THE OSCE CHALLENGED - NHC/IHF

PART V: NEW CHALLENGES AND NEW THREATS FOR THE OSCE
heading_white

mr. edwin bakker (netherlands institute of international relations “clingendael”):
“How might NGOs address new threats to security?”

heading_white
Which role can NGOs play in addressing new and emerging threats to security in the OSCE area, such as the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or environmental degradation? Mr. Edwin Bakker, researcher at the Netherlands Institute of International Relations “Clingendael” considers two threats.
Firstly, terrorism. Mr. Bakker thinks that NGOs should do more to stress the need for democratisation, the rule of law, human rights and a more just society as essential parts of terrorism prevention. They should also use the current counter-terrorism momentum to ‘sell’ their own activities as an important, even indispensable part of the fight against terrorism.
The so-called Roma issue, according to Mr. Bakker, constitutes Europe’s largest and most difficult minority issue with a high ethnic conflict potential in the long term. Addressing this issue is primarily the responsibility of states. But since states lack contacts in Roma communities, and face public disapproval as well, implementation of anti-discrimination policies is slow. There too lies a role for NGOs: they should see to it that national and international pressure on governments remains high.
heading_white

“Yesterday, the Chairman-in-Office argued that ‘we are faced with a complex international agenda. An agenda that combines ‘hard’ threats, such as terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, regional conflicts, and trafficking in human beings, with ‘soft’ threats, such as poverty, discrimination and environmental degradation.’ He also stated that ‘These threats and challenges have one thing in common: they show no respect for national borders.’ States, and groups of states such as the OSCE, have a role to play as, according to De Hoop Scheffer, ‘No single state is in a position to tackle these challenges without the help of others. They demand collective responses.’
The Chairman-in-Office is of the opinion that in several of these areas the OSCE can make a difference. I agree, but states are not the only actors in this play. In this short introduction to the discussion, I would like to focus on NGOs: what role can they play in regard to new and emerging threats to security in the OSCE area, be it either the so-called ‘hard’ threats, or ‘soft’ threats?
Given the limited time I have, I will focus on one ‘hard’ threat and on one ‘soft’ threat: terrorism and discrimination, respectively.

Terrorism presents an increasing threat to peace and security. It does so in two ways. Firstly, through terrorist acts that have become increasingly successful and that are likely to become more widespread, extreme, international, and autonomous. Secondly, terrorism will represent an increasing threat to peace and security, since the label ‘terrorism’ is used as an excuse for practices and operations that do not (only) combat terrorism, but that are (primarily) directed to curb human rights, the rule of law and democratisation processes.
Preventing terrorist acts is primarily a task for the state and its security and intelligence apparatus. Beyond this task lays the prevention of terrorist acts by tackling some of its root causes. Unfortunately, no sole root cause can be identified, nor even a set of root causes upon which scholars and experts agree. Moreover, some preconditions of terrorism cannot be ‘removed’, because they are beyond our capacity to change them, such as past history and traumas, extremist ideologies and the trends of modernisation and globalisation.
Although no sole root cause or set of root causes might be identified, there are preconditions that constitute a breeding ground for terrorism or that give rise to terrorism. According to the findings from an international expert meeting on terrorism held in Oslo (?) the following preconditions set the stage for terrorism in the long run:

lack of democracy, civil liberties and the rule of law;
failed or weak states;
illegitimate or corrupt governments;
repression through foreign occupation or by colonial powers;
feelings of social injustice; and
feelings of discrimination on the basis of ethnic or religious origin.

In these areas, NGOs can, and do, play a role. Striving for a more just world is the core of most activities of NGOs that are present here in Maastricht today.
Moreover, it is in these fields that NGOs can make a difference with regard to combating terrorism. If they want to contribute to a anti-terrorism policy and want to prevent the idea and practice of a war against terrorism, it is in these fields that NGOs should be active and should show themselves as important ‘fighters’ against terrorism, as those who address the preconditions of terrorism.

As mentioned before, unfortunately, in some countries with a high potential for terrorism or in countries where terrorism is a real and sometimes daily threat to peace and security, the work of NGOs is made very difficult as a result of the ‘war against terrorism’; the activities of NGOs in these countries are hampered by restrictions imposed on them in light of the fight against terrorism.
I say nothing new or spectacular, when I stress that the use of the label ‘terrorism’ by some states or state institutions in fact contributes, indirectly, to bombings and shootings as it is used to deport populations, to imprison opposition leaders, to issue all kinds of restrictive measures and policies to hinder democratisation and to curb human rights and the rule of law.
Of course NGOs should continue their work or struggle in these countries and elsewhere. But the larger and internationally oriented ones may do more. In order to prevent the negative use of the label ‘terrorism’, NGOs might, more so than they do today, stress the need for democratisation, the rule of law, human rights and a more just society in light of the prevention of terrorism. NGOs too, should use the anti-terrorism bandwagon and counter-terrorism momentum to the benefit of their causes, similar to the way states use this label, for better or for worse. They could and should ‘sell’ their activities as an important, even indispensable part of the fight against terrorism.
There is much more to say on the role of NGOs with regard to combating terrorism, but I would also like to leave room for discussion.

Chairman, let me continue with the so-called ‘soft’ threat of discrimination. With regard to this threat, I would like to focus on a truly Pan-European threat which partly, or even to a large extent, centres around discrimination; the threat to Roma and the social tensions surrounding Roma within the OSCE area.
It is my belief that the so-called Roma issue, perhaps together with the issue of so-called ‘new minorities’ constitutes Europe’s largest and most difficult minority issue with a high ethnic conflict potential in the long term. Addressing this issue, or threat, is, of course, primarily the responsibility of states, but, so far, states and state institutions find it hard to formulate and implement successful policies for two reasons. Firstly, it is difficult for states to conduct these policies as many of them are in an early stage of establishing contacts with Roma communities and gaining their trust. Secondly, it is difficult for states to put policies into practice and to make the necessary financial means available, as in many countries public opinion is not very positive with regard to Roma, to put it mildly. Negative public opinion severely limits the political will of governments to do what is needed. Fortunately, in this case, international pressure on Central and South-Eastern European governments has created some room for manoeuvre, and has increased the political will to address the issue, often for the sake of EU membership.
However, the problems are too serious to wait for states to be ready to tackle them. Fortunately, NGOs have not waited; they are supporting Roma and they have addressed Roma issues already for a long time. However, NGOs should see to it that national and international pressure on governments remains high. Showing states that in the long term there might be a security threat or security dimension to the Roma issue may perhaps put the matter higher on the political agendas and may further increase pressure on states and governments. Of course this holds the risk of adding yet another stigma on the Roma communities, having perhaps more negative than positive effects.

Chairman, by focussing on terrorism and on the Pan-European issue of Roma, I hope to have addressed two important security issues that can be regarded as new challenges and threats within the OSCE area. Also issues that need, and indeed receive, attention of NGOs. These issues need the NGOs’ attention because in some areas, or with regard to some aspects, states may be less able, incapable, or simply unwilling, to opt for a comprehensive approach towards security of which all speak in the rooms in the other part of this conference centre, but which not all are willing to endorse.”

| page top