Who’s Socialising Whom? Regional Organisations and Contested Norms in Central Asia

Abstract

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) represent competing sets of international norms in Central Asia. The contestation between these sets of norms has not led to a complete polarisation between members of the two organisations, however. Instead, the OSCE has used a range of discursive tactics to reduce political contestation, downplaying some contested issues and seeking shared discourses on security threats. This article explores these tactics and suggests that these discursive shifts may eventually threaten the normative identity of the OSCE and lead to the acceptance of a more hybrid set of security-related norms in the region.

I would like to thank the British Academy for a Small Research Grant, which supported research for this project in Beijing and Vienna.

Notes

I would like to thank the British Academy for a Small Research Grant, which supported research for this project in Beijing and Vienna.

¹For a critique of such approaches, see Heathershaw and Megoran (2011).

²The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation includes Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, in addition to Russia and China. Five states—Afghanistan, India, Iran, Pakistan and Mongolia—have ‘Observer’ status, while Turkey, Sri Lanka and Belarus are ‘Dialogue Partners’. The OSCE includes 56 ‘participating States’ from Europe, the former Soviet republics and North America. Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Morocco, Tunisia, Japan, Mongolia, Republic of Korea, Thailand, Afghanistan and Australia are ‘Partners for Cooperation’. For a thorough analysis of many of the similarities and divergences between the two organisations, see De Haas (2007).

³This is one reason why Russia, in particular, has frequently referenced the Final Act as a priority document rather than the 1990 Charter of Paris (see Galbreath 2009).

⁴See, for example, Freedom House, ‘Worst of the Worst 2011: The World’s Most Repressive Societies’, Washington, DC, available at: www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/special_report/101.pdf, accessed 9 January 2012.

⁵The founding documents of the SCO may be found on the organisation’s website, available at: www.sectsco.org, accessed 9 January 2012.

⁶The OSCE has a wide range of commitments that provide protection for ethnic minorities, and an independent official, the High Commissioner on National Minorities, who is engaged in trying to prevent ethnic violence. See Wright (1996) on early OSCE commitments in this area.

⁷For an overview of Chinese reactions to the Kyrgyz crisis, see Bassan (2011).

⁸Uzbekistan left the GUUAM in 2005 and joined the CSTO in 2006.

⁹Speech by Ambassador Andrew Tesoriere, Head of the OSCE Centre in Bishkek at Forum of Ministry of Interior/OSCE Police Steering Committee in Kyrgyzstan, 14 October 2009, available at: http://www.osce.org/bishkek/66276?page=2, accessed 10 December 2011 (italics added by the author).

¹⁰This marked a significant shift in emphasis from the previous OSCE Centre in Tashkent, which had no similar security issues in its mandate, but focused more on human dimension issues. This change was in response to a deterioration in relations between Uzbekistan and the OSCE following the massacre of civilians in Andijan by Uzbek security forces in May 2005 (see Lewis 2011a). In Tajikistan, the OSCE has a wider mandate, but it includes assisting ‘the Republic of Tajikistan in the development of common approaches to problems and threats to security, taking into account the commitments of the Republic of Tajikistan to contribute to stability and security, to prevent conflicts and take measures for crisis management, as well as in the areas of, inter alia, police-related activities, border management and security and anti-trafficking’ (‘Mission Survey’, available at: http://www.osce.org/tajikistan/43448, accessed 22 December 2011).

¹¹Statement of the President of Turkmenistan H.E. Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov at the OSCE Summit in Astana 1–2 December 2010, available at: http://www.osce.org/cio/73906, accessed 17 March 2011.

¹²Personal communication with Western diplomats, Vienna, 11 April 2011.

¹³A joint operation in 2007 had the scenario that ‘under the support of an international terrorist organization based in the north border of country N, a terrorist organization of country A launched an anti-government movement. At the headquarters of the joint drill, commanders from the six SCO members decide to annihilate the terrorists’. A wide range of incidents could be envisaged under such a scenario, given the broad definition of terrorism used by the SCO. See ‘SCO Conducts Final Stage of Joint Anti-Terror Drill’, Xinhua News Agency, 17 August 2007, available at: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-08/17/content_6553596.htm, accessed 5 January 2012.

¹⁴‘SCO, UN to Strengthen Cooperation on Combating Drugs, Crimes’, Xinhua News Agency, 14 June 2011, available at: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-06/14/c_13929576.htm, accessed 3 January 2012.

¹⁵Statement by Pierre Lellouche, Minister of State for European Affairs, at the Meeting of the OSCE Permanent Council, Vienna, 20 May 2010, available at: http://www.osce.org/pc/68240, accessed 17 March 2011 (italics added by the author).

¹⁶On the nature of this discourse, see Horsman (2005).

¹⁷For critical accounts of the dynamics of narcotics smuggling and counter-narcotics efforts in Central Asia and the relationship between state agencies and drug trafficking, see De Danieli (2011) and Paoli et al. (2007).

¹⁸Statistics are not always reliable, but according to UNODC figures, about 9,394 kg of opiates were reportedly seized in 2006 in the region, almost matching a 1996 figure of 9,155 kg. In fact, the pattern of seizures has been much more volatile than suggested by these figures, but overall the pattern is fairly consistent, with an average of 9,632 kg seized annually in the period from 1996 to 2006. Since 2006 seizures have generally fallen, reaching just 4.4 tons in 2009 (UNODC 2008, p. 10; INCB 2011, p. 98).