Narrative Report on the
20th SUMMER ACADEMY ON OSCE
9-18 June 2016
At the Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR)
Under the Auspices of the
Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
In the framework of In cooperation with
1
ORGANISED BY
Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution, Stadtschlaining
PROJECT TEAM
Academy Director & Moderator: Arie Bloed
Academy Co-Director: Walter Kemp
Academy Co-Director & Programme Coordinator: Ursula Gamauf-Eberhardt
Administrative Assistant: Claudia Hofer
Accountant: Martina Tader
RAPPORTEUR
Hana Đogović
Author’s note: The opinions and views expressed herein are the result of critical, thought-provoking
group discussion and should not be credited to any single participant or presenter.
2
Acknowledgement:
The Austrian Study Center for Peace and Conflict Resolution
would like to express its sincere gratitude and highest estimation to
Austria / the Permanent Mission of Austria to the OSCE,
Ireland / Permanent Mission of Ireland to the OSCE,
Germany/ the Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE and
The OSCE Chairmanship 2016 by Germany
for their financial support for the “Summer Academy on OSCE 2016”.
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction 1.1. 20th Summer Academy on the OSCE 1.2. Aims of the Academy 1.3. Participants 1.4. Speakers 1.5. Directors 1.6. The organizers: Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution
2. Methodology
3. Evaluation
4. Session reports
4.1. OSCE’s sui generis Status 4.2. Three Dimensions of OSCE 4.3. Minority Rights and Minority Issues 4.4. Gender Issues 4.5. Mediation, Negotiations and Diplomacy 4.6. Simulation: Special Meeting on the Refugee and Migrant Crisis 4.7. Visit to Hofburg – OSCE’s Headquarters in Vienna 4.8. Social Events 4.9. Roundup
5. Appendices
Appendix 1: Programme Appendix 2: List of Resource Persons Appendix 3: List of Participants
4
1. Introduction
1.1 20 th Summer Academy on the OSCE
The 20th Summer Academy on the OSCE took place from 9-18 June 2016 at the
Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) in Stadtschlaining, Austria.
The programme which celebrated its 20 anniversary was held under the auspices of the
Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and it was organised in
cooperation with the OSCE and supported by the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna.
1.2 Aims of the Academy
The ten-days programme gave an opportunity to the participants to develop their
own attitudes and opinions on the OSCE and its activities in general. The aim of the Summer
Academy on OSCE was to strengthen the participants’ understanding of OSCE, by providing
a detailed overview of the history, organisational structure, functions, values and current
activities of the OSCE. The 2016 Summer Academy focused on the concept of peace and co-
operation, providing the participants with a chance to exchange ideas, thoughts and to lead
lively discussions.
1.3 Participants
26 participants from 18 different countries attended the 20th Summer Academy on
OSCE. The heterogeneous group was comprised of experts and diplomats who already work
with the organisation through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the country they are coming
from, OSCE staff from field missions/presences, representatives of NGOs, students and
individuals who already have experience in working with or for the OSCE. The multi-facetted
group was very actively participating in all sessions of the Academy, sharing their respective
expertise and experience, raising key questions and defining creative ways forward. Critical
questions and courageous ideas provoked lively discussions both with speakers and inside
the group.
5
1.4 Speakers
The speakers invited to the 20th Summer Academy were high level diplomats, scholars,
experts from the OSCE Secretariat as well as from the field missions and lecturers with a
deep knowledge about the organisation’s functions, history, tasks, values and current
issues. A special emphasis was given to the OSCE’s current SMM in Ukraine. A close
cooperation with the German Chairmanship with a number of interactions throughout the
Academy was a clear asset.
1.5 Directors
Arie Bloed, co-founder and Academy Director, senior consultant for international
organizations such as the OSCE, UN and EU, was the programme-moderator. Bloed gave
interactive lectures, through which he stimulated inspiring discussions that led to a critical
reasoning and new ideas. By challenging the participants with his interesting questions and
topics, he motivated them to think about the organisation in a different manner – from the
perspective of an objective observer, as well as from the insiders’ point of view.
Academy Co-Director Walter Kemp, is Vice President and Chief Operating Officer at
the International Peace Institute (IPI). He joined IPI in August 2010 as Director for Europe
and Central Asia. Kemp provided a specific input on the HCNM, while managing to maintain
interesting and lively lectures on the practical level of diplomacy through the simulation of
the OSCE’s Permanent Council meeting on a refugee crisis.
Academy Co-Director Ursula Gamauf-Eberhardt, programme coordinator and a
member of academic staff of the ASPR, was - in consultation with her co-directors -
responsible for the planning of the 20th Summer Academy, the composition of the content,
the management of the lectures and speakers, and the overall organisation of the
programme in general.
6
1.6 The organizers: Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution
The Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) was founded in
September 1982 as an independent, non-profit and non-partisan organisation. The aim of
this centre is to contribute to the promotion of peace and peaceful conflict resolution,
which makes it an ideal place where such ideas could be discussed and supported, not only
on a national, but also on the international level. The ASPR provides several training
programmes – Capacity-Building in West Africa, Europe’s New Training initiative for Civilian
Crisis Management (ENTRi), Civil-Military Training Cooperation, International Civilian
Peacekeeping (IPT) Customised Trainings etc. Furthermore, the ASPR organises Peace
Weeks for more than one thousand Austrian pupils every year, also offering training for
teachers in the topics of team-building, conflict management It also engages in Peace and
Conflict Research, through which the ASPR contributes significantly to the Austrian and
European academic community in relation to the topics of peace and security.
Moreover, the ASPR set up the Peace Library in a former synagogue in
Stadtschlaining, as well as a Conference Centre in Schlaining Castle, where this Centre is
organising numerous conferences and meetings. For all the aforementioned, the ASPR was
awarded the UN "Peace Messenger" status in 1987, and, together with the EPU, the
UNESCO-Price for Peace Education 1995.
7
2. Methodology
The programme of the 20th Summer Academy on OSCE consisted of a combination of
lectures, group work, high level panel discussions, case studies, simulations and workshops.
Lectures were divided according to different topics, usually covering one thematic
unit within the day. This was done mostly by providing a theoretical lecture in the morning,
followed by workshops and discussions in the afternoon. Both lectures and workshops
provided the participants with the basis to understand in depth the three dimensions of the
OSCE and other relevant areas of organisation’s work. The lectures also covered issues
related to Freedom of the Media, High Commissioner on National Minorities, the Office for
Democratic institutions and Human Rights, Conflict Prevention Centre, etc. A considerable
amount of time was spent on discussing the topic of OSCE’s current SMM in Ukraine.
