though this plan still includes stations being built in Turkey, Spain, Portugal, Romania, and Poland. NATO will also maintain the «status quo» in its nuclear deterrent in Europe by upgrading the targeting capabilities of the «tactical» B61 nuclear bombs stationed there and deploying them on the stealthier Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II. Following the 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia, NATO committed to forming a new «spearhead» force of 5,000 troops at bases in Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Romania, and Bulgaria. At the 2014 Wales summit, the leaders of NATO's member states reaffirmed their pledge to spend the equivalent of at least 2% of their gross domestic products on defense. In 2015, five of its 28 members met that goal. On 15 June 2016, NATO officially recognized cyberwarfare as an operational domain of war, just like land, sea and aerial warfare. This means that any cyber attack on NATO members can trigger Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. Montenegro became the 29th and newest member of NATO on 5 June 2017, amid strong objections from Russia. 131

3.1.1. Military Operations Early operations No military operations were conducted by NATO during the Cold War. Following the end of the Cold War, the first operations, Anchor Guard in 1990 and Ace Guard in 1991, were prompted by the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Airborne early warning aircraft were sent to provide coverage of southeastern Turkey, and later a quick-reaction force was deployed to the area. Bosnia and Herzegovina intervention The Bosnian War began in 1992, as a result of the breakup of Yugoslavia. The deteriorating situation led to United Nations Security Council Resolution 816 on 9 October 1992, ordering a no-fly zone over central Bosnia and Herzegovina, which NATO began enforcing on 12 April 1993 with Operation Deny Flight. From June 1993 until October 1996, Operation Sharp Guard added maritime enforcement of the arms embargo and economic sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. On 28 February 1994, NATO took its first wartime action by shooting down four Bosnian Serb aircraft violating the no-fly zone. On 10 and 11 April 1994, during the Bosnian War, the United Nations Protection Force called in air strikes to protect the Goražde safe area, resulting in the bombing of a Bosnian Serb military command outpost near Goražde by two US F-16 jets acting under NATO direction. This resulted in the taking of 150 U.N. personnel hostage on 14 April. On 16 April a British Sea Harrier was shot down over Goražde by Serb forces. A two-week NATO bombing campaign, Operation Deliberate Force, began in August 1995 against the Army of the Republika Srpska, after the Srebrenica massacre. NATO air strikes that year helped bring the Yugoslav wars to an end, resulting in the Dayton Agreement in November 1995. As part of this agreement, NATO deployed a UN-mandated peacekeeping force, under Operation Joint Endeavor, named IFOR. Almost 60,000 NATO troops were joined by forces from non-NATO nations in this peacekeeping mission. This transitioned into the smaller SFOR, which started with 32,000 troops initially and ran from December 1996 until 132

December 2004, when operations were then passed onto European Union Force Althea. Following the lead of its member nations, NATO began to award a service medal, the NATO Medal, for these operations. Kosovo intervention In an effort to stop Slobodan Milošević's Serbian-led crackdown on KLA separatists and Albanian civilians in Kosovo, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1199 on 23 September 1998 to demand a ceasefire. Negotiations under US Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke broke down on 23 March 1999, and he handed the matter to NATO, which started a 78-day bombing campaign on 24 March 1999. Operation Allied Force targeted the military capabilities of what was then the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. During the crisis, NATO also deployed one of its international reaction forces, the ACE Mobile Force (Land), to Albania as the Albania Force (AFOR), to deliver humanitarian aid to refugees from Kosovo. Though the campaign was criticized for high civilian casualties, including bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, Milošević finally accepted the terms of an international peace plan on 3 June 1999, ending the Kosovo War. On 11 June, Milošević further accepted UN resolution 1244, under the mandate of which NATO then helped establish the KFOR peacekeeping force. Nearly one million refugees had fled Kosovo, and part of KFOR's mandate was to protect the humanitarian missions, in addition to deterring violence. In August – September 2001, the alliance also mounted Operation Essential Harvest, a mission disarming ethnic Albanian militias in the Republic of Macedonia. As of 1 December 2013, 4,882 KFOR soldiers, representing 31 countries, continue to operate in the area. The US, the UK, and most other NATO countries opposed efforts to require the U.N. Security Council to approve NATO military strikes, such as the action against Serbia in 1999, while France and some others claimed that the alliance needed UN approval. The US/UK side claimed that this would undermine the authority of the alliance, and they noted that Russia and China would have exercised their Security Council vetoes to block the strike on Yugoslavia, and 133

could do the same in future conflicts where NATO intervention was required, thus nullifying the entire potency and purpose of the organization. Recognizing the post-Cold War military environment, NATO adopted the Alliance Strategic Concept during its Washington summit in April 1999 that emphasized conflict prevention and crisis management. War in Afghanistan The September 11 attacks in the United States caused NATO to invoke Article 5 of the NATO Charter for the first time in the organization's history. The Article says that an attack on any member shall be considered to be an attack on all. The invocation was confirmed on 4 October 2001 when NATO determined that the attacks were indeed eligible under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty. The eight official actions taken by NATO in response to the attacks included Operation Eagle Assist and Operation Active Endeavour, a naval operation in the Mediterranean Sea which is designed to prevent the movement of terrorists or weapons of mass destruction, as well as enhancing the security of shipping in general which began on 4 October 2001. The alliance showed unity: On 16 April 2003, NATO agreed to take command of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), which includes troops from 42 countries. The decision came at the request of Germany and the Netherlands, the two nations leading ISAF at the time of the agreement, and all nineteen NATO ambassadors approved it unanimously. The handover of control to NATO took place on 11 August, and marked the first time in NATO's history that it took charge of a mission outside the north Atlantic area. ISAF was initially charged with securing Kabul and surrounding areas from the Taliban, al Qaeda and factional warlords, so as to allow for the establishment of the Afghan Transitional Administration headed by Hamid Karzai. In October 2003, the UN Security Council authorized the expansion of the ISAF mission throughout Afghanistan, and ISAF subsequently expanded the mission in four main stages over the whole of the country. On 31 July 2006, the ISAF additionally took over military operations in the south of Afghanistan from a US-led anti-terrorism 134

coalition. Due to the intensity of the fighting in the south, in 2011 France allowed a squadron of Mirage 2000 fighter/attack aircraft to be moved into the area, to Kandahar, in order to reinforce the alliance's efforts. During its 2012 Chicago Summit, NATO endorsed a plan to end the Afghanistan war and to remove the NATO-led ISAF Forces by the end of December 2014. ISAF was disestablished in December 2014 and replaced by the follow-on training Resolute Support Mission Iraq training mission In August 2004, during the Iraq War, NATO formed the NATO Training Mission – Iraq, a training mission to assist the Iraqi security forces in conjunction with the US led MNF-I. The NATO Training Mission-Iraq (NTM-I) was established at the request of the Iraqi Interim Government under the provisions of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1546. The aim of NTM-I was to assist in the development of Iraqi security forces training structures and institutions so that Iraq can build an effective and sustainable capability that addresses the needs of the nation. NTM-I was not a combat mission but is a distinct mission, under the political control of NATO's North Atlantic Council. Its operational emphasis was on training and mentoring. The activities of the mission were coordinated with Iraqi authorities and the US-led Deputy Commanding General Advising and Training, who was also dual-hatted as the Commander of NTM-I. The mission officially concluded on 17 December 2011. Gulf of Aden anti-piracy Beginning on 17 August 2009, NATO deployed warships in an operation to protect maritime traffic in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean from Somali pirates, and help strengthen the navies and coast guards of regional states. The operation was approved by the North Atlantic Council and involves warships primarily from the United States though vessels from many other nations are also included. Operation Ocean Shield focuses on protecting the ships of Operation Allied Provider which are distributing aid as part of the World Food Programme mission in Somalia. Russia, China and South Korea have sent warships to participate in the activities as well. The operation seeks to dissuade and interrupt pirate attacks, 135

protect vessels, and abetting to increase the general level of security in the region. Libya intervention During the Libyan Civil War, violence between protestors and the Libyan government under Colonel Muammar Gaddafi escalated, and on 17 March 2011 led to the passage of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, which called for a ceasefire, and authorized military action to protect civilians. A coalition that included several NATO members began enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya shortly afterwards. On 20 March 2011, NATO states agreed on enforcing an arms embargo against Libya with Operation Unified Protector using ships from NATO Standing Maritime Group 1 and Standing Mine Countermeasures Group 1, and additional ships and submarines from NATO members. They would «monitor, report and, if needed, interdict vessels suspected of carrying illegal arms or mercenaries». On 24 March, NATO agreed to take control of the no-fly zone from the initial coalition, while command of targeting ground units remained with the coalition's forces. NATO began officially enforcing the UN resolution on 27 March 2011 with assistance from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. By June, reports of divisions within the alliance surfaced as only eight of the 28 member nations were participating in combat operations, resulting in a confrontation between US Defense Secretary Robert Gates and countries such as Poland, Spain, the Netherlands, Turkey, and Germany to contribute more, the latter believing the organization has overstepped its mandate in the conflict. In his final policy speech in Brussels on 10 June, Gates further criticized allied countries in suggesting their actions could cause the demise of NATO. The German foreign ministry pointed to «a considerable [German] contribution to NATO and NATO-led operations» and to the fact that this engagement was highly valued by President Obama. While the mission was extended into September, Norway that day announced it would begin scaling down contributions and complete withdrawal by 1 August. Earlier that week it was reported Danish air fighters were running out of bombs. The following week, the head of the Royal Navy said the country's operations in the conflict were not 136

sustainable. By the end of the mission in October 2011, after the death of Colonel Gaddafi, NATO planes had flown about 9,500 strike sorties against pro-Gaddafi targets. A report from the organization Human Rights Watch in May 2012 identified at least 72 civilians killed in the campaign. Following a coup d'état attempt in October 2013, Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zeidan requested technical advice and trainers from NATO to assist with ongoing security issues. Members NATO has twenty-nine members, mainly in Europe and North America. Some of these countries also have territory on multiple continents, which can be covered only as far south as the Tropic of Cancer in the Atlantic Ocean, which defines NATO's «area of responsibility» under Article 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty. During the original treaty negotiations, the United States insisted that colonies such as the Belgian Congo be excluded from the treaty. French Algeria was however covered until their independence on 3 July 1962. Twelve of these twenty-nine are original members who joined in 1949, while the other seventeen joined in one of eight enlargement rounds. Few members spend more than two percent of their gross domestic product on defence, with the United States accounting for three quarters of NATO defense spending. From the mid-1960s to the mid-1990s, France pursued a military strategy of independence from NATO under a policy dubbed «GaulloMitterrandism». Nicolas Sarkozy negotiated the return of France to the integrated military command and the Defence Planning Committee in 2009, the latter being disbanded the following year. France remains the only NATO member outside the Nuclear Planning Group and unlike the United States and the United Kingdom, will not commit its nuclear-armed submarines to the alliance. Enlargement New membership in the alliance has been largely from Central and Eastern Europe, including former members of the Warsaw Pact. Accession to the alliance is governed with individual Membership Action Plans, and requires approval by each current member. NATO currently has two candidate countries that are in the process of joining 137

the alliance: Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republic of Macedonia. In NATO official statements, the Republic of Macedonia is always referred to as the «former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia», with a footnote stating that «Turkey recognizes the Republic of Macedonia under its constitutional name». Though Macedonia completed its requirements for membership at the same time as Croatia and Albania, NATO's most recent members, its accession was blocked by Greece pending a resolution of the Macedonia naming dispute. In order to support each other in the process, new and potential members in the region formed the Adriatic Charter in 2003. Georgia was also named as an aspiring member, and was promised «future membership» during the 2008 summit in Bucharest, though in 2014, US President Barack Obama said the country was not «currently on a path» to membership. Russia continues to oppose further expansion, seeing it as inconsistent with understandings between Soviet leader M. Gorbachev and European and American negotiators that allowed for a peaceful German reunification. NATO's expansion efforts are often seen by Moscow leaders as a continuation of a Cold War attempt to surround and isolate Russia, though they have also been criticised in the West. Ukraine's relationship with NATO and Europe has been politically divisive, and contributed to «Euromaidan« protests that saw the ousting of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014. In March 2014, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk reiterated the government's stance that Ukraine is not seeking NATO membership. Ukraine's president subsequently signed a bill dropping his nation's nonaligned status in order to pursue NATO membership, but signaled that it would hold a referendum before seeking to join. Ukraine is one of eight countries in Eastern Europe with an Individual Partnership Action Plan. IPAPs began in 2002, and are open to countries that have the political will and ability to deepen their relationship with NATO. Partnerships The Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme was established in 1994 and is based on individual bilateral relations between each partner country and NATO: each country may choose the extent of its participation. Members include all current and former members of 138

the Commonwealth of Independent States. The Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) was first established on 29 May 1997, and is a forum for regular coordination, consultation and dialogue between all fifty participants. The PfP programme is considered the operational wing of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership. Other third countries also have been contacted for participation in some activities of the PfP framework such as Afghanistan. The European Union (EU) signed a comprehensive package of arrangements with NATO under the Berlin Plus agreement on 16 December 2002. With this agreement, the EU was given the possibility to use NATO assets in case it wanted to act independently in an international crisis, on the condition that NATO itself did not want to act – the so-called «right of first refusal». For example, Article 42(7) of the 1982 Treaty of Lisbon specifies that «If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power». The treaty applies globally to specified territories whereas NATO is restricted under its Article 6 to operations north of the Tropic of Cancer. It provides a «double framework» for the EU countries that are also linked with the PfP programme. Additionally, NATO cooperates and discusses its activities with numerous other non-NATO members. The Mediterranean Dialogue was established in 1994 to coordinate in a similar way with Israel and countries in North Africa. The Istanbul Cooperation Initiative was announced in 2004 as a dialog forum for the Middle East along the same lines as the Mediterranean Dialogue. The four participants are also linked through the Gulf Cooperation Council. Political dialogue with Japan began in 1990, and since then, the Alliance has gradually increased its contact with countries that do not form part of any of these cooperation initiatives. In 1998, NATO established a set of general guidelines that do not allow for a formal institutionalisation of relations, but reflect the Allies' desire to increase cooperation. Following extensive debate, the term «Contact Countries» was agreed by the Allies in 2000. By 2012, the Alliance had broadened this group, which meets to discuss issues such as counter-piracy and technology exchange, under the names «partners across the globe» or «global partners». Australia and New Zealand, 139

both contact countries, are also members of the AUSCANNZUKUS strategic alliance, and similar regional or bilateral agreements between contact countries and NATO members also aid cooperation. Colombia is the NATO’s latest partner and Colombia has access to the full range of cooperative activities NATO offers to partners; Colombia became the first and only Latin American country to cooperate with NATO. Structures The main headquarters of NATO is located on Boulevard Léopold III/Leopold III-laan, B-1110 Brussels, which is in Haren, part of the City of Brussels municipality. A new €750 million headquarters building began construction in 2010, was completed in summer 2016, and was dedicated on 25 May 2017. The 250,000 square metres (2,700,000 sq ft) complex was designed by Jo Palma and home to a staff of 3800. Problems in the original building stemmed from its hurried construction in 1967, when NATO was forced to move its headquarters from Porte Dauphine in Paris, France following the French withdrawal. The staff at the Headquarters is composed of national delegations of member countries and includes civilian and military liaison offices and officers or diplomatic missions and diplomats of partner countries, as well as the International Staff and International Military Staff filled from serving members of the armed forces of member states. Nongovernmental citizens' groups have also grown up in support of NATO, broadly under the banner of the Atlantic Council/Atlantic Treaty Association movement. While the cost of the new headquarters structure was not mentioned on the NATO website's «NATO’s new headquarters» page dated May 23, 2017, Daniel Halper, citing the NATO website's February 2017 «New NATO HQ» page, reported in the May 25, 2017 issue of The Washington Free Beacon that the cost was $1.23 billion. NATO Council Like any alliance, NATO is ultimately governed by its 29 member states. However, the North Atlantic Treaty and other agreements outline how decisions are to be made within NATO. Each of the 29 140

