21ST CENTURY DIPLOMACY. A DIPLOMACY FOR THE FUTURE by PROFESSOR DR. ANTON CARAGEA PhD,MA,FINS

February 15, 2013

On 13th November 2012 Romania had hosted the Conference on Peace and Security in Europe and Asia, an impressive gathering of Europe`s most important political brains, destined to express the support for Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia.

The Platform is a designed model of cooperation and peace created by the lofty President of Kazakhstan-Nursultan Nazarbayev.

The Platform for Peace and Security is an intellectual replay to the challenges of XXI century: war, criminality, terrorism, inter-ethnic conflicts, inter-state wars, collapse of international organizations such as United Nations and his affiliated agencies etc.

CARAGEA ANTON VORBIND DESPRE KAZAHSTAN 2050web

All this conceptual and reality`s defiance are becoming part of the security concerns of XXI century.

No state and no individual are immune to this general collapse of authority and legality, that is fringes the collapse of organized society.

The only solution for a reconstruction of world and for solving the humanity problems is to restart the National State concept.

A National State that will be, undoubtedly, different from his XIX century prototype. The fights for respect of human rights and for managing globalization trends must be implicated in the reconstruction of state authority.

Without the state authority reconstructed and put at the heart of international law and norms, no global issue can be resolved.

The re-construction of XXI century national state is the conceptual center of the Platform for Peace and Security.

The Platform for Peace and Security is solving the evils of the globalization such as: terrorism, drug trafficking, crime and globalized crime only by concentrating on the reconstruction of a modern, sophisticated and up to date national state.

This approach is truly revolutionary, as in the last two decades the international efforts, that could have being put to a much better use, where dedicated to dissolve and tragically destroy the national state authority.

All this effort of destroying and portraying as outdated and even criminal the national state, had as only result the dissolution of state authority, the dramatic rise of international criminality, a policy of international involvement in the internal affairs of the sovereign countries and the destruction of private property and the terrible crimes against human rights, that the last century had ever witness.

Reconstructing national statehood is an intricate part of re-establishing the global equilibrium.

Globalization is a dangerous trend that, without being proper managed, could distort and destroy people’s lives and the only possible coordinator for a better understanding and use of globalization is the national state.

Instead of perceiving the national state as an obstacle against globalization, the forces of globalization will do better to understand that only the national state is the proper provider of globalization and if the current trends of opposing globalization and national state are allowed to continue, the nation state will be trimmed and destroyed and globalization will become a totally negative trend.

None of the current global problems of the mankind can be properly addressed in the absence of a strong a pertinent national state.

The spread of mass destruction weapons and the terrorism is only the result of nation state weakness.

No mass destruction weapons could ever be transferred to private groups, as long as a state is functioning and running.

Only when the former Soviet Union collapsed, the matter of mass destruction weapons was tabled as an emergency. Only after Afghanistan state was destroyed by the internal convulsion, the terrorist movement obtained a save heaven and created the base for terrorism to attack.

At the beginning of 2000, the North Africa, composed of  shamble states, with long desert border, such as: Mauritania, Niger, Mali, Algeria etc. become the center for new terrorist activity.

The lessons of the last two decades are showing clearly that: only by offering support to national state to overcome the globalization related weakness, can insure that the flow of terrorism and destruction weapons can be stopped.

 

Nation`s rights are human rights.

 

With the end of Cold War a new concept had flourished, the concept that human rights are to be imposed against national rights. The theory it was that: the only legitimate way to assert human rights is to destroy national state rights.

This wrong policy had created the nightmare of Kosovo, where in order to promote individual and minority rights a global intervention had destroyed Serbia, had killed 100.000 peoples and had created more than 1 million refugees.

The final result was the creation of an illegitimate state, the creation of a vacuum and tension area in the center of the Balkans.

What have even aggravated the aggression against national rights, was the unlawful use of the humanitarian intervention concept to destroy nation state, to aggravate crisis, to persecute democratic movements and to install a general atmosphere of distrust and insecurity at world d level.

As the Platform for Peace and Security had stated:  By this, basic human rights and freedom are jeopardized, ignored or directly violated under the slogan of defending the very rights and freedoms.

Human rights are nation rights – this must be the key concept of insuring a peaceful world and preventing the masquerade of so called human rights protection by war to be used as pretence for foreign intervention and bluntly aggressions.