After providing the participants with a deeper insight in aforementioned topics,
theoretical knowledge was then applied within small working groups. Such workshops gave
an opportunity to rethink and elaborate more thoroughly on OSCE and related issues. The
participants then had a chance to apply practical skills through negotiations and team-work.
OSCE’s Permanent Council meeting simulation was comprised of interaction of
multinational teams, where the participants had to apply their communication and
diplomatic skills.
In order to prepare for the academy and its programme, participants were provided
three weeks ahead of its start with articles containing relevant introductory information.
Additional material was distributed during the programme itself and also via email. During
the Summer Academy, participants received a comprehensive reader on the OSCE, which
served to help their better understanding of organisation’s work and issues related to it.
8
3. Evaluation
On the first day of the Summer Academy in Schlaining an anonymous questionnaire
was distributed, which provided the participants with a chance to evaluate each and every
session during ten days of the programme. Participants had an opportunity to assess
individual daily sessions and the overall programme, but also to provide their own ideas and
suggestions for further improvements.
At the end of the programme at the OSCE Headquarters in Hofburg, Vienna, an oral
feedback session was facilitated by the directors of the Summer Academy. Participants
discussed their personal programme evaluation and gave inputs and propositions for the
further improvement in general.
The overall evaluation of the programme derived from the questionnaires can be illustrated
in pie.
1.1. Usefulness
for my professional development
Excellent 13
Good 12
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 1
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
9
1.2. Usefulness
for my personal development
Excellent 16
Good 9
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 1
1.3. Content
Excellent 16
Good 8
Fair 1
Poor 0
No Answer 1
1.4. Methodology of the programme:
(mix of lectures, working groups, exercises, readings)
Excellent 11
Good 13
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 2
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
10
2. OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE PROGRAMME
2.1 Usefulness for my professional development
Excellent 15
Good 9
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 2
2.1.2 Usefulness for my personal development
Excellent 16
Good 8
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 2
2.2 Basic Structure of the programme
Excellent 13
Good 12
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 1
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
11
2.3 Methodology of the programme (mix of lectures,
working groups, exercises)
Excellent 13
Good 12
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 1
2.4 Readings
Excellent 13
Good 12
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 1
2.5 Facilities - Hotel Burg Schlaining
Excellent 18
Good 7
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 1
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
12
- Seminar Rooms
Excellent 14
Good 11
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 1
- Library
Excellent 12
Good 9
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 5
2.6 Staff of the ASPR - Ursula Gamauf-Eberhardt
(helpfulness, efficiency, etc.)
Excellent 24
Good 1
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 1
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
13
2.7 Staff of hotel (helpfulness, efficiency, etc.)
Excellent 21
Good 4
Fair 0
Poor 0
No Answer 1
3. Future Development of the Programme
3.1 Would you recommend the programme to colleagues?
Yes 25
No 0
No Answer 1
From the oral feedback session, the following can be summarized:
Participants tended to feel that the Academy had achieved its objective of expanding and
deepening knowledge about the OSCE. Participants left the Academy with a better
understanding of the purpose, the current and future role of the OSCE, as well as of its
various distinct activities, enhancing their knowledge about the OSCE as well as the OSCE
participating states and providing training in working more effectively within the OSCE
diplomatic and OSCE-NGO milieus. In this respect, the range of input from speakers, the
experience of Arie Bloed, who directed the Academy and enhanced the critical dialogue
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Answer
Yes
No
No Answer
14
between resource persons and participants, and the multinational and diverse occupational
backgrounds of the participants proved beneficial.
From the written evaluation the following points can be raised:
Overall, the methodology and the content of the programme were evaluated very positively
(“Excellent” and “Good”). Participants found the focus on different topics to be positive,
though some desired greater attention to one or another specific issue depending on their
personal background – as this is always the case due to different backgrounds. Participants
stated that in general a proper balance had been reached between providing an overview in
a lecture and deepening the knowledge and skills in working groups. A greater practical
involvement of participants as recommended in earlier evaluations proved being effective.
Participants stated that interactive sessions and exercises helped them improving their
communication skills within a multicultural, international setting and provided them with
crucial insights and a better understanding of other OSCE participating states. The mix of
methods in communicating the content was assessed as effective, interesting and
challenging.
Participants considered the two-days excursion to Vienna, including the visit to the OSCE
Permanent Council, some presentations and the high level diplomats-panel as very useful
and interesting and for some of them even exciting since they had the chance to meet their
delegations.
Most participants praised the selection of speakers for the programme. The involvement of
current and former high-ranking OSCE officials, sharing not only their knowledge and vast
experience but also their specific insights in the OSCE, was considered particularly valuable.
Also the panel discussion of high level diplomats was clearly a highlight.
Participants especially welcomed that the Academy Director made himself readily available
throughout the 10 days, and that some resource persons were able to continue discussion
with them outside the seminar room during lunch or dinner. This greatly enhanced the
overall learning experience.
15
Apart from getting an extensive knowledge about the OSCE, its structure, functioning etc.
the Academy was appreciated as being an opportunity to communicate with colleagues
from other OSCE offices in an intercultural atmosphere.
Also the venue was assessed positively, being a perfect location for a great learning
experience and for socializing.
Overall, participants felt warmly welcomed and appreciated the friendly professionalism,
helpfulness and efficiency of the staff at the ASPR and the Hotel Burg Schlaining.
Some statements on the overall evaluation of the Academy by participants:
• In such tight schedule it was very informative and covered almost all across of the
OSCE
• The programme was rich. The presentations delivered during the week shed light on
what the OSCE is truly about.
• I find the overall week very useful for my development.
• This week one was the excellent opportunity to discover more about the OSCE.
• I have never participated in such events. This is my first experience. I am very
pleased to be a participant of this anniversary course
• A very well managed, professional programme, made by the well-known OSCE
personalities
• Sometimes lectures were very basic, which you can always find in any newspaper. It
would be better if there had been more information concerning the history of the
OSCE its process, reasons and of course more legislation basics.
• It was good to have theoretical and practical courses with experts worked/ working
within OSCE.
• A lot of information was given to us, very carefully chosen. It was a busy time, but
really interesting.
• Lecturers contributed to any professional as well as personal development content,
experience and people-wise
16
• It was very interesting. It was my first such practice and I was a little afraid in the
beginning, but everything was excellent and I now have 25 new friends and also
clear understanding, what OSCE is and what it is doing.
• Many interesting information. Opportunity to meet new people and share ideas
• It fostered in my mind new perspectives about international security and gave me
oversight what things I need to do for improvement.
• Thank you for the extended course. It has been a great opportunity to come and
meet all those diplomatic, high professionals working on OSCE field, understood the
sore of OSCE activities, challenges it faces. Wish the course much success and
happily recommend the programme to colleagues.
