NATO Individual Democratic Institutions Research Fellowships (1994-1996)

The research reports reproduced here are the responsibility of the individual authors. Their reproduction does not imply any form of official or unofficial endorsement by NATO. The reports are offered in unedited form, as presented by their authors, with a view to make their findings available to a wide audience. Creating The European Security System in a Post Cold War Period Dr. Alexander Konovalov [Back to Index] Foreseeable Risks And Challenges Towards Security And Stability In Europe Traditional direct military threats related to the possible conflicts between European countries as well as potential military threats from outside Europe do not dominate a strategic landscape any longer. It is clear now that the most serious risks and threats towards European security for the foreseeable future should be attributed to the category of "non-conventional" ones. The term "non-conventional" should be understood in this context as a security risk which either did not exist or did not play a significant role in the recent past. One of the most significant new risk is contained in the dramatic internal contradiction between principle of inviolability of the state borders in Europe, proclaimed by the Helsinki documents, and declared rights of nations for self-determination, which resulted in numerous changes in the political map of Europe already. Massive creation of the new states in Europe was not foreseen by international community but represents now a vital element of the current European political reality, directly undermining in many cases stability and security in Europe. Nobody can say for sure whether the process of the state creation is over already in Europe and we see the final or at least a durable version of the European political map. On the contrary, it seems likely that the further changes in this map look inevitable.

The other potential risk towards European security is linked with the internal economic and political instabilities and uncertainties originated from inside the new independent states, and first of all from Russia. The level of interdependence of all European states is so high that political rivalry or economic collapse in any European country would impact the security interests of each state on this continent. That is why the creation of the new security arrangements should include the deepening of economic integration and development of democratic political systems as the best precaution against relapses of the totalitarism in domestic and foreign policies of European states. The probability of negative political developments in Russia and restoration of totalitarian regime their with hostile and aggressive foreign policy is considered as the main threat towards their security by many Central European countries. Such concern seems legitimate, taking into consideration their historical experience. At the same time it should be seen as a wrong example of historical analogies. In such analogy the new Russia is automatically evaluated as the same "devil empire" as the Soviet Union was, but with the new label only. The hates to the communism and to the Soviet system as such is redirected to Russia. This approach seems extremely dangerous because it replaces the stereotype of "Sovietophobia" in public mind with the stereotype of "Russuphobia" which dooms Europe to see a new military-political confrontation in the near future. To be objective it is necessary to accept that the probability of negative political changes in Russia theoretically does exist. At the same time any professional and objective expert while analyzing such a probability has to come to conclusion that current situation in the Russian economy and armed forces clearly confirm, that Russia is physically unable to project military power beyond national borders at least for fifteen years to come even in the worst case scenario for development of its domestic political situation. That is why it would be much more wise to launch the efforts to avoid the negative political scenarios in Russia than to construct the costly security precautions already now, provoking the changes in the Russian policy, nobody would like to see. Much more real threat to the European security originates from the "renaissance of nationalism" and the growing probability of national and ethnic conflicts. The most representative example is the tragedy in former Yugoslavia. National and ethnic conflicts are dangerous not only as a potential source of military hostilities but as a factor provoking huge flows of refugees and illegal mass migration. Illegal migrants and refugees already became the important factor destabilizing European situation. The real danger towards European security is linked with the possibility of nuclear, chemical and modern conventional weapons proliferation. Practically all the European nations have common vital national interest - to prevent proliferation of the weapons of mass destruction and high-tech modern conventional weapons or saturation with modern conventional weapons the areas of national and regional conflicts. This concern is applicable not only to weapons themselves but to transferees of the modern military technologies. The other important factor which undermines the stability and security in Europe is an unprecedented growth of organized crime and its penetration and in a number of cases symbioses with the power structures in the new independent states. One of the well known byproduct of this trend is a diversification and widening of illegal drug traffic. It is well known that after the end of the Soviet invasion to Afghanistan and withdrawal of the Soviet troops from this country this area became the world leader in manufacturing of heroin containing drugs and substantial part of this product reaches European countries through the territories of the new independent states which emerged from the former Soviet Union. Of course, this list does not exhaust all potential risks and challenges towards security and stability Europe is facing now and will face most likely in the years to come. At the same time the items of the current European security agenda mentioned above allows to conclude that institutionally, conceptually and methodologically Europe was and continues to be not ready to properly meet these new challenges. All the institutions functioning in the internationally security field (NATO, WEU, OSCE, etc.) were founded in the period of the Could War and were designed to act in the Could War environment. The main military-strategic concepts, like nuclear deterrence, used the bi-polar military and ideological confrontation as an internal skeleton around which they were developed. This confrontation was absolutely necessary to prove their internal logic and approaches towards international stability and security. The very idea to insure of strategic stability was understood as a way to stabilize the military-political confrontation, in other words to make this confrontation less costly, more reliable and less vulnerable, especially in the crises situation. But nobody put under doubts the confrontation itself as a main organizational principles of international relations. The end of the Cold War has radically changed this situation. Liquidation of bi-polar military confrontation put international community in front of several dramatic problems - to work out institutions, mechanisms and principles of the new security system in Europe which would correspond with the changes in security environment and challenges towards international security and stability. Of course the first and the most evident idea was linked with the possibility to arrange and to use the existing institutions and structures and the most powerful of them - NATO. The idea of NATO enlargement as the most if not the only way to insure security and stability in Europe dominates the political thinking either in the West or in Central European countries. At the same time it continues to be the "apple of discord" between Russia and the West in the security field.