International political and economic organizations of general competence. Company core competencies International organizations and their areas of competence

Source: Electronic catalog of the branch department in the direction of "Jurisprudence"
(Libraries of the Faculty of Law) of the Scientific Library. M. Gorky St. Petersburg State University

Makarenko, A. B.
OSCE - Pan-European International
organization of general competence /A. B. Makarenko.
//Jurisprudence. -1997. - No. 1. - S. 156 - 165

The article is in the publication “News of higher educational institutions. »

Material(s):

• The OSCE is a pan-European international organization of general competence.
  Makarenko, A. B.
  

  OSCE - Pan-European International Organization of General Competence

  A. B. Makarenko*

  Adopted at the Summit of States Parties to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in Budapest (5-6 December 1994) a package of documents (Political Declaration "Towards a Genuine Partnership in a New Era" and "Budapest Decisions") 1 contains a number of major decisions aimed at reorganizing the CSCE in accordance with the dictates of the times, significantly increasing its effectiveness and efficiency. The direction of development of the CSCE along the path of its transformation into a full-fledged regional organization is clearly indicated. The first part of the "Budapest Decisions" - "Strengthening the CSCE" - is actually a detailed summary of the Charter of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

  An event of great significance was the renaming of the CSCE into the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which is a recognition of the fact that today the CSCE actually has all the features of a regional (uniting Europe with the integrated inclusion of the USA and Canada) international organization of a common competencies.

  A feature of the OSCE is that it does not have a single document - a constituent act. The process of creating the organization took a long period of time and is still ongoing, and the set of decisions adopted at the summits of the participating states acts as a constituent act.

  The history of the OSCE began on August 1, 1975, when the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), held in Helsinki, ended with the signing by the leaders of 33 European states, the United States and Canada of the final document of the meeting - the Final Act. The participation of the United States and Canada in the European regional meeting was due to the presence of military contingents and military bases of these countries in Europe, as well as the fact that the participation of the United States, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, is of great importance for ensuring security in Europe.

  The Final Act is rightfully considered one of the most important international documents of our time, since its content includes the following: firstly, the establishment of general principles of international relations between the participating States, which at the same time represent the principles of international law; secondly, a set of agreements to ensure European security and confidence-building; thirdly, agreements on cooperation in the field of economy, science and technology and the environment, humanitarian and other fields; fourthly, a statement of determination to continue the multilateral process initiated by the Conference and an agreement on activities to be carried out by the participating States after the Conference; fifthly, the creation of the basis for a system of collective security and cooperation.

  The final act has a complex multifaceted structure. In addition to establishing the legal principles of relations between states, it fixes the goals and intentions of its participants, collectively developed and agreed recommendations, and also contains specific legal norms.

  By its legal nature, the Final Act is unique, and this gave rise to numerous discussions q: the legal force of this document, and subsequently other agreements within the CSCE. As noted by V. K. Sobakin, this uniqueness makes it impossible to bring the Meeting and the Final Act under the traditional classifications of international meetings and international legal documents. 2

  There is no doubt that the Final Document of the Helsinki Conference is not an international treaty. 3 Such a conclusion can be drawn from the text of the Act itself, which states that it "is not subject to registration under Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations." In accordance with this article, all treaties and international agreements concluded by members of the UN must, as soon as possible, be registered with the Secretariat and published by it. The refusal to register deprived the participants of the Meeting of the right to refer to the Final Act as a treaty in any of the UN bodies, from which it can be concluded that the states participating in the CSCE decided not to give this agreement a contractual form.