• Overall, excellent experience and people liked this summer academy. I had the
opportunity to gain more knowledge on OSCE projects and generally of the
organisation. It is hard to add something or take out from this course. The speakers
were very interesting to listen. To sum up, there is always a space to fill in and
develop, such simulations and practical workshop, though these two weeks covered
almost everything and provided great knowledge. At last, I am glad the group was
interactive.
• The programme was useful and in time, special for those who is dealing OSCE,
offered the opportunity to understand what kind of organisation it stands how is
working the materials provided are useful for forward studying. Maybe it would be
more efficient if was a programme of two weeks. Thank you and wish you good luck
on future seminars!
• This academy is a very good opportunity not only to understand more, but also to
feel motivated while you go through the topic.
17
4. Session reports
4.1 OSCE’s sui generis status
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) is the world’s largest
regional security organization: fifty-seven States participate in it today. OSCE deals with the
issues such as arms control, conflict prevention, promotion and protection of human rights,
crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation and adaptation. The OSCE had been
established in July 1973 as Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE),
during the period of Cold War in order to represent a kind of a multilateral forum for
negotiations between East and West, and it also has its origins in the Helsinki Conference,
which was held in 1975. The document that was signed in Helsinki contained several issues
that had been essential for the so-called Helsinki process, as well as the future
commitments of the CSCE.
The significant turning point in the functioning of the OSCE was the collapse of the
Soviet Union, which led to the great change of role for the CSCE. Until the beginning of
1990s, CSCE used to function mostly through organizing various meetings and conferences
that were dealing with the extension of commitments and obligations of participating
States’. The new path for this organization was set up during the Paris Summit in November
1990, when the permanent institutions were established. However, CSCE was renamed in
OSCE in the beginning of the 1995. Therefore, the period of 1990-1994 was marked by the
transformation of the functioning of this organization, because it was rather difficult to
adapt its aims and methods to the newly established geopolitical environment. There are in
total six official languages of this organization – English, German, French, Italian, Russian
and Spanish and its headquarters are in Vienna.
The Opening of the Academy was enriched by a key statement by the Ambassador of
Sweden Fredrik Löjdquist who willingly presented his countries positions and foci within the
OSCE and beyond, also touching upon sensitive issues within the OSCE.
18
During the first day of the Summer Academy, on Friday, 10 June, the main topic was
focused on explanation of OSCE as an organization with a specific status, as an entity
different in comparison to other international organizations. The OSCE is not a typical
international organization, since it doesn’t fulfil all characteristics which would necessary for
a certain organization to be considered as an international one. The OSCE’s organizational
structure is very complex, while the Chairman-in-Office, High Commissioner on National
Minorities and Representative on Freedom of Media play a huge role.
While Arie Bloed was committing a lot of time explaining the participants the basic
features of the OSCE and its institutional structures and budget, Lisa Tabassi, Head of Legal
Services at OSG, talked about highly disputable and complex legal status of the organization.
The OSCE does not have a legal personality, nor a classical constituent treaty. Its documents
are political decisions rather than legal ones. Furthermore, the OSCE itself confirms that the
intention was never to create legally binding commitments. A rather interesting and specific
aspect of the OSCE is the fact that the nature of its constitutive charter is non-binding – it is
a political commitment of all signatories rather than a formal treaty. Therefore, due to the
lack of legal effect of OSCE’s constitutive charter, this organization is formally deprived of
international legal personality. Taking into account that each and every international or
intergovernmental organization is specific in its way, the status of OSCE constitutive charter
shouldn’t be seen as something unusual. What is more, despite the non-binding status of its
charter, the OSCE was and continued to be very flexible when it comes to the adaptation
and evolution of its functions and commitments to the constantly changing world
environment.
The OSCE seems to be a very interesting example when it comes to the difficulty of
the determination of legal personality of a certain organization. In the case of the OSCE,
upon establishment of this organization, no international treaty was adopted. What is more,
many legal authors think that the existence of an international agreement, signed, adopted
and ratified by states is required and even necessary when it comes to determining the
nature of a certain organization. Since the OSCE was established and based on the Helsinki
Final Act, it is important to emphasize that this document was not considered to be a treaty
19
under international law. Therefore, for many authors, all of the basic documents of the
OSCE are not treaties and cannot have a legal character, and therefore, cannot be a source
of political commitments.
On the other hand, by analysing the text of the Final Act, it cannot be denied that
signing states agreed to establish future Summits and that it defines principles that truly are
international in their nature. However, many authors also consider that the original text of
Helsinki Act had no intention to include legal obligation of the states. Nevertheless, during
the period of the Cold War, states decided to maintain the periodical meetings, which
resulted in the creation of the term “Helsinki Process”. Therefore, these states were not
marked as “member states” but “participating states”. Taking into account the actual
activity of the OSCE nowadays, this organization does meet the main criteria required by the
general principles of international law and can be considered to be a proper international
organization, which is a subject of international law and which has an international legal
personality.
Moreover, the decision making in this organization is being made by a consensus of
all 57 participating (not member) states, which in the end makes decisions more effective
and strong, but at the same time it is very difficult to reach it. That is why the work of the
OSCE is based on the concept of equality of all states. In the decision-making process in the
OSCE, mechanisms of consensus minus one (C-1) and minus two (C-2) also exist. However,
the first one has only been enforced once, in the case of the conflict in Yugoslavia in the
early 1990s, while the latter one has never been used.
4.1.1 Decision-Making Powers
Each participating State has equal power in all OSCE decision-making bodies. The
main document to look at, when it comes to the rules for decision-making process are Rules
of Procedure, which was adopted in December 2006, by the Brussels Ministerial Council.
According to this document, decisions are adopted by consensus. By the consensus, it is
20
understood that, in the process of the adoption of decision is question, there is an absence
of any objection by participating State.
However, according to the Prague Document on Further Development of the CSCE
Institutions and Structure, in case of a State’s “clear, gross and uncorrected violation”,
decision should be taken without the consent of that State. Therefore, some exceptions
from the “consensus rule” do exist.
In addition, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly adopts its decisions by majority vote
of the all members.
For these reasons, the OSCE and all its organs are bound by the rules and principles
of international law and they can be legally responsible for their acts. In December 2008,
the Greek Chairmanship overtook the task of strengthening the legal framework of the
OSCE, with the help of participating States. However, a final decision regarding the lack of
legal personality has not been adopted. When it comes to the funding of this organization,
the OSCE budget consists of the contribution of its member states. The largest contribution
of the participant States is currently provided by Germany, Italy, France, the United States,
the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom.