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 (and holding that diplomatic rank). Several countries have diplomatic missions to NATO through embassies in Belgium. Together, 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. From time to time the Council also meets at higher level meetings involving foreign ministers, defence ministers or heads of state or government (HOSG) and it is at these meetings that major decisions regarding NATO's policies are generally taken. However, it is worth noting that the Council has the same authority and powers of decisionmaking, and its decisions have the same status and validity, at whatever level it meets. France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States are together referred to as the Quint, which is an informal discussion group within NATO. NATO summits also form a further venue for decisions on complex issues, such as enlargement. The meetings of the North Atlantic Council are chaired by the Secretary General of NATO and, when decisions have to be made, action is agreed upon on the basis of unanimity and common accord. There is no voting or decision by majority. Each nation represented at the Council table or on any of its subordinate committees retains complete sovereignty and responsibility for its own decisions. NATO Parliamentary Assembly The body that sets broad strategic goals for NATO is 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. The NATO Parliamentary Assembly is made up of legislators from the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance as well as thirteen associate members. Karl A. Lamers, German Deputy Chairman of the Defence Committee of the Bundestag and a member of the Christian Democratic Union, 141

became president of the assembly in 2010. It is however officially a different structure from NATO, and has as aim to join together deputies of NATO countries in order to discuss security policies on the NATO Council. The Assembly is the political integration body of NATO that generates political policy agenda setting for the NATO Council via reports of its five committees: – Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security – Defence and Security Committee – Economics and Security Committee – Political Committee – Science and Technology Committee These reports provide impetus and direction as agreed upon by the national governments of the member states through their own national political processes and influencers to the NATO administrative and executive organizational entities. Military structures NATO's military operations are directed by the Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, and split into two Strategic Commands commanded by a senior US officer and (currently) a senior French officer assisted by a staff drawn from across NATO. The Strategic Commanders are responsible to the Military Committee for the overall direction and conduct of all Alliance military matters within their areas of command. Each country's delegation includes a Military Representative, a senior officer from each country's armed forces, supported by the International Military Staff. Together the Military Representatives form the Military Committee, a body responsible for recommending to NATO's political authorities those measures considered necessary for the common defence of the NATO area. Its principal role is to provide direction and advice on military policy and strategy. It provides guidance on military matters to the NATO Strategic Commanders, whose representatives attend its meetings, and is responsible for the overall conduct of the military affairs of the Alliance under the authority of the Council. The Chairman of the NATO Military Committee is Petr Pavel of the Czech Republic, since 2015. 142

Like the Council, from time to time the Military Committee also meets at a higher level, namely at the level of Chiefs of Defence, the most senior military officer in each nation's armed forces. Until 2008 the Military Committee excluded France, due to that country's 1966 decision to remove itself from the NATO Military Command Structure, which it rejoined in 1995. Until France rejoined NATO, it was not represented on the Defence Planning Committee, and this led to conflicts between it and NATO members. Such was the case in the lead up to Operation Iraqi Freedom. The operational work of the Committee is supported by the International Military Staff. The structure of NATO evolved throughout the Cold War and its aftermath. An integrated military structure for NATO was first established in 1950 as it became clear that NATO would need to enhance its defences for the longer term against a potential Soviet attack. In April 1951, Allied Command Europe and its headquarters (SHAPE) were established; later, four subordinate headquarters were added in Northern and Central Europe, the Southern Region, and the Mediterranean. 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. In early 2015, in the wake of the War in Donbass, meetings of NATO ministers decided that Multinational Corps Northeast would be augmented so as to develop greater capabilities, to, if thought necessary, prepare to defend the Baltic States, and that a new Multinational Division Southeast would be established in Romania. Six NATO Force Integration Units would also be established to coordinate preparations for defence of new Eastern members of NATO. 143

Multinational Division Southeast was activated on 1 December 2015. Headquarters Multinational Division South – East (HQ MNDSE) is a North Atlantic Council (NAC) activated NATO military body under operational command (OPCOM) of Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) which may be employed and deployed in peacetime, crisis and operations by NATO on the authority of the appropriate NATO Military Authorities by means of an exercise or operational tasking issued in accordance with the Command and Control Technical Arrangement (C2 TA) and standard NATO procedures. During August 2016, it was announced that 650 soldiers of the British Army would be deployed on an enduring basis in Eastern Europe, mainly in Estonia with some also being deployed to Poland. This British deployment forms part of a four-battle group (fourbattalion) deployment by various allies, NATO Enhanced Forward Presence, one each spread from Poland (the Poland-deployed battle group mostly led by the U.S.) to Estonia. 3.2. The Collective Security Treaty Organization The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) is an intergovernmental military alliance that was signed on 15 May 1992. In 1992, six post-Soviet states belonging to the Commonwealth of Independent States – Russia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan – signed the Collective Security Treaty (also referred to as the «Tashkent Pact» or «Tashkent Treaty"). Three other post-Soviet states – Azerbaijan, Belarus, and Georgia – signed the next year and the treaty took effect in 1994. Five years later, six of the nine – all but Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Uzbekistan – lagreed to renew the treaty for five more years, and in 2002 those six agreed to create the Collective Security Treaty Organization as a military alliance. Uzbekistan rejoined the CSTO in 2006 but withdrew in 2012. Nikolai Bordyuzha was appointed secretary general of the new organization. On 23 June 2006, Uzbekistan became a full participant in the CSTO; and its membership was ratified by the Uzbek parliament 144

on 28 March 2008. It suspended its membership in 2012. The CSTO is an observer organization at the United Nations General Assembly. The CSTO charter reaffirmed the desire of all participating states to abstain from the use or threat of force. Signatories would not be able to join other military alliances or other groups of states, while aggression against one signatory would be perceived as an aggression against all. To this end, the CSTO holds yearly military command exercises for the CSTO nations to have an opportunity to improve inter-organization cooperation. A CSTO military exercise called «Rubezh 2008» was hosted in Armenia, where a combined total of 4,000 troops from all seven constituent CSTO member countries conducted operative, strategic and tactical training with an emphasis towards furthering efficiency of the collective security element of the CSTO partnership. The largest of such exercises was held in Southern Russia and central Asia in 2011, consisting of more than 10,000 troops and 70 combat aircraft. Also, Russia has won the right to veto the establishment of new foreign military bases in the member states of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). In order to deploy military bases of a third country in the territory of the CSTO member-states, it is necessary to obtain the official consent of all its members. The CSTO employs a «rotating presidency» system in which the country leading the CSTO alternates every year. History The CSTO grew out of the framework of the Commonwealth of Independent States, and first began as the CIS Collective Security Treaty (CST) which was signed on 15 May 1992, by Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, in the city of Tashkent. Azerbaijan signed the treaty on 24 September 1993, Georgia on 9 December 1993 and Belarus on 31 December 1993. The treaty came into effect on 20 April 1994. The CST was set to last for a 5-year period unless extended. On 2 April 1999, only six members of the CST signed a protocol renewing the treaty for another five-year period – Azerbaijan, Georgia and Uzbekistan refused to sign and withdrew from the treaty instead. At the same time Uzbekistan joined the GUAM group, established in 145

1997 by Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova, and largely seen as intending to counter Russian influence in the region. Uzbekistan later withdrew from GUAM in 2005 and joined the CSTO in 2006 in order to seek closer ties with Russia. On 28 June 2012, Uzbekistan suspended its membership in the CSTO. Policy Agenda Information Technology and Cyber Security Member nations adopted measures to counter cyber security threats and information technology crimes in a Foreign Ministers Council meeting in Minsk, Belarus. Foreign Minister Abdrakhmanov put forward a proposal to establishing a Cyber Shield system. Recent Developments On March 19, 2015, the CSTO Secretary General Nikolai Bordyuzha offered to send a peacekeeping mission to Donbass, Ukraine. «The CSTO has a peacekeeping capacity. Our peacekeepers continuously undergo corresponding training. If such a decision is taken by the United Nations, we stand ready to provide peacekeeping units». In August 2014, 3,000 soldiers from the members of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan participated in psychological and cyber warfare exercises in Kazakhstan under war games managed by CSTO. On 21 December 2011, Russia won the right to veto the establishment of new foreign military bases in the member states of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). Additionally, Kazakhstan took over the rotating presidency of the CSTO from Belarus. On 10 December 2010, the member states approved a declaration establishing a CSTO peacekeeping force and a declaration of the CSTO member states, in addition to signing a package of joint documents. On 5 September 2008, Armenia assumed the rotating CSTO presidency during a CSTO meeting in Moscow, Russia. On 29 August 2008, Russia announced it would seek CSTO recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Three 146

days earlier, on 26 August, Russia recognized the independence of Georgia's breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. On 6 October 2007, CSTO members agreed to a major expansion of the organization that would create a CSTO peacekeeping force that could deploy under a U.N. mandate or without one in its member states. The expansion would also allow all members to purchase Russian weapons at the same price as Russia. In October 2007, the CSTO signed an agreement with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), in the Tajik capital of Dushanbe, to broaden cooperation on issues such as security, crime, and drug trafficking. In June 2007, Kyrgyzstan assumed the rotating CSTO presidency. During 2005, the CSTO partners conducted some common military exercises. Collective Rapid Reaction Force On 4 February 2009, an agreement to create the Collective Rapid Reaction Force (KSOR) was reached by five of the seven members, with plans finalized on 14 June. The force is intended to be used to repulse military aggression, conduct anti-terrorist operations, fight transnational crime and drug trafficking, and neutralize the effects of natural disasters. Belarus and Uzbekistan initially refrained from signing on to the agreement; Belarus because of a trade dispute with Russia, and Uzbekistan due to general concerns. Belarus signed the agreement the following October while Uzbekistan has yet to sign it. However a source in the Russian delegation said Uzbekistan would not participate in the collective force on a permanent basis but would «delegate» its detachments to take part in operations on an ad hoc basis. On 3 August 2009 the foreign ministry of Uzbekistan criticized plans by Russia to establish a military base in southern Kyrgyzstan for the CSTO rapid reaction force, stating, «The implementation of such projects on complex and unpredictable territory, where the borders of three Central Asian republics directly converge, may give impetus to the strengthening of militarization processes and initiate all kinds of nationalistic confrontations. Also, it could lead to the appearance of radical extremist forces that could lead to serious destabilization in this vast region». 147

Kyrgyz Conflict After Kurmanbek Bakiyev was ousted from office as President of Kyrgyzstan as a result of riots in Kyrgyzstan in April, 2010, he was granted asylum in Belarus. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko expressed doubt about the future of the CSTO for failing to prevent Bakiyev's overthrow, stating, «What sort of organization is this one, if there is bloodshed in one of our member states and an anticonstitutional coup d'etat takes place, and this body keeps silent?» Lukashenko had previously accused Russiaof punishing Belarus with economic sanctions after Lukashenko's refusal to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, stating «Economy serves as the basis for our common security. During a trip to Ukraine to extend Russia's lease of the Crimean port Sevastopol in return for discounted natural gas supplies, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was asked about whether Belarus could expect a similar deal and responded, «Real partnership is one thing and a declaration of intentions is another; reaching agreement on working seriously, meeting each other halfway, helping each other is one thing and making decisions about granting permanent residence to people who have lost their job is another». The Belarusian President defended himself against this criticism by citing former Russian President Vladimir Putin's invitation of Askar Akayev to Russia after he was ousted as President of Kyrgyzstan during the 2005 Tulip Revolution. The following month, President Medvedev ordered the CEO of Russia's natural gas monopoly Gazprom to cut gas supplies to Belarus. Subsequently, the Russian television channel NTV, run by Gazprom aired a documentary film which compared Lukashenko to Bakiyev. Then the Russian President's foreign policy adviser Sergei Prikhodko threatened to publish the transcript of a CSTO meeting where Lukashenko said that his administration would recognize Abkhazian and South Ossetian independence. In June 2010, ethnic clashes broke out between ethnic Kyrgyz and Uzbeks in southern Kyrgyzstan, leading interim Kyrgyz President Roza Otunbayeva to request the assistance of Russian troops to quell the disturbances. Kurmanbek Bakiyev denied charges that his supporters were behind the ethnic conflict and called on the CSTO to intervene. Askar Akayev also called for the CSTO to send troops 148

saying, «Our priority task right now should be to extinguish this flame of enmity. It is very likely that we will need CSTO peacekeepers to do that». Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that «only in the case of a foreign intrusion and an attempt to externally seize power can we state that there is an attack against the CSTO», and that, «all the problems of Kyrgyzstan have internal roots», while CSTO Secretary General Nikolai Bordyuzha called the violence «purely a domestic affair». Later however Bordyuzha admitted that the CSTO response may have been inadequate and claimed that «foreign mercenaries» provoked the Kyrgyz violence against ethnic Uzbek minorities. On 21 July 2010, interim Kyrgyz President Roza Otunbayeva called for the introduction of CSTO police units to southern Kyrgyzstan saying, «I think it’s important to introduce CSTO police forces there, since we’re unable to guarantee people’s rights on our own», but added «I’m not seeking the CSTO’s embrace and I don’t feel like bringing them here to stay but the bloodletting there will continue otherwise». Only weeks later the deputy chairman of Otubayeva's interim Kyrgyz government complained that their appeals for help from the CSTO had been ignored. The CSTO was unable to agree on providing military assistance to Kyrgyzstan at a meeting in Yerevan, Armenia, which was attended by Roza Otunbayeva as well as Alexander Lukashenko. Literature 1. «What is NATO?» NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium. 26 May 2017. Retrieved 26 May 2017. 2. Burns, Robert (10 June 2011). «Gates blasts NATO, questions future of alliance», Washington Times. Retrieved January 29, 2013. 3. Weinrod, W. Bruce; Barry, Charles L. (September 2010). «NATO Command Structure: Considerations for the Future» (PDF). Center for Technology and National Security Policy. National Defense University. Retrieved 4 September 2013. 4. «NATO Topics: The Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council». Retrieved 22 August 2010. 5. Espen Barth, Eide; Frédéric Bozo (Spring 2005). «Should NATO play a more political role?». Nato Review. NATO. Retrieved 15 July 2007. 6. John A. Mowchan. The Militarization of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSL Issue Paper, Volume 6-09, July 2009). 7. Richard Weitz. The Collective Security Treaty Organization: Past Struggles and Future Prospects // RUSSIAN ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 152, 21 July 2014. 149


4.1. The International Organization of Turkic Culture TURKSOY The International Organization of Turkic Culture TURKSOY is the UNESCO of the Turkic World and was established in 1993 upon signature of its founding agreement by the Ministers of Culture of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Turkey. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and the autonomous republics of the Russian Federation, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Altai, Sakha, Tyva, Khakassia and Gagauzia (Moldova) joined TURKSOY as member states with an observer status. Since its establishment, TURKSOY has been carrying out activities to strengthen the ties of brotherhood and solidarity among Turkic peoples, transmit the common Turkic culture to future generations and introduce it to the world. Since 1993, TURKSOY has been carrying out its activities under the auspices of the Heads of States of its member states with their approval and appreciation. Permanent Council meetings. Activities carried out by TURKSOY are determined by the Permanent Council of the Ministers of Culture of Turkic speaking countries. Decisions met by the Permanent Council are enforced by the Secretariat General of TURKSOY. Traditional Events. With its traditional events such as Painters’ gatherings, Opera Days and Literature Congresses, TURKSOY offers a common platform to scholars and artists of the Turkic World where they can exchange their experiences. Nevruz Celebration. Thanks to TURKSOY, Nevruz which is a common tradition of the Turkic World has been introduced to the whole world. Besides historical Nevruz celebrations in UNESCO 150

