|
International Herald Tribune, 26.3.2005 The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has come under strong attack lately. Many have written it off altogether, arguing that it is a relic of the Cold War, unfit for the security needs of the 21st Century. The recent events which have engulfed Kyrgyzstan show the opposite is true. Today, it is the OSCE that is on the ground in Kyrgyzstan facilitating a political process leading to compromise, maybe to a new interim government and preparring conditions for a new election. As Chairman-in-Office of the OSCE, I sent my Personal Representative for Central Asia to Kyrgyzstan to maintain dialogue between the disputing sides, and help them reach an agreement. The situation in Kyrgyzstan is truly complex, and the conflicting interests are numerous. In order to succeed in Kyrgyzstan, we will not only need to attain maximum local cooperation, but also coordination between third party negotiators. In this light, Russian and American support is welcomed. We should all work together to create an all inclusive interim process. The whereabouts of President Akayev remain unknown, while the opposition
claims to be in control of the country. While it is fortunate that
violence has been kept to a bare minimum, my message to all parties
in Kyrgyzstan is the same: democratic legitimacy can only be derived
through democratic process. The looting of state and private property
must stop immediately, and law and order must be reestablished.
Preparations must be made in order to enable an appointment of a
stable interim government. I believe new elections should be organized sooner rather than later. Kyrgyzstan is also suffering from grave economic underperformance. In order to kick-start the economy Kyrgyzstan above all needs stability and transparency, which can only be derived through a free and fair election. The OSCE can do its part by offering both election preparation assistance, election monitoring assistance, as well as, assistance to the interim government. But we have to be clear. The role of the OSCE cannot be to pick a new government; we can only help by facilitating the process and offering our expert help. Some have taken this opportunity to criticize the OSCE for its election observation missions, implying that Kyrgyzstan would not happen otherwise. This criticism is unjust and out of context. The positive impact of democracy, free and fair elections cannot be denied neither in America nor in Russia (not to speak about Europe and Asia). In fact, election monitoring throughout Europe and Central Asia has helped to strengthen democracies. I do agree, however, with those who argue that the OSCE should be reformed. Rather than killing what the OSCE does well in order to level the playing field between the three security baskets human dimension, economic-ecological dimension, and socio-political dimension lets instead improve parts which dont work as well. While the recent events in Kyrgyzstan have probably taken most
of us by surprise, the yellow, or lemon as some call it, revolution
in the Central Asian Republic is not a carbon-copy of Ukraine and
Georgia. Aside from having a common interest of removing President
Akayev from power, the Kyrgyz opposition has no common domestic
agenda. This raises the possibility of a political stalemate, which
could stall new elections, or even create a political vacuum. Finally, all of us must prepare contingency plans in case the political sides fail to agree, and massive violence does break out. Bloodshed is still a possibility in Kyrgyzstan. Dimitrij Rupel is Foreign Minister of Slovenia and Chairman-in-Office
of the OSCE. This article reflects his personal views. © Pravice pridržane. International Herald Tribune 2005. -
|
V središču
OSCE Chairmanship Newsletter >>>KontaktMinistrstvo za zunanje zadeve
|