The introductory session held on 10 June by Zarko Puhovski, University Professor
from Zagreb, Croatia, was very informative when it comes to the topic of Security and
Cooperation in the OSCE Area: Conflicts and New Dividing Lines. Puhovski explained the
history of OSCE and talked about various “dividing lines” that OSCE was faced with
throughout its existence – Cold War, fall of Communism, EU issues and the recent conflict in
Ukraine. He discussed the possible consequences of Brexit and also focused his lecture on
the conflict in Yugoslavia, which, as he argued, was equally (if not even more) catastrophic
as the Ukrainian crisis, but highlighted that it is commonly perceived that the latter one is
more serious and important since it involves Russia as a great power, relating it to the Cold
War situation. Puhovski also talked about similarities and differences between referenda for
independence held in Kosovo and the one held in Crimea. Puhovski and participants
21
discussed EU’s failures when it comes to the refugee/migrant crisis, war in Yugoslavia,
economic crisis, etc., highlighting the importance of OSCE when it comes to all the
mentioned matters.
4.1.2 Institutional Structure
The OSCE functions with the help of the complex network of its institutions and
bodies, which are being created by decisions adopted during the Summits by the Heads of
State and Governments. The most important bodies with decision-making powers are the
Ministerial Council, the Permanent Council, the Senior Council, the Forum for Security-
Cooperation, Summits and review Conferences.
The Chairman-in-Office has the power to control all of the operational activities of
the OSCE and has a direct contact with the parties concerned, when it comes to the issues
such as conflict prevention and resolution, rehabilitation and co-ordination. As a supporter
and help-provider of the Chairman-in-Office there is the OSCE Secretariat with the
appointed Secretary General. Claus Neukirch, Senior Political Advisor of the German
Chairman-in-Office joined the group for a session, specifically looking at the role of the
chairmanship within the OSCE, highlighting possibilities, options and limitations, mandates
and aims, challenges and successes.
Additionally, there are other important institutions belonging to the OSCE and these
are:
• the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly,
• the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR),
• the Office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media,
• the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities (HCNM) and
• the OSCE Court of Conciliation and Arbitration
22
However, each and every one of them is a story for itself and a separate subject of
analysis. The part of the complex structure of the OSCE institutions and organs can be found
in the following chart.1
1 Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE Handbook Vienna 2007, s. 13
Summit (OSCE Heads of States or
governments
The Ministerial Council (Main and central decision-making and governing body � Foreign Ministers of
Permanent Council (permanent decision-making
body
Forum for Security Co-operation
(body arms control � meets weekly in
Senior Council (Political Directors
and Economic Forum
OSCE Parliamentary
Assembly (Parliamentarians from participating
States
Chairperson-in-Office (the Foreign Minister of a
participating state � system of “Troika”
� previous and succeeding
The Office of the OSCE
Representative on Freedom of
the Media
OSCE High Commissioner
on National Minorities (HCNM)
Secretary General
(support to the Chairmanship
and to the OSCE in general
the
OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights (ODIHR)
OSCE Secretariat
Vienna (co-ordination
23
It is for these reasons that the OSCE is often seen as a platform for a dialogue
between participating states. The debate which is still taking place even today is whether
the legalization of organization would be a good idea or not. On the other hand, the OSCE,
under some circumstances can be a subject of international law. For instance, in the case of
the Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) to Ukraine, the OSCE has legal personality under the
Ukrainian law.
The OSCE’s experienced a great evolution when it comes to its tasks. The CSCE was
created during the Cold War, when political, military and human security issues were major
ones for the international community. However, as the Helsinki Final Act was adopted in
1975, this organization served as a conference which would provide participating states
with a chance to discuss current issue. This practice has been kept until this day.
Of course, a very important segment of the OSCE’s institutional structure is surely its
field missions, through which OSCE supports rule of law, minority rights, media freedom etc.
OSCE’s Mission to Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, Skopje, Moldova, Kosovo, Ukraine, Estonia,
Latvia, Croatia, Georgia are only some examples of how OSCE’s field operations handle
various crises in the certain States and regions. David Campion, Operational Support Officer
at the CPC introduced participants to concepts and general issues of long term mission and
discussed with them lessons learned.
It can certainly be concluded that the OSCE’s institutional structure is based on
cooperation and on non-hierarchical, but still rational division of powers and duties
between the institutions.
4.2 Three dimensions of OSCE
It is wide-known that OSCE’s framework is divided into three dimensions –
economic-environmental, politico-military and human, all of which are interlinked.
24
Arie Bloed committed a great amount of time explaining the third, “human”,
dimension of the OSCE. However, this dimension is not limited only to human rights, which
may be commonly believed. On the contrary, this Human Dimension is dealing with many
different issues – democratic institutions, gender equality, protection of minorities, anti-
terrorism, election observation, rule of law, fundamental freedoms and rights etc.
Therefore, the Human Dimension in the OSCE is not only focused on security matters, but it
is at the same time a political process, making it more flexible. All of the aforementioned
topics are interconnected because of their huge importance for security.
Ambassador Halil Yurdakul Yigitguden, Coordinator of the OSCE Economic and
Environmental Activities held a lecture followed by discussion on the topic of Economic and
Environmental Dimension (EED). The second dimension (or basket, as it is often being
referred to), consists of Economic and Environmental Dimension Implementation Meeting
(EEDIM), Economic and Environmental Forum (EEF), and Economic and Environmental
Committee. The EEDIM was established in 2011 and it is mostly focused on enhancing
dialogue and cooperation, reviewing implementation of decisions and commitments in the
EED, setting the direction for future work and good governance. The EEF, for instance, deals
with different topics throughout the years, such as the Water governance in the OSCE area –
increasing security and stability through co-operation (2015), Responding to environmental
challenges with a view to promoting cooperation and security in the OSCE area (2014), etc.
Office of the Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities (OCEEA) and Field
Operations are the tools for implementation of the mandates of OSCE’s Economic and
Environmental Dimension (EED). Halil Yurdakul Yigitguden further elaborated on the major
economic acitivies, such as Good Governance and Anti-Corruption, Migration Management
and Transport.
Moreover, the Politico-Military Dimension of the OSCE was discussed by
Ambassador Marcel Pesko, who currently serves as Director of Conflict Prevention Centre
(CPC). Arnar Jensson from the Strategic Police Matters Unit (SPMU) introduced activities
relating to policing issues within the security dimension. Ambassador Alexey Lyzhenkov, Co-
ordinator of Activities to Address TNT, presented and discussed with the group
25
transnational threats including boarder security and terrorism. The participants were very
eager to learn more about different dimensions of the OSCE, since they are key points when
it comes to understanding the basic principles of security and cooperation of the OSCE. It
was certainly interesting to learn more about history of the organisation, since different
dimensions that exist today were created throughout the Cold War. While the Eastern and
Western part back then had different interests, it is natural that they had to find some kind
of compromise in order to establish a functioning security organisation.