Anton caragea-Emirate-kazakhstan

Security by cooperation.

 

The last two decades after the Cold War where based on the concept of uni-polar world, destruction of nation state , the blunt disregard for human rights and the forced cooperation by so called coalition of the willing, such us in Iraq intervention in 2003.

The only reasonable and practical way of creating a cooperation system in Europe and Asia could be based only on cooperation models and the most successful one is that of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in 2010, under Kazakhstan Presidency.

Kazakhstan can play an instrumental role by the Platform for Peace and Security in uniting Europe and Asia by his tremendous capacity of building bridges.

Also, the concept of building not only a state to state cooperation movement but also a state to multilateral  organization is a truly remarkable idea, that could by itself created a momentum for unification and cooperation based not only on destruction of  nation state but on his reconstruction.

The quest for peace is in XXI century as actual and necessary as it was in the last hundred years.

After the Second World War an array of international organization spring up, especially in Europe, a traumatized   continent after the destructions suffered in two world wars.

In the Helsinki Agreement run off, countries lead by Romania had created a special Conference on Security and Cooperation, in order to offer a possibility to act and re-act to international provocation, borders, conflicts, disarmament and human rights issues.

The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe had soon proved to be a very concrete arena for international dialogue, fostering security in Europe, avoiding Cold War to become a hot war in Europe.

This long track of success created the potential to be developed at the end of Cold War in Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

In 1990 the Paris Conference that settled the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe as the main framework for dialogue in the larger Europe area had an instrumental role in creating peace in our continent.

After 1990 until 1999 the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe can be used as an example for his activity. Solving the security problems in Europe after the dissolving of Warsaw Treaty, insuring the peaceful devolution of Czechoslovakia in 1993 and offering solutions for the resolution of conflicts in former Yugoslavia where essential achievements.

Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe had also successful passed the exam of the disintegration of former Soviet Union, paving the way for peaceful resolution of border conflicts, management of local wars ( as the Caucasus area ) and insuring the construction of democratic , open society in former USSR countries.

In 1999, the unlawful attack against Serbia, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe had being gradually transformed from an arena of dialogue and fostering cooperation in a place for distorting the framework of cooperation that dramatically reduced the organization standing in the world.

Only in 2010 the mechanisms of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe had being one again put in motion by the will and strength of Kazakhstan.

The Chairmanship of Kazakhstan in 2010 will be without a doubt hailed as the most glorious moment on Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe history: a moment for international gathering, for creating a path for reform and relevance of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in XXI century and the involvement of democratic civil societies in the organization development where all felicitous decision that insured the survival of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

This moment of multilateral cooperation must be exploited and Kazakhstan experience must become the main pillar of an international cooperation model.

We need this international cooperation and the restart of international organization efficiency and global action if we want to muster the changes that lay ahead of our civilization.

Anton caragea finalizeaza conferinta

The respect for international law: main pillar of diplomacy in XXI century.

 

The XXI century appears to be a period of numerous conflicts: ethnic cleansing, civil wars, irregular international interventions. If we have to summarize all this conflicts and international tensions have just one common trend: the total disregard towards international norms and laws.

Unfortunately, in the last two decades, after the end of the Cold War, the efforts of some interested parties to foster a uni-polar world, to undermine the international associations and to misused and miss appropriate the concept of human rights had created a general state of conflict and an unprecedented time of discord.

The first concept that we have to use: is to balance the human rights issue with the national rights and to rebuke firmly and decisively the ideas of conflict between individual rights and nation rights.

The nation and statehood concept are an intricate part of the concept of respecting human rights.

National protection of human rights is the only natural and acceptable possibility of offering the protection of human rights. The last two decades of international affairs express clear the fact that international intervention in the so called favor of human rights are no less than war crimes and a total disregard of human rights.

The long and unfinished tragedy of Iraqi people after the First Golf War and after Second Golf War, are creating a clear picture of the failed human rights based intervention:   more than 2 billon euro in destruction, famine, starvation, the destruction of infrastructure and sanitary and cultural services for 20 million people and more than 1 million killed and 3 million refugees, this was the tragic result of the United States intervention in Iraq.

