・First, there will be a short analysis of the major challenges of European institutions proper: OSCE, NATO and EU. How do they handle enlargement, internal restructuring and the management of the interrelationship at the same time and what are the prospects and probable roles of these organizations in the foreseeable future? All of these processes have been accelerated by the two wars on the Balkans. They are, however, part and parcel of a broader development related to the new strategic setting after the demise of the Cold War system.
・Secondly, there is a problem of how to link the UN with European security affairs. Two questions will be addressed: Can these European organizations be understood as "regional arrangements" under Article 53 of the UN Charter?; and is there the possibility of a permanent seat on the Security Council for the EU?
・Thirdly, before some concluding remarks, the question is addressed, which role the Contact Group and/or the G-8 club can execute in European security affairs (and beyond) and what the limits and potential of these bodies are.
I. Basic policies of European security organizations after the demise of the bipolar order in Europe and the wars on the Balkans
The changed security environment in Europe after the demise of the Soviet Union and the conflicts on the Balkans forced the three major security institutions in Europe, the EU, NATO and OSCE, to adjust more or less dramatically. The future of the organizations will depend on the mastering of three major inter-related processes: enlargement, internal restructuring, and the management of the interrelationship among these institutions. Their role in the international system and their outreach to the wider world will be very much determined by how effectively they are able to cope with these challenges.
Operation 1: Enlargement:
There have been applications for membership by the Central and East European states to all the European security institutions. The EU and NATO understand that the extension of their organization is an instrument to stabilize the European system of states. The interest of the applicant states to become a member intersects with the interest of the existing institutions to extend their membership for reasons of stability in Europe.
What is the state of the art?
The OSCE was extended without much complication and now embraces 53 member states. No further extension is discussed. NATO has taken in three new members (Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic) and maintains still―at least in accordance with official statements―an open door. The EU is considering the applications of 13 candidates (including, with a slightly different status, Turkey). The first applicants may become members in 2004/5. Even more, there is the inclination to include additional countries from the Balkans, maybe even Serbia, in the longer run, in order to stabilize this crisis-ridden region. This would one day augment EU membership to more than 30 states.
The OSCE had relatively few problems with expansion because it was―justifiably or not―regarded by most member states as a useful organization but ultimately marginal. It was always a consensus driven institution. This had its costs but also its benefits. The idea to establish a European Security Council in the OSCE's framework never got substantial support.
