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.
“Nevers”25 pages
Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268 still a dangerous place and that only one institution has the operational capabilities and habits of coopera- tion to preserve peace and stability on the Continent in the post—Cold War era: NATO. To accomplish this mission, however, NATO must transform itself from an Alliance based on collective defense against an identifiable threat into an Alliance committed to projecting democracy, stability, and crisis management throughout the Continent. This cannot be done without engaging the nations to the East. The real and potential hotspots in Europe all lie in this area. If NATO does not deal with these nations, it will become increasingly irrelevant—a closed, chummy club without a mission or a message. Any new security structure, therefore, must be inclusive rather than exclusive; it should not lead to the redivi- sion of Europe into blocs. Over time, therefore, NATO must be open to new members, largely to the East but also to include the neutral and nonaligned states of Europe. This approach—which has been called the “Partnership for Peace” program—would provide a framework within the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) for enhanced political and military cooperation. Under this rubric the militaries of East and West would plan, train, and exercise together. Active cooperation in this partnership could lay the foundation for full NATO membership. In short, future expansion should be evo- lutionary, inclusive, and aimed at enhancing the stabil- ity of Europe. Trade, Not Aid While the Soviet empire was fragmenting, West Euro- pean officials smugly maintained that they had resolved their remaining differences at Maastricht. A united and prosperous European Community, they believed, could be protected from the economic and political instability in the East. The euphoria was short lived. Many Europeans now conclude the Maastricht Treaty was drafted “too soon and too quickly.” Faced with depressed economies and weak govemments, European polities, like their American brethren, seek national solutions to global problems. Westem Europe threatens to define itself and its world role narrowly. Neither parochial nor EC-only solutions, however, address the unavoidable fact that the West cannot insulate itself from economic decline, ethnic strife, and political instability in the East. Their fates are intertwined. Ethnic minorities have perhaps most at stake in a stable and prosperous Europe. In times of recession, populist leaders seek scapegoats, most often ethnic minorities. Such conditions create eco- nomic refugees throughout Europe. While Europeans must ultimately determine their own economic architecture, Americans have a large stake in the outcome. A successful Uruguay Round of the world trade talks, to a large degree, hinges on the ame- nable conclusion of inter-European and US-EC nego- tiations. It is in our mutual interest, therefore, to decrease trade barriers and to increase market access to our respective markets. European economic integration is of particular interest to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the NIS. Without an outlet for their products, many of the leaders of these countries will be tempted to return to the false stability and the failed statist policies of the past. Just as in the security field, American policy- makers should seek to extend the zone of economic prosperity eastward. We should encourage the expan- sion of the EC eastward. We should welcome the greater integration of the former East Bloc into the global trading system. We should lower or eliminate inefficient subsidies. In short, trade, not aid, is the best guarantee for a prosperous Europe. CSCE: Conscience of Europe The CSCE has recently been called the conscience of Europe. European statesmen from Vacel Havel to Margaret Thatcher to Andrey Sakharov have credited the 1975 Helsinki Final Act, the founding document of CSCE, for providing the intellectual basis for the demise of Communism. The CSCE has not always received such good press. In 1975 the Soviet leader- ship believed that the Final Act legitimized the Soviet presence in Europe; that is, a sphere of influence. 182 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 under it. 205 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.