The 1999 Kosovo crisis has also expressed the same results of the unlawful character of the human rights based interventions.   The NATO led intervention in Serbia had created 1 million refugees, around 100.000 killed and terrifying destruction   and left a terrible international law wound: Kosovo, an illegal so called state in the heart of Europe.

The list of destruction created by the human rights based intervention can be extended to civil war in Syria, anti-Libya intervention, Haiti terrifying experience etc.

The necessity to foster and strengthen the recognition and application of international laws and norms is the most important necessity for a peaceful XXI century.

 

Four golden rules of international law.

 

The main principles of Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia states the respect of fundaments of international law such as: equality among states, the rejection of interference in the internal affairs of independent countries, the rejection of threaten with force and use of force in international arena and the consensus as the main feature of common international activity etc.

These main principles are the only sound and common accepted principles that could build true representative coalitions, coalitions that could address efficiently the provocation of XXI century.

This principles have being forgotten  or even replaced in international activity of the last 20 years, a feature that undermined the efficiency of international bodies  and aloud the violence in international affairs to reach unacceptable levels.

Equality among states is the fundamental, basic principle, on which international diplomacy is based in the last four centuries.

Without equality of small to medium or big states, the international arena becomes a place for using the right of force instead of force of right. The fundamental condemnation off all wars and the main body of diplomatic activity is based on the self evidence of the equality amongst states.

The Second World War, to mention only the most known example, had started only on the base of disregard toward the principle of equality of all international actors. In the moment that appears the idea of a qualification and a selection among states, this is the first step toward aggression, war and the dismantling of United Nation principles.

Unfortunately, the last two decade transformed this principle in a so called forgotten or obsolete international norm, allowing that by indiscriminant actions, sanction regime, targeted political attitude and aggression`s some state to be deprived by their use of air space, or of maritime border or to be forbidden to acquire certain types of arm’s or defensive equipment or event to pursue scientific research or develop their economy.

This long line or arbitrary measures, contrary to international norms are based on a so called classification in good or bad states, in axes of evil or axes or good. Such a classification, contrary to international law, is a fragrant violation of the basic principle of equality amongst nation.

The non-interference in internal affairs is another principle that must be restored, if the climate of insecurity and war that prevailed in the last period is to find an end.

The basic principle of independence and sovereignty and of respect among nations was specially subjected to enormous pressure in international arena.

New, unrecognized principles of   a so called humanitarian right to interference or humanitarian interference or the right to preserve minority, all contra factual invention had appeared in international arena with devastating consequences.

The wars in Balkans, the conflicts in former Yugoslavia, the conflicts in Caucasus, the Iraqi war, to mention just a few of the abomination resulted in this deviation  of international norms, are speaking plainly to the necessity to restore this principle of independence and sovereignty in the international diplomacy.

The non-interference is the only solution for creating a climate of respect amongst nation, of fostering the international laws to their former glory and to allow international organizations to find their true partners in the construction of a free and normal world: nation’s state.

Without the umbrella of non-interference, no nation’s state could be sure of his territorial integrity, of his place in the world arena or about his right to protect his citizens and his interest and to act responsible in the construction of the XXI century world.

The rejection of non-interference principles is creating an insecure world, in destroying the human rights and by destroying the national state is supporting the flourishing of terrorism and of non-state actors that could have an infelicitous behavior.

The rejection of thereat of use of force in international arena is another fundamental principle that could not be negotiated, if the XXI century is to be a place of law and international norms.

The latest decade had also seen an unsavory use of rattle sobering and threats against independent and free states by groups of other states.

The violent mass media campaign, the use of rhetoric and of violent language in international diplomacy made this concept to look obsolete, when only his respect could be the base for a more security world.

In the global village of XXI century, where information and communications became not only essential tools, but essential security risks, the full and correct complying with this principle of refraining to the use of threat to the use of force must be restored.

The use of threats, of labeling in international arena, is the first step towards military intervention, diabolizing states , removing them from international arena, isolation policy, are all steps toward aggression and war that must be reprehended.

We must never forgot that the Second World War started by the use of a so called Czech peril to Europe stability , when a small country of 20 million people was accused of preparing an attack on 90 million strong Hitler`s Germany.

This is just an historical example and the latest two decades have seen many such outrages claims being presented in the international media as basic truth and later bases for international intervention.

