"There is still much work to be done in building democratic
and pluralistic societies, where diversity is fully protected
and respected in practise. Consequently we reject racial,
ethnic and religious discrimination in any form. Freedom and
tolerance must be taught and practised."
CSCE Helsinki Document  1992


There are many ingredients in the alphabet soup of European
organisations; some of them are well known like EC, NATO or EFTA, but
there are others people have seldom heard or read about, therefore the
aim of the following article is to give you a short introduction to
the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, CSCE, sometimes
even called 'Helsinki Process'.

Background to the CSCE

After the Second World War the majority of European states grouped
themselves into two opposing military alliances, NATO and Warsaw Pact.
Eventually the need for communication, guarantees of peace and
security in a divided Europe resulted in raising the idea of the
conference of European States. Finally, in 1972, the representatives
of Eastern and Western Europe and Northern America met in Helsinki for
consultations. In the meetings of 1972-73 a decision was made on
organising a three phase conference. The result of the conference was
the adoption of the Helsinki Final Act in August 1975.

In order to make the vast amount of different subjects easier to
handle they were divided into four "baskets". The first one dealt with
security, including the principals of inter-state relations and
certain military subjects. The second basket consisted of
recommendations in the fields of economics, science, technology and
environment.

The third one, the human dimension, contained co-operation in
humanitarian fields, such as human rights, information, cultural
relations and freer movement of people and ideas. The fourth basket
looked for the possibility of establishing a permanent body for
European security and co- operation. The values of the declaration
represented the basic human values - human rights, democracy and the
rule of law. However one must bear in mind that CSCE documents aren't
treaties but non-legal commitments. Nevertheless the Helsinki document
has had a significant influence on European matters. In Eastern Europe
human rights-movements and NGOs (often called Helsinki-groups)
especially drew strength from the CSCE. The Helsinki Final Act gave
legitimacy for individuals to demand rights given to them by states
adopting the Act and for the first time the participating states were
ready to encourage and promote the individual activities parallel to
interstate cooperation. Despite the existing confrontation and
disagreements the Helsinki conference was nevertheless an important
landmark in the process of détente between east and west.

CSCE 1975-1990

Until the year of 1989 the CSCE existed without institutions or even a
formal structure. The CSCE proceeded from one following meeting to
another, with each deciding the date and place of the next and what
other meetings were to take place. Among meetings were for example
Conference on Disarmament in Europe in Stockholm 84-86 ;Cultural Forum
in Budapest 85 ;Seminar on Co-operation in the Mediterranean in
Valletta 79 and CFE (Conventional Armed Forces) and CSBM (Confidence
and Security Building Measures) negotiations in Wien. These are just
some of the different events taking place within the CSCE framework.
This unstructured method served well to the relatively static
east-west situation prior 1989.

The collapse of communism had effects on the CSCE as well which is
also reflected in the name of the concluding document of the Paris
Summit 1990: Charter of Paris for a New Europe. In the document an end
to the cold war and the division of Europe is declared as the Charta
emphasises the values shared by all the participating states: human
rights, representative democracy, market economy, shared
responsibility of all in the protection of environment. The Paris
Summit was also the starting point for the institutionalisation of the
CSCE.

Helsinki 1992

The follow-up meeting in Helsinki was significant for three reasons.
Firstly, it was the first one to be held after the fall of communism
in Eastern Europe, secondly it was the first meeting of the CSCE which
was to tackle with a war in Europe, thirdly, many new states were for
the first time taking part in the work of an international
organisation. The result of the follow-up meeting, the final
document "Challenges of Change" was signed in Helsinki by 51 heads of
states. In addition to delegations from various states,
representatives of international organisations like NATO, Council of
Europe, WEU and UN took part in the summit. Living in Finland I had
the pleasure to attend the Helsinki summit and it was quite an
experience. It is very seldom that an ordinary student has the
possibility to see all the leaders of the world including Bush,
Yeltsin, Mitterand or Kohl "alive and kicking". From the press balcony
I could listen to all the speeches and in most of them the keyrole of
the EC in Europe and the need for implementation of CSCE principals
especially in the new states in Eastern Europe were mentioned.

The Helsinki Document represents a typical CSCE document. It consists
of two parts of which the first one is a declaration giving outlines
for the future developments of the CSCE. The second part is more
concrete and includes commitments on several areas like environment,
security co- operation and human dimension.

CSCE Institutions

When describing CSCE institutions it is important to keep in mind the
nature of CSCE, above all the fact that the CSCE consists of
PARTICIPATING states, not of member states. Most of the CSCE decisions
and activities are carried out by individual states, not by common
institutions. Since 1989 there has been a change towards some
institutionalization of the CSCE, however keeping the CSCE as flexible
and open as possible.

