Europe, Moscow need mutual trust to break 'cold peace'
0 
Is the cold war over? Yes, but the ensuing "cold peace" seemed to have prevented Russia and her European neighbors from rebuilding mutual trust. That may explain why participants at the Munich conference argued about "the future of European security architecture."
'NATO's failure'
Addressing the high-level conference on Saturday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Europea's security has been weakening "in every aspect" over the last 20 years, after undergoing several serious conflicts, even hot wars in the highly-integrated European land.
Lavrov and some experts blamed the clashes on the NATO-led security institutions, which failed to prevent Kosovo wars in 1999 and conflicts in South Ossetia in 2008.
NATO's continuing expansion policy not only divided Europe into zones "with different levels and political standards," but also "move these lines deliberately to East Europe," which Russia views as a vital threat to its security, said the top Russian diplomat.
In 2009, NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization) members have increased to 28 from the original 12 in 1949.
In the words of Thorsten Benner, associate director of Berlin-based Global Public Policy Institute, "the post-cold war has produced a cold peace at best." As 20 years have passed, the post-Soviet Russia, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the United States and its Western NATO allies have not reached a consensus on organizing security.
Sergei Karaganov, chairman of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, had this to say: "The unfinished nature of the Cold War constantly bring about open or hidden suspicious, as well as a confrontational mentality in Russia and many other European countries. "
He cited quarrels over natural gas between Western and Eastern Europe, scrambles for Arctic resources and disputes over missile defense system as "classic examples."
Low political mutual trust has rendered NATO-Russia Council (NRC), another main security framework, ineffectual to help form a real partnership between Moscow and other European countries.
Russia's approach
Lavrov said Saturday that Russian "wants to overcome the block approach of cold war in the European architecture and to ensure new policy of mutual trust." In other words, the NATO institution should be changed, or even replaced.
"No single state can ensure its security at the expense of others," he stressed.
Russia has actually offered an alternative for NATO: the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). It will be the world's largest security-oriented intergovernmental organization, which has 56 member states including the United States, Russia, and most of the European countries.
Moscow has been calling for new security architecture since President Dmitry Medvedev fleshed out his proposals in the draft of "European Security Treaty" after the 2008 war with Georgia. But many NATO members were suspicious of Russia's intention, dismissing it as an excuse to thwart further NATO expansions.
Lavrov said Russia wants to see the OSCE become "a strong, efficient organization with legal binding to ensure equal security for every state in the European region," in line with Russia's principle of "the indivisibility of the security in whole Europe."
By contrast, many European officials still believed that future security of the region would rely on two pillars, NATO and the European Union (EU).
Speaking at the panel discussion immediately after Lavrov, Catherine Ashton, EU's high representative for foreign affairs, said the Lisbon Treaty had enabled the EU to make collective actions in tackling various threats in the 21st century, without mentioning the Russian proposal.
Last year, former NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said the present security structure remained "intact," and there was no need to have new security architecture as Russia suggested.
Go to Forum >>0 Comments