Headquarters and the United Nations General Assembly Hall, TURKSOY has held colourful Nevruz Celebrations gathering thousands of spectators in Germany, Austria and the United Kingdom. – 2010 – UNESCO Headquarters, Paris – 2011 – United Nations General Assembly Hall, New York – 2011 – Lincoln Theater, Washington DC – 2013 – Trinity College, Cambridge, England – 2014 – Eskişehir, Turkey – 2015 – UNESCO Headquarters, Paris – 2015 – Stadthalle Mülheim, Cologne, Germany – 2015 – Hofburg Imperial Palace, Vienna, Austria – 2016 - United Nations General Assembly Hall, New York – 2016 – Warner Theater, Washington DC Cultural Capitals of the Turkic World. As an international organization committed to self-improvement and innovation, TURKSOY declares one city of the Turkic World as its Cultural Capital every year. Within this framework, cities of the Turkic World which have seen their cultural and artistic activities thrive thanks to this initiative have been the Astana, the colourful city of Kazakhstan, in 2012, Eskisehir, the symbol of modern Turkey, in 2013, Kazan, the historical city of Tatarstan, in 2014 followed by Merv, the ancient city of Turkmenistan in 2015, Sheki, the nature’s wonder of Azerbaijan, in 2016 and Turkestan, the homeland of Khoja Akhmet Yassawi, in Kazakhstan in 2017. Special projects. Within the framework of its cultural and artistic activities, TURKSOY has carried out special projects to promote Turkic culture worldwide. Some of these projects are Uzeyir Hajibeyli’s opera «Koroghlu» which was performed in 6 countries, Mukan Tulebayev’s opera «Birjan and Sara» which was the first opera of the Turkic World to have been included in the repertoire of the State Opera and Ballet of the Republic of Turkey, and Adnan Saygun’s Yunus Emre Oratorio which was performed with the contribution of 200 artists from 9 countries and an American Choir in Turkey and the United States of America. Other special projects carried out by TURKSOY include the Youth Chamber Orchestra of TURKSOY which enchanted its 151

audience in various cities of the World, the Youth Chamber Choir of TURKSOY which won 3 gold medals in the European Choir Games shortly after its establishment and the Orchestra of Folk Instruments of TURKSOY which was established on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the independence of Turkic republics. Cooperation activities. TURKSOY carries out its activities in coordination with the Turkic Council, the Turkic Academy and the Turkic Culture and Heritage Foundation. TURKSOY also cooperates with UNESCO and ISESCO, which it shares the same principles and goals with. Besides, TURKSOY carries out various cooperation activities with many municipalities, universities and non-governmental organizations. TURKSOY carries out activities to strengthen the ties of brothehood and solidarity among Turkic peoples with a view to transmitting their common cultural heritage to future generations and promoting it around the world. The International Organization of Turkic Culture was established in 1993 upon signature of its founding agreement by the Ministers of Culture of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Turkey. TURKSOY gathers 14 member countries 6 of which are founding members while the remaining 8 member countries hold an observer status within the organization. Click on the following link to view the list of TURKSOY member countries. 4.2. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation History The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the second largest inter-governmental organization after the United Nations with a membership of 57 states spread over four continents. The Organization is the collective voice of the Muslim world. It endeavors to safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world in the spirit of promoting international peace and harmony among various people of the world. The Organization was established upon a decision of the historical summit which took place in Rabat, Kingdom of Morocco on 12th 152

Rajab 1389 Hijra (25 September 1969) following the criminal arson of Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied Jerusalem. In 1970 the first ever meeting of Islamic Conference of Foreign Minister (ICFM) was held in Jeddah which decided to establish a permanent secretariat in Jeddah headed by the organization’s secretary general. Dr. Yousef Ahmed Al-Othaimeen is the 11th Secretary General who assumed the office in November 2016. The first OIC Charter was adopted by the 3rd ICFM Session held in 1972. The Charter laid down the objectives and principles of the organization and fundamental purposes to strengthen the solidarity and cooperation among the Member States. Over the last 40 years, the membership has grown from its founding members of 30 to 57 states. The Charter was amended to keep pace with the developments that have unraveled across the world. The present Charter of the OIC was adopted by the Eleventh Islamic Summit held in Dakar on 13-14 March 2008 to become the pillar of the OIC future Islamic action in line with the requirements of the 21st century. The Organization has the singular honor to galvanize the Ummah into a unified body and have actively represented the Muslims by espousing all causes close to the hearts of over 1.5 billion Muslims of the world. The Organization has consultative and cooperative relations with the UN and other inter-governmental organizations to protect the vital interests of the Muslims and to work for the settlement of conflicts and disputes involving Member States. In safeguarding the true values of Islam and the Muslims, the organization has taken various steps to remove misperceptions and has strongly advocated elimination of discrimination against Muslims in all forms and manifestations. The Member States of the OIC face many challenges in the 21st century and to address those challenges, the Third Extraordinary Session of the Islamic Summit held in Makkah in December 2005, laid down the blue print called the Ten-Year Program of Action. It successfully concluded with the close of 2015. A successor programme for the next decade (2016-2025) has since then been adopted. The new programme OIC-2025 is anchored in the provisions of the OIC Charter and focuses on 18 priority areas with 107 goals. The 153

priority areas include issues of Peace and Security, Palestine and AlQuds, Poverty Alleviation, Counter-terrorism, Investment and Finance, Food Security, Science and Technology, Climate Change and Sustainability, Moderation, Culture and Interfaith Harmony, Empowerment of Women, Joint Islamic Humanitarian Action, Human Rights and Good Governance, among others. Among the OIC’s key bodies: the Islamic Summit, the Council of Foreign Ministers (CFM), the General Secretariat, in addition to the Al-Quds Committee and three permanent committees concerned with science and technology, economy and trade, and information and culture. There are also specialized organs under the banner of the OIC including the Islamic Development Bank and the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, as well as subsidiary and affiliate organs that play a vital role in boosting cooperation in various fields among the OIC member states. General Secretariat The general secretariat was established by the First Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers, held in Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in Muharram 1390H (February 1970). The General Secretariat comprises a Secretary General who is the Chief Administrative Officer of the Organisation and such staff as the Organisation requires. The Secretary General: the Secretary General is elected by the Council of Foreign Ministers for a period of five years, renewable once only. The Secretary-General is elected from among nationals of the Member States in accordance with the principles of equitable geographical distribution, rotation and equal opportunity for all Member States with due consideration to competence, integrity and experience. The Secretary General assumes the following responsibilities: 1) bring to the attention of the competent organs of the Organisation matters which, in his opinion, may serve or impair the objectives of the Organisation; 2) follow-up the implementation of decisions, resolutions and recommendations of the Islamic Summits, and Councils of Foreign Ministers and other Ministerial meetings; 154

3) provide the Member States with working papers and memoranda, in implementation of the decisions, resolutions and recommendations of the Islamic Summits and the Councils of Foreign Ministers; 4) coordinate and harmonize, the work of the relevant Organs of the Organisation; 5) prepare the programme and the budget of the General Secretariat; 6) promote communication among Member States and facilitate consultations and exchange of views as well as the dissemination of information that could be of importance to Member States; 7) perform such other functions as are entrusted to him by the Islamic Summit or the Council of Foreign Ministers; 8) submit annual reports to the Council of Foreign Ministers on the work of the Organisation. Member States: Republic of Azerbajan, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Republic of Albania, State of The United Arab Emirates, Republic of Indonesia, Republic of Uzbekistan, Republic of Uganda, Islamic Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Kingdom of Bahrain, Brunei-Darussalam, People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Republic of Benin, Burkina-Faso (then Upper Volta), Republic of Tajikistan, Republic of Turkey, Turkmenistan, Republic of Chad, Republic of Togo, Republic of Tunisia, People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, Republic of Djibouty, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Republic of Senegal, Republic of The Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Republic of Suriname, Republic of Sierra Leone, Republic of Somalia, Republic of Iraq, Sultanate of Oman, Republic of Gabon, Republic of The Gambia, Republic of Guyana, Republic of Guinea, Republic of Guinea-Bissau, State of Palestine, Union of The Comoros, Kyrgyz Republic State of Qatar, Republic of Kazakhstan, Republic of Cameroon, Republic of Cote D'ivoire, State of Kuwait, Republic of Lebanon, Libya, Republic of Maldives, Republic of Mali , Malaysia, Arab Republic of Egypt, Kingdom of Morocco, Islamic Republic of Mauritania, Republic of Mozambique, Republic of Niger, Federal Republic of Nigeria, Republic of Yemen. 155

To-date, four specialized institutions have been established and they are located in different capitals and cities in the Islamic World they are the following: Kazakhstan’s Chairmanship in the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation Kazakhstan became a full-fledged member of the Organization in 1995. On June 28-30, 2011, Astana hosted the 38th session of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Thus, Kazakhstan took over the chairmanship of respected international organisation. The meeting became a historic milestone as it was decided to rename the Organization of the Islamic Conference into the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. In addition, a Special Commission on Human Rights was established and the OIC Plan of Action for Cooperation with Central Asia was adopted for the first time in the history of the organisation. The keynote address by President Nursultan Nazarbayev to the Muslim Ummah laid the foundation of the OIC Astana Declaration, which was the most progressive document of the Organization that proclaimed modernization and reform as the basic principles of development of the Islamic world in the 21st century. The OIC ministerial meeting approved more than hundred resolutions, including those that promoted the initiatives of Kazakhstan in the fight against illicit drug production and trafficking from Afghanistan and rehabilitation of regions of the former Semipalatinsk nuclear test site and the Aral Sea. Kazakhstan consistently implemented its priorities which are reflected in the concept and programme of the chairmanship in the OIC Council of Foreign Ministers in 2011-2012. In addition, the General Secretariat and OIC institutions in cooperation with the OIC member states implemented Kazakhstan’s initiatives put forward in 2011 at the 7th World Islamic Economic Forum and the 38th OIC Council of Foreign Ministers on the establishment of a mechanism for food security activities, support of small and medium sized businesses and ensuring the participation of the OIC in the G20 summits. Against the backdrop of difficult geopolitical situation in the Islamic world, an extraordinary meeting of the Executive Committee 156

of the OIC was held in order to discuss the crisis in Syria and Libya. The discussions focused on the issues of overcoming the humanitarian catastrophe in Somalia, fighting Islamophobia and preventing interreligious conflicts. As part of a large-scale campaign carried out under the auspices of Kazakhstan’s OIC chairmanship, the organization managed to accumulate more than $ 500 million to help Somalia. In addition, the United Nations approved three global initiatives of President Nursultan Nazarbayev, including the proposal to proclaim August 29 as the International Day against Nuclear Tests, the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, combating drug trafficking from Afghanistan, as well as strengthening cooperation between the OIC and the influential regional organizations. Kazakhstan was also elected deputy chairman of the OIC Standing Committee for Commercial and Economic Cooperation (COMCEC), the main body responsible for the promotion of trade and economic interaction between member states of the organisation. Secretary General of the OIC Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu noted the high level of Kazakhstan’s chairmanship and said that it will remain one of the most brilliant chapters in the history of the Organisation. At present, the OIC continues to consistently support Kazakhstan’s initiatives in the international arena and contributes to their success. In particular, the initiative to convene the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia and the Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions are reflected in the annual documents of the Organization. The OIC also recognizes the important coordinating role of Kazakhstan in the field of promotion of inter-civilization and interreligious dialogue, where Kazakhstan acts as a communicational bridge between the East and the West. Another important area of cooperation between the country and the OIC is the development of interaction with its financial institutions, including the Islamic Development Bank - one of the largest investors in the Muslim world. The total investment portfolio of the IDB in Kazakhstan amounts to nearly US$ 700 million. The OIC supports the creation of a special programme for Central Asia. The project provides support and cooperation with the 157

Organisation in the promotion of trade, investment, industrial projects that are of mutual interest to both Central Asia and the countries of the Muslim community. Literature 1. TURKSOY, the International Organization of Turkic Culture 2. International Forum of museums held in Kazan. Mode of access: 3.



5.1. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations History Why did Southeast Asia need an intergovernmental organization? the most important reason was the fact that, with the withdrawal of the colonial powers, there would have been a power vacuum which could have attracted outsiders to step in for political gains. As the colonial masters had discouraged any form of intraregional contact, the idea of neighbors working together in a joint effort was thus to be encouraged. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, was established on 8 August 1967 in Bangkok, Thailand, with the signing of the ASEAN Declaration (Bangkok Declaration) by the Founding Fathers of ASEAN, namely Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Brunei Darussalam then joined on 7 January 1984, Viet Nam on 28 July 1995, Lao PDR and Myanmar on 23 July 1997, and Cambodia on 30 April 1999, making up what is today the ten Member States of ASEAN. Aims and purposes. As set out in the ASEAN Declaration, the aims and purposes of ASEAN are: 1. To accelerate the economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region through joint endeavours in the spirit of equality and partnership in order to strengthen the foundation for a prosperous and peaceful community of Southeast Asian Nations. 2. To promote regional peace and stability through abiding respect for justice and the rule of law in the relationship among countries of the region and adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter. 159

3. To promote active collaboration and mutual assistance on matters of common interest in the economic, social, cultural, technical, scientific and administrative fields. 4. To provide assistance to each other in the form of training and research facilities in the educational, professional, technical and administrative spheres. 5. To collaborate more effectively for the greater 160rganizatio of their agriculture and industries, the expansion of their trade, including the study of the problems of international commodity trade, the improvement of their transportation and communications facilities and the raising of the living standards of their peoples. 6. To promote Southeast Asian studies. 7. To maintain close and beneficial cooperation with existing international and regional 160rganizations with similar aims and purposes, and explore all avenues for even closer cooperation among themselves. Fundamental principles In their relations with one another, the ASEAN Member States have adopted the following fundamental principles, as contained in the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC) of 1976: mutual respect for the independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity, and national identity of all nations; the right of every State to lead its national existence free from external interference, subversion or coercion; non-interference in the internal affairs of one another; settlement of differences or disputes by peaceful manner; renunciation of the threat or use of force; and effective cooperation among themselves. ASEAN community. The ASEAN Vision 2020, adopted by the ASEAN Leaders on the 30th Anniversary of ASEAN, agreed on a shared vision of ASEAN as a concert of Southeast Asian nations, outward looking, living in peace, stability and prosperity, bonded together in partnership in dynamic development and in a community of caring societies. At the 9th ASEAN Summit in 2003, the ASEAN Leaders resolved that an ASEAN Community shall be established. 160

