The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is a regional security based organization. This organization is unique in many ways and has been contributing to the security of its members and neighbors since 1975. The OSCE has had a busy history from the Cold War and beyond. With the end of the Cold War major shifts have come about in the area of international security that this organization primarily deals with. The OSCE is now facing a new era where it needs to convince its members that it still has a role to play.
The OSCE was initially formed as the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe by Helsinki Final act in 1975. This act outlined the principles upon which the organization was to be based and the specific areas in which the members would work. The principles which guide the actions of states amongst themselves include: sovereign equality, respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty, territorial integrity of States, peaceful settlement of disputes, non-intervention in internal affairs, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, equal rights and self-determination of peoples, co-operation among States, and fulfillment in good faith of obligations under international law. The document goes on to lay out that the states shall work together in the fields of human rights, on politico-military affairs and on economic, scientific and environmental issues. The organization has been unique from its inception because of the geographic area with which it was associated and the range of participants. It encompasses an area from Vladivostock to Vancouver with member states including both the United States of America and Canada...
... middle of paper ...
...“The OSCE: A Forgotten Transatlantic Security Organization?” British American Security Information Council. http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Research/2002osce.pdf
Geissmann, Hans J. 2001. “The Underrated OSCE” Working paper presented for Consultation on NATO Nuclear Policy, National Missile Defence & Alternative Security Arrangements in Ottowa, Canada. http://www.ploughshares.ca/libraries/WorkingPapers/Simons%20Conf%20Ottawa/Giessmann.html
Rotfeld, Adam D. 1998. “Prescriptions for Improving OSCE Effectiveness in Responding to the Risks and Challenges of the 21st Century” Presented to the 3rd International Security Forum and 1st Conference of the PfP Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes. http://www.isn.ethz.ch/3isf/Online_Publications/WS5/WS_5B/Rotfeld.htm
Barry. 2002.
Barry. 2002.
Barry. 2002.
Barry. 2002.
Rotfeld. 1998.
International organizations such as NATO and the UN are essential not only for global peace, but also as a place where middle powers can exert their influence. It is understandable that since the inception of such organizations that many crises have been averted, resolved, or dealt with in some way thro...
ABSTRACT: The United States and the European Union share common values, economic interests, and security challenges. The expansion of the European Union into the countries which were under the Soviet sphere of influence continues to complicate the internal border security of the European Union. Given the liberalization of trade within the EU and in turn into the US, the port and border security of each trading partner is connected in this global economy. This paper examines some of the border security issues facing the EU and how these challenges affect the United States. Particular interest is paid to the porous borders of the former Warsaw Pact countries given their habitual, Cold War trading partners. The EU must strengthen its executive authority in order to enforce external border security in order to maximize its internal free trade zone. The national leaders within the EU will continue to resist the increasing strength of the EU Commission and the decreasing sovereignty of the member states. This paper was originally submitted on 5 August 2004 as the final project for Bush 689-200 Structure and Policy of the European Union, taught by Dr. Klaus L. Aurisch.
Nolan, Janne E. 1999. An Elusive Consensus: Nuclear Weapons and American Security After the Cold War. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press.
Glynn, Patrick. Closing Pandora's Box "Arms Races, Arms Control, and the History of the Cold War". New York: HarperCollinsPublishers, Inc. 1992.
"North Atlantic Treaty Organization." World History: The Modern Era. ABC-CLIO, 2014. Web. 1 Apr. 2014.
Wendt, Alexander. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security. Cambridge: President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1995. 71-81. Print.
The Cold War historiography, specifically the issue of nuclear deterrence has provided historians the classic dialectic of an original thesis that is challenged by an antithesis. Both then emerge in the resolution of a new synthesis. Unfortunately, each evolution of a new synthesis is quickly demolished with each political crisis and technological advance during the Cold War narrative. The traditional/orthodox views were often challenged by the conventional wisdom with the creation of synthesis or post revisionism. There appears to be a multiple historiographical trends on nuclear deterrence over the Cold War; each were dependent and shaped upon international events and technological developments. I have identified four major trends: the orthodox, the revisionist, the post revisionist, st and the New Left. Each of these different historical approaches had its proponents and opponents, both in the military as well as the political and
Collective security is one type of coalition building strategy whether global or regional in which a group of nations agree not to attack each other and to defend each other against an attack from one of the others, if such an attack is made. The principal is that "an attack against one is an attack against all." It differs from "collective defense" which is a coalition of nations which agree to defend its own group against outside attacks. It can also be described as a system where states attempt with its use to prevent or stop wars. Examples of Collective defense are NATO and the Warsaw Pact .The United Nations (UN) is the best example at an attempt at collective security. Many nations enter into such an agreement in an effort to maintain the status quo and to secure their best interests. Collective security is achieved when states come to an agreement on the need for same. As a result an international organization is formed under the rules of international law. The collective security organization then becomes an arena for diplomacy, balance of power and exercise of soft power. The use of hard power by states, unless legitimized by the Collective Security organization, is considered illegitimate, reprehensible and needing remediation of some kind. This idea of collective security was posited by people such as Immanuel Kant and Woodrow Wilson. There are a few basic assumptions as it relates to collective security, including , In an armed conflict, member nation-states will be able to agree on which nation is the aggressor another basic assumption is that each member state has freedom of action and ability to join in proceedings against the aggressor. Also of great importance is the fact that all member nation-states are e...
Over the years the endurance of NATO has led to closer ties among its members and to a growing community of interests. The treaty itself has provided a model for other collective security agreements. NATO activities are no longer small only to Europe. In
NATO is an intergovernmental military alliance between the two continents of Europe and America which is formed to safeguard the peace and security developing a link among t...
Taking into account that states asses its strengths in order to adopt the most effective strategies to deal with potential menaces, westerns states understand the advantages of the aforementioned theory. The current threats that the Western world take into account are composed by local, regional and global menaces. To this paper it is essential recognise the scope of all of those elements that configure a threat to the West. Among many others there are drugs, crime, and terrorism, geo-strategic actors such as the Middle East and Russia, and growing powers such as China. These are complicated patterns that states need to strategically cope with. In fact, the security strategy from Western states is framed between the combination o...
Members of The United Nations have a duty “to maintain international peace…in conformity with the principles of justice and international law.”[1] China, a core member of the United Nations since its formation in 1945, fails to comply with international human rights’ norms set forth by The United Nations Charter. This failure is noticeably prevalent in the practices of the Chinese Legal System. Its judicial proceedings in handling peaceful, political dissenters fail to provide the minimum protection of human rights guaranteed to all through international law. By examining accounts of Tibetans detained for such peaceful protests, this paper will set out to highlight the discrepancies between Chinese enforcement of international law in theory and in practice. Before this paper goes any further, the notion of international law must be explained. Providing a better understanding of international law will make easier the task of highlighting China’s struggles with enforcing such standards.
The universally known federal agency responsible for nuclear weapons is the Department of Defense, which of course, supervises the nation’s armed forces, as well as those military units qualified to control nuclear weapons and their means of delivery; for example, the missiles, bombers and submarines that are used to “deliver” the weapons to their intended targets. Within the Office of the Secretary of Defense are a number of agencies that deal with nuclear weapons concerns from erratic
Olender, Michael. “Keeping Pace with Cyber Power, Defense, and Warfare.” Journal of International and Global Studies 6.2 (2015): 55+. Academic OneFile. Web. 5 Oct. 2015.