The OSCE’s is an organization created to ensure the security and co-operation in
Europe. Therefore, security is one of the most basic concepts for this organization,
introduced by the Istanbul Summit in 1999, when the Charter for European Security was
adopted. This year marked the inclusion of new threats to the security, such as
transnational ones. Nowadays, OSCE’s focus on security is seen in much broader terms. It is
called a “comprehensive security” for a reason and there are no enforcement mechanisms
or sanctions for implementation.
4.3 Minority Rights and Minority Issues
Lectures held by Arie Bloed on 12 June were focused on the issue of minority rights,
finishing with the case study on national minorities conducted by Walter Kemp, Senior Vice
President at the International Peace Institute and Co-Director of the Summer Academy on
OSCE. Aforementioned issues were highlighted as one of the crucial ones to be dealt with
when it comes to the OSCE, simply because of their predominant importance for security.
The High Commissioner on Minorities is a unique instrument of this organization, since it
does not exist in such form in other organizations. The mandate of Commissioner has a
special focus on conflict prevention and on minority rights, since it is generally accepted that
human rights themselves are not a sufficient tool to ensure security. This dimension gained
in value particularly during the war in former Yugoslavia since the international community
did not have effective tools to deal with the situation.
26
Very important aspect of minority rights in relation to the OSCE is to promote the
integration of minorities into the broader society, while ensuring that assimilation is being
avoided. During the session, particularly interesting aspect was the discussion on the aim of
the international regime of minority rights, since it is very disputable whether different
countries try to assimilate, separate or integrate their national minorities into the general
society. In OSCE’s view, it is crucial to ensure the possibility for minorities to preserve their
identity, in the case that is their wish. On the other hand, minority rights regime deals with
keeping a balance between rights and duties, since OSCE believes that minorities should not
be in possession of rights only, but certain obligations as well.
When it comes to the topic of minority rights, the most important OSCE’s political
instrument is the Copenhagen Document, which is sometimes considered to have relatively
vague formulation of rights in question. Many argue that the vagueness of this document is
due to the fact that governing elites in countries with minority issues often consider that
such rights only benefit minorities, and sometimes even harm the majority. Moreover, it
was also intended to be vague since the minority rights issues varies from country to
country and it is impossible to have one, strict, instrument to address all of the differences.
For all these reasons, the character of minority rights within the OSCE is often
comprehended as vague, as mainly political nature and as “principles” rather than “rights”.
Since the minority rights often require considering the territorial integrity of the
country, non-discrimination, self-determination and self-identification rights, one of the
most interesting examples was the current crisis in Ukraine. That is why a lot of time was
committed trying to understand the ongoing situation in this country from the view of OSCE
and High Commissioner on National Minorities.
Furthermore, it is important to emphasize that minority rights in the OSCE are not in
principle legally binding, but they are politically binding. This issue, as concluded by both
participants and lecturers, are a crucial issue to be dealt with at the OSCE, since they are
directly related to the principle of sovereignty. According to the Bolzano Recommendation,
sovereignty comprises the jurisdiction of the State over its territory and population, and is
27
constrained only by the limits established by international law. No State may exercise
jurisdiction over the population or part of the population of another State within the
territory of that State without its consent. In often discussed case of the conflict in Ukraine,
the argument that was used by Russia was significantly related to the issue of minority
rights. That is why the mentioned Recommendation is a very important instrument, stating
that although a state may have an interest – even a constitutionally declared responsibility –
to support persons belonging to national minorities residing in other states based on ethnic,
cultural, linguistic, religious, historical or any other ties, this does not imply a right under
international law to exercise jurisdiction over these persons on the territory of another state
without that state’s consent (as it was the case with Russia and Ukraine).
Sandra Sacchetti, Head of the External Co-operation Section of the OSCE Secretariat
complemented the topic by discussing with participants the question of migration and how
does the OSCE deal with it.
4.4 Gender Issues
One session during the Summer Academy was committed to the explanation of
gender issues in regard to the OSCE. Key note speakers in this session were the Deputy
Permanent Representative of Spain to the OSCE, M. Victoria Scola, the First Secretary of the
Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE, Cordula Geinitz, as representative of the
German Chairmanship, and the Programme Coordinator for the civil military co-operation
project at ASPR Susanne Brezina. The panel introduced the importance of gender issues
from different perspectives, emphasizing that the OSCE has included into its framework
several goals to improve and ensure gender equality. Minister Victoria Scola explained the
main achievements of Spain in this matter and the great importance of gender issues for the
OSCE. She referred to the OSCE commitments in the field, to the Gender Action Plan 2004
and to the need for an Addendum. She also referred to the Woman Peace and Security
agenda and explained the important role of OSCE in the implementation of UN Resolution
1325.
28
Ms Geinitz provided valuable information about achievements in Germany and explained
the importance of the issue for the German Chairmanship as a cross-dimensional topic. She
also shared information about aspects that the German Chairmanship had identified as
especially important and which therefore will be reflected in the main events of the
program of the Chairmanship, such as the conference to counter violence against women in
July and a conference on the Role of Women in Conflict Prevention and Settlement in
November. Ms Brezina provided a detailed and very well documented presentation of the
issue of the Security Sector Reform and explained the importance of gender perspective in
that respect.
4.5 Mediation, Negotiation and Diplomacy
Wilbur Perlot, training and research fellow from the Netherlands Institute of
International Relations Clingendael conducted a workshop on the topic of “Mediation,
Negotiation and Diplomacy” on 11 June in Stadtschlaining. The participants had a chance to
gather a basic understanding of the process of negotiations, which begins with a good
communication and applying appropriate methods. A particularly interesting part for the
participants was the discussion about stereotypes related to the body language, i.e.
behaviour of the people involved in negotiations. Perlot further elaborated on different
stages of negotiation processes, introducing participant to two commonly used terms –
BATNA (best alternative to negotiated agreement) and ZOPA (zone of possible agreement).
After providing the participant with a basic knowledge of negotiation skills, Perlot
carried out an exercise in which participants were split in groups of two, both having
different tasks related to the negotiations for the purchase of a car by a certain embassy.
Furthermore, another simulation game was conducted, in which participants were
representing different states within the OSCE and where they had to negotiate different
political actions due to the crisis in Algeria. Here, decisions were not only dependant on the
states that the participants were representing, but it was crucial to negotiate actions to be
further taken in order to reach a consensus, for any state which would consider to be in a
disadvantaged position would be able to use its veto power. These two exercises were
29
certainly useful because the participants experienced the difficulties of being involved in
negotiations where they had to represent their states, while at the same time they had to
reach a certain decision where all parties would be relatively satisfied.
