BibTex RIS Cite

THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY

Year 1999, Volume: 4 Issue: 4, 0 - 0, 01.12.1999

Marton Krasznaı

Abstract

The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe has a relatively short history. The first decisions aimed at turning it into a 'regular' international organisation from a series of conferences were taken at the end of the Cold War in 1990 in Paris, where, among other things, the Charter of Paris was adopted. Subsequent decisions establishing the Secretariat, the institutions and changing its name from Conference to Organisation were steps on the road to maturity.

References

  • 1 The term is used in the spirit of K.N. Waltz, op. cit. (fn. 1), pp. 74-77 and 127-128.
  • 2 See S.M. Walt, 'Revolution and War', World Politics 3, 1992, pp. 321-368.
  • 3 See M. Webber, CIS Integration Trends, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1997.
  • 4 See: J. Frankel, International Relations in a Changing World, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1988; S. Dalby, 'Security, Modernity, Ecology: the Dilemmas of Post-Cold War Security Discourse', Alternatives, 17, 1992, pp. 95-134.
  • 5 The post-Cold War international system is one of multilevel interdependence. At the military level, the international system is unipolar since there is no other military power comparable to the United States. At the economic level, the international system is tripolar consisting of an Asian bloc formed around the yen, a Western Hemisphere bloc around the US dollar and a European bloc clustering around the ECU or the German mark. At the level of transnational interdependence, the international system shows a diffusion of power.
  • 7 See T. Bukkvoll, Ukraine and European Security, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1997.
  • 8 See: R.J. Martin, The Economy and Foreign Relations of Azerbaijan, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1996; G. Bondarevsky and G. Englefield, Boundary Issues in Central Asia, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1996.
  • 9 See P. Baev, Russian Policy in the Caucasus, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1996.
  • 10 See G. Segal, Rethinking the Pacific, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1990.
  • 11 See H. Kissinger, Diplomacy, New York, Simon & Schuster, 1994, p. 834.
  • 12 See H. Kissinger, White House Years, Boston, Little, Brown and Co., 1979. p. 55.
  • 13 See J. Kirkpatrick, interview, U.S. News & World Report, 10 March 1986, p. 36. It is a mistake on behalf of the West (especially the EU) to adopt the view that modern societies are supposed to diffuse the values of the Western democracy in the developing countries without bearing in mind historical necessities. For instance, in the 1990s, the army is the most modernised authoritative agency in Turkey's transitional society. In Turkey, the army can provide a sense of citizenship, an appreciation of political action and can lead to a more responsible nationalism since it counters Islamic fundamentalism and aims at the modernisation of Turkey by introducing and consolidating Western economic, social and political institutions. In general, following Jeanne Kirkpatrick's 'Dictatorships and Double Standards', Commentary 68, 1979, pp. 34-45, we can argue that authoritarian regimes (on the right) that are allies of the West should be differentiated from and considered to be 'better' than totalitarian regimes (i.e. regimes based on left-wing ideologies or religious fundamentalism) mainly because authoritarian systems are putatively susceptible to incremental democratisation/modernisation-a disposition for which their enmity to communism/fundamentalism served as a predominant piece of evidence.
  • 14 See H. Kissinger, op. cit. (fn. 14), p. 21.
  • 15 See R. Gates, interviewed by B. van Voorst, Time, 20 April 1992, pp. 39-40.
  • 16 See B. Schneider and L. Grinter (eds.), Battlefield of the Future: 21st Century Warfare Issues, Air War College Studies in National Security, No. 3, 1995.
  • 17 A characteristic example of bio-terrorism is the Aum Shinri Kyo sect attack on the Tokyo subway on 20 March 1995.
  • 18 See M. Rifkind, 'Diplomacy and the Spreading of Prosperity', Survey of Current Affairs 26, 1996, p. 232.
  • 19 See M. Rifkind, ibid., pp. 232-233.