At the 12th ASEAN Summit in January 2007, the Leaders affirmed their strong commitment to accelerate the establishment of an ASEAN Community by 2015 and signed the Cebu Declaration on the Acceleration of the Establishment of an ASEAN Community by 2015. The ASEAN Community is comprised of three pillars, namely the ASEAN Political-Security Community, ASEAN Economic Community and ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community. Each pillar has its own Blueprint, and, together with the Initiative for ASEAN Integration (IAI) Strategic Framework and IAI Work Plan Phase II (2009-2015), they form the Roadmap for an ASEAN Community 2009-2015. ASEAN Charter. The ASEAN Charter serves as a firm foundation in achieving the ASEAN Community by providing legal status and institutional framework for ASEAN. It also codifies ASEAN norms, rules and values; sets clear targets for ASEAN; and presents accountability and compliance. The ASEAN Charter entered into force on 15 December 2008. A gathering of the ASEAN Foreign Ministers was held at the ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta to mark this very historic occasion for ASEAN. With the entry into force of the ASEAN Charter, ASEAN will henceforth operate under a new legal framework and establish a number of new organs to boost its community-building process. In effect, the ASEAN Charter has become a legally binding agreement among the 10 ASEAN Member States: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Viet Nam The ASEAN Charter serves as a firm foundation in achieving the ASEAN Community by providing legal status and institutional framework for ASEAN. It also codifies ASEAN norms, rules and values; sets clear targets for ASEAN; and presents accountability and compliance. In effect, the ASEAN Charter has become a legally binding agreement among the 10 ASEAN Member States. It will also be registered with the Secretariat of the United Nations, pursuant to Article 102, Paragraph 1 of the Charter of the United Nations. ASEAN achievements and challenges. Today the ASEAN region has largely recovered from the Asian financial and economic 161

crisis. As the world is beset by many problems, such as the adverse economic impact of the war in Iraq, the global economic slowdown, the negative impact of terrorism, including the Bali Bombing and the SARS epidemic, the ASEAN countries as a group continue to consolidate their economic recovery while investors are beginning to take renewed interest in the region. ASEAN’s economic dynamism is also encouraged by the interest of various economic powers, including China, Japan and South Korea, in intensifying economic cooperation with ASEAN bilaterally and through the ASEAN+3 process. It is no coincidence either that since ASEAN was founded in 1967, the region has been emerging peaceful. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, with Indonesia serving as its interlocutor, ASEAN launched an initiative toward peace in civil war-tom Cambodia. That peace initiative, with vigorous help from the international community and the United Nations, finally led to a successful peace process that brought about the rebirth of a democratic Kingdom of Cambodia in 1993. In the process, ASEAN also became widely recognized as a force for peace in this part of the world. Through the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) formed in 1994, ASEAN was able to secure the participation of all the powers whose activities and interest impact on the security and political stability of the Asia- Pacific region. Today, the ARF continues to serve the goal for which it was established: to manage security relations among these powers so that peace based on mutual trust and goodwill is eventually achieved. ASEAN also endeavors to ensure peace and prosperity for the region. Foreign Ministers of ASEAN and the Russian Federation concluded Joint Declaration on Partnership for Peace and Security, and Prosperity and Development in the Asia Pacific Region. Meanwhile, China will accede to the Treaty on Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia. That would be a major contribution of ASEAN and the dialogue partners to global peace. Today ASEAN acts as one of the system-forming elements of the emerging security and cooperation system in Asia-Pacific region. Around it a system of so-called «dialogues» arose. Full-scale partners in the dialogue with ASEAN are 9 countries (Australia, India, Canada, China, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Russia, USA, Japan), as well 162

as the EU. The main areas of interaction are determined at the annual meetings of ASEAN foreign ministers and dialogue partners. ASEAN continues to build and consolidate the network of dialogues and other arrangements that have served Southeast Asia in good stead over the years. For instance, ASEAN is strengthening its linkage with Europe, while maintaining its close engagement with the Americas and the South Pacific through APEC. In spite of all its achievements and the flurry of its current activities, ASEAN continues to be confronted by formidable challenges, mainly as a by-product of its rapid expansion. Today ASEAN is seen as being a two-tiered organization, with the upper tier composed of its first six members, or the ASEAN-Six, while the lower tier is made up of its four latest members: Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam, or the CLMV countries. It is the need for greater cohesiveness within the Association and for bridging the gaps in social and economic development among the members of ASEAN. Another challenge that ASEAN must address is poverty. Since the mid-1990s, when ASEAN was well on its way to realizing the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA), it was already anticipating the conquest of poverty as a basic problem in Southeast Asia by the year 2020. Unfortunately, soon after the Association developed the ASEAN Vision 2020 and articulated it in 1997, the Asian financial crisis struck and shocked the ASEAN economies of much of their celebrated dynamism. Today the problem of poverty remains as real as ever and its ultimate conquest remains a dream in Southeast Asia. Another challenge that is not at all new but has become such a great source of anxiety in recent times is the threat of international terrorism along with all the other non-traditional threats to security, such as the traffic in illicit drugs, arms smuggling, money laundering and people smuggling. Regional plans of action to tackle such problems had long been established as part and parcel of ASEAN’s functional cooperation, but suddenly these appeared to be inadequate in the face of the cataclysms like terrorist attacks in the United States and in Bali. These two tragedies roused the entire civilized world to the immense danger of international terrorism and other transnational crimes. It became clear that no single country or group of coun- tries could overcome this threat alone. In Indonesia’s view, which is shared 163

by the rest of the ASEAN members, it would take a global coalition involving all nations, all societies, religions and cultures to defeat this threat. How ‘should ASEAN respond to those challenges? To the problem of ASEAN’s diminished coherence as a result of its rapid expansion, the Association has responded in a most forthright manner -by launching the Initiative for ASEAN Integration (IAI), aimed at getting the CLMV countries (Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam) to catch up with the rest of the ASEAN family in terms of economic and social development as well as in terms of capacity to participate in ASEAN’s many activities. The initiative, therefore, has focused on infrastructure, human resources development, information and communications technology, as well as economic integration. We hope that the Initiative can be further intensified and accelerated with the participation of more of ASEAN’s dialogue partners. Through organizational integration, ASEAN is also tackling the problem of poverty. In fact, what is actually happening is that ASEAN is being integrated in three ways: organizationally, through the Initiative for ASEAN Integration; physically, through an infrastructures-building program that covers the Southeast Asian region and involves the construction of highways, railway systems and oil and gas pipelines; and economically, through the AFTA and the IAI, which offer the regional economies as well as ASEAN’s economic partners a good number of attractive advantages. One additional way by which ASEAN can further integrate itself is through cooperation on maritime matters. There is no .doubt that the sea plays an important role in the trade, transportation and communications activities of all the ASEAN countries, even landlocked Laos. The sea should serve as a bridge, a unifying force. That is why ASEAN, at the instance of Indonesia, has agreed to form a Maritime Forum for the discussion of issues related to maritime cooperation. Effective maritime cooperation can indeed help ASEAN overcome the problem of poverty in the region. By addressing the problem of poverty, ASEAN is also responding to the challenge of security. This is the idea behind the early emphasis that ASEAN gave to economic cooperation. In the face of a surge of international terrorism, ASEAN has also taken vigorous steps to combat this 164

threat through, among other measures, an ongoing regional work programme against terrorism in which dialogue partners are intensively involved. However, considering the security crises that have taken place in various places allover the world in recent months, including the ongoing nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula, ASEAN needs to do more in order to help find a peaceful resolution to the conflict. This is especially so in the light of a surge of unilateralism in international affairs that has shunted aside the established democratic ways of resolving disputes between and among nations. 5.2. Asia Europe Meeting The origins of the ASEM process lay in a mutual recognition, in both Asia and Europe, that the relationship between the two regions needed to be strengthened, reflecting the new global context of the 1990s, and the perspectives of the new century. In July 1994, the European Commission had already published Towards a New Strategy for Asia, stressing the importance of modernising our relationship with Asia, and of reflecting properly its political, economic and cultural significance. The Commission Communication of September 2001, entitled Europe and Asia: A Strategic Framework for Enhanced Partnerships, reaffirmed this objective. In November 1994, Singapore and France proposed that an EUAsia summit meeting be held, to consider how to build a new partnership between the two regions. Following Singapore's proposal, the 1st ASEM Summit (ASEM1) was held in March 1996 in Bangkok, Thailand, which marks the beginning of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). Political Pillar Traditionally, the political dialogue is a key element of the ASEM process. High-level meetings held as part of ASEM, at Heads of State and Government as well as at Foreign Ministers levels, have allowed the development of a genuine dialogue on the main political issues of concern to ASEM partners. ASEM has become a privileged 165

framework where Asian and European countries can discuss major global issues on the international agenda, such as terrorism, Weapons of Mass-Destruction (WMD), migrations, dialogue of Cultures and Civilisations, environment, Human Rights, or the impact of globalisation. ASEM is also a privileged process where regional developments can be addressed in a non-confrontational way. ASEM political pillar's activities focus on international crisis, security, multilateralism. In addition it seeks to open up the dialogue with policy-makers from Europe and Asia. Addressing international and regional developments The ASEM political pillar offers a privileged dialogue platform to address international and regional issues. It provides with additional consultation opportunities in an informal setting. It is worth noting that, for instance on North Korea, all the key partners are around the ASEM table, hence allowing ASEM to develop a substantial dialogue on the situation on the Korean peninsula. ASEM Leaders and Ministers have regularly exchanged their views and occasionally taken a common stance on international and regional developments of common interest. On certain issues, when deemed appropriate, ASEM Leaders and ASEM Foreign Ministers have endorsed separate political declaration. It was for example the case on the Middle East Peace Process and India-Pakistan relations when the situation in the region was rapidly deteriorating (Foreign Ministers Meeting of 4 June 2002 in Madrid). At the Foreign Ministers Meetings in Bali in July 2003 and in Kildare (Ireland) in April 2004, ASEM Foreign Ministers discussed regional developments including the political situation in Burma/Myanmar. Ministers discussed recent political developments in Burma/Myanmar. The Ministers called on the Government of Myanmar to release Daw Aung San Suu Kyl and other NLD partners and ensure them freedom of political activities. They called upon Burma/Myanmar to resume its efforts toward national reconciliation and democracy. Subsequently, ASEM 5 and 6 Summits saw discussion on the latest situation in Burma/Myanmar, North Korea, as well as the situation in Afghanistan, Iraq and in the Middle East. 166

Reinforcing the multilateral system through effective multilateralism ASEM political pillar has worked towards reinforcing the multilateral system and promoting a Asia-Europe dialogue on keyissues. The ASEM Foreign Ministers Meeting 3 in Beijing (24-25 May 2001) agreed to further develop ASEM dialogue in the fields of arms control, disarmament and UN reforms. In fact, the ASEM political dialogue can facilitate the streamlining of the international agenda, and enhance multilateral co-operation. One prime example of this ASEM co-operation is the decision to hold consultations on an had hoc basis before sessions of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly at the appropriate level in New York or other agreed places to exchange views on relevant agenda items. A first informal meeting of the Ambassadors of ASEM partners to the UN took place on 7 September 2001 in New York before the planned UN General Assembly. Other informal meetings in New-York, at Ambassadors level have taken place since. The ASEM 4 Summit (Copenhagen, 2224 September 2002), drawing on the positive experience of the consultative meetings of ASEM partners at the United Nations, has decided that ASEM partners should continue this political dialogue, by establishing an ad hoc informal consultative mechanism enabling ASEM Coordinators and Senior Officials to exchange views on significant international events. Security and anti-terrorism cooperation Pursuant to 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks, the fight against international terrorism has become a priority in the political dialogue among ASEM partners. At the ASEM 4 Summit (Copenhagen 2002), Leaders have underlined their determination to fight international terrorism, while underlining the need to address the root causes of the emergence of terrorism. They pledged to work closely together to combat this threat to global peace and security, sustainable economic development and political stability. It was stressed that the fight against terrorism should be based on the leading role of the United Nations and the principles of the UN Charter. Leaders have adopted the ASEM Copenhagen Declaration on Cooperation against International Terrorism and the ASEM 167

Copenhagen Cooperation Programme on Fighting International Terrorism. Actions are planned under the 2002 ASEM Copenhagen Cooperation Programme including, inter alia, organizations of seminars, greater Europe-Asia cooperation at the UN level (accession and implementation of existing international counter-terrorism conventions and work towards the finalisation of UN Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism and Convention on Nuclear Terrorism), increased cooperation on customs, air and maritime security, money laundering. Specific activities are now being undertaken. A Seminar on counter-terrorism was held in Beijing on 22-23 September 2003 during which ASEM partners reaffirmed the need to cooperate in the context of the United Nations, and on issues such as moneylaundering. The next conference will be held in Germany in October 2004. Furthermore, an ASEM anti-money laundering project is being implemented. ASEM political dialogue has been active in the field weapons of mass destruction and non-proliferation. At the ASEM Foreign Minister in Bali in July 2003, Ministers exchanged views on the issue of Weapons of Mass-Destruction and agreed to issue a separate Political Declaration on the prevention of the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and their means of delivery. This Political Declaration reaffirms the importance of comprehensive and nondiscriminatory implementation of relevant international conventions, in particular the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, the Biological Weapons Convention and Chemicals Weapons Convention, IAEA safeguards agreements and relevant protocols. Opening up dialogue The ASEM spirit of promoting open exchanges applies also to sensitive issues like Human Rights. On the occasion of the 1st meeting of ASEM Foreign Ministers in 1997 in Singapore, Sweden and France had suggested that informal seminars on human rights be held within the ASEM framework. Titled the ‘Informal ASEM Seminar on Human Rights’ series, the aim of this initiative has been to promote mutual understanding and co-operation between 168

Europe and Asia in the area of political dialogue, particularly on human rights issues. The seminar series is co-organised by the French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs, the Raoul Wallenberg Institute (delegated by the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs), the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Philippines and the Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF), which has acted as a secretariat of the seminar since 2000. 15 seminars in this series have been organised so far since 1997. The experience of the Seminars convened thus far have shown the usefulness of the chosen formula: a climate of confidence and mutual understanding, in accordance with the ASEM spirit, has grown stronger during this process; the topics selected by the Steering Committee, which focus on issues of common interest to the two regions, have made high quality discussions possible; the high level of participation of the ASEM partners shows the strong interest of the partners for these meetings. ASEM political dialogue has initiated parliamentary contacts whereby partners of Parliament from ASEM countries can develop more direct contacts. The Asia-Europe Parliamentary Partnership (ASEP) was set up to facilitate such contacts, with its first meeting held in Strasbourg (France) on 1996. The European Parliament has also followed the ASEM process closely. ASEM Environmental Dialogue Environmental issues have become important on the international agenda, and ASEM has developed a genuine dialogue on international environmental issues. ASEM partners discuss key environmental issues, in particular on the future of the Kyoto Protocol and climate change, on the follow up of the World Summit for Sustainable Development, and on the general multilateral framework. At the ASEM Environment Ministerial Meeting in Lecce (11-12 October 2003), it was stressed that ASEM should be used to develop consultations among partners ahead of major international conferences on environmental issues. It was also agreed to hold an «ASEF Asia-Europe Environment Forum» as a venue for informal ASEM consultations with civil society. Thus, on environmental matters, ASEM shows its capacity to foster dialogue on global issues 169

and link with multilateral discussion as well as promote co-operation with civil society. ASEM dialogue on migrations Migration has become a topic of discussion in the ASEM context following an ASEM Ministerial Conference on Cooperation for the Management of Migratory Flows between Europe and Asia which was held in Spain in April 2002, at the initiative of China, Germany and Spain. The Conference agreed on a follow-up including an exchange of information on flows of migrants and migration management, cooperation in improving the quality and security of travel documents, fighting forgery of documents, setting up networks of immigration and consular liaison officers and meetings at expert and director-general level. Literature 1. 2. Acharya A. Constructing a security community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the problem of regional order. New-York: Routledge, 2014. – 291 p 3. Beeson M. Institutions of the Asia – Pacific: ASEAN, APEC and beyond. – New – York: Routledge, 2008. – 131 p.



