Geum.ru

Подборка материалов по председательству казахстана в обсе (1 января-14 февраля 2010 г.) Оглавление

Вид материалаДокументы

Содержание


Registan, 26.01.10, Gauging Kazakhstan’s Chairmanship of the OSCE, by Joshua Foust
Подобный материал:
1   ...   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   ...   67

Registan, 26.01.10, Gauging Kazakhstan’s Chairmanship of the OSCE, by Joshua Foust


William Courtney, the former U.S. Ambassador to Astana, is guardedly optimistic about Kazakhstan’s chairmanship of the OSCE this year:

Democratic activists are crying foul, saying President Nursultan Nazarbayev represses dissent. Others worry that Kazakhstan will be used by Russia, which has undermined the O.S.C.E. in the past, to advance Russian initiatives.

Based on my experience as U.S. ambassador in Kazakhstan after independence in 1991 and on later developments, I believe these concerns are understandable but excessive.

His argument is a familiar one: despite setbacks in terms of democracy and civil liberties, Kazakhstan has actually become a fairly successful, well-integrated state without major conflicts with its neighbors (we’ll leave aside the lingering border issues with Uzbekistan).

I share ambassador Courtney’s concerns about Kazakhstan’s chairmanship—after all, one of the OSCE’s charters is to promote civil society and democracy. However, I also share his guarded optimism: while it’s true that Kazakhstan has actually backslid along the democracy frontier, and has developed what can only be called recidivism on the civil rights front, it is still a more stable, more functioning country than any of its neighbors in Central Asia. As such, even an imperfect model is better than none at all. (And it’s worth noting I’m in disagreement with my friends who study this place, both on this blog and elsewhere.)

But let us not lose track of the OSCE’s other primary function: conflict resolution. Kazakhstan has barely been in charge a month and it’s already holding summits trying to defuse the remainder of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The Sochi talks are nothing to talk about yet, but they do show on direction in which Kazakhstan might move as chair.

But this raises the question: why appoint Kazakhstan in the first place? When the OSCE was first deliberating this question in 2006, it couldn’t make up its mind, and even postponed the chairmanship. This was partially because of Kazakhstan’s democratic backsliding, but there was also rampant speculation that the European members of the OSCE didn’t feel like a Central Asian state had the “right” to chair the organization. Anna Wołowska explains:

The decision to award the chairmanship to Kazakhstan was taken in an attempt to stop deepening divisions within the OSCE, especially the split between the CIS countries (which were calling for less control over political and election processes), and the remaining OSCE members, most of whom endorsed the OSCE’s original line.

Awarding the chairmanship to Kazakhstan was a gesture to the post-Soviet states, a demonstration of equality between the new and the old OSCE members. The West hoped that Astana would be able not only to avert the threats to the Organisation’s unity, but also to boost stability in Central Asia. At the time the decision was being taken in Madrid, the participants also keenly hoped that the chairmanship would become an impulse for genuine democratisation in Kazakhstan.

So there we have it. Ms. Wolowska also notes that lobbying for the OSCE chair has been part of Astana’s regional strategic calculus, meant to position itself as the sane arbiter and “big brother” of sorts to its neighbors. She also mention’s Russia’s support, which, while the subject of some ludicrous hyperbole, is also hugely important to the region.

Where things stand right now, it’s difficult to consider Kazakhstan’s chairmanship anything other than a prestige-building measure for Astana. While I remain hopeful some good might come of it within Kazakhstan, the lack of impetus from any corner, anywhere within the OSCE membership, probably means the next year will be little more than empty summits and lots of speeches.

Still, there is the chance for us to be surprised. It’s happened before. We’ll keep on top of it.

News.az, 26.01.10, Kazakhstan supports territorial integrity principle in protracted conflicts, Leyla Tagiyeva


News.Az interviews Kuralay Bayzakova, chief of the European information center under the Kazakh National University of Al-Farabi.

What do you think the Kazakhstan’s chairmanship in OSCE will be marked by? 

Considering its experience of developing a sovereign state, Kazakhstan has made four key works-trust, tradition, transparency and tolerance-its slogan during chairmanship.