Another exercise which the participants found particularly interesting was a test
comprised of 30 questions to be answered without thinking too much. The goal of the test
was to analyse the negotiation skills of participants, so they could understand what kind of
negotiations would be successful for them and which not. One could argue that this exercise
helped the participants to understand their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to
negotiation skills and to evaluate their personal input.
4.6 Simulation: Special Meeting on the Refugee and Migrant Crisis
One of the highlights of the entire 20th Summer Academy on OSCE was certainly a
simulation of the OSCE’s Permanent Council meeting on the refugee and migrant crisis on
15 June, moderated by Walter Kemp and Arie Bloed. After providing the participants with an
insight regarding the basics of the functioning of Permanent Council and after assigning
them different roles, Kemp and Bloed explained the main rules of the simulation.
This part of the Summer Academy was particularly interesting for participants, since they
had a chance to experience the functioning of one of the crucial parts of the OSCE in
practice, after which they have realized that negotiations and the work of the OSCE in
general is very challenging and demanding. Moreover, the topic was very timely and
relevant since the refugee and migrant crisis is one of the most important and most
discussed topics nowadays. Georg Klussmann, First Secretary of the Permanent Mission of
the Federal Republic of Germany to the OSCE joined the group and commented on the
outcome of the simulation exercise from a practitioners point of view. He welcomed the
engagement of people and their creative ways of dealing with the issue and took note of
some of the outcomes.
30
4.7 Visit to Hofburg – OSCE’s Headquarters in Vienna
One of the major events that took place during the 20th Summer Academy on OSCE
was the visit to the OSCE headquarters in the Hofburg palace in Vienna. Unlike all previous
years, this year’s visit was the first time when the Summer Academy was concluded by the
visit to Vienna, after which all participants departed for their home countries. It was a two
days long programme, which included a visit to the Permanent Council’s meeting on 16
June, followed by an interesting discussion with Ruth Pojman, Deputy Co-ordinator at the
Unit for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, on this very current issue.
During the visit to the Permanent Council, the participants were provided with a chance to
see the work of OSCE in practice. A great amount of time was committed to the statements
and condolences to the United States regarding the recent Orlando shooting incident.
The Freedom of the Media, explained and introduced by Gunnar Vrang, Senior
Adviser to the Representative for the Freedom of Media (RFOM), was very informative for
the participants, particularly because of the importance of freedom of speech for
democratic societies and OSCE in general. Vrang’s presentation was concentrated on
analysing different issues that the RFOM is dealing with on a daily basis – safeguarding
freedom of speech, protecting lives of journalists, and issues related to the difficulties of
propaganda, misinformation and misusage of data, all particularly related to the current
conflict in Ukraine.
The first day of the visit to Hofburg was concluded with a stimulating discussion at
the High Level Panel, moderated by Walter Kemp, on the topic of “Back to Diplomacy – But
How?” The panel consisted of several experts – Ambassador Christian Strohal (Austria),
Minister Christine Weil (Deputy CiO – Germany), Valeri Maslin (Senior Counsellor, RF) and
Fred Tanner (Senior Adviser to the SG). The panellists proceeded with a very complex topic
of deciding upon and discussing the best way of how to go back to the roots of diplomacy
and deal with multiple issues that threaten it every day, such as ongoing conflicts around
the world and focusing on the importance of the OSCE for the entire topic.
31
The second day at Hofburg, and at the same time last official day of the 20th Summer
Academy on OSCE was marked by the talk of Ambassador Christian Strohal, the
representative of the Austrian delegation to the OSCE and former director of ODIHR, which
focused on the function of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR)
and the importance of election observation missions of the OSCE. The Ambassador tackled
main goals of election observation missions, which is to ensure fair and democratic elections
in all OSCE participating states. One of the interesting discussion questions that came up
after Ambassador’s presentation was certainly the issue of focusing the observation of
election process mostly on the countries in the East, with almost no focus on the elections
occurring in the western countries. Furthermore, the participants were very interested in
the discussion of actual efficiency of OSCE’s election observation missions, since in the past
this was not the only organisation that was dealing with such issues, sometimes causing
confusion since different observers would come up with different conclusions regarding the
fairness of election process in certain countries.
Afterwards Robert Hampshire, former SPMU staff who had recently served at the SMM to
Ukraine, shared with the groups his experiences from the field, starting with the setup of
the mission, also dealing with challenges and highlighting successes. His presentation was
complemented by input from one of the participants, John Yuhas who is currently serving at
the SMM.
The final day of the Academy was closed by a wrap-up statement by Walter kemp who
summarised the Academy by looking at the OSCE as a phenomenon which is nowadays
again more relevant but more divided.
4.8 Social Events
The organisers of the Summer Academy provided participants with the variety of
social events, such as a visit to a typical winery (Heurigen), a barbecue dinner with music at
the Hotel Burg Schlaining and a guided tour visit through the castle of Schlaining and the
32
Peace Museum. At the end of the Academy, participants enjoyed a farewell lunch together
in Vienna.
A social highlight took place on the PC day when participants had a chance to attend a
reception celebrating “20 Years of Summer Academy on OSCE” at the OSCE Headquarters in
Hofburg, Vienna. A number of high level diplomats, representatives of the secretariat,
national delegations and cooperation partners and also former Academy participants who
are today serving in the diplomatic corps attended the reception. Ambassador Pesko
forwarded the guests the best regards by the Secretary General and his sincere
congratulations for the anniversary. He highlighted the Summer Academy as an important
and unique training possibility for OSCE diplomats and partners and appreciated the efforts
of the ASPR in the area of international training and research. He also expressed his highest
estimation for the fruitful cooperation the OSCE shares with this Austrian Peace Institute
since more than 20 years.
4.9 Roundup
OSCE is, in general, a very successful “story”. This organization’s contribution to the
peaceful conflict resolutions was and continues to be immense, especially when it comes to
the transformation of Eastern Europe’s States after the Cold War period. Since the security
presents a very important aspect of every day’s life, it has become necessary to keep such
organization existing. The OSCE deals with three important aspects of security: economic-
environmental, politico-military and human, and therefore its role in establishing a
framework for co-operation between these fields is large. Although its main weakness is a
legally non-binding character of its decisions, they nevertheless have a huge impact on the
behaviour of its participating States. Considering the fact that conflicts appeared in the
history of mankind and that they will continue to emerge in the future, OSCE surely
represents one of the essential organizations in the contemporary world.
