(Estimated Pub Date) the Challenge of Ethnic Conflict to National and International Order in the 1990S: Geographic Perspectives- October 1995

Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268
1
l
l
>
l
American critics, including Ronald Reagan, con-
curred; the West had sold out to Moscow.
However, the leaders who founded the CSCE, perhaps
unknowingly, began a process that would ultimately
lead to the collapse of the Soviet Empire. By acknowl-
edging that certain principles ‘are inherent and univer-
sal, Moscow, in effect, acknowledged limits to its
power. It did not have the sovereign right to transgress
the Helsinki principles either its colonies or even in
Mother Russia. Of course, this did not prevent succes-
sive Soviet leaders from ignoring these principles;
they did, however, lose their intellectual cover. The
CSCE, with its broad definition of security founded on
human rights and democracy and its inclusive mem-
bership, helped win the Cold
The CSCE can now help win the peace in Europe by
establishing human rights norins, protecting ethnic '_
minorities, and pursuing low-intensity conflict preven-
tion and peacekeeping activities. I-lelsinki’s broad def-
inition of security also encompasses the conciliation
and crisis management. To cope with existing and
potential crises, largely fueled by ethnic conflicts, the
CSCE has deployed monitor missions to Kosovo, Ser-
bia proper, and Macedonia to prevent a spillover from
the Bosnian tragedy. It has also deployed or is consid-
ering deploying missions to Cieorgia, Estonia, and
Moldova in the former Soviet Union. It has brought
the parties of the Nagomo-Karabakh dispute to the
table. s
We should build on these quiet successes. For
instance, the CSCE High Commissioner on National
Minorities now has the authority to provide “early
warning" and, as appropriate,A“early action” to
national minority issues, which have “the potential to
develop into a conflict.” The CSCE can play a role
that neither NATO, the EC, nor any other European
institution can play in preventing Bosnia-like conflicts
and, ultimately, in integrating Eastem Europe and the
NIS into a new Europe.
Conclusion
The United States is a nation of idea—not of blood,
birth or creed. It has largely avoided ethnic strife
because it has not attempted to build a state based on
ethnic, racial, or religious homogeneity. If human
rights and fundamental freedoms belong to the indi-
vidual, then group or collective rights can best be
addressed through the protection of individual rights.
As long as ethnicity is seen as the only basis for sort-
ing out human relations or creating nations, we will
have ethnic conflict in Europe. Group rights can have
no meaning if the basic human rights are ignored by
ethnic zealots.
The best way to address ethnic conflict in Europe is
through a united, but decentralized, Europe governed
by mutually accepted rules of behavior. The integra-
tion of Western Europe into institutions—NA'PO, the
EC, and the CSCE-—founded on fundamental human
rights, has gone a long way to eliminating territorial
disputes, irredentist claims, and ethnic grievances
among and within its member states. We must now
find creative ways to use these institutions to deal with
emerging ethnic-—and other subregional—tensions
before they erupt into shooting conflicts. We must
avoid the situation where every crisis presents a
choice between inaction and military intervention. We
must now extend these habits of cooperation to the
East.
183
I
I
Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268