The Second Golf War started in the search of illusory weapons of mass destruction, that have never being fund, is just the latest example of the tragic use of lies and disinformation and of threats with the use of force or bland aggression against independent countries.

Such actions had long time undermined the international security and had created a climate of universal suspicion and of pointing fingers that proved to be disruptive to international cooperation.

The latest fundamental principle is the principle of consensus in international arena.

Without a doubt this fundamental principle was under attack as in the latest decade the international actions have being far from consensual.

Actions based on crossing the principle of international laws and diplomacy and on fabricated evidence like in the case of the attack on Serbia in 1999 or on Iraq in 2003, had proved to be incapable of mastering a consensus.

This is not a proof of the inefficiency of this principle, but just the contrary, this is the demonstration that only the consensus based activity is really positive and is creating the necessary framework for efficient activity of international organizations.

Only the consensus can prove that the cooperation and action on behalf of the international community are really based on the free will of the states and nations of United Nations and are not just the result of pressure or manipulation.

The principle of consensus had worked on the First Iraq War of 1990, when a broad consensus of all nations, drive Saddam Hussein forces out of Kuwait.

A consensus based activity is efficient, speedy and supported by all international forces and is having the force of law and diplomacy.

Consensus is possible and is the only way that international cooperation could be achieved.

All international actions not based on consensus are illegitimate and inefficient; majority is not enough in international arena and in international law. The community of states is based on equality, respect of fundamental rights and on consensus. Only by this way international activity can resolve crisis, not create new ones.

The tragic history of the last 20 years has spoken enough about this.

The Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia, the latest drive for peace and a better world in XXI century, launched by Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev, is part of a long tradition of searching and promoting peace in the world.

This initiative is having all the necessary ingredients to be successful, mainly because is rational and based on the reconstruction of international norms.

We also must draw attention to a dangerous trend: the rapid decline of the national states, the increase power of criminal groups from economy, politics and even military areas and the increase insecurity in international affairs.

These dangerous trends are increasing in Asia: conflicts for influence and borders, internal civil wars, international interventions, military threat are flourishing. Other continents like Africa are also engulfed in crimes and corruption and in collapsing national states.

This general climate of conflict, tragic global insecurity and outer disregard for international norms is making more urgent and necessary a global solution based on the value and inspiration of Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia.

This must be not only a search of peace of diplomats and the powerful elite of this world.

Security and peace are essential for every individual, state, community and interest group.

Without security, and in the perpetuation of the present day climate, nobody is safe and the world development is in balance. The world spruce up goes by the fulfillment of the Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia commitments.

We need a global voice to resolve the global issue and to balance the forces of destruction and chaos in today`s world.

In Bucharest, Conference on Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia, the voices of intellectual, diplomatic and academic elite of Europe had being heard for the first time.

Let`s not let this voices to go in vain.

Peace is everybody quest.

Professor dr. Anton Caragea MA, FINS, EDA


PROFESSOR DR. ANTON CARAGEA MA,FINS EDA RECEIVES THE PRIZE ON VOCATION FOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

December 3, 2012

On 30th of November 2012, the ceremony of handing out the awards for diplomatic and international relations activity, hosted by the Balkans and Europe Magazine has taken place.

Professor A.Caragea receives the prize

Professor dr. Anton Caragea receiving the PRIZE ON VOCATION FOR  INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION.

The prizes are destined to render homage to the most important personalities of Romanian diplomatic life, personalities that had a long standing and positive influence in forging Romanian foreign policy and in supporting a better international image for our country.

Professor dr. Anton Caragea, Director of Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation was hailed as the best romanian diplomat of this year, receiving the PRIZE ON VOCATION FOR  INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION .

In the last period, the PRIZE ON VOCATION FOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION was bestowed upon such lofty personalities as: Macedonian President-Boris Trajkovski, Azerbaijan President: Ilham Aliyev and Greece Prime Minister, Constantinos Simitis etc.

In the official handing out ceremony, offering the response to the presentation made by Mr. Carol Roman, Director of Balkans and Europe Magazine, Professor Dr. Anton Caragea had taken the rostrum presenting the main highlights of his vision of Romanian foreign policy.

Professor dr. Anton Caragea had underlined the necessity that Romanian voice must be regarded as the voice of Europe, and when Bucharest is stating a foreign policy decision this must be also regarded as an European voice. Romania is a fundamental element of European construction, concluded professor Anton Caragea.