APPENDIX 1
20th SUMMER ACADEMY ON OSCE
9 – 18 June 2016
At the Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR)
Under The Auspices of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
P R O G R A M M E
1
DATE & TIME
SESSION
SPEAKER
METHOD
Thursday, 9 June
Until 16.00
Arrival of Participants / Check-in
16:30 – 17:00
Coffee-Break served break-out room in the Castle/Seminar Centre
17.00 – 18.30
Introduction of Participants and Team &
Introduction to the Programme
ARIE BLOED
Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE
URSULA E. GAMAUF-EBERHARDT Co-Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE/ ASPR
Interactive
Introduction Session
18:45
Group photo in the courtyard of the castle
19:00 – 19:45
Official Opening Ceremony
AMBASSADOR FREDRIK LÖJDQUIST, Head of Swedish
Delegation to the OSCE ARIE BLOED
BLANKA BELLAK, Director, ASPR
Ceremony
in the Knights Hall
20:00
Welcome Cocktail & Welcome Dinner
2
Friday, 10 June
09:00 – 10:30
Security and Cooperation in the OSCE Area:
Conflicts and New Dividing-Lines
ZARKO PUHOVSKI
University Professor, Zagreb / Croatia
Lecture
Q&A
11:00 – 12:30
Basic Principles of Security and Cooperation:
1975-2016
ARIE BLOED
Presentation
Q&A
14:00 – 15:00
OSCE’s Legal Status
LISA TABASSI
Head of Legal Services, OSG
Presentation
Q&A
15:00 – 16:30
The OSCE’s Organisation: Basic features
ARIE BLOED
Presentation
Q&A
17:00 – 18:30
The OSCE’s organisation: Institutional Structures
and Budget
ARIE BLOED
Presentation
Q&A
Saturday, 11 June
09:00 – 12:30 (incl. breaks)
Workshop 3: Mediation, Negotiation and
Diplomacy
WILBUR PERLOT Training and Research Fellow, Netherlands Institute of
International Relations Clingendael
Interactive Workshop:
Presentation, Q&A Role Plays Simulation Discussion
14:00 – 18:30 (incl. breaks)
Continued
3
19:00
Social Event at a Winery
Sunday, 12 June
Free time
11:00-12:30
The Human Dimension of the OSCE
ARIE BLOED
Presentation
Q&A
15:00 – 16:00
Minority Rights and Minority Issues Within the
OSCE
ARIE BLOED
Presentation
Q&A
16:30 – 18:30
Case Study on National Minorities
WALTER KEMP
Senior Vice President, International Peace Institute (IPI) Co-Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE
Workshop
4
Monday, 13 June
09:00-10:30
The Politico-Military Dimension of the OSCE
AMBASSADOR MARCEL PESKO
Director, Conflict Prevention Centre (CPC)
Presentation
Q&A
11:00 – 12:30
The Security Dimensions: Policing Issues
ARNAR JENSSON
Strategic Police Matters Unit (SPMU), Transnational Threats (TNT) Department
Presentation
Q&A
15:00 – 16:30
Migration– How does the OSCE deal with these
Issues?
SANDRA SACCHETTI
Head of the External Co-operation Section of the OSCE Secretariat
Presentation
Q&A
17:00 – 18:30
Experts Panel on Gender Issues
M. VICTORIA SCOLA PLIEGO, Deputy Permanent
Representative, Spain CORDULA GEINITZ, First Secretary / Human Dimension /
Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE SUSANNE BREZINA, Programme Coordinator/ASPR
Panel Discussion
Q&A Discussion
Tuesday, 14 June
09:00 – 10:30
Economic and Environmental Dimension (EED) of
the OSCE
HALIL YURDAKUL YIGITGÜDEN
Coordinator of the OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities
Presentation
Q&A
5
11:00 - 12:30
Transnational Threats
(incl. Terrorism & Boarder Security)
ALEXEY LYZHENKOV
Coordinator of Activities to Address TNT / OSCE TNTD
Presentation
Q&A
15:00 – 16:30
Introduction, Concepts and General Issues of Long
Term Missions & Lessons Learned
DAVID CAMPION
Operational Support Officer, Operation Service, Conflict Prevention Centre (CPC)
Presentation
Q&A Discussion Case Study
17:00 – 18:30
Continued
Wednesday, 15 June
09:00 – 10:30
The Role of the Chairmanship
CLAUS NEUKIRCH
Senior Political Advisor, German 2016 OSCE Chairmanship
Presentation
Q&A
11:00 - 12:30
Simulation: Special Meeting on the Refugee and
Migrant Crisis
WALTER KEMP & ARIE BLOED
Role Play, Simulation
14:00 – 18:30
Continued (incl. Coffee Break)
GEORG KLUSSMANN
First Secretary, Permanent Mission of the Federal Republic of Germany to the OSCE
6
Thursday, 16 June
VIENNA EXCURSION (day 1) to the OSCE Conference Centre / PC / Hofburg
10:00 – 11:00
Visit of the Permanent Council (PC)
11:00 – 12:00
Room 201
Trafficking
RUTH POJMAN
Deputy Coordinator, Unit for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings
12:00 – 13:00
Room 201
Freedom of the Media (FoM)
GUNNAR VRANG
Senior Adviser to the RFOM
Presentation
Q&A
13:00 – 15:30
Lunch-break, Check-In Hotel, Free-Time
individually
16:00 – 18:00 Room 201 /
2nd Floor
High Level Panel: Back to Diplomacy – But How?
AMBASSADOR CHRISTIAN STROHAL / AUSTRIA
MINISTER CHRISTINE WEIL / DEPUTY CIO-GERMANY VALERY MASLIN, SENIOR COUNSELLOR / RF FRED TANNER, SENIOR ADVISOR TO THE SG
Moderator: WALTER KEMP
Presentations by Panellists
Q&A Discussion
18:00 – 20:00
RECEPTION
“20 Years of Summer Academy on OSCE”
Reception
7
Friday, 17 June VIENNA EXCURSION (day 2)
09:30 – 10:30
Room 201
ODIHR, EO, HR
AMBASSADOR CHRISTIAN STROHAL (INV.)