In the military and political direction Kazakhstan intends to concentrate on the settlement of new problems and addressing such threats as terrorism and extremism, organized crime, uncontrolled migration, drug, arms and human trafficking, spread of mass destruction weapon and recovery of long-suffering Afghanistan. In period of its chairmanship in OSCE in 2010, Kazakhstan intends to use its potential to address threats posed by Afghanistan.

Kazakhstan offers renewed principles of mutual understanding and peace. It also proposed to turn OSCE into a negotiation area for NATO and CSTO, OSCE and SOC. Much is also expected from the OSCE conference on Afghan problem due in Astana in 2010 that will make it clear whether different international associations will be cooperating in the future for the sake of common security. Kazakhstan may primarily play a role of the initiator of a deeper discussion of European security and the possible new role of the OSCE.

In the economic and ecological sphere, Kazakhstan intends to concentrate on the development of the Eurasian transit and transport corridor and continental transport corridors. There are also plans to settle regional ecological problems that may have global implications, such as the restoration of the Aral Sea.

In humanitarian sphere Kazakhstan will primarily focus on encouraging tolerance and intercultural dialogue within OSCE. One of Kazakhstan’s goals as the future OSCE chairman is raising OSCE’s importance as a bridge between West and East in the dialogue of civilizations consistently supported by our country.

The issue of OSCE’s reformation is urgent today. Which reforms does the Kazakh chairmanship intend to promote within the framework of this organization?

Positively assessing the process of OSCE reformation, Kazakhstan considers that the main element of the process of OSCE’s renewal must be prevention of the imbalance in the activity of the organization through balanced activeness in three spheres: military and political cooperation, economy and ecology, human measurement, that is removal of functional and geographic imbalance in its activity, settlement of the issue of international capacity of the OSCE.

As is known, there appeared an urgent need for the further development and improvement of existing mechanisms of OSCE, making them operative and prompt and giving additional powers to them. According to Kazakhstan, the renewal must be accompanied by the rise of pragmatism and practical approaches of the OSCE to the settlement of common problems on the basis of wide consensus and specification of the OSCE’s activity. Thus, work is carried out to strengthen the country’s representation within the organization to raise operative potential within the OSCE.

Kazakhstan supports the gradual transportation of the OSCE activity with respect to the interests of all its participants, their views and positions.

President Nazarbayev has recently said that the western community has definite negative stereotypes regarding the former USSR countries. Do you consider Kazakhstan will be able to break this tradition through a year of its chairmanship?

Kazakhstan’s chairmanship in OSCE is an important and remarkable image project taking significant amounts. Raising the international image of our country will have a positive influence on overcoming stereotypes towards all the post-Soviet countries.

One of Kazakhstan’s goal as the future OSCE chairman is raising OSCE’s importance as a bridge between East and West in the dialogue of civilizations consistently supported by our country. It is expedient to move accents on the agenda and practical steps of the OSCE in the humanitarian basket from democratization to cultural cooperation, interconfessional concord and civilian interaction.

The further spread of Kazakhstan’s experience of interethnic, interreligious accord and active interaction in the sphere of cultural cooperation will prevent the intercivilization split between the OSCE members.

There are four protracted conflicts in the CIS area. How do you see Kazakhstan’s role in supporting their resolution?

The so-called “protracted conflicts” will remain the coordinates of Kazakhstan’s chairmanship. The monitoring and revealing of any signals or signs of possible escalation of conflicts as well as attraction of preventive of mechanisms of political consultations might become a key instrument in this sphere.

Earlier President Nazarbayev has always spoken for the resolution of the Karabakh conflict within the framework of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. Do you think this position may change in period of Kazakhstan’s chairmanship in OSCE?

Kazakhstan speaks for the peaceful resolution of conflicts, for the observation of the principle of territorial integrity and violation of borders. Therefore, I think this position of Kazakhstan in the resolution of the Karabakh conflict will remain changeless.

Which initiatives could come from Kazakhstan as the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair in the direction of the Karabakh conflict settlement?

I think Kazakhstan will view the settlement of the Karabakh conflict in terms of regional security considering the aforementioned principles.