A.caragea speech at award ceremony

Professor dr. Anton Caragea on the rostrum for the acceptance speech 

Another basic principle of foreign policy must be the necessity for Romania to forge new partnership`s, a tradition that has proven useful for Romania in the past and must be revived.

The revival of this long standing tradition had transformed the foreign policy landscape of Romania as seen by the favorable examples of Romania`s relations with Kazakhstan and United Arab Emirates.

By strategic partnership with Kazakhstan, Romania was able to host in February 2010 the Preparatory Conference on OSCE reform  and the theories presented in the Bucharest Conference had being transformed in key elements of the OSCE agenda of reform, debated in the High Level Astana Conference in December 2010.

In 2011, Romania hosted the most important international conference, after the one held in Washington, to mark the independence of Kazakhstan.

In 2012, Romania was the first European country to announce his support for Astana-Kazakhstan capital, as the host for EXPO 2017 international exhibition. Also in 2012, the two decades of successful diplomatic relations between Romania and Kazakhstan where celebrated with pomp and ceremony.

I must also emphasize on the hosting by Romania of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe and Asia, in November 2012, occasion for the Romanian elite to express his staunch support for the Kazakhstan President-Nursultan Nazarbayev, plan to forge an area of security and cooperation between Europe and Asia.

This are just a few moments of a bilateral relation that must be regarded as an example for the future of Romanian foreign policy, concluded his allocution professor A. Caragea.

Professor dr. Anton Caragea had also mentioned the results of his visits to United Arab Emirates, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan as elements of building new cooperation bridges.

Anton caragea-Emirate-kazakhstan

Professor dr. Anton Caragea with Ambassador of UAE-Yacoub Yousef Al Hosani and Kazakhstan Charge d`affairs -Talgat Kaliyev.

Kazakhstan and United Arab Emirates are among the countries that have a rapid growing bilateral relation with Romania during professor Anton Caragea term in office.

 

Accompanied by thunderous applause of the assistance, professor dr.Anton Caragea had received the PRIZE ON VOCATION FOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION    as a statement of appreciation for his lofty diplomatic activity.

On this occasion where also honored, for their role on bilateral relations development, the Ambassador of Peoples Republic of China Mrs. Huo Yuzhen , Ambassador of Bulgaria Mr. Aleksandar Filipov and Ambassador of United States to Romania etc.

 

The PRIZE ON VOCATION FOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION was previously received by: Macedonian President-Boris Trajkovski, Azerbaijan President: Ilham Aliyev and Greece Prime Minister, Constantinos Simitis.

BorisTrajkovski1399px-Lech_Kaczynski_Ilham_Alijew_(09)Kostas_Simitis


HOW BUCHAREST CONFERENCE ON OSCE WAS ORGANIZED by Professor Dr.Anton Caragea MA, FINS,EDA

October 23, 2012

2010 has being an important year for Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, as the only chance for a survival of this important organization, legacy of cold war, had being played out.

Professor dr. Anton Caragea – President of Bucharest Conference on OSCE-24 February 2010

The Kazakhstan Presidency of OSCE had come in a difficult time for the organization. OSCE has being one of the main results of the Final Declaration of Helsinki Conference, designed to create a forum for continuous dialogue between the communist powers and capitalist powers.

Opening of Bucharest Conference on OSCE-24 February 2010

The long period of the Cold War had seen important moments of tension between the two opposite power`s : USSR and United States, having as center the European continent: Berlin Blockade, Berlin Wall, 1956- Hungary Revolution, 1968- Czechoslovakia Revolution etc.

These continuous tensions, on the fringes of European continent and the issue of the frontiers drawn after the Second World War, needed a platform for dialogue and mutual understanding between the Cold War adversaries.

The CSCE ( The Council for Security and Cooperation in Europe ), as it was the former name of OSCE, had succeeded in this task of providing a rostrum for declarations, dialogue and détente between the irreconcilable adversaries of the cold war.

The period after the collapse of the communist system in Europe assured, after the extinction of Warsaw Treaty, a new period of glory for CSCE.

Re-named as OSCE, the organization provided a formula for democratic support tor former communist states and a dialogue and security forum, in a changing world, until the NATO decided to expand and include former communist satellite from Eastern Europe.