6.1. The Eurasian Economic Union The Eurasian Economic Union represents the opening of new economic opportunities without sacrificing political independence. The EEU builds on the economic success of the Customs Union, and the EEU is in line with Kazakhstan's multi-vector foreign policy. Kazakhstan unequivocally maintains the EEU will not erode the country's political independence, which is critical to Kazakhstan’s priorities and multi-vector orientation. The EEU in its final form serves to advance Kazakhstan’s economic integration with the European Union, the United States, China and Latin America. Facts about the EEU: – The EEU builds on the Customs Union (CU) and Common Economic Space (CES) to establish a market for more than 171 million people. The EEU currently includes three states: Belarus, Russia and Kazakhstan with a combined GDP of $2.7 trillion. The objective of the union is to form a legal framework for a united economic zone, establish a common energy market, and enable the free movement of people within the community. – The EEU is an economic, not political union. It will not have any supra-national authority, over the sovereign states. Kazakhstan has made it clear that it will not support any supranational political bodies, such as an EEU Parliament. – No country will dominate the decision-making process in the Union as each country has an equal vote as well as the right to veto. Resolutions will be based on the ruling of the majority. – As in the case of the EU, the member countries have various predispositions and concerns reflecting their endowments and 171

power. Kazakh officials favor an economic association (much like UK’s disposition to the EU) while Belarus and Russia support stronger and deeper political and economic union (much like Germany). Given Kazakhstan’s insistence that EEU will not go beyond economic union, it is unlikely that integration will proceed further than the currently agreed-to format. – The Union is created to facilitate trade, both inside of the Union and with outside economies – not to act as a barrier to trade. – As a result of the creation of a new business environment and conditions for interaction between different businesses, all countries will see structural benefits that manifest themselves in the use of workforce, production and infrastructural cooperation and mutual investments. According to analysts, this will generate up to 25 per cent growth in member states by 2030 (15 years after the creation of the economic space), or around $600bn. The Eurasian Economic Union represents the opening of new economic opportunities without sacrificing political independence. The EEU builds on the economic success of the Customs Union, and the EEU is in line with Kazakhstan's multi-vector foreign policy. Kazakhstan unequivocally maintains the EEU will not erode the country's political independence, which is critical to Kazakhstan’s priorities and multi-vector orientation. The EEU in its final form serves to advance Kazakhstan’s economic integration with the European Union, the United States, China and Latin America. The Eurasian Economic Union is an international organization for regional economic integration. It has international legal personality and is established by the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union. The EAEU provides for free movement of goods, services, capital and labor, pursues coordinated, harmonized and single policy in the sectors determined by the Treaty and international agreements within the Union. The Member-States of the Eurasian Economic Union are the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic and the Russian Federation. 172

The Union is being created to comprehensively upgrade, raise the competitiveness of and cooperation between the national economies, and to promote stable development in order to raise the living standards of the nations of the Member-States. History After the end of the Cold War and the Dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia and the Central Asian republics were weakened economically and faced declines in GDP. Post-Soviet states underwent economic reforms and privatisation. The process of Eurasian integration began immediately after the break-up of the Soviet Union to salvage economic ties with Post-Soviet states through the creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States on 8 December 1991 by the presidents of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia In 1994, the President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, first suggested the idea of creating a «Eurasian Union» during a speech at Moscow State University. Numerous treaties were subsequently signed to establish the trading bloc gradually. Many politicians, philosophers and political scientists have since called for further integration towards a monetary, political, military and cultural union. However the member states decided to seek a purely economic union, having concerns about keeping their independence and sovereignty intact. The Eurasian Economic Union has an integrated single market of 183 million people and a gross domestic product of over 4 trillion U.S. dollars (PPP). The EAEU introduces the free movement of goods, capital, services and people and provides for common policies in macroeconomic sphere, transport, industry and agriculture, energy, foreign trade and investment, customs, technical regulation, competition and antitrust regulation. Provisions for a single currency and greater integration are envisioned in future. The union operates through supranational and intergovernmental institutions. The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council is the «Supreme Body» of the Union, consisting of the Heads of the Member States. The second level of intergovernmental institutions is represented by the Eurasian Intergovernmental Council (consisting of the Prime Ministers of member states). The day-to-day work of the EAEU is done through 173

the Eurasian Economic Commission (the executive body), which is a supranational body similar to European Commission. There is also a judicial body – the Court of the EAEU. Meeting of the leaders of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in Bishkek, 2008. The CIS initiated the lengthy process of Eurasian integration. During the 1990s, the Eurasian integration process was slow, possibly due to the economic crisis experienced after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the size of the countries involved (Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan cover an area of about 20 million km²). As a result, numerous treaties have been signed by member states to establish the regional trading bloc gradually. In 1995, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, and later acceding states Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan signed the first agreements on the establishment of a Customs Union. Its purpose was to gradually lead the way toward the creation of open borders without passport controls between member states. In 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Kyrgyzstan signed the Treaty on Increased Integration in the Economic and Humanitarian Fields to begin economic integration between countries to allow for the creation of common markets for goods, services, capital, labour, and developing single transport, energy and information systems. In 1999, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan signed the Treaty on the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space by clarifying the goals and policies the states would undertake in order to form the Eurasian Customs Union and the Single Economic Space. Eurasian Economic Community (2000-2014) To promote further economic integration and more cooperation, in 2000 Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan established the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) which Uzbekistan joined in 2006. The treaty established a common market for its member states. The Eurasian Economic Community was modelled on the European Economic Community.] The two had a comparable population size of 171 million and 169 million, respectively. 174

A Treaty on a Single Economic Space by Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine was signed in 2003 and ratified in 2004, but the process was stalled after the Orange revolution. In 2007, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia signed an agreement to create a Customs Union between the three countries. Establishing the customs union and single market (2010-2014) A session of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council (composed of the union's heads of state) is held at least once every year. The Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia (now the Eurasian Customs Union) came into existence on 1 January 2010. The Customs Union's priorities were the elimination of intra-bloc tariffs, establishing a common external tariff policy and the elimination of non-tariff barriers. It was launched as a first step towards forming a broader single market inspired by the European Union, with the objective of forming an alliance between former Soviet states.[41] The member states planned to continue with economic integration and were set to remove all customs borders between each other after July 2011. On January 1, 2012, the three states established the Eurasian Economic Space which ensures the effective functioning of a single market for goods, services, capital and labour, and to establish coherent industrial, transport, energy and agricultural policies. The agreement included a roadmap for future integration and established the Eurasian Economic Commission (modelled on the European Commission). The Eurasian Economic Commission serves as the regulatory agency for the Eurasian Customs Union, the Single Economic Space and the Eurasian Economic Union. The signing ceremony of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union (in Astana, Kazakhstan, on 29 May 2014) In 2011, the then-Prime Minister of Russia, Vladimir Putin, announced his support for Nursultan Nazarbayev's idea for the creation of a Eurasian Economic Union. On 18 November 2011, the presidents of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia signed an agreement setting a target of establishing the Eurasian Economic Union by 2015.[ The member states put together a joint commission on fostering closer economic ties. 175

On 29 May 2014, the presidents of Kazakhstan, Belarus and Russia signed the treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union, which came into effect on 1 January 2015. The presidents of Armenia and Kyrgyzstan were also present at the signing ceremony. Russian president Vladimir Putin stated, «Today we have created a powerful, attractive centre of economic development, a big regional market that unites more than 170 million people». Kazakh politicians emphasized the Eurasian Economic Union was not intended to be a political bloc, but a purely economic union.[49] Bakytzhan Sagintayev, the first deputy prime minister of Kazakhstan and lead negotiator, said, «We are not creating a political organisation; we are forming a purely economic union». He further stated «it is a pragmatic means to get benefits. We don't meddle into what Russia is doing politically, and they cannot tell us what foreign policy to pursue». By October, the treaty had received parliamentary approval from all three states.[ On 9 October 2014, a treaty to enlarge the EEU to Armenia was signed. Kyrgyzstan signed a treaty on 23 December 2014 and became a member of the Eurasian Union on 6 August 2015. Kazakhstan’s agenda From the very beginning, Kazakhstan wanted the Eurasian Union to be purely economic, without any political dimension. On Astana’s initiative, the EEU’s basic principles contain a point on respecting each member state’s political system, which means that members do not have to make political changes as a result of closer integration. Kazakhstan sees the creation of the EEU as a way to strengthen its position in an increasingly competitive global environment. The EEU is officially seen as a way of achieving important economic goals. Kazakh businesses are to have access to the EEU market, with a population of 170 million, and cross-border trade is to be increased with the 12 Russian regions bordering Kazakhstan, which have a population of 27 million. Kazakhstan should be more attractive to investors who also want to operate in the Russian and Belarusian markets. The Russian and Belarusian state procurement markets, valued at $198 billion a year, will be opened to Kazakh businesses. Transport routes linking up European and Asian trade flows through Kazakhstan are to be created and landlocked Kazakhstan’s high 176

transport costs should be lowered through equal access to the Russian and Belarusian railway networks. A single space will be created for the free flow of capital, services, and labour, and a single financial market is to be instated by 2025. And Kazakhstan will gain access to energy infrastructure by 2025 on the basis of the EEU’s single market for oil and gas. But there will be real problems in achieving these official goals. It is impossible to create an equal union between strong and weak players. And it is even more difficult to create a working union between uncompetitive players if their economies are based primarily on the export of natural resources. All the members of the Customs Union have high levels of corruption and state interference in the economy, bloated bureaucracies, and no proper market economy. And it will be interesting to find out whether authoritarian regimes are able to integrate in an effective way. Rather than economic integration with other states, the best foreign policy for Kazakhstan would be diversified cooperation in water, energy, agriculture, and other spheres with various countries (other Central Asian countries, China, Russia, the European Union, and the United States). Anti-Eurasian sentiments in Kazakhstan The creation of the Customs Union and its transformation into the EEU caused serious divisions in Kazakh society. In early 2014, an anti-Eurasian movement was set up, which sees the EEU as a threat to Kazakhstan’s national sovereignty. Back in 2012, the opposition even proposed a referendum on Kazakhstan’s membership of the precursors of the EEU, the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space. The influence of the opposition on domestic politics should not be overestimated. But the government needs to be careful, because the EEU is becoming more unpopular with the ethnic Kazakh part of the population, including the influential Kazakh-speaking intelligentsia on whose support the government depends. Moreover, the war in Ukraine and the West’s sanctions on Russia have hardened the sceptics’ position that it is dangerous for Kazakhstan to be in a union with a Russia that is becoming an international outcast. It is also unclear whether Kazakhstan and Belarus will remain members of the EEU after the regimes in both countries change. In 177

Kazakhstan, both domestic and foreign policy are highly personalised – the EEU is a part of Nazarbaev’s personal political ambitions. Will the next president have the same aims? Most importantly, how will Russia react? Will it try to put pressure on the Kazakh leadership as it has at times done in Belarus? Russia made a tactical mistake and set a precedent when it declared that the change of regime in Kyiv meant that Russia did not have to recognise the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances for Ukraine. This leaves the door open to other countries in the future to leave the EEU if they consider that it is no longer in their interest. Prospects for the future of the EEU The EEU may develop in several different directions, depending on economic and geopolitical factors. The bureaucratisation of the integration project may serve to hamper the development of the EEU’s members. In the ongoing trade dispute between Belarus and Russia, economic tensions between Moscow and Minsk have led to a public spat in spite of the supranational structures of the Eurasian Economic Commission and its Council, which is made up of the deputy prime ministers of the three member countries. These structures seem to be more for show than of any practical use. Kazakhstan and Belarus did not agree with Moscow’s introduction of import sanctions against Western goods, so the move led to a cooling of relations within the Customs Union. Moscow accused Minsk of re-exporting banned goods to the Russian market. Moreover, Russia introduced limits on the transit of goods across its territory, including those destined for Kazakhstan. This was in violation of the basic principles of the Customs Union and Belarus retaliated by restoring its own customs controls. All this means that as the EEU starts out in 2015, these internal conflicts will continue, since the sanctions war, along with Moscow’s war against re-exports, shows no sign of ending. The three current EEU members will likely retain their different views on the future of the project. This may lead to an increase in economic and political tension and to conflict within the organisation. Moreover, the EEU’s enlargement to include underdeveloped and uncompetitive countries (Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan) may 178

delay its development because funding will be required to help their economies catch up. The coming into being of the EEU may lead to the disintegration of the post-Soviet space into several groups: Eurasians (Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan), antiEurasians (Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia), and neutral countries (Turkmenistan). Russia will continue to push for more political integration through the EEU, especially after the regime in Kazakhstan changes. This means that Kazakhstan’s continued membership of the EEU will undoubtedly carry serious political risks. 6.2. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is a Eurasian political, economic, and security organization, the creation of which was announced on 15 June 2001 in Shanghai, China by the leaders of China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan; the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Charter was signed in June 2002 and entered into force on 19 September 2003. These countries, except for Uzbekistan, had been members of the Shanghai Five group, founded on 26 April 1996 in Shanghai. India and Pakistan joined SCO as full members in June 2017. History The Shanghai Five grouping was created 26 April 1996 with the signing of the Treaty on Deepening Military Trust in Border Regions in Shanghai, China by the heads of states of China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan. On 24 April 1997, the same countries signed the Treaty on Reduction of Military Forces in Border Regions in a meeting in Moscow, Russia. On 20 May 1997, presidents of Russia Boris Yeltsin and prime minister of China Jiang Zemin signed a declaration on a «multipolar world». Russian President Vladimir Putin, Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev, Chinese President Jiang Zemin, Kyrgyz President Askar Akayev, and Tajik President Emomali Rahmon, at one time the leaders 179

of the Shanghai Five. Subsequent annual summits of the Shanghai Five group occurred in Almaty, Kazakhstan in 1998, in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan in 1999, and in Dushanbe, Tajikistan in 2000. At the Dushanbe summit, members agreed to «oppose intervention in other countries' internal affairs on the pretexts of 'humanitarianism' and 'protecting human rights;' and support the efforts of one another in safeguarding the five countries' national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and social stability». In 2001, the annual summit returned to Shanghai. There the five member nations first admitted Uzbekistan in the Shanghai Five mechanism (thus transforming it into the Shanghai Six). Then all six heads of state signed on 15 June 2001 the Declaration of Shanghai Cooperation Organization, praising the role played thus far by the Shanghai Five mechanism and aiming to transform it to a higher level of cooperation. In June 2002, the heads of the SCO member states met in Saint Petersburg, Russia. There they signed the SCO Charter which expounded on the organization’s purposes, principles, structures and forms of operation, and established it in international law. In July 2005, at the summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, with representatives of India, Iran, Mongolia and Pakistan attending a SCO summit for the first time, the President of the host country, Nursultan Nazarbayev, greeted the guests in words that had never been used before in any context: «The leaders of the states sitting at this negotiation table are representatives of half of humanity». By 2007 the SCO had initiated over twenty large-scale projects related to transportation, energy and telecommunications and held regular meetings of security, military, defence, foreign affairs, economic, cultural, banking and other officials from its member states. In July 2015 in Ufa, Russia, the SCO decided to admit India and Pakistan as full members. India and Pakistan signed the memorandum of obligations in June 2016 in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, thereby starting the formal process of joining the SCO as full members. On 9 June 2017, at the historic summit in Astana, India and Pakistan have officially joined SCO as full-fledged members. The SCO has established relations with the United Nations in 2004 (where it is an observer in the General Assembly), Commonwealth of Independent States in 2005, Association of 180

Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 2005, the Collective Security Treaty Organization in 2007, the Economic Cooperation Organization in 2007, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in 2011, the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA) in 2014, and the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific in 2015. Its eight full members account for half of the world's population and a quarter of the world's GDP. Activities Cooperation on security. The SCO is primarily centered on its member nations' Central Asian security-related concerns, often describing the main threats it confronts as being terrorism, separatism and extremism. However evidence is growing that its activities in the area of social development of its member states is increasing fast. At 16–17 June 2004 SCO summit, held in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, the Regional Antiterrorism Structure (RATS) was established. On 21 April 2006, the SCO announced plans to fight cross-border drug crimes under the counter-terrorism rubric. In October 2007, the SCO signed an agreement with the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), in the Tajik capital Dushanbe, to broaden cooperation on issues such as security, crime, and drug trafficking. Joint action plans between the two organisations are planned to be signed by early 2008 in Beijing. The organization is also redefining cyberwarfare, saying that the dissemination of information «harmful to the spiritual, moral and cultural spheres of other states» should be considered a «security threat». An accord adopted in 2009 defined «information war«, in part, as an effort by a state to undermine another's «political, economic, and social systems». Military activities. Over the past few years, the organization’s activities have expanded to include increased military cooperation, intelligence sharing, and counterterrorism. There have been a number of SCO joint military exercises. The first of these was held in 2003, with the first phase taking place in Kazakhstan and the second in China. Since then China and Russia have teamed up for large-scale war games in 2005 (Peace Mission 2005), 2007 and 2009, under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. More than 4,000 181

soldiers participated at the joint military exercises in 2007 (known as «Peace Mission 2007») which took place in Chelyabinsk Russia near the Ural Mountains, as was agreed upon in April 2006 at a meeting of SCO Defence Ministers. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said that the exercises would be transparent and open to media and the public. Following the war games' successful completion, Russian officials began speaking of India joining such exercises in the future and the SCO taking on a military role. Peace Mission 2010, conducted 9–25 September at Kazakhstan's Matybulak training area, saw over 5,000 personnel from China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan conduct joint planning and operational maneuvers. The SCO has served as a platform for larger military announcements by members. During the 2007 war games in Russia, with leaders of SCO member states in attendance including Chinese President Hu Jintao, Russia's President Vladimir Putin used the occasion to take advantage of a captive audience: Russian strategic bombers, he said, would resume regular long-range patrols for the first time since the Cold War. «Starting today, such tours of duty will be conducted regularly and on the strategic scale», Putin said. «Our pilots have been grounded for too long. They are happy to start a new life». On 4 June 2014, in the Tajik capital Dushanbe, the idea was brought up to merge the SCO with the Collective Security Treaty Organization. It is still being debated. Economic cooperation. Russia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan are also members of the Eurasian Economic Union. A Framework Agreement to enhance economic cooperation was signed by the SCO member states on 23 September 2003. At the same meeting the PRC's Premier, Wen Jiabao, proposed a long-term objective to establish a free trade area in the SCO, while other more immediate measures would be taken to improve the flow of goods in the region. A follow up plan with 100 specific actions was signed one year later, on 23 September 2004. On 26 October 2005, during the Moscow Summit of the SCO, the Secretary General of the Organization said that the SCO will priorities joint energy projects; such will include the oil and gas sector, the exploration of new hydrocarbon reserves, and joint use of water resources. The creation of an Inter-bank SCO Council was also agreed 182