  This fact was a prerequisite for differences of opinion regarding the obligatory nature of the Act for the participating countries. The American International Law Association, when publishing the text of the Final Act, provided it with an explanation stating that the Final Act has no binding force. 4 This approach received a negative legal assessment from the international legal community. Both the Final Act itself and the outcome documents of all subsequent summit meetings within the framework of the CSCE are permeated with statements of the participating countries about their “intention to put into practice”, “determination to give full effect” to the provisions of the Final Act of the Conference. The section of the Act dealing with the principle of good faith fulfillment of obligations under international law states that the participants "will ... take due account of and fulfill(my cursive. - A.M.) provisions of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe”. 5 More decisive is the wording of the Madrid Outcome Document: confidence- and security-building measures will be “mandatory and will be provided with adequate forms of verification corresponding to their content”. 6 In the Final Document of the Vienna Meeting, the participants expressed their determination to “assume responsibility for the full implementation of the obligations contained in the Final Act and other documents of the CSCE”. 7

  At present, the attitude to the agreements within the framework of the CSCE as having a binding character has become generally recognized. However, the question of the nature of the binding force of these documents is still a matter of controversy.

  There are two main points of view on this issue: according to the first, CSCE acts are in the nature of political agreements, and their binding force is moral and political in nature; 8 the second recognizes the legal force of these associate professors, the content of international legal norms in them. 9 Recent trends in the development of the CSCE process, qualitative changes in it, the essence of which will be described below, have proved the correctness of the second point of view.

  The international legal doctrine proceeds from the theory of concordance of the wills of states as a way of creating international legal norms. The most common source of international law is an international treaty, however, it cannot be considered as the only form of agreement of wills. In addition, there are other generally recognized sources, such as international customs and mandatory normative resolutions of international organizations, as well as a special form of harmonization of the wills of states - the final documents of international conferences, to which the Final Act belongs. Its legal force is not diminished by the fact that the prescriptions contained in it are different in the nature of their binding nature. It contains both legal norms and non-normative provisions, both imperative and non-normative provisions coexist. But the combination of normative and non-normative provisions in one document does not eliminate its qualification as a source! law, since the rules of law are still present in it. 10

  The interpretation of CSCE documents as sources of international law is of particular importance in connection with the gradual transition of the CSCE into a new quality - the quality of an international organization of a regional nature. Throughout the history of the existence of the CSCE, a sequence of steps in this direction can be traced.

  The meeting in Helsinki laid the foundation for the organizational process of building a system of security and cooperation in Europe. In the section of the outcome document “Following the Meeting”, the participating States expressed their desire to continue the multilateral process initiated by the Meeting and to implement the provisions of the Final Act.

  A whole series of meetings of representatives of states at various levels was planned. Even then, in the aggregate of these meetings, some organizational unity was seen, as well as the possibility of giving the process a more organized form.

  The first was the Belgrade Meeting of the States Parties to the Pan-European Conference, held in the capital of Yugoslavia from October 4, 1977 to March 9, 1978. At this meeting, an in-depth exchange of views took place on the implementation of the Final Act and on the development of the detente process in the future. The final document of the Belgrade meeting, adopted on March 8, 1978, emphasized the determination of the participating countries "to implement in a unilateral, bilateral and multilateral manner all the provisions of the Final Act." eleven

  At the Madrid meeting, the participating states managed to reach agreements that create new opportunities for expanding their cooperation in various fields, for intensifying their efforts in the interests of strengthening European and global peace. The meeting ended on September 9, 1983 with the adoption of the final document, which was fully based on the principles and provisions of the Helsinki Final Act. The final document confirmed that it is necessary to strictly and rigorously respect and put into practice the ten Helsinki principles, by which the states participating in the all-European meeting have committed themselves to be guided in their mutual relations. The intention was also confirmed to take further steps to reduce or gradually eliminate all kinds of obstacles to the development of trade, to expand economic, scientific and technical ties.

