Good Read. OSCE Mediation and Conflict Management

A plurality of strands

Readers can follow a plurality of strands through the collection of analyses and case studies by policymakers, academics and practitioners, all of them high-level experts in conflict situations, including mediators having worked for international NGOs or the OSCE itself.

They can inform themselves about the history and institutional set-up of the OSCE, as a forum for dialogue among its participating States, as a provider of mediation and mediation support for resolving conflicts within the region and finally as a dialogue facilitator on many issues, connecting governmental and civil society actors between and within states (David Lanz, Christina Stenner).

Or they can take a closer look at the OSCE’s role as third-party mediator in the different settlement processes for protracted conflicts in the region: the Geneva International Discussions that deal with the consequences of the 2008 conflict in Georgia (Teona Giuashvili and Jaba Devderiani), the Transdniestrian settlement process (Roxana Cristescu) and the Minsk Group-led process for the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict (Carey Cavanaugh, Zaur Shiriyev, Anahit Shrinyan).

They can zero in on the OSCE’s involvement in dealing with the crisis in and around Ukraine, which is very much in the public eye: three case studies explore the unique setup of the Trilateral Contact Group (Christian Schläpfer), the role of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine (Hilde Haug) and lessons learned from the OSCE-led attempt at initiating a national dialogue (Natalia Mirimanova).

Or they can read about the OSCE’s less well-known efforts at conflict management in Central Asia, where low-intensity conflicts and short flare-ups of violence present a special challenge, likened by author Pál Dunay to Don Quixote’s tilting at windmills.

Several authors peer backwards or forward in time, tracing the history of OSCE dialogue facilitation from its beginnings (Laurien Crump) or considering future scenarios (Oleg Shakirov).

Others provide the opportunity to view OSCE mediation through a national lens – that of Azerbaijan (Zaur Shiriyev), Armenia (Anahit Shrinyan), Russia (Oleg Shakirov) or the United States (Philip Remler, Matthew Rojansky).  

Diagnostic ambition

The objective of this volume goes beyond offering a description of OSCE mediation; its ambition is diagnostic. As guest editor-in-chief Anna Hess Sargsyan, who provides an introduction and a concluding summary, points out, the OSCE is often criticized for being ineffective in its mediation work, typically with mutual finger pointing at the parties, the mediators or the OSCE itself. The aim of the collection, she says, is to “unpack the oversimplified narratives in light of the idiosyncrasies of the conflicts concerned, the peculiarities of respective peace processes, the institutional frameworks within which these processes unfold and the impact of geopolitical drivers on the conflict and peace process dynamics alike.”

The question to what extent heightened tension between Russia and the Western countries is affecting the OSCE’s mediation efforts was, states Sargsyan, a catalyst for this publication. But the analyses by the various authors reveal that this is but one factor standing in the way of more effective mediation processes. A lack of perceived benefits, or concerns about losing power on the part of conflict parties but also of the mediating third parties, can compromise political will to work towards a settlement. Other impediments  identified and discussed include the intractability of the conflicts and inherent institutional limitations of the OSCE, such as the fact that many of its instruments are outdated, developed for Cold War realities.

One red thread that can be followed throughout the articles is the question of how to assess the consensus-based decision-making rule of the OSCE, which is characterized – sometimes even by the same author – both as a guarantee of the organization’s impartiality and as a hindrance to its freedom of action. Is consensus a blessing or a curse for the OSCE’s mediation work? It is probably not an accident that the last word in this volume is given to Laurien Crump’s pladoyer for a return to the basics, to a concerted effort by the participating States to seek consensus among themselves on the fundamental issues that continue to divide them, as the indispensable condition for overcoming the lack of progress in the various mediation processes for individual conflicts.

Looking ahead

A strength of this collection is that it clearly states what it does not do. It is not an attempt to fit the complex reality of OSCE mediation into any paradigm in the existing academic literature. It intentionally works with a broad definition of mediation that allows seeing the OSCE’s mediation efforts, which often have not produced results beyond the cessation of violence, as situated on a continuum leading from the management to the resolution of conflicts.

What this collection also does not purport to do, is to provide fully developed recipes for overcoming the challenges uncovered by the authors. While the case studies do offer recommendations for improving the practice of mediation by the OSCE, they are meant to leave the readers with key questions that deserve further research, Sargsyan states.  

The concluding note of her summary is optimistic: “Reversing institutional hurdles, bypassing political obstacles, and ripening the geopolitical will of the parties with sufficient third party will are all tangible challenges, yet ones that can be overcome with enough determination, competence and commitment of everyone concerned.”

What the special issues does offer, is a multitude of leading threads that can be taken up by those inspired to work towards giving the political settlement of conflicts in the OSCE area the upper hand over violence and destruction.

OSCE Mediation and Conflict Management: Unraveling Complexities in OSCE Mediation. Security and Human Rights, Special Issue, Volume 27, Nos. 3-4, 2016. Published for the Netherlands Helsinki Committee by Brill Nijhoff, Leiden.

The introduction and concluding chapter are available online at "Security and Human Rights Monitor", a multifaceted platform that provides analysis of the work of the OSCE, as well as on security and human rights challenges stemming from the OSCE region and beyond. www.shrmonitor.org.