In this paper, it will be analysed if the Organization for Security and Cooperation (OSCE) is able to successfully manage conflicts within Europe on the example of two case studies. Furthermore, to evaluate the OSCES`s effectiveness, a closer look at the different organs has to be done. In the essay conflict management will be also referred to as conflict resolution.
The world has never been peaceful, there were always conflicts around that states, people and organizations had to deal with. Today most of these conflicts have been mostly forgotten. However, even though the absolute number of war deaths has declined since 1946, the overall numbers of ongoing conflicts each years has increased, compared to the World War Ⅱ period. This increase is related to the more and more civil conflicts arising, on the contrary the conflicts between states have almost ceased to exit. Also the scale of conflicts has changed. Nowadays the world has to deal with small scale conflicts rather than large scale conflicts.
The OSCE aims at preventing and managing these conflicts within Europe. They have developed several activities to prevent and consolidate peace through eliminating the root causes of tension. They do so by strengthening the respect for human rights, building democratic institutions and fostering economic and social progress within and between States.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
3. Conflict Management in the OSCE
4. Missions of the OSCE
4.1 Kyrgyzstan
4.2 Ukraine
5. Conclusion
6. Literature
6.1 Online
6.2 Print
Objectives and Key Themes
This paper aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) as a tool for managing conflicts within the European region. By analyzing the structural capacities of the organization and examining two specific case studies, the research seeks to determine whether the OSCE can successfully intervene in crises and provide sustainable conflict resolution or prevention strategies.
- The historical development and structural evolution of the OSCE.
- The conceptual framework of conflict management in broader and narrower senses.
- Evaluation of OSCE mediation and peacekeeping activities in Kyrgyzstan (2010).
- Assessment of OSCE intervention and monitoring roles in the Ukraine crisis (2013–2014).
- Critical analysis of consensus-based decision-making and the lack of autonomous military capabilities.
Excerpt from the Book
3. Conflict Management in the OSCE
According to the OSCE them self, they are the primary institution to manage conflicts. In the Helsinki document, they have defined conflict management in a broader and narrower sense. The broader sense refers to a comprehensive, multidimensional security building. It addresses economic, social, environmental and other components of classic interstate and intrastate conflicts. Furthermore it addresses specific new transnational threats and challenges that may give rise to insecurity such as bad governance, social disparities, demographic maldevelopment, human right violations, illegal migration, mass expulsion, terrorism, etc.
The definition builds the framework and conceptual foundation for conflict management in a narrower sense. Conflict management in the narrower sense addresses concrete examples to forestall aggression and violence as well as examples to prevent, manage and settle conflicts peacefully by appropriate means. This includes peacekeeping activities in cases of conflicts within or among participating states to help to maintain peace and stability in support of an ongoing effort at a political solution. However, any peacekeeping operation excludes enforcement actions. All peacekeeping operations take place in cooperation with the European Union, the United Nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Council and Russia’s CIS. Usually the OSCE takes the role of a 3rd party mediator between the participating states. All decisions in the OSCE are taken on the basis of consensus. This guarantees that the states are always directly involved in conflict management.
A range of different structures and institutions within the OSCE are included in the process of conflict management. The Chairmanship is explicitly authorized to deal with crisis or conflict situations. He/ she is empowered to appoint personal representatives for dealing with the conflict and appoints the head of field operations. The primary task is to advice and give guidance.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter provides an overview of the shifting landscape of modern conflicts and introduces the research objective concerning the effectiveness of the OSCE.
2. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe: This section details the historical evolution of the OSCE from the CSCE and describes its structural mandate and current role in regional security.
3. Conflict Management in the OSCE: This chapter defines the theoretical framework of conflict management within the organization, covering its institutions, mechanisms, and consensus-based approach.
4. Missions of the OSCE: This chapter presents empirical evidence through two case studies, examining the OSCE's interventions in Kyrgyzstan and Ukraine.
5. Conclusion: This chapter synthesizes the findings, highlighting the OSCE's successes in mediation while acknowledging limitations regarding military enforcement and geographic focus.
6. Literature: This section lists the sources consulted, categorized into online and print materials.
Keywords
OSCE, Conflict Management, Conflict Resolution, Peacekeeping, Mediation, Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, Minsk Agreement, Consensus, Human Rights, Regional Security, Diplomacy, Crisis Prevention, Multidimensional Security, International Relations.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper examines whether the OSCE functions as an effective tool for managing and resolving conflicts within Europe, specifically looking at its operational mechanisms.
What are the central themes of the work?
The central themes include the structural capacity of the OSCE, the distinction between broad and narrow conflict management, and the practical application of these methods in field missions.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to determine if the OSCE is capable of successfully managing conflicts in Europe by evaluating its performance in real-world crisis scenarios.
What methodology is used in the study?
The study utilizes a qualitative approach, combining an institutional analysis of the OSCE’s structure with a comparative case study analysis of events in Kyrgyzstan and Ukraine.
What topics are covered in the main body of the work?
The main body covers the historical development of the OSCE, its internal organs (like the Chairmanship and the Secretariat), and detailed analysis of its missions in Kyrgyzstan and Ukraine.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include OSCE, Conflict Management, Peacekeeping, Mediation, Consensus, Crisis Prevention, and regional security studies.
How does the OSCE's "consensus decision making" impact its conflict management?
While consensus ensures that member states remain involved, the author notes that it can also be time-consuming and sometimes leads to delayed responses to unfolding crises.
What conclusion does the author reach regarding the OSCE's effectiveness?
The author concludes that while the OSCE is capable of managing tensions and facilitating dialogue, its effectiveness is limited by a lack of military capabilities and a geographic focus that currently favors Eastern Europe.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Anonym (Autor:in), 2019, The OSCE and the Effectiveness of their Conflict Management and Missions, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1023042