upon at that summit in order to fund future joint projects. The first meeting of the SCO Interbank Association was held in Beijing on 21– 22 February 2006. On 30 November 2006, at The SCO: Results and Perspectives, an international conference held in Almaty, the representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry announced that Russia is developing plans for an SCO «Energy Club». The need for this «club» was reiterated by Moscow at an SCO summit in November 2007. Other SCO members, however, have not committed themselves to the idea. However, on 28 August 2008 summit it was stated that «Against the backdrop of a slowdown in the growth of world economy pursuing a responsible currency and financial policy, control over the capital flowing, ensuring food and energy security have been gaining special significance». At the 2007 SCO summit Iranian Vice President Parviz Davudi addressed an initiative that has been garnering greater interest and assuming a heightened sense of urgency when he said, «The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation is a good venue for designing a new banking system which is independent from international banking systems». In 16 June 2009, at the Yekaterinburg Summit, China announced plans to provide a US$10 billion loan to SCO member states to shore up the struggling economies of its members amid the global financial crisis. The summit was held together with the first BRIC summit, and the China-Russia joint statement said that they want a bigger quota in the International Monetary Fund.[60] Cultural cooperation. Cultural cooperation also occurs in the SCO framework. Culture ministers of the SCO met for the first time in Beijing on 12 April 2002, signing a joint statement for continued cooperation. The third meeting of the Culture Ministers took place in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, on 27–28 April 2006. An SCO Arts Festival and Exhibition was held for the first time during the Astana Summit in 2005. Kazakhstan has also suggested an SCO folk dance festival to take place in 2008, in Astana. Summits According to the Charter of the SCO, summits of the Council of Heads of State shall be held annually at alternating venues. The locations of these summits follow the alphabetical order of the 183

member state's name in Russian. The charter also dictates that the Council of Heads of Government (that is, the Prime Ministers) shall meet annually in a place decided upon by the council members. The Council of Foreign Ministers is supposed to hold a summit one month before the annual summit of Heads of State. Extraordinary meetings of the Council of Foreign Ministers can be called by any two member states. The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is a permanent intergovernmental international organisation, the creation of which was announced on 15 June 2001 in Shanghai (China) by the Republic of Kazakhstan, the People's Republic of China, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan, and the Republic of Uzbekistan. It was preceded by the Shanghai Five mechanism. The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Charter was signed during the St.Petersburg SCO Heads of State meeting in June 2002, and entered into force on 19 September 2003. This is the fundamental statutory document which outlines the organisation's goals and principles, as well as its structure and core activities. The SCO's main goals are as follows: strengthening mutual trust and neighbourliness among the member states; promoting their effective cooperation in politics, trade, the economy, research, technology and culture, as well as in education, energy, transport, tourism, environmental protection, and other areas; making joint efforts to maintain and ensure peace, security and stability in the region; and moving towards the establishment of a democratic, fair and rational new international political and economic order. The Heads of State Council (HSC) is the supreme decisionmaking body in the SCO. It meets once a year and adopts decisions and guidelines on all important matters of the organization. The SCO Heads of Government Council (HGC) meets once a year to discuss the organization’s multilateral cooperation strategy and priority areas, to resolve current important economic and other cooperation issues, and also to approve the organization’s annual budget. The SCO's official languages are Russian and Chinese. In addition to HSC and HGC meetings, there is also a mechanism of meetings at the level of heads of parliament; secretaries of Security Councils; ministers 184

of foreign affairs, defence, emergency relief, economy, transport, culture, education, and healthcare; heads of law enforcement agencies and supreme and arbitration courts; and prosecutors general. The Council of National Coordinators of SCO Member States (CNC) acts as the SCO coordination mechanism. The organization has two permanent bodies – the SCO Secretariat based in Beijing and the Executive Committee of the Regional AntiTerrorist Structure (RATS) based in Tashkent. The SCO SecretaryGeneral and the Director of the Executive Committee of the SCO RATS are appointed by the Council of Heads of State for a term of three years. Rashid Alimov (Tajikistan) and Yevgeny Sysoyev (Russia) have held these positions, respectively, since 1 January 2016. SCO Secretariat. The SCO Secretariat, based in Beijing, is the main permanent executive body of the SCO. Bringing together the colorful and distinctive cultures of Central Asia, Russia and China, it promotes mutual assistance and team spirit among staff and provides reliable support on the basis of a stable administrative system that has taken shape over 15 years. The Secretariat is headed by the SecretaryGeneral. Nominated by the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs and approved by the Heads of State Council, the Secretary-General is appointed from among citizens of the SCO member states on a rotating basis in Russian alphabetical order for a single three-year term with no possibility of extension. Deputy Secretaries-General are nominated by the Council of National Coordinators and approved by the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs. Officials of the Secretariat are hired from among citizens of the SCO member states on the basis of quotas. The SCO Secretariat coordinates the activity of the SCO and provides informational, analytical, legal, organizational and technical support. The Secretariat coordinates the organization’s cooperation with observer states and dialogue partners in line with SCO regulatory and legal documents, works with states and international organizations on issues related to the organization’s activity, and concludes agreements to that end with the consent of the member states. The Secretariat also works with non-governmental organizations within the SCO framework in accordance with the legal documents regulating their activity. In addition, it organises and coordinates the 185

activity of the SCO Observer Mission in presidential and/or parliamentary elections, as well as referendums. The Secretariat holds regular briefings for representatives of print and internet media, prepares and publishes a news bulletin, and manages its website. With the consent of the member states and within budgetary limits, it recruits experts on the basis of limited-term contract to conduct research on issues of concern to the SCO, and organises workshops and conferences. The Secretariat carries out preliminary legal and financial assessments of draft treaties and regulations drawn up within the SCO framework, acts as the depositary of documents adopted within the SCO framework, and certifies copies of such documents and forwards them to the member states as well as to the SCO RATS as applicable. The Secretariat provides organisational and technical support for meetings and/or sessions of SCO institutions in accordance with relevant regulations and in cooperation with the state hosting the meeting. Structure of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation The Council of National Coordinators. The Council of National Coordinators shall be a SCO body that coordinates and directs day-today activities of the Organisation. It shall make the necessary preparation for the meetings of the Heads of State Council, the Heads of Government Council and the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs. National coordinators shall be appointed by each member state in accordance with its internal rules and procedures. The Council shall hold its meetings at least three times a year. A meeting of the Council shall be chaired by the national coordinator of the member state on whose territory the regular meeting of the Heads of State Council takes place, from the date of the last ordinary meeting of the Heads of State Council to the date of the next ordinary meeting of the Heads of State Council. The Chairman of the Council of National Coordinators may on the instruction of the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs represent the Organisation in its external contacts, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the Council of National Coordinators. Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure. The SCO Regional AntiTerrorist Structure established by the member states of the Shanghai 186

Convention to combat terrorism, separatism and extremism of 15 June, 2001, located in Bishkek, the Kyrgyz Republic, shall be a standing SCO body. Its main objectives and functions, principles of its constitution and financing, as well as its rules of procedure shall be governed by a separate international treaty concluded by the member states, and other necessary instruments adopted by them. The Executive Committee of the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS) of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is the permanent body of the SCO RATS based in Tashkent, the capital of Uzbekistan. Decisions-Taking Procedure. The SCO bodies shall take decisions by agreement without vote and their decisions shall be considered adopted if no member state has raised objections during the vote (consensus), except for the decisions n suspension of membership or expulsion from the Organisation that shall be taken by «consensus minus one vote of the member state concerned». Any member state may expose its opinion on particular aspects and/or concrete issues of the decisions taken which shall not be an obstacle to taking the decision as a whole. This opinion shall be placed on record. Should one or several member states be not interested in implementing particular cooperation projects of interest to other member states, nonparticipation of the abovesaid member states in these projects shall not prevent the implementation of such cooperation projects by the member states concerned and, at the same time, shall not prevent the said member states from joining such projects at a later stage. Implementation of Decisions. The decisions taken by the SCO bodies shall be implemented by the member states in accordance with the procedures set out in their national legislation. Control of the compliance with obligations of the member states to implement this Charter, other agreements and decisions adopted within SCO shall be exercised by the SCO bodies within their competence. The Business Council of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. The Business Council of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was founded on June 14, 2006 in Shanghai. The founding session of the Business Council was attended by representatives of the Council's national branches from the Republic of Kazakhstan, the People's Republic of China, the Kyrgyz 187

Republic, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan and the Republic of Uzbekistan. During the session the parties signed the documents which regulate activities of the Council and its permanent body – the SCO BC Secretariat based in Moscow. The Council was created in accordance with the decision of the SCO Heads of State Council. It is a non-governmental body which brings together the most influential members of the business communities of the six countries with the aim of boosting economic cooperation in the framework of the Organisation, establishing direct links and dialogue among business and financial circles of the SCO member states, assisting practical promotion of multilateral projects determined by the heads of government in the Programme of Trade and Economic Cooperation. Annual Session is the highest body of the Business Council which sets priorities, formulates main targets for its activity, and decides on important issues concerning links with business associations from other states. The SCO Business Council is an independent institution capable of taking advisory decisions and giving expert assessments on the involvement of members of the business communities of the SCO member states in trade, economic and investment interaction in the framework of the Organization. Another important feature of the Business Council is that alongside the priority areas of multilateral cooperation such as energy, transportation, telecommunications, credit and banking the Council pays special attention to interaction of the SCO member states in education, science, new technology, healthcare and agriculture. Proceeding from the dynamism and interest of the business communities the BC closely cooperates with economic ministries and departments of governments and in no way duplicates their work. During Shanghai Summit in June 2006 the heads of state underlined the significance of founding the Business Council for further development of the SCO and were confident that it would become an effective mechanism for the promotion of business partnership in the SCO region. In 2006 special working groups in charge of cooperation in healthcare and education as well as interaction in creating SCO Energy Club were created. Currently the special working group on healthcare is conducting selection 188

of projects aimed to set up a structure in the SCO framework similar to the World Health Organisation (the working title is «SCO WHO») which would work in the interest of improving medical services in the SCO member states, developing disease-prevention capabilities, and satisfying the needs of population in high-tech medical treatments. In order to stimulate effective business relations within the SCO and achieve economic targets, on August 16, 2007, the SCO Business Council and the SCO Interbank Consortium signed a cooperation agreement. The SCO Business Council activities are a component of the work done by the government bodies of the SCO member states on pursuing the List of Measures of Further Development of Project Activities within the SCO for the Period of 2012-2016, which outline the priorities for economic cooperation in the coming decade. To achieve the set targets, throughout 2013 several events were held within the SCO Business Council. Thus, the national bodies and the Secretariat of the SCO Business Council organized six conferences on the prospects of developing relations on the territory of the SCO in the financial sector of the economy and on the introduction of high technology, investment, and transport and logistics areas. Five meetings, three round tables and three conferences were also held and synchronised with the major events held by the SCO Business Council in the aforementioned period. The major direction of the business companies' cooperation involved projects in energy and IT, as well as in infrastructure and transport development in the SCO member states. 6.3. Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA) is an inter-governmental forum for enhancing cooperation towards promoting peace, security and stability in Asia. It is a forum based on the recognition that there is close link between peace, security and stability in Asia and in the rest of the world. 189

The idea of convening the CICA was first proposed by Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev on 5 October 1992, at the 47th Session of the United Nations General Assembly. Background The proposal for convening the CICA was welcomed by a number of Asian States. During the next seven years, a series of meetings were held among the interested countries to discuss modalities of convening the CICA and draft basic documents. The first meeting of the CICA Ministers of Foreign Affairs was held in 14 September 1999 with participation of 15 Member States. The Declaration on Principles Guiding Relations between CICA Member States was adopted at this meeting. The first CICA summit was held on 4 June 2002 with participation of 16 Member States and Almaty Act, the charter of the CICA, was adopted. At the second meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs in 2004, CICA Catalogue of Confidence Building Measures and CICA Rules of Procedures were adopted. At the second CICA Summit in 2006, it was decided to admit Thailand and Republic of Korea as new members and to establish a permanent secretariat. At the third meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs in 2008, Jordan and UAE were admitted as new members. At the third CICA Summit in 2010, Turkey assumed Chairmanship fo CICA from the founding Chairman Kazakhstan. The third Summit also admitted Iraq and Vietnam as new members and adopted the CICA Convention. Ministerial Meeting 1999 The First Meeting of CICA Ministers of Foreign Affairs was held in Almaty on September 14, 1999 with participation of fifteen member states: Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, China, Egypt, India, Iran, Israel, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Palestine, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkey and Uzbekistan. Representatives of the then Observer States: USA, Japan, Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mongolia, Ukraine, and International Organizations like UN and Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) also participated in the meeting. The First Ministerial Meeting laid the foundation of CICA with the signing of the Declaration on Principles Guiding Relations 190

between CICA Member States by the Ministers. The Ministers, while reaffirming commitment to the United Nations Charter, agreed that the Member states will respect each other’s sovereign equality; refrain from the threat or use of force; respect the territorial integrity of each other; settle disputes in accordance with the Declaration, UN Charter and international law; refrain from any intervention in the internal affairs of each other; reaffirm their commitment to the goal of achieving general and complete disarmament under effective control; enhance the process of economic, social and cultural cooperation; and respect human rights and fundamental freedoms of all individuals. Summit 2002 The first summit of the CICA was held in Almaty on June 4, 2002. The idea was proposed by Kazakhstan at the end of the Cold War and at the time of shifting geopolitics, provided a timely opportunity for the Asian nations to address modern challenges to the international peace and stability and set out the vision to tackle them. The fledgling forum's main purpose of bringing peace to all, including bringing together seemingly irreconcilable countries and interests, was immediately put to a real life test. The CICA Summit drew spotlight of the world's attention to Almaty, provided the background for laying the foundations for the first security organization in Asia. The 16 nations signed the Almaty Act, the Charter of the CICA and pledging to work «towards promoting peace, security and stability in Asia». The Act was signed by Chairman of the Administration of Afghanistan Hamid Karzai, President of China Jiang Zemin, Prime Minister of India Atal Behari Vajpayee, President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev, President of Kyrgyzstan Askar Akayev, President of Mongolia Natsagiin Bagabandi, President of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf, President of Russia Vladimir Putin, President of Turkey Ahmet Necdet Sezer, and President of Tajikistan Imomali Rakhmonov. Signatories from other CICA members included the prime ministers of Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan, a deputy prime minister of Israel, as well as special high-level envoys from Egypt, Iran, and the Palestinian National Authority. 191