From this moment, the downfall of the organization had being sharply and rapid. The last of the summits, held in 1999 in Istanbul, failed to offer a new conceptual reconstruction of the OSCE and failed even to open the opportunity for a new high level summit of the organization.

The agreement for putting OSCE in a shadow corner was clearly marked , for NATO and United States the organization become superfluous and un-necessary. The security of the European countries become a task for the armed arm of the western world: NATO and the economic and human dimension was entrusted to European Union expansion.

For Russia, OSCE had become guilty of becoming an anti-chamber of the NATO expansion and was perceived as a fostering tool for promoting the dismantling of the former Soviet Union, under the name banner of promoting a so called democracy.

In 2010, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe was confronted with the lack of vision, lack of concept and was victim of an extensive period without a high level meeting, from 1999.

The Kazakhstan Presidency was confronted with a negative perception. The promoters of a special kind of democracy where discussing the Kazakhstan track record in fulfilling a hypothetical democracy scale. Other countries, after a failed mandate at the presidency of OSCE, where not to eager to offer to a new comer a red carpet treatment.

Finally, the organization was confronted with a lack of resources and visionary leadership and controlled by a conservative state of mind: if we did not need a high level summit for 10 years why we will need one now? If we survive without a reform, why we need a reform today? This where the question`s whispered on the diplomatic corridors of power.

In this important moment, Kazakhstan leadership decided to commit resources and interest in offering to OSCE the example of an efficient and active chairmanship, engaging the creativeness of European intellectual elite in an ample debate to renew the concept and vision of OSCE.

The appeal of president of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, presented in Vienna to European elite was clear and un-equivocal: the reform of OSCE and enabling a new vision for the organization, could only result in a common effort of the progressive intellectual`s and leaders of Europe.

In this moment I have taken the decision to uphold the Kazakhstan Presidency to OSCE and to nurture an intellectual and academic response to the challenge presented by President Nazarbayev.

President Emil Constantinescu at Bucharest Conference on OSCE-24 February 2010

The initial discussion was concentrated with President of Romania (1996-2000), the fine and impressive intellectual Emil Constantinescu.

President Emil Constantinescu, with his ample European vision had embraced the idea of a coagulated Romanian and European response to OSCE reform challenge.

Together we have shaped the vision of two main ideas that must be emphasized in a Bucharest conference on OSCE: the support for a high level meeting of OSCE and the highlighting of the main topics for a future reform of OSCE.

With this discussion, the European elite response to OSCE challenge, mounted by the president of Kazakhstan had started to gather essence.

Soon afterwards President of Romania (1990-1996; 2000-2004) Ion Iliescu had accepted to attend and support a Bucharest conference on OSCE.

President Ion Iliescu at Bucharest Conference on OSCE-24 February 2010

With the presence of two presidents, that supervised the transformation of OSCE after the Cold War and had supported the last high level gathering of OSCE in Istanbul, the European reform project for OSCE had become a major conceptual work of ″renovatio″ (re-building).

Along the ambitious project, the presence of the economic community, in this reform debate had imposed as a necessity. OSCE needs a powerful economic impact, need an economic overhaul and also must become an economic center of attraction. Mr. Cezar Coraci had entrusted himself with the task of creating an OSCE economic agenda that would transform the organization in a motor for growth and development.

Concluding Bucharest Conference on OSCE-24 February 2010

The diplomatic community of Europe, under the leadership of Professor Dr. Mircea Constantinescu, Director of European Diplomatic Academy, had also created a draft for a human security dimension of OSCE.

A strong reform project, supported by all the speakers of Bucharest conference on OSCE included: the necessity of reforming the so called democracy promotion arm of OSCE, creating a true and honest democracy framework and offering a new peace and security concept for the Euro-Asian region.

Finally, with their impressive moral and political authority Presidents Emil Constantinescu and Ion Iliescu offered their support for a high level meeting of OSCE in Astana.

In the concluding coverage of the Bucharest conference on OSCE the main international press outlets considered that Astana High Level Conference of OSCE it is now a necessity.

The long trail of shadow and mistrust in Kazakhstan Presidency had being defeated and the intellectual and political support of European elite had clearly shined thru.