Presentation
Q&A
10:30– 11:30
Room 201
OSCE Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine – Experiences from the Field & Lessons Learned
ROBERT HAMPSHIRE
JOHN YUHAS
Interactive Session
Q&A
11:45 – 13:00
Room 201
The OSCE - More Relevant but More Divided
(Wrap-Up)
WALTER KEMP
Interactive Session
Q&A
14:00
Farewell Lunch in Vienna
Closing & Farewell
ARIE BLOED, WALTER KEMP,
URSULA GAMAUF
APPENDIX 2
LIST of Lecturers/Moderators/Facilitators
Nr Mr/Ms NAME Position
01 Mr. Arie BLOED
International Consultant, Lecturer and Trainer, Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE
02 Mr. Walter KEMP
IPI - Director for Europe and Central Asia and Co-Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE
03 Ms. Ursula GAMAUF-EBERHARDT
Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) - Programme Director for ASPR-OSCE Cooperation
04 Mr. Fredrik LÖJDQUIST
Ambassador of Sweden to the OSCE
05 Ms. Blanka BELLAK
Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) - Director
06 Mr. Zarko PUHOVSKI
University of Zagreb - Professor; Chairperson of the Croatian Helsinki Committee for Human Rights
07 Ms. Lisa TABASSI
OSCE Secretariat, Legal Service - Head of Unit
08 Mr. Wilbur PERLOT
Clingendael Academy - Senior Training and Research Fellow, International and European Negotiations
09 Mr. Marcel PESKO
OSCE Secretariat, Vienna - Director of the OSCE Conflict Prevention Centre
10 Mr. Arnar JENSSON
OSCE Secretariat, Vienna - Head of Strategic Police Matters Unit at OSCE
11 Ms. Sandra SACCHETTI
External Co-operation Section of the OSCE Secretariat - Head
12 Ms. Susanne J. BREZINA
Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) - Programme Coordinator Civil-Military Relations, SSR, Peacebuilding and Training
13 Ms. Maria Victoria SCOLA
Permanent Mission of Spain to the OSCE - Deputy Permanent Representative
14 Ms. Cordula GEINITZ
Permanent Mission of the Federal Republic of Germany to the OSCE - First Secretary, Human Dimension
15 Mr. Halil Yurdakul YIGITGÜDEN
The Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities (OCEEA)
16 Mr. Alexey LYZHENKOV
OSCE Secretariat, Transnational Threats Department (TNTD) - Co-ordinator of Activities to Address Transnational Threats
17 Mr. David CAMPION
Conflict Prevention Centre for Operations Service at OSCE - Operational Support Officer
1
Nr Mr/Ms NAME Position
18 Mr. Claus NEUKIRCH
Conflict Prevention Centre for Operations Service at OSCE, German Delegation to the OSCE - Deputy Director
20 Mr. Georg KLUSSMANN
Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE - First Secretary
21 Mr. Gunnar VRANG
Office of the OSCE reprsentative on Freedom of the Media - Spokesperson
22 Ms. Ruth POJMAN
OSCE Secretariat, Office of the Special Representative and Co-ordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings - Special Representative
23 Mr. Christian STROHAL
Ambassador of Austria to the OSCE, Vienna
24 Ms. Christine WEIL
Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE - Deputy Head of Mission, Chairperson of the Preparatory Committee
25 Mr. Valery MASLIN
Senior Counsellor of the Russian Federation to the OSCE
26 Mr. Fred TANNER
Senior Advisor to the OSCE Secretary General
27 Mr. Robert HAMPSHIRE
2
APPENDIX 3 List of Participants
Nr Sex NAME citizen Position
1 Ms. Elira ÇANGA
Albania OSCE Presence in Albania - Senior Media Development Assistant, Media Development Unit
2 Ms. Anna SARKISYAN
Armenia Caucasus Research Resource Centre, Armenia - Senior Programme Manager
3 Ms. Tamara SHAHINYAN
Armenia Office to the President of the Republic of Armenia - Expert at the Department of External Relations
4 Mr. Martin HARRICH
Austria Freelance
5 Ms. Nubar SALMANOVA
Azerbaijan Council of Europe Office in Azerbaijan - Project Assistant
6 Mr. Aleksandr SAKOVICH
Belarus Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus - Second Secretary, Department of Europe
7 Mr. Yaroslav MARTINKEVICH
Belarus Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus - Attaché, Unit of the EU and Subregional organisations, European Cooperation Department
8 Ms. Hana ĐOGOVIĆ
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Australian Embassy and Permanent Mission to the United Nations, Austria - Intern
9 Mr. Philip MASCHKE
Denmark Danish Helsinki Committee for Human Rights, Denmark - Manager Secretariat and Magazine Producer
10 Ms. Tatiana KHROL-LAPPALAINEN
Finland UN Assistance Mission to Afghanistan (UNAMA) - Political Affairs Officer
11 Mr. Beka KIRIA
Georgia Ministry of Defence, Georgia - Senior Specialist in Policy and Planning Department
12 Ms. Maia SHOGIRADZE
Georgia European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia, Field Office Zugdidi - Administrative Assistant
13 Ms. Irina TSERTSVADZE
Georgia Ministry of Defence, Georgia - Head of Division, International Relations and Euro-Atlantic Integration Department, Division of European Integration and Relations with the International Organizations
14 Mr. Andreas HERRMANN
Germany Saxonian Parliament, Dresden, Germany - Policy Advisor and Journalist
15 Mr. Madi KONAKBAYEV
Kazakhstan Permanent Mission of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the International Organizations in Vienna - Attaché
16 Ms. Eivina ZIZIUNAITE
Lithuania Beckley.Institute, Vienna, Austria - Sales & Training Coordinator, Project Management Responsible
3
Nr Sex NAME citizen Position
17 Ms. Ludmila NOFIT
Moldova Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Moldova -Attaché, International Security Division, General Directorate of Multilateral Cooperation
18 Ms. Tatiana BUDECI
Moldova OSCE Office of the Secretary General, Austria, Vienna - Temporary Assistant at the Records Management Unit
19 Ms. Anna MASLOVA
Russia Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russia - Third Secretary, OSCE Section, Department of All-European Cooperation
20 Ms. Madina KURBANOVA
Tajikistan OSCE Office in Tajikistan - Senior Assistant to Head of Office
21 Ms. Suray SEYILBAYEVA
Turkmenistan Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan - Attaché at the International Organizations Department
22 Mr. Arslan MELYAYEV
Turkmenistan OSCE Centre in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan - Procurement & Asset Management Assistant
23 Ms. Maral RAHYMOVA
Turkmenistan Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan - The American Desk Officer
24 Ms. Kateryna HONCHARENKO
Ukraine High Court, Kyiv, Ukraine - Assistant to the Judge in High Specialized Court of Ukraine of Civil and Criminal Cases
25 Ms. Olena SYRINSKA
Ukraine Junior Editor-in-Chief of TERAZE.org.ua website; Junior Researcher at A.Yu Krymsky Intstitute of the Oriental Studies; Expert at Association of Middle East Studies; Coordinator of International Projects and Training Programmes at Maidan Monitoring Inf.Ce
26 Mr. John YUHAS
USA OSCE Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine - Cease fire monitor
Recommended