Ten more nations, including the United States, were accorded observer status in the new forum, as also a number of international organizations, such as the UN, the OSCE and the Arab League. In the final Almaty Act, the 16 leaders said that the CICA process presents «new opportunities for cooperation, peace and security in Asia» and «will guide us towards a better future, which our peoples deserve». They declared their «determination to form in Asia a common and indivisible area of security, where all states peacefully coexist, and their peoples live in conditions of peace, freedom and prosperity, and confident that peace, security and development complement, sustain and reinforce each other». The leaders agreed to hold summits every four years, while the foreign ministers are to meet every two years. There are also provisions allowing for special meetings and summits to be convened at the consensus at other times. The committee of senior officials will keep up the organizational work and will meet annually. In another major development, the leaders adopted the CICA Declaration on Eliminating Terrorism and Promoting Dialogue among Civilizations, condemning «all forms and manifestations of terrorism, committed no matter when, where or by whom», and declaring their commitment to cooperation with each other and other nations in combating terrorism. Ministerial Meeting 2004 The Second Meeting of CICA Ministers of Foreign Affairs was held in Almaty on October 22, 2004. At this meeting, CICA Catalogue of Confidence Building Measures (CBMs), CICA Rules of Procedure and Declaration of CICA Ministerial Meeting were adopted. Thailand was admitted as the seventeenth member of CICA. CICA Rules of Procedure laid down ground rules for decision making, member ship, observer status, chairmanship, types of meetings and procedure for conducting meetings. One of the most important aspects of the Rules of Procedure is that decisions and recommendations at all levels are taken by consensus. Rules of Procedure were amended by a decision adopted on September 1, 2009. With this amendment, period of Chairmanship was reduced from four years to two years. It was also decided that the member state hosting 192

regular Summit would be Chairman till the next regular meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs. The member state hosting the regular meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs would be Chairman till the next regular Summit. Declaration of the Second Ministerial Meeting included assessment of the situation at that time at the regional and global levels including Afghanistan, Iraq, Middle East, South Caucasus, and Korean peninsula. Member states once again condemned terrorism in all forms and manifestations and reiterated their commitment to fight this menace. Summit 2006 The Second CICA Summit was held in Almaty on June 17, 2006 with participation of the Heads of State/Government of Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan, Thailand and Uzbekistan and Special Envoys of the Heads of State/Government of Egypt, India, Iran, Israel, Mongolia, Palestine, Turkey and Republic of Korea which was admitted as the eighteenth member of CICA. The Second Summit adopted the Statute of CICA Secretariat and Declaration of the Second CICA Summit. The Declaration of the Second CICA Summit reflected the general view of the member states on key problems of security and cooperation in Asia and in other parts of the world. The Declaration also reiterated the desire of the member states to continue the efforts to move forward CICA process to achieve its shared objectives; and noted with satisfaction that the establishment of CICA Secretariat in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan was an important milestone in the evolution of CICA process. It was also decided to mark October 5 as CICA Day to commemorate the initiation of the proposal for convening the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia by H.E. Mr. Nursultan Nazarbayev, President of the Republic of Kazakhstan at the 47th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in 1992. Ministerial Meeting 2008 The Third Meeting of CICA Ministers of Foreign Affairs was held in Almaty on August 25, 2008. Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and United Arab Emirates were admitted to CICA on this occasion 193

taking the member ship to twenty. State of Qatar was conferred the status of observer. The Declaration of the Ministerial Meeting, titled CICA Progress in Implementation of CBMs, reaffirmed the importance of promoting CICA as a multilateral forum for close cooperation; continuous dialogue and interaction; comprehensive exchange of views; addressing new challenges and threats; facilitating prevention of conflicts; peaceful settlement of disputes; as well as for developing and implementing agreed Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) in the Asian continent. The Ministers welcomed commencement of implementation of CBMs and appreciated the efforts of coordinating and co-coordinating countries in the process. The Ministers also reviewed the tasks given by the Heads of State and Government at the Second CICA Summit of 2006 and adopted Conclusions of the Third Meeting of CICA Ministers of Foreign Affairs reflecting the results of the work done by the Member states in order to accomplish the tasks given at the Second Summit and to continue the work towards preparations for the Third CICA Summit in 2010. The Ministers adopted the Protocol Amending the Statute of the Secretariat of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia which provides for shifting of CICA Secretariat from Almaty to Astana as and when need arises. The Ministers also adopted, in principle, Convention on the Legal Capacity of CICA Secretariat, its Personnel and their Privileges and Immunities and urged the Member states to finalize their respective internal procedures with a view to sign it at the earliest possible. Summit 2010 The Third CICA Summit was held in Istanbul, Turkey on 8 June 2010 with participation of the Heads of State/Government of Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Russia and Turkey; Deputy Heads of State/Government of Iraq and Vietnam; and Special Envoys of China, Egypt, India, Israel, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Republic of Korea, Pakistan, Palestine, Tajikistan, Thailand and United Arab Emirates. Uzbekistan was the only member state that was not represented at the Summit. For the first time in the short history of CICA, Chairmanship passed from Kazakhstan to Turkey. Iraq and Vietnam were admitted as new members of CICA taking the 194

membership to twenty two. Bangladesh was accorded the status of observer. Summit adopted the declaration, Constructing cooperative approach to interaction and security in Asia and Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Secretariat, its Personnel and Representatives of Members of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia. The declaration reflected CICA’s stand and views on important issues of security and cooperation in Asia and other parts of the world including terrorism, disarmament, illicit drugs, global financial crisis, environment as well as situation in Afghanistan and Middle East. The declaration also reiterated commitment of the member states to carry forward the CICA process and reaffirmed the importance of initiating deliberations on security issues in accordance with the provisions of the CICA Catalogue of CBMs. During the summit Israel was condemned by all members but Israel itself for its Gaza flotilla raid, which Turkish president Abdullah Gulwelcomed in saying Israel was isolated and «[would] suffer the consequences of its mistake against Turkey». Literature 1. Official cite 2. Chin-Hao Huang China and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization: PostSummit Analysis and Implications for the United States // The Journal of the China-Eurasia Forum. – 2006. – Vol. 4. – №3. – P. 15-21. 3. Cohen Ariel After the G-8 Summit: China and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation// The Journal of the China-Eurasia Forum. – 2006. – Vol. 4. – №3. – P. 5164. 4. Blank, Stephen – The Shanghai Cooperative Organisation: Post-Mortem or Prophecy // CEF Quarterly, The Journal of the China-Eurasia Forum (Summer 2005) // URL: August2005.pdf 5. Amreyev, Baghdad. «Kazakhstan launches global initiative». Hurriyet Daily News. Retrieved 10 June 2010. 6. Kılıç, Gülay. «What can Turkey get out of CICA?». Hurriyet Daily NEws. Retrieved 10 June 2010. 7. «Israel condemned at Turkey summit». Al Jazeera. Retrieved 9 June 2010.


7. THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS ROLE IN THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD International organizations are important actors in the critical episodes of international politics, with power in mediation, dispute resolution, peace keeping, applying sanctions and others. They also help in managing various key areas of international concern, from global health policy to the monetary policies around the world International organizations can function for the aggregation and articulation of the national interests of its members into the international system. Thus, they bring the interested states into the same framework to articulate their interests into the world society. Just like interests groups in the national systems articulate and aggregate their common interests by forming institutions, associations, and interest-groups such as unions for better wages and working conditions, or green peace for cleaner environment, states do the same by articulating and aggregating their common interests onto the international political system through the international organizations. To achieve this, they form coalition, co-operation, and alliance. For example, OPEC is a organization for the aggregation and articulation of the oil exporting countries, to raise the oil prices, or to increase their power by using oil as a weapon. UNCTAD is sub-organ of the UN to articulate the interests of the developing countries, and to augment their voice in the system. On the other hand, there are some INGOs for the same objective, such as World Zionist Organization, International Chamber of Shipping, etc. An international organizations can be defined as ‘an institutional agreement between members of an international system in order to achieve objectives according to systemic conditions, reflecting attributes, aspirations and concerns of its members’. And what gives the basic rule of them is the sovereignty of the nation-state .In terms of the concept of global governance promoted by the international organizations, this was originally based on raw power, but has evolved to legitimacy and customs. 196

During the last six decades, international organizations have extended and reviewing their mandates and objectives, reaching the global level through the number of members, thus being among the favorite subjects of criticism for accelerating the globalization, failure of their missions or superficial supervision and liberalization of international trade by providing the framework for the negotiations and formalizing trade agreements. After the Cold War, the institutions of global economic governance have become the favorite subject of criticism. While globalizations and systemic risk awareness led to the need for global governance, the form it took it is no longer adequate to the current challenges, which goes to an increasing sentiment of dissatisfaction about the unilateral order, and then to the crisis of multilateralism. The favorable global institutions do not work either individually or collectively (McGrew, 2011). Paradigmatic Role of International Organizations .But why states use international organizations as engines for cooperation? Some issues are raised by their structure and operations, and also by international relations theories involving these complex phenomena. The independence of these organizations depends on states, because they can limit or extend their autonomy, interfering in their activity, restructure or dissolve them. They sometimes collide with the sovereignty of the state when they create new structures for regulating cross-border relationships. One of the main reasons why states want to establish or participate as members of international organization s is related to the fact that they delegate authority in matters that require expertise, knowledge, information, time and resources that are not available at all times. As we know them today, international organizations can be a complement to national prevailing paradigm, being an expression of denationalization policies . And this is an evident fact by supranational and transnational characteristics of undermining national decisions, using the principle of international cooperation. But the politicization of these decisions brings again into question their need for legitimacy. Two very important features make the difference between international organizations and other type of organizations: centralizations of power and decision-making autonomy. Both have 197

political effects beyond the simple effectiveness of the already taken decisions, because they resemble so much with governments or private companies. International organizations carry out actions that enjoy a sort of legitimacy and affect the legitimacy of the state activity. Even centralization may alter the perceptions of the states in the context of complex interactions between them. The centralization outlines the political context of interactions between states. International organizations provide forums for neutral, depoliticized and specific discussions in a much more effective way than any other agreements. They outline the specific terms of the ongoing interactions between states and try balancing the relationships between stronger and weaker states, between interests and knowledge. Romanian Economic and Business Review – Special issue The organizational structure influences the evolution of interstate cooperation and adapts itself to specific circumstances. Most organizations perform functions to support cooperation between conferences dealing with very important issues, as well as implementing a set of regulations. International standards can be addressed as expectations of head of states about international relations. The Legitimacy of International Organizations Legitimacy, as concept, was an integral part of political thought for a long time, but only recently has come to the attention of specialists in international relations. International specialty literature addresses legitimacy as being related to certain criteria that confer continuity and trust. Some well-known researchers say that international organizations seek to establish solid connections between their activities and social values system to which they belong, this links representing their legitimacy. . Others say that legitimacy lies in the means by which to achieve the specific goal. What is clear is the fact that most researchers have concluded upon the legitimacy problems that international organizations face as threatening the global economic balance, along with other crucial elements. When concerns about legitimacy decrease, the system itself is flawed and solutions must be found really quickly. International organizations participate as independent and neutral actors on the global age and can transform the relationships between 198

states, increasing the efficiency and legitimacy of their individual or collective decisions. This feature requires the short or long term balanced actions depending on the interest of both sides: powerful states will not join any organization they cannot influence and small countries will not join any organization whose decisions undermine their sovereignty. Authoritarian states are reluctant to allow international organizations in taking decisions for them, decisions that interfere with their national policies. And with the ones which are undemocratic and unstable and tend to limit the presence of organizations within their territory, states can even be against their participation in global economic governance. Global governance is strengthened only if it fits the internal profile of dominant countries. The main attributes of international organizations continue to be in the first line for facilitating negotiations and implementing agreements, dispute resolution, offering technical assistance and developing rules. But the most important thing remains their neutrality, impartiality and independence. Neutrality enables organizations to act as mediators between states and to implement their decisions. Impartiality resides on the fact that neither part is favored whatever the subject is. And independence resides on the fact that international organization s can take decisions for themselves. It is undeniable that international organizations can take decisions that bind on member states through predictable mechanism and pursuing their interests. Decision-making processes vary between consensus, vote and unanimous vote. The most common form of decision-making is consensus, involving further discussions to reach general agreement rather than forcing the decision by voting process. While the member states have certain reservations about the discussions or negotiations, they are. The role of international organizations in the global economic governance – an assessment forced to make concessions to each other in order to reach an agreement. If consensus cannot be reached, the last resort is unanimous voting or qualified majority voting. There is a gap between demand, responsibility and jurisdiction of global governance and its institutional capacity to take decisions and implement effective solutions for global problems. This is 199

associated with diminishing expectations that global institutions seem to reach and political demands are addressed, in part because of the lack of resources and because governments cannot deliver properly their institutional capacity. Most global institutions are unable to take a firm decision and hence the exiting pressing problems, as climate change or financial system reform, that face failure in advancing collective actions. These systemic failures lead to widening the disparities between promised collective actions and what really comes, being clear the limited progress of submission of the Millennium Development Goals. These deficiencies in the legitimacy and effectiveness exacerbate each other. The countries feel more and more disconnected from international institutions, greater being the tendency to invest in institutions to be successful. The international system needs structural renovation to allow adapting to a global community that is different from the last century existing one.



Changes and challenges in the current global governance are extremely diverse and they rapidly change on the international arena. The challenge of international organizations and their role in the global economy remains in the midst of global economic governance approach, although it seemed utopian at first and regarded as too ambitious in redefining the international system. A fundamental reorganization of the international system was not fair and everyone looks blown if this change will be unnoticed or will cause geopolitical pressures. In terms of prior work, it has been previously tried to emphasizing the concepts already by known researchers in the field. The approach is a more theoretical one, with emphasis on results and future research. The key results are related to some aspects of redefining the global economic governance in terms of international organizations. The implications are varied in terms of tidying the concepts and address researchers in the field. The main added value is the pragmatic approach of the role of international organizations and its formal relationship with the global economic governance. Can globalization be implemented without the creation of supranational coordinating organisms? Some analysts answer affirmatively to this question; they form the souvereignists’ camp, while others answer negatively to this question, forming the supranationalists’ trend. What mankind needs today is not just any globalization, but a globalization with a human face, namely one in which the benefits of globalization should be divided equitably among nations internationally and among people nationally. In order to set globalization on the values of equity and social justice, what is needed is reforms and new rules of conduct in the glob al governance organizations, IMF, WB and WTO. 201

The world economy is faced with the first recess ion of the globalization era. Today, there is no similar system supervising the world globalization process. We have global governance, without having a global government. In exchange, for the last 50 years, we have had a system of institutions such as WB, IMF and WTO, which are responsible for different segments of the process, development, trade, financial stability. The way in which these economic organizations are led comes from the way in which they developed throughout the years: non-democratically, non-transparently, depending on the great interests, at the expense of the poor countries». The governments accuse globalization for the loss of the national sovereignty triggered by the unrestrained growth of the force of the financial markets and of the multinational companies. The problem raised at present is related to the reform of the international organizations, so as to serve not only the rich and the developed industrialized countries, but also the poor and the less developed countries. The IMF and the World Bank were at the center of the major economic problems of the last two decennia, which also include the financial crises and the transition of the former communist states to the market economy. In its relations to a particular country, the IMF was conceived so as to limit itself to the macroeconomic issues: state budget deficit, monetary policy, inflation, trade deficit, contractrelated policy for credits coming from external sources. The World Bank was meant to deal with structural problems – what the government of the respective country spent money on, the country’s financial institutions, the labor force market, trading policies. We can certainly affirm that not only did the IMF not fulfill its initial mission of promoting global stability, but it also did not have any more success either in the new missions it undertook, such as the coordination of the former communist countries’ transition to the market economy. The WTO needs to adopt decisions having for a goal the facilitation of the penetration on the international market of certain firms from the developing countries which have potential and prove that they have the capacity to align themselves to certain standards imposed by the international organizations for a determined period of time. 202

In order for this goal to become reality, it is necessary that the WTO along with the other international organizations should plead for the adoption and implementation of decisions in favor of the Southern countries, such as the allotment of non-reimbursable funds and loans under more advantageous conditions, giving specialized technical assistance in order to instruct managers for an efficient resource allotment and for the adoption of policies and strategies allowing the attainment of the proposed goals. In this sense, the developed countries should provide the developing countries with effective technologies and equipments under advantageous conditions, should assure the necessary specialized technical and financial assistance so that the countries of the South may be capable of exploiting the raw material s that they have and of using the abundant and relatively cheap labor force available. The economic policies elaborated in Washington by the international economic institutions and their application in the developed countries were not adequate for the countries going through the first stages of their development or through their transition. Most of the advanced industrialized countries have created solid economies for themselves by selectively protecting some of their activity branches until they were strong enough to face the competition of the foreign companies. The worldwide practice has demonstrated that obliging a developing country to open its market to import products that would compete with those realized by certain branches of its national economy triggered disastrous social and economic consequences. Jobs systematically went missing, the poor farmers of the developing countries simply could not face the competition of the products supported by strong subventions coming from Europe or the USA, before the industry and agriculture of these countries were able to develop and create new jobs. Because of the IMF’s insistence that the developing countries should continue to apply restrictive monetary policies, the interest rates reached levels that made it impossible to create new jobs, even under the most favorable conditions. Because trade liberalization was realized before taking the necessary social protection measures, those who lost their jobs became poor, while those who did not lose their jobs had a strong feeling of insecurity. 203

