Documents / FOIA release
This Central Intelligence Agency conference report, numbered RTT 95-10039 and dated October 1995, presents the proceedings of a conference held 30 September to 1 October 1993. The CIA's Geographic Resources Division sponsored the conference. In it, academic geographers, anthropologists and US Government officials examined ethnic conflict by region, covering Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, Asia and South Asia. The report also discusses what these conflicts mean for US policy. It does not deal with UFOs or unidentified aerial phenomena.
“The Advance”17 pages
Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268 failed to protect ethnic minorities, the collapse of the nation-state has not offered an appealing alternative. Can Europe’s ethnic problems be solved by redrawing state frontiers? National and ethnic identities existed for centuries before state borders were drawn and redrawn, usually by outside ii’1I6I'6SI1S. What year would we use to define the nation-state structure in Europe? 1993? 1989? 1945? I917? Clearly, there is no magic formula. While we should not encourage that ethnic conflict be solved by changing national bound- aries, we should not exclude that these boundaries can be changed by peaceful means. As in the case of a reunified Germany, border ch'anges can be counte- nanced by the intemational community if they are accepted by all interested parties and accompanied by guarantees protecting individual rights and minority communities. ‘ A Kinder and Gentler Europe Is there an ideal—or even preferable—state structure for Europe today? Perhaps this is the wrong question. We should rather ask how Europe can best accommo- date individual rights, as well: as national and ethnic pluralism? Clearly, there are no simple answers. How- ever, we might begin by contemplating a Europe that is both more united and less centralized. While the nation-state remains the mostésignificant unit in Europe today, its political role is increasingly being supplemented by both supemational and subnational units. This development is fraught not only with dan- gers but also with opportunities for a kinder and gen- tler Continent. ' A Europe, which respects individual and ethnic rights, can only be achieved on a democratic basis if there is grass roots involvement in the process. Logically, decisions are best made at the lowest possible level. Europeans have dubbed this concept—in the best Brussels bureaucratese—"subsidiarity’; Americans might call it “federalism.” This very American approach can lead to practical, not ideological, solu- tions to local problems from garbage collection to minority rights, from electing jregional govemments to establishing native-language schools. i Autonomy can lead to anarchy, however, unless it is accompanied by rules of the road to guide the devel- opment of a civil society in the East. Without an active partnership with the West, it is doubtful whether this model can flourish in nations unaccustomed to unre- strained democracy. Thus, the process of devolution of power, particularly in the East, could exacerbate ethnic tensions and ultimately threaten democracy unless it is guided by institutions based on shared val- ues. The only appropriate Western response is to inte- grate the countries east of the Oder-Niesse line to the family of democratic nations. This must be done in the political sphere by supporting Eastem reform and reformers, in the economic sphere by opening Western markets to Eastern goods and in the strategic sphere by opening Eastem Europe and eventually nations of the former Soviet Union into Westem security struc- tures. NATO: A New Mission The security of Europe is indivisible. Ethnic conflict, ultranationalism, or massive flows of refugees any- where threaten stability everywhere, including the most advanced West European democracies. What happens in Central and Eastern Europe also has a direct bearing on the fate of the Newly Independent States (NIS)-—and vice versa. Without the successful expansion of the democratic community of nations to the East, the stability of Europe cannot be guaranteed. A stable security framework, in the view of many Eastem democrats, is a precondition for building democracies and strong economies in their part of the world. While this argument can easily be tumed around-—bui1ding viable economies is the best way to ensure security—there is no doubt that this perception is widely shared. Three times in this century the United States has been drawn into European wars (two hot, one cold). We have learned through painful history that the United States cannot remain indifferent to threats to European stability. The ethnic conflicts in the former Yugoslavia should serve as a poignant reminder that Europe is l8l l Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268
Not linked to a story yet.
FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 205 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.