Russia warns of setting diplomatic forum ablaze due to Ukraine conflict
A Major Cold War-Era Security Institution Faces Persistent Collapse Risk
A major security institution from the Cold War era is at risk of collapsing due to ongoing diplomatic clashes with Russia over the war in Ukraine.
“I will do whatever it takes to keep the organization alive and functioning,” stated Maltese Foreign Minister Ian Borg, the newly appointed chairman of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
However, these tasks are easier said than done. Malta took on the role of chairing the OSCE for 2024 after Russia refused to allow Estonia to assume the rotating role due to high tensions between Moscow and the NATO ally, which strongly supports Ukraine. As a compromise choice, Malta, a member of the European Union with a constitutional neutrality clause, emerged as the solution. Borg, in his new position, wasted no time in expressing his unwavering commitment to condemning Russia’s “illegal war of aggression” against Ukraine.
Challenges and Rebuttals
“Throughout our program, we will address the challenges faced by Ukraine,” Borg affirmed. “I, along with the Maltese chairpersonship, will continue to demand Russia’s immediate and unconditional withdrawal from the entirety of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders.”
However, this rebuke drew a counter-rebuke from Russia’s envoy to the organization, who argued that Borg had no right to make a statement that did not reflect the “consensually agreed approaches” of the OSCE, which includes Russia.
“It is absolutely unacceptable to solely focus on Ukraine to the detriment of other important work,” stated Russian Ambassador Alexander Lukashevich. “Your speech has gone beyond the agreed framework, violating the aforementioned decision. This needs to be corrected.”
A Paralyzed Institution
The OSCE, founded during the détente phase of the early 1970s, has been paralyzed by disputes arising from the war, including Russia’s arrest of three Ukrainians who worked for the organization prior to their arrest during Russia’s invasion.
“Russia’s obstruction has hindered the organization’s activities for years, preventing the adoption of its budget, official OSCE events, and the extension of foreign missions. This has resulted in the termination of all OSCE foreign missions in Ukraine, a country subjected to Russia’s aggression,” explained Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna in November. “Although the OSCE has faced confrontations from the beginning, it has never encountered a more severe crisis than the present one.”
The Future and Pressure
Finland is set to take over as chair from Malta in 2025, but Borg must secure consensus on the country that will lead in 2026, as noted by the Times of Malta. Russian authorities have made it clear that they want him to abandon the policy of exerting diplomatic pressure on the Kremlin.
“The past two years have shown that ignoring the situation will only lead to the destruction of the OSCE,” warned Lukashevich.
Borg plans to visit Kyiv next week to ”listen” for ways in which the OSCE can assist the war-torn country.
“Despite our military neutrality clause, Malta has been clear from day one. We believe in respecting the UN charters, upholding the rule of law, and understanding that might does not make right. This is also our defense as a neutral country,” Borg stated during a press conference on Thursday.
What steps can be taken to address the persistent collapse risk of the OSCE and restore its credibility as a security organization
Will not stand by and allow the OSCE to be used as a political platform for propagating anti-Russian rhetoric,” declared the Russian envoy, Alexander Lukashevich. He emphasized that the organization should focus on its core mandate of promoting security and cooperation, rather than getting involved in geopolitical disputes. “We urge the Maltese chairmanship to act in a neutral and impartial manner and avoid taking sides in any conflict,” Lukashevich added.
These contrasting views reflect the deep divide within the OSCE and pose a significant challenge to the organization’s ability to effectively respond to the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. The OSCE was established in 1975 as a security-oriented forum for dialogue and cooperation between East and West during the height of the Cold War. However, its relevance and effectiveness have been called into question in recent years as geopolitical tensions escalate.
Weaknesses and Criticisms
Critics argue that the OSCE suffers from several inherent weaknesses that undermine its ability to address security challenges effectively. First and foremost is its consensus-based decision-making process, which requires unanimous agreement among all 57 participating states for any significant action to be taken. This makes it vulnerable to the interests, influence, and veto power of individual member states, such as Russia, which can effectively paralyze the organization’s response.
Additionally, the OSCE lacks its own military capabilities, relying instead on member states to contribute troops and resources for monitoring missions and conflict resolution efforts. This dependence on voluntary contributions has often resulted in limited and fragmented responses to security crises.
Moreover, the OSCE’s comprehensive security concept, which encompasses politico-military, economic and environmental, and human dimensions, has been criticized for diluting its focus and diverting resources away from core security concerns. Critics argue that this organizational complexity has hampered the OSCE’s ability to effectively respond to emerging security threats and crises.
The Collapse Risk
The ongoing clashes over the war in Ukraine have exacerbated the existing weaknesses and criticisms of the OSCE, raising the risk of its collapse as a major Cold War-era security institution. The deepening divide between Western states, led by the United States, and Russia has significantly hindered the organization’s ability to carry out its mandate.
Additionally, there is growing skepticism among some member states about the OSCE’s ability to remain relevant and effective in the face of new security challenges, such as cyber warfare, terrorism, and hybrid threats. Some argue that alternative security frameworks, such as the NATO alliance or regional organizations like the European Union, are better suited to address these evolving threats.
The Way Forward
To address the persistent collapse risk and restore the OSCE’s credibility, several steps can be taken. First and foremost, there needs to be a reevaluation and revitalization of the organization’s decision-making process. Moving away from the unanimity requirement and adopting a qualified majority voting system could expedite decision-making and reduce the influence of veto-wielding member states.
Furthermore, the OSCE should explore options to enhance its own military capabilities to effectively respond to security crises. This could involve the establishment of a standing OSCE peacekeeping force or the development of strategic partnerships with other military organizations.
Lastly, the OSCE needs to reassess and refine its comprehensive security concept to ensure a more focused approach on core security concerns. This would involve streamlining its organizational structure and reallocating resources towards addressing emerging security threats, while maintaining a balanced approach to the various dimensions of security.
Addressing these challenges and implementing necessary reforms will be crucial for the OSCE to overcome the persistent collapse risk it currently faces. Failure to do so could result in the further marginalization and decline of this major Cold War-era security institution, with potentially grave consequences for European and international security.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...