Role of non-governemental-organisations

CSCE was for a long time a closed process but with the changes in
Europe NGOs have also been given access to the work of the CSCE.
Before the follow-up meeting in Helsinki NGOs were able to participate
at three meetings concerning the human dimension: Paris 1989,
Copenhagen 1990 and Moscow 1991. The most active groups have been
international human rights organisations and so called Helsinki Groups
which were very active in Eastern Europe during the Cold War. Most of
the NGOs have seen their main task to be the implementation and
evaluation of CSCE and the values it represents. The important role of
NGOs has also been recognised by CSCE, and the information NGOs can
provide for example on human rights violations has great importance on
the efficiency of the CSCE.

In the Helsinki document of _92 it was decided that the participating
states will make open to NGOs all plenary meetings of review
conferences, ODHIR seminars, workshops and meetings, the CSO when
assembling as the Economic Forum and human rights implementation
meetings. They should also instruct directors of CSCE institutions and
secretariats of CSCE meetings to designate an NGO liaison person from
among their staff and to promote contacts and exchange of views
between NGOs and relevant national authorities and governmental
institutions between CSCE meetings.

Furthermore it was decided to facilitate during the CSCE-meetings
informal meetings between representatives of participating states and
of NGOs; to encourage written presentations by NGOs to the CSCE
institutions and last but not least provide encouragement to NGOs
organizing seminars on CSCE- related issues. The meaningful role of
NGOs will depend on whether these commitments will be implemented or
not, and there are some states which are against increasing the
influence of NGOs. Nevertheless, at least during the implementation
meeting on Human Dimension Issues in Warsaw this autumn, NGOs had the
possibility to address the delegates and lobby for issues they felt to
have importance. This possibility is especially important for
different minority groups which need an international forum where to
bring up their problems.

AEGEE and CSCE

AEGEE has had contacts with the CSCE since the Helsinki follow-up
meeting '92 and there are several reasons why I think AEGEE should
keep itself involved with the CSCE. Firstly, our aims and principals
are almost the same as those of CSCE. Actually we are implementing the
ideas of CSCE through our practical work. Secondly, the national
governments have made a commitment to provide encouragement to NGOs
organizing seminars on CSCE related issues. What the word
encouragement will include, shall remain to be seen, but in principal
most of the conferences, academies and seminars organized by AEGEE
have been relevant for CSCE (environment, east-west-relations,
tolerance, minorities, anti-discrimination). This can be used in case
of applying money from national governments for different events.

Thirdly, AEGEE has the possibility to attend the expert seminars and
implementation meetings. This is especially relevant for our working
groups. For example if we had a functioning anti discrimination - WG,
it could really learn a lot about the human rights situation in
Europe during the CSCE expert seminars and if they were active enough,
also take up issues the WG would find relevant or important. We should
also bear in mind that the CSCE is the only European organisation
which covers all the countries where AEGEE have antennae. Furthermore
during the CSCE follow-up meetings NGOs, like we are, will have the
possibility to organise so-called parallel activities, like seminars,
press conferences, meetings etc. For these activities financial
support can be provided. Finally the possibility to attend the summits
and follow-up meetings will give an insight into the work of an
international organisation and a chance to promote our own work.

Conclusions

The CSCE is a unique as well as rather complicated phenomena in
international relations. The participating states don't represent any
geographically defined area including both European and non-European
states. The process has also had almost non-existing institutional
structure and it is gradually changing from a process to an
organisation. Furthermore, the CSCE has provided the only platform for
discussions and co-operation on a wide variety of issues reflecting
the political, military, economic, humanitarian, cultural and
educational concerns of the participating states. But is CSCE still
needed in today's Europe? Don't we have other organisations with
better structures? There are different answers to these questions, but
one thing we should have learned from the history: it is very
difficult to foresee the future, therefore it may be of vital
importance to maintain and to develop the possibilities the CSCE
offers for communication and co-operation between European states.




Sources and further information:

The Final Act of the CSCE 1975 (The Helsinki Final Act), The Charter
of Paris for a New Europe 1990, The Helsinki Document 1992, The
Summary of Conclusions, Third Council Meeting, Stockholm
1992'Redefining the CSCE' ed. by Ian M. Cuthbertson, 'Human Rights
Commitments within the CSCE Process' by Merja Pentikinen, 'A Citizens
Guide to CSCE' by The Finnish Committee for European Security.


The structure of the CSCE:
a) General Secretary - management of CSCE structures and operations -
assists the Chairman-in-Office in publicizing CSCE policies and
practises as international representative of the Chair-man-in-Office
b) Secretary of the Conflict Prevention Center/Vienna c) CSCE
secreteriat/Prague - helps CSO in its work d) Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights (ODHIR) - the main institution on the
human dimension -assits the building of democratic institutions e)
High Commisioner on National minorites (Mr. Max van der Stoel)
-provides "early warnings" and appropriate "early action" at the
earliest possible stage in regard to tensions involving national
minority issues that have the potential to develope into a conflict
within the CSCE area. f) Parliamenatary Assembly -discusses the fields
of activities, working methods and rules of procedures of the CSCE.