The President of Kazakhstan decision had played off; Europe had supported his ambitious vision, supported a High level conference in Astana, defeated the mistrust and misunderstanding and created an agenda for reform of OSCE. Kazakhstan president had obtained a full support in his plans to reform OSCE.

 

I must also emphasize that Bucharest Conference on OSCE had started a special relation between Romania and Kazakhstan.

Romania had never forgotten that Kazakhstan had the ambition to reform OSCE, to promote an agenda of security at Euro-Asia level and had trusted the Romanian elite to coagulate a European response to Kazakhstan initiative for a new OSCE.

The ideas and the reform plans conceptualized in Bucharest conference on OSCE had become the main issues on the table of the High level meeting in Astana in 1-2 December 2010.

The voices of Romanian and European elite had crossed the space and become the main back bone of the reform of OSCE.

The lesson of the successful European-Asian cooperation of Bucharest Conference on OSCE from 24 February 2010 remain vivid today : OSCE could retained his efficiency, could become one more time a pillar of security and could rediscover his legacy of promoting human rights and authentic democracy.

Romania had started a strategic relation in the benefit of European unity and stability and in forging ties with Asia via Kazakhstan.

This strategic and visionary relation continuous today and the journey for creating a new world of peace and security with the support of Romania and Kazakhstan is a never ending story.

Professor Dr. Anton Caragea MA, FINS, EDA


ROMANIA-KAZAKHSTAN: 20 YEARS OF DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS

May 27, 2012

KAZAKHSTAN-ROMANIA : A STRATEGIC RELATION by professor dr. Anton Caragea MA, FINS, EDA

 

We have gathered here today in order to discuss about the remarkable achievements of the past 20 years of diplomatic relations, and above all, about the Romania- Kazakhstan friendship.

I shall not repeat all that has been discussed with so many details here: the extraordinary role of Kazakhstani investments in the Romanian energy sector, the amount of 3 billion $ speaks for itself about the essential role of these investments in the Romanian economy; therefore I do not aim to reiterate the extraordinary role of the Kazakhstani-Romanian cultural relations which will be enshrined by signing a new complete and broad bilateral agreement.

I wish to focus on a phrase found in the previous speeches and which calls upon the name of a current manifestation: Romania – Kazakhstan, a strategic partnership.
Very well, indeed, Romania has known how to be faithful to this concept and how to build a strategic partnership, for which I truly hope that will be applied not only for Central Asian countries but also for other states worldwide.
President Ion Iliescu and President Emil Constantinescu have described both clearly and with numerous details the importance and sometimes the difficulties of this strategic partnership in which both countries have known how to prove their friendship and interest in collaboration.

I shall mention only a few episodes of the past years showing the utility and the importance of this strategic partnership. In 2010, Kazakhstan was in charge of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Presidency in a tense environment in which the Russian and American concepts over the role and even of the organization’s utility were exacerbated, the last high level Summit of OSCE had taken place in 1999 at Istanbul and no compromise for any new summit was to be found.
It appeared impossible for young Kazakhstan, with its energetic but still young diplomacy to succeed this stunt.
Since the very first hours of the new presidency, Romania showed its availability to support Kazakhstani OSCE reformation and organizational reactivation concepts by means of a new high level summit. Romania had the wisdom along with Kazakhstani diplomacy to proceed in the best possible way : a summit of the wise held in Bucharest in which with calm, diplomacy and especially with strong arguments, the European intellectual elites and not only, were convinced of the OSCE reform necessity and of the organization’s future preservation through a new summit.
High ranked Romanian intellectual personalities such as President Ion Iliescu and President Emil Constantinescu took over the OSCE ideas’ flame and hence supported the OSCE reform. There was a clear test of how the strategic relations Romania – Kazakhstan functioned not only for the bilateral relation’s sake, but for the guardianship benefit of an organization with a notorious past, fallen in the shadows.
I was proud when the planted ideas in Bucharest, February of 2010 blossomed in Astana, December of 2010. It was more than Romania’s voice: it was the voice of Kazakhstan and of a functioning bilateral relation. When the world was wondering whether the Kazakhstan presidency would be a success, Romania gave an intellectual and resounding answer: YES.
Furthermore, at the Conference dedicated to 20 years of Kazakhstan independence in November 2011, the intellectual and academic Romanian elite under the guidance of natural leaders: President Emil Constantinescu and President Ion Iliescu knew how to place the conference’s importance on the 2nd position after Washington’s conference. These were other proofs of a working partnership. Moreover, on April 24th of 2012 Romania demonstrated once more its support for Kazakhstan, organizing the Candidacy support Exhibition for Astana at EXPO 2017. Thus, Romania was the first European country to do such a gesture, followed afterwards by Germany; I wish to highlight that Romania was the first country to support Astana for EXPO 2017.
My intention was just to list some of the past months’ moments in which Romania was faithful to its decision of building a strategic relation with Kazakhstan, a relation in which Romania’s voice is heard. Supporting Kazakhstan at OSCE, Romania supported the reform of a European organization which threatens to lose its importance; by supporting the 20 years celebration of Kazakhstan’s independence, Romania rang a bell for the model of democracy, development and security offered by Kazakhstan and President Nursultan Nazarbaev to the region and the rest of the world; assisting Astana for capital at EXPO 2017, Romania gives a signal of advancing, backing and not being afraid of 21st century’s transformations and Asian growth. Perhaps this is the secret of the strategic relation Romania – Kazakhstan, its benefits going beyond these two countries, the fruits of this friendship being directed worldwide.
May the strategic relation Romania – Kazakhstan further continue with the same great results!


