IN RESPONSE TO THE REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR OF CONFLICT PREVENTION CENTRE AMBASSADOR ADAM KOBIERACKI

Tacan İldem 15.11.2012
Mr. Chairperson,
I would like to join the previous speakers in expressing our thanks to Ambassador Kobieracki for his informative presentation and report on the activities of the Conflict Prevention Center (CPC).

As a delegation which has actively taken part in the negotiations of Ministerial Council Decision 3/11 on the conflict cycle, we appreciate the determination of the CPC, to implement all aspects of the decision. The various informal working group meetings organized throughout the year allowed us to assist further the CPC in improving coordination, collaboration and complimentarity between the different executive structures of the organization in this area. We would like also to thank the Secretary General for its report published in July, outlining the many salient aspects of the work carried out so far.

On the other hand, we would like to voice our call for increasing interaction with participating States when taking decisive steps within the Secretariat especially in instances that make an impact on the shape and nature of the organization. In this vein, we have to remind ourselves of the fact that the many guidelines prepared for internal use are of non-consensual nature and would naturally be considered with the status that they hold in our future work.

The intensive and detailed discussions in the Informal Working Group have shown the variety of opinions as to the way MC Decision 3/11 should be implemented. This is only natural considering the different approaches but also the various security needs of the participating States. The CPC should take into consideration this reality.

The workshop to be organized next month by the CPC on reconciliation should, in order to be successful, also try to identify areas where the OSCE could bring an additional value in this new area for the organization. In our view, the network of field missions in areas affected by recent conflicts could be used in complementing existing efforts in regions such as South Eastern Europe and South Caucasus.

We took positive note of the CPC’s contributions in Geneva Discussions and 5+2 negotiations as well as its role during the incidents in Tajikistan. We would like to reiterate that the core function of the organisation is to contribute to the resolution of the conflicts that OSCE has been tasked to deal with. We believe that the CPC could help identify elements of the OSCE tool box that could be mobilised on the request of participating States, parties to the conflicts, to help sparkle political will.

We also commend the active role assumed by the CPC in coordinating work with the field missions. The active engagement of the CPC certainly adds value to the various efforts in the field and consolidates the confidence of the host countries in OSCE institutions. One area where increased focus could be given is CPC’s role in increasing cooperation between field offices in their respective regions. The good examples in South Eastern Europe can be replicated in Central Asia. Furthermore, we share the view of the Director on the need for the OSCE as a regional organization to create synergies with other international organizations.

The Work Programme which Ambassador Kobieracki touched upon, on conventional arms, SALW and UNSCR 1540 for the period 2012-2015, which is developed by the FSC Support Section is a useful reference document explaining in detail the activities of the OSCE in these respective fields. I would like to express our satisfaction for the preparation of this comprehensive document that provides a strategic approach and facilitates multi-year planning.

The CPC’s positive cooperation with the TNT Department or its work in the area of implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1323 are also commendable.

Before I conclude, I would like to commend the work of the CPC and thank Ambassador Kobieracki for this timely report in the eve of Dublin Ministerial Council.

Thank you.