Astana OSCE Summit Is Breakthrough In International Relations - Expert Marat Bashimov

By Askar Bimendin

Well known expert of international relations, history expert, Doctor of Law Marat Bashimov who was directly involved in the work of OSCE Summit shared his view on the event and its results with a correspondent of Kazinform agency. According to him the Summit has become a breakthrough in the sphere of international relations.
Mr. Bashimov, what is the uniqueness of this Summit?

Holding the Summit is like a restart of international relations because the heads of state have not gathered together to discuss the prospects of further development of the OSCE for many years. There were no negotiations on further fulfilling of the principles and responsibilities of the Organization.

For instance, the proposition of the Kazakh President to establish such an institute as the OSCE Center for tolerance and nondiscrimination was special. Nobody has ever proposed it before. A lot of documents say that it is necessary to observe tolerance but there are really few bodies that keep it under control. Therefore this offer was unique and innovative and truly relevant in any regard.

Experts already positively appraise the proposal to establish the centers on socio-economic forecasts and economic monitoring and analysis.

These initiatives of Kazakhstan give opportunity to the OSCE to control the situation and go ahead and develop, therefore experts positively judge the initiatives of Kazakhstan.

At the OSCE Summit in Astana many people noted that thanks to the presidency of Kazakhstan in the Organization the work of it was put at the higher level. We can trust these words because they were said by the heads of state, heads of government, ministers of foreign affairs and these people are those who do not lie. They do not need it; they just objectively appraise the work accomplished by Kazakhstan.

For the other part it means that the diplomats of other countries and their authorities did not work really actively and purposefully within their presidency.

During Kazakhstan's presidency our diplomatic mission was fully involved in resolution of 'frozen' international conflicts. The problem is that for 20 years nobody has even started working in this direction. It was all to become the responsibility of Kazakhstan. The problem of Transnistria is the one with longhistory which has always been considered irresolvable. Due to Kazakhstan's chairmanship the Organizationg gives more attention to this problem.

What about Nagorno-Karabakh? Who and when got so close to this issue over years? Kazakhstan was actively working on it. Of course, the sides had different views, but there were proposals, ways to solve it, work on the resolution.

Kyrgyzstan was next. The major task was to prevent civil war which Kazakhstan managed to handle. The world community fully accepts it.

The fact that Kazakhstan is located between Europe and Asia helps us be very good diplomats; we are good mediators. It was many times emphasized by the world community.

We got an "excellent" mark for the work within the first basket of the OSCE. Even Americans positively appraise the presidency of Kazakhstan. It is a truly objective appraise.

It is also important that we just moved the activity of the OSCE to a new level and put concrete contents into the baskets of the Organization.

The adoption of the Astana Declaration is one more proof of our huge contribution to development of the OSCE and showed direction for further improvement. It is a success.
Many words were said about the absence of a charter of the OSCE. Alexander Lukashenko mentioned it on the second day of the Summit. What do you, as a lawyer, think about it?

The most important thing was that this issue was hotly debated during our presidency. We actively talked about moving further, defining the legal personality of the OSCE, for any international organization must have a charter.

The decisions in the OSCE are not made as easily as it is thought because of the lack of a charter and the consensus decision-making rule. This rule is quite obsolete and the EU has already changed it because if one state does not like anything it can spoil plans and positions of the majority.

Changing it would give a good boost for the Organization to move ahead. In this case the Organization would be more than the platform for the dialogue. Adoption of a charter of the OSCE would help it change into a more effective organization.
Thank you very much for the interview.