Year 1999, Volume: 4 Issue: 4, 0 - 0, 01.12.1999

Marton Krasznaı

Abstract

References

  • 1 The term is used in the spirit of K.N. Waltz, op. cit. (fn. 1), pp. 74-77 and 127-128.
  • 2 See S.M. Walt, 'Revolution and War', World Politics 3, 1992, pp. 321-368.
  • 3 See M. Webber, CIS Integration Trends, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1997.
  • 4 See: J. Frankel, International Relations in a Changing World, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1988; S. Dalby, 'Security, Modernity, Ecology: the Dilemmas of Post-Cold War Security Discourse', Alternatives, 17, 1992, pp. 95-134.
  • 5 The post-Cold War international system is one of multilevel interdependence. At the military level, the international system is unipolar since there is no other military power comparable to the United States. At the economic level, the international system is tripolar consisting of an Asian bloc formed around the yen, a Western Hemisphere bloc around the US dollar and a European bloc clustering around the ECU or the German mark. At the level of transnational interdependence, the international system shows a diffusion of power.
  • 7 See T. Bukkvoll, Ukraine and European Security, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1997.
  • 8 See: R.J. Martin, The Economy and Foreign Relations of Azerbaijan, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1996; G. Bondarevsky and G. Englefield, Boundary Issues in Central Asia, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1996.
  • 9 See P. Baev, Russian Policy in the Caucasus, London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1996.
  • 10 See G. Segal, Rethinking the Pacific, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1990.
  • 11 See H. Kissinger, Diplomacy, New York, Simon & Schuster, 1994, p. 834.
  • 12 See H. Kissinger, White House Years, Boston, Little, Brown and Co., 1979. p. 55.
  • 13 See J. Kirkpatrick, interview, U.S. News & World Report, 10 March 1986, p. 36. It is a mistake on behalf of the West (especially the EU) to adopt the view that modern societies are supposed to diffuse the values of the Western democracy in the developing countries without bearing in mind historical necessities. For instance, in the 1990s, the army is the most modernised authoritative agency in Turkey's transitional society. In Turkey, the army can provide a sense of citizenship, an appreciation of political action and can lead to a more responsible nationalism since it counters Islamic fundamentalism and aims at the modernisation of Turkey by introducing and consolidating Western economic, social and political institutions. In general, following Jeanne Kirkpatrick's 'Dictatorships and Double Standards', Commentary 68, 1979, pp. 34-45, we can argue that authoritarian regimes (on the right) that are allies of the West should be differentiated from and considered to be 'better' than totalitarian regimes (i.e. regimes based on left-wing ideologies or religious fundamentalism) mainly because authoritarian systems are putatively susceptible to incremental democratisation/modernisation-a disposition for which their enmity to communism/fundamentalism served as a predominant piece of evidence.
  • 14 See H. Kissinger, op. cit. (fn. 14), p. 21.
  • 15 See R. Gates, interviewed by B. van Voorst, Time, 20 April 1992, pp. 39-40.
  • 16 See B. Schneider and L. Grinter (eds.), Battlefield of the Future: 21st Century Warfare Issues, Air War College Studies in National Security, No. 3, 1995.
  • 17 A characteristic example of bio-terrorism is the Aum Shinri Kyo sect attack on the Tokyo subway on 20 March 1995.
  • 18 See M. Rifkind, 'Diplomacy and the Spreading of Prosperity', Survey of Current Affairs 26, 1996, p. 232.
  • 19 See M. Rifkind, ibid., pp. 232-233.
There are 18 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Marton Krasznaı This is me

Publication Date December 1, 1999
Published in Issue Year 1999 Volume: 4 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Krasznaı, M. (1999). THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY. PERCEPTIONS: Journal of International Affairs, 4(4).
AMA Krasznaı M. THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY. PERCEPTIONS. December 1999;4(4).
Chicago Krasznaı, Marton. “THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY”. PERCEPTIONS: Journal of International Affairs 4, no. 4 (December 1999).
EndNote Krasznaı M (December 1, 1999) THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY. PERCEPTIONS: Journal of International Affairs 4 4
IEEE M. Krasznaı, “THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY”, PERCEPTIONS, vol. 4, no. 4, 1999.
ISNAD Krasznaı, Marton. “THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY”. PERCEPTIONS: Journal of International Affairs 4/4 (December 1999).
JAMA Krasznaı M. THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY. PERCEPTIONS. 1999;4.
MLA Krasznaı, Marton. “THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY”. PERCEPTIONS: Journal of International Affairs, vol. 4, no. 4, 1999.
Vancouver Krasznaı M. THE ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN EUROPE IN THE EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY. PERCEPTIONS. 1999;4(4).