PROFESSOR DR. ANTON CARAGEA ON NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT SUMMIT

April 26, 2012

The Seoul Summit had just concluded, but his reverberation will be long standing. Everybody is agreeing that we are witnessing just the beginning of  an international custom on managing nuclear weapons and nuclear security.  Seoul Summit, if it was not exceedingly rich on international regulation,   had offered instead a successful model of nuclear security management, of relinquishing the illusory security offered by nuclear weapons in exchange for a world commitment to his security: Kazakhstan.

Professor Dr. Anton Caragea during his visit in Kazakhstan.

The world leaders have showered praises on the Central Asian country and his leader-Nursultan Nazarbaev ,top of the list being  United States President, Barack Obama,  who described Kazakhstan as a model for the world  and express his support for the country`s bid to host the International Nuclear Fuel Bank .

In this moment, when we are confronted with an insufficient legal framework on nuclear security, the need for a successful example to be offered as a way out for the countries that had pursued or are pursuing a program for nuclear military development it is clearly marked.

Kazakhstan is, undoubtedly, the success story of nuclear disarmament : dismantling an impressive nuclear arsenal inherited from Soviet Union ,with more than 1.000 warheads, prohibiting nuclear experiments on Semipalatinsk  polygon and in exchange obtaining security guarantees and international recognition of his borders .

International leaders express their appreciation towards Kazakhstan President- Nursultan Nazarbayev

In today world Kazakhstan and the architect of this enlighten policy: President Nursultan Nazarbavev had a long track record of  achievements.

Among others unremitting exertion for the nuclear disarmament Kazakhstan joined the “Group of Eight” (G-8) Global Partnership against the spread of weapons of mass destruction and ratified the 2005 Amendment to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM) to bring it into force by 2014 and successfully hosted the Conference of the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism” .

If to this list we add the impressive achievements of Kazakhstan Presidency to Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the hosting of the first high level OSCE Summit in Astana  in 2010 and the lavish and profound transforming Chairmanship to Organization of Islamic Conference we have the complete picture of a country determined to leave his mark on international arena.

Kazakhstan had not fall asleep on the laurels already won and President Nursultan Nazarbaev already used his country high standing to promote a regulation package destined to offer the possibility of further development of use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes such as: the adoption of legally binding nuclear safety standards, the establishment of mechanisms for rapid response in case of emergency at nuclear facilities, and the granting to all states of an equal access to peaceful nuclear technology and supplies of low enriched uranium (LEU), including through an International Nuclear Fuel Bank.

The mounting support of the world leaders to Kazakh President vision of a nuclear weapons free world   had offered a new chance for Seoul Summit. The value of this vision is reflected in President Nursultan Nazarbaev own words: Based on the experience of my country, that voluntarily renounced the world’s fourth nuclear arsenal, I can say that the real security guarantees are provided by sustainable economic and social development,”

If the world will support Kazakhstan in sharing this lesson, than the mankind could have a chance for a better future.

Professor Dr. Anton Caragea MA, FINS, EDA