Kazakhstan, Astana, Dec. June / Trend A. Maratov /
The OSCE should be divided into regional subgroups to increase its effectiveness, Kazakh political scientist, Risk Assessment Group Director Dosym Satpayev told Trend today. Its summits should also be held in a narrower format, he said.
"It should not spread out its focus (to global problems)," Satpayev stressed, while lauding Turkmen President Gurbanguly Berdumuhammadov's proposal to create an Organization for Security and Cooperation in Central Asia and the Caspian region. "Let's instead take on a specific issue and work on it. It is necessary to update the OSCE so that it includes structures that would be responsible for each region."
Berdumuhammadov voiced the proposal to create such a structure during the OSCE summit in Astana held last Wednesday and Thursday. The summit was held under Kazakhstan's OSCE presidency and brought together the leaders of member countries after an 11-year break. The last such summit was held in 1999 in Istanbul.
Big hopes were placed on meeting in Astana, but the summit left more disappointment than optimism, he said. On the summit's second day, after more than eight hours of talks, the participants agreed on a final declaration, which left the representatives of many countries feeling dissatisfied. An action plan on the OSCE's future work in protracted conflicts in the post-Soviet space also remained uncoordinated.
According to Satpayev, the summit has caused frustration among those who approached the event too optimistically.
"However, if you assess it realistically, then what happened was bound to happen," he said. However, the summit was necessary, Satpayev added, as the 11-year break was too long for such an important international organization.
He stressed that the summit was supposed to give an answer to the question whether the organization is actually needed. Most participants decided that the OSCE is actually needed, Satpayev said.
"Thus, the OSCE received another portion of legitimacy after 11 years," he said, noting that in recent years the OSCE was often accused of only having a formal existence.
It is not worth expecting effective solutions to protracted conflicts from the OSCE, he said. The organization is too cumbersome for such purposes. Its structure very structure prohibits it from solving difficult problems, Satpayev said, and there are other players that need to deal instead with the settlement of conflict regions.
"The Minsk Group exists to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict," he said. "If we speak about the Georgian conflict, then no OSCE will resolve this problem. It has to do with the relationship of Russia and Georgia alone. And the mediators represented by European countries can only assist in the negotiation process."
The expert added that the OSCE also does not play a big role in Central Asia. As an example, he cited the restoration of political stability in Kyrgyzstan, and stressed that Bishkek can only rely on Russian and Kazakh support.
"Therefore, if we look at the OSCE as a space for dialogue where nations can gather and voice their old grievances, then the summit fulfilled this mission," he said. "It was clear that everyone gathered not to solve problems, but to voice their complaints."
The security and resolution of protracted conflicts was included in the summit agenda. However, no point of contact was found on these conflicts - neither Nagorno Karabakh, nor the Georgian-Ossetian conflict, nor Transnistria.
According to Satpayev, the summit looked like "a magnifying glass, which gave a clearer picture of what the myths and stereotypes are in many politicians' minds."
However, there is no alternative to peaceful negotiation, although it may be sluggish, the expert underscored.
"Even if to assume that there will be a war, then it would be even worse, as the conflict sides would sooner or later have to sit at the negotiation table," he said. "But in that case they would sit down at the table with a new load of offenses and list of pain.
E. Ostapenko (Baku) contributed to the article.