So, much too often, liberalization was followed not by the promised economic growth but by the increase of poverty. The decisions of a certain institution normally reflect the conceptions and the interests of those who make them. Globalization – Approaches to Diversity. The disappointment related to actions undertaken under the guidance of the IMF has grown as the poor of Indonesia, Morocco or Papua-New Guinea benefit of increasingly lower subventions for fuel and food, those of Thailand see the AIDS spreading because of the health expense cuts imposed by the IMF, and the families of many developing countries, having to pay the schooling of their children as part of the so-called «cost recovery» programs, choose not to send them to school anymore. One might wonder if the IMF is really needed today. It is the UN that should be conceived so as to help the countries develop their interactions, should facilitate these interactions and should make them function efficiently in a multilateral system. A constantly divergent dimension in the discussion s on the notion of system reform refers to the centralization-decentralization dilemma. The realization of the international cooperation tasks on the scale and magnitude demanded by the Charter, in such diverse domains would not have been possible on a centralized level. The international action in the economic and social domains depends on the active participation and complementary action of the national authorities in each domain. They can operate by means of a direct association with the international partners, so decentralization is an objective need. The role of the international organizations in the occurrence of financial stability consists in: operating prudently in promoting the liberalization of capital; describing conditions for its acceptance by individual countries; avoiding too restrictive macroeconomic policies and structural adjustment policies that have not proved their efficiency; ending the global monopoly of the International Monetary Fund. The UN has an indispensable role in preventing and mitigating the consequences of the conflicts, not just by its actions in the strict sphere of the peace-keeping operations or other military and security actions but also by all it s others preoccupations, such as the promotion 204

of sustainable development, the respect for human rights and the development of the international law. The UN does not only have to pursue the increase of its own role in this direction, but it also needs to stimulate the mobilization of the resources of the international financial institutions in common projects. Unfortunately, at present one cannot speak about the existence of a world organization able to significantly reduce the inequalities between the countries of the North and the countries of the South, governing according to its own rules, without being influenced by the governments of the most industrialized countries. We need important reforms of the existing world organizations or even the disappearance of the existing ones and the creation of new institutions able to apply the laws objectively, to adopt decisions, strategies and plans, serving the interests of the whole world and not just the interests of the main industrialized countries, able to «listen» to the problems of each The Role of the International Organisms in the Globalization Process country in turn, to adopt specific measures for each of them, to find solutions as adequate and as close to reality as possible. The pressures exerted by globalization on the economy and on the lives of the people of our planet are felt more and more intensely. At the same time, we should «transform the terrible economic crisis into an opportunity of launching a new era of sustainability». Development and sustainability are the goals of the «model of capitalism of the 21st century». The United Nations Environment Program has developed a new concept: A Green New Deal, representing a program of public investments in infrastructure and technology, by means of which the countries can assure the rehabilitation of their economy, can keep the unemployment rate under control an d, in the long run, can obtain competitive advantages. In other words, everything that was considered true until now has become updated. The state’s strong intervention is not the only way to overcome the financial crisis, yet with a new practice of the concept of sustainable development, it should become reality. The sustainable development concept was created more 22 years ago and it has been accepted and adopted in almost all the international 205

institutions. A fact that should not be forgotten is that the European Union, the main promoter of the environmental protection measures, renewed it s sustainable development strategy in 2006, its main instruments being: the institution for regulation and modernization, a new fiscal philosophy and an improved subvention structure.




Number №1 Highlight the UN specialized agency:

0 1 0 0 0

A. INTERPOL B. World Health Organization C. The Trusteeship Council D. NATO E. IAEA


Number №2 The universal international organizations include:

1 0 0 0 0

A. UN B. NATO C. Organization of African Unity D. Organization of American States E. Organization of the Collective Security Treaty

1 0 0 0

Number №3 Among UNESCO's programs run by the communication and information areas are: A. International Program for the Development of Information Technology B. Memory of the World C. The digital future D. Communication and Information E. Provisional heritage;


Number №4 One of the special themes of UNESCO is:

1 0 0 0 0

A. Climate change; B. Kosovo conflict C. Leakage of information D. Nuclear disarmament E. Global economic crisis

V1 0


V1 0

Number №5 ANZUS member -states agreed took part and interfered in the affairs of: A. Karabakh war;


B. Korean War;

0 0

C. Ossetian-Ingush conflict; D. Bosnian war;


E. First Chechen War;

V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №6 One of the main objectives of UNICEF to 2010 is: A. Reducing suicidal adolescents up to 50%; B. Reduction of 50% of maternal mortality; C. Raise the standard of living of women in Third World countries; D. Post a higher education 70% of the population in the Third World; E. to improve the health of the population;


Number №7 UNFPA has programs in the following regions:

0 1 0 0 0

A. West Africa; B. Arab States; C. Baltic States; D. Kosovo; E. Mediterranean;


Number №8 One of the main goals of the League of Arab States:

0 1 0 0 0

A. The single currency; B. Economic and financial problems; C. Subjects of Natural Sciences; D. Health Problems; E. Creation and implementation of new technologies;


Number №9 The country which is part of the League of Arab States:

0 1 0 0 0

A. Iraq; B. Morocco; C. Azerbaijan; D. Egypt; E. Iran; 208

1 0 0 0 0

Number №10 The Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) headquartered is located in A. Thailand B. Almaty. C. Europe D. Taiwan E. Shanghai

V1 1 0 0 0 0

Number №11 States formed the EEC: A. Federal Republic of Germany, France, Netherlands, Italy. B. Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Germany, France. C. Belgium, Luxembourg, Italy, Germany, France. D. Netherlands, Luxembourg, France E. Netherlands, Italy


V1 0 0 0 0 1

V1 1 0 0 0 0 V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №13 Departments are not included in the General Secretariat of the Latin American Integration Association A. Agreements and negotiations. B. Information and Statistics C. International cooperation D. Trade and Competitiveness Development. E. Trade Commission. Number №14 Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe – A. It was convened to develop measures to lessen military confrontation and to enhance security in Europe. B. It was convened on the initiative of the European capitalist countries. C. International forum of representatives of all the European countries. D. It was convened to create a military bloc. E. It was convened to address the economic problems. Number №15 Organization of American States was established by purpose of: A. Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons B. strengthening the cooperation and the protection of its sovereignty, its territorial integrity and independence C. economic stability D. punishing perpetrators of genocide E. tightening border controls 209


Number №16 The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund

0 1 0 0 0

A. consists of 35 Executive Directors B. is responsible for most decisions C. is looking for compliance with environmental safety D. coordinates the General Assembly E. check the implementation of the budget


Number №17 One of the official Mercosur languages is

0 0 1 0 0

A. Arabic B. Chinese C. Portuguese D. French E. Turkey


Observer State of the SCO:

0 1 0 0 0

A. Turkmenistan B. Afghanistan; C. Ukraine; D. Belarus; E. US;

V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №19 The country is a part of the Eurasian Economic Community: A. Azerbaijan; B. Kazakhstan; C. China; D. Belarus; E. Mongolia;

V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №20 The State is the EurAsEC observer: A. Kazakhstan; B. Armenia; C. China; D. Belarus; E. Russia;

Number №18


0 1 0 0 0

Number №21 Select the category that is not the classification of international organizations: A. Classification of participants in a circle; B. Classification by nationality; C. Classification by the nature of the powers D. Classification in order of admission of new members; E. Classification by function;


Number №22 Select the category that is not classified by the functions they perform:

0 1 0 0 0

A. normative; B. time; C. advisory; D. intermediary; E. operating;


0 1 0 0 0

Number №23 Choose the category, which is the classification of the participants in a circle: A. normative; B. universal; C. advisory; D. intermediary; E. operating;

V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №24 Specify an organization that is inactive: A. Council of Europe; B. The League of Nations C. United Nations D. MERCOSUR; E. APEC.


V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №25 Specify an organization that is not an interstate association, created under the auspices of the countries that were part of the USSR: A. The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS); B. Arab Maghreb Union (AMU); C. Organization for Democracy and Economic Development - GUAM (GUAM); D. The Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC); E. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). 211

0 1 0 0 0

Number №26 Specify an organization that is not an interstate association, created under the auspices of European countries: A. Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE); B. Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO); C. The Council of Europe (CoE); D. The North Atlantic Alliance (NATO); E. Benelux - Economic Union

V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №27 One of the EU's political center? A. Warsaw B. Brussels C. Paris D. Cologne E. Prague


Number №28 Specify the type of trade bloc:

1 0 0 0 0

A. Customs Union B. ETFs; C. Bank; D. Military unit; E. Development Bank.


Number №29 Specify international paraorganization (club):

0 1 0 0 0

A. United Nations; B. Big Eight; C. OIC; D. OSCE; E. Customs Union


Number №30 When the OIC was created:

0 1 0 0 0

A. April 1978. B. September 1969 C. March 1988. D. in January 1992 E. December 2002.



V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №31 Specify an independent organization that is not part of the OIC: A. The Islamic Development Bank B. Council of Europe; C. The Islamic Chamber of Commerce D. Islamic Development Fund; E. The Islamic Court of Justice.

V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №32 Participating country of the OIC: A. Russia; B. Kazakhstan; C. US; D. China; E. Poland.


Number №33 Country that is not an observer in the OIC:

0 1 0 0 0

A. Russia; B. Egypt; C. Bosnia and Herzegovina D. Thailand E. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.


Number №34 The international organization, which is not an observer in the OIC:

0 1 0 0 0

A. United Nations; B. EU; C. League of Arab States; D. African Union; E. Organization of Economic Cooperation.

V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №35 Point out the similarities that necessarily inherent in international organizations: A. The international nature, purpose B. Organizational structure (permanent member), international character, purpose C. The legal status of the secretariat D. International character constant element, finance E. The international nature of the secretariat, 213

V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №36 Intergovernmental organizations are the result of the conclusion: A. agreement on financial rules B. International agreements C. Cooperation agreement D. Privileges contract E. Agreement on Privileges and Immunities

V1 0 1 0 0 0

Number №37 Termination of an international organization is done by: A. Elimination of the international organization B. the consent of the Member States C. adoption of an international treaty D. Review of observers E. consent of the state

V1 1 0 0 0 0

V1 0 1 0 0 0 V1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №38 The international official, carries out its mission in a given territory, by any international organization active: A. international interest B. in the interest of the organization C. in the interests of third parties D. in the interests of international stability E. in the interests of the organization and the host country Number №39 Privileges and immunities of international organizations and officials are: A. general amount of which depends on the practices of individual organizations B. Functional C. special volume of which depends on the work of the organizations D. International E. Special Number №40 Modern international organization that has taken the place of the League of Nations A. UES B. Organization of the United Nations C. The Council of Europe D. NATO E. EU F. CSTO 214

V1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №41 Admission to the UN is open to: A. Third World B. All States C. Only for the Western powers D. with a presidential form of ruling E. Arab States F. Тhe former Soviet Union

V1 1 0 0 0 0 0

Number №42 On what conference the United Nations was established? A. San Francisco B. Tehran C. Washington D. Versailles E. Paris F. Yalta

V1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №43 The purpose of the United Nations: A. Conflict Resolution B. Prevention and elimination of threats to the peace C. Decision of Humanitarian Affairs D. Economic Integration E. Global integration F. Resolution of environmental problems

V1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №44 Where is the headquarters of the UN A. San Francisco B. New York C. Paris D. Almaty E. Moscow F. Astana

V1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №45 When Kazakhstan joined the UN? A. March 2, 1991 B. March 1992 C. April 1992 D. 1994 March 5 E. 1993 April 2 F. 2000 May 24 215

V1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №46 Permanent UN Security Council members are: A. China, France, Kazakhstan, USA B. Russia, USA, France, UK, China C. Japan, China, Russia, India D. Canada, the UK, Ukraine, USA E. Russia, USA, Japan, China, F. France, Germany, Japan, Russia

V1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №47 Which of the following bodies is not part of the main UN bodies? A. The Trusteeship Council B. The Council of Europe C. International Court of Justice D. General Assembly E. Security Council F. Human Rights Council

V1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №48 UNESCO is a – A. political bloc B. United Nations specialized agency C. US economic department D. UN branch E. main UN body F. economic bloc

V1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №49 In 1949, under the patronage of the United States was created by: A. OAS B. NATO C. WEU D. CENTO E. North Atlantic Council F.UN

V1 0 1 0 0

Number №50 What state is not included in NATO in 1949? A. France B. Germany C. Italy D. United States 216

0 0

E. Norway F. Belgium

0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №51 A country that has not signed a contract 14 May 1955 in the Warsaw meeting of European states to ensure peace and security in Europe? A. Albania B. United States C. Hungary D. Czechoslovakia E. DDR F. Bulgaria


Number №52 What is the «Partnership for Peace"?

0 1 0 0 0 0

A. peacekeeping operation Soviet troops in Afghanistan B. A new, NATO's peacekeeping mission C. appeasement pursued in the 1930s. in Europe D. appeasement UK in Northern Ireland E. peacekeeping mission in Iraq F. peacekeeping mission in Syria


0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №53 Which organization has played a leading role in resolving the Kosovo conflict? A. UNESCO B. NATO C. The Council of Europe D. CSCE E. CICA F.SCO


OSCE – is:

0 1 0 0 0 0

A. UN specialized agency on defense B. International Organization C. European Department of State US Department of D. Department of NATO E. EU common defense concept F. Regional integration


Number №54



Number №55 What document associated with a new phase of activities of the OSCE

0 1 0 0 0 0

A. The Rome Declaration on Peace and Cooperation B. The Charter of Paris for a New Europe C. Petersberg Declaration D. treaty of Tlatelolco E. The Charter of Paris for a New Europe, 1991. F. The Kyoto protocol


Number №56 Which organization most fully embodies the integration processes in North America?

0 1 0 0 0 0



Number №57 Which organization is not one of the main institutions of the EU?

0 1 0 0 0 0

A. The European Council B. The European Prosecutor C. The European Parliament D. The Court of Auditors E. European Court of Auditors F. The Council of Europe


Number №58 How is formed part of the European Parliament?

0 1 0 0 0 0

A. through representation of the parliamentary groups of the EU Member States B. through the general election of deputies C. by the election of deputies to the special electoral college D. by the election of deputies of the municipal bodies E. through the appointment of deputy groups the governments of the Member States F. by voting


0 1 0 0 0 0

Number №59 What is the contract provides for the principle of the common foreign policy and common security of EU Member States? A. Brussels Treaty of 1966 B. The Maastricht Treaty in 1992 C. The London Summit 1990 D. The Treaty of Rome 1957 E. The Treaty of Rome 1992 F. Lisbon Treaty in 2007


What is TACIS?

0 1 0 0 0 0

A. Programme for food aid Africa B. the EU program to help the countries of the CIS C. «Partnership for Peace» D. Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent States E. EU Programme for the CIS security F. Human Rights Office


Number №60


Educational issue Kukeeva Fatima Turarovna Nurdavletova Saniya Moryakovna Zhekenov Duman Qurmangazievish INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS Educational manua Computer page makeup and cover designer N. Bazarbaeva The website used for front-page designing

IS No.11276 Signed for publishing 04.10.17. Format 60x84 1/16. Offset paper. Digital printing. Volume 12,37 printer’s sheet. Edition 120. Order No. 4673 Publishing house «Qazaq university» Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, 71 Al-Farabi, 050040, Almaty Printed in the printing office of the «Qazaq university» publishing house