  An important agreement reached at the Madrid meeting was the decision to convene a conference of states on confidence-building, security and disarmament measures in Europe, which began on January 17, 1984, in Stockholm. The main achievement of this conference was the adoption of a set of complementary confidence- and security-building measures. The document of the Stockholm Conference is a politically significant achievement, and the measures contained in it are an important step in efforts aimed at reducing the danger of military confrontation in Europe. 12

  The next main stage of the CSCE process was the Vienna meeting of the representatives of the states-participants of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The meeting was held from November 1986 to January 1989. It brought to the fore one of the main elements of the CSCE process - the human dimension, which had not been in the spotlight before, in contrast to the military issue. The final document of the Vienna meeting significantly expanded the provisions of the Final Act concerning human rights and humanitarian cooperation. 13 It is of fundamental importance that a permanent mechanism has been established to monitor the fulfillment of obligations in this area by participating States - the so-called Vienna Mechanism. On this occasion, significant differences arose between East and West. The question arose whether the human dimension mechanism would not contradict the basic principle of international law - non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. This principle continues to be one of the fundamental foundations of international communication. However, states, voluntarily assuming appropriate obligations, can to a certain extent limit the scope of their internal competence, which is not subject to interference. The primacy of universal human values ​​over national or group values ​​is also directly related to ensuring human rights. The above is of particular importance in connection with the issue of recognizing the binding force of agreements within the framework of the CSCE.

  The essence of the Vienna Mechanism was the decision of the participating States:

  1) exchange information and respond to requests for information and representations made to them by other participants on matters relating to the human dimension of the CSCE;

  2) to hold bilateral meetings with other participating States in order to study issues related to the human dimension of the CSCE, including situations and specific cases, with a view to resolving them;

  3) that any participating State that considers it necessary may draw the attention of other participating States through diplomatic channels to situations and cases concerning the human dimension of the CSCE;

  4) that any participating State may provide contact information in accordance with the above paragraphs at CSCE meetings. fourteen

  The Vienna Conference decided that three Human Dimension Meetings should be held. Three meetings-conferences on the human dimension were held: in Paris - in 1989, in Copenhagen - in 1990 and in Moscow - in 1991. These meetings significantly strengthened and expanded the Vienna Mechanism, creating a system of international non-violent action to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

  The Copenhagen Document strengthened the Vienna Mechanism by setting specific deadlines for responding to requests for information. 15 This was followed by the Moscow Document, whose three main parts, concerning respectively the strengthening of the human dimension mechanism, the rule of law and human rights obligations, supplemented and strengthened the Copenhagen Document. For the first time, its preamble stated unequivocally that "questions relating to freedoms, democracy and the rule of law are of an international character" and that "the commitments made by them in areas of the human dimension of the CSCE, are issues of direct and legitimate interest to all participating States, and do not belong exclusively to the internal affairs of the respective state”, 16 The innovation of the Moscow Conference was the possibility of sending independent missions of experts and speakers, in including against the will of the state that violates human rights. To achieve this goal, the participating States took an important step - they came into conflict with an important principle of the CSCE: the rule of consensus (see below). Thus, the foundations for the procedure of international control were laid.

  On November 19-21, 1990, a meeting of the heads of state and government of 34 CSCE member countries took place in Paris. The main question that was discussed at it was this: what should be the future of Europe and pan-European cooperation.

  The outcome of the meeting was the adoption of a document called the Charter of Paris for a New Europe. It noted the profound changes and fundamental socio-political changes that had taken place in Eastern Europe, and contained the statement that "the era of confrontation and division of Europe is over." 17 The participants of the meeting reaffirmed their adherence to the ten principles of the Final Act and stated that from now on their relations will be based on mutual respect and cooperation. The Charter clearly states the right to equal security for all and the freedom to choose how to ensure one's own security.

  Let us especially note this meeting in connection with the fact that it marked the beginning of a new stage in the institutionalization of the pan-European process and the transition of the CSCE to a new quality. In the section of the Charter of Paris entitled “New Structures and Institutions of the CSCE Process”, the participating States stated that “joint efforts to ensure respect for human rights, democracy and promote unity in Europe require a new quality of political dialogue and cooperation and thus , development of CSCE structures”. The organizational and procedural conditions for the establishment of these structures were contained in the "Supplementary Document", which was adopted together with the Charter of Paris. Thus, there was a transition from the general principles of creating a system of security and cooperation in Europe, proclaimed by the Final Act of 1975, to building specific structures of the system.

  One of the bodies created at the Paris meeting was the Council of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the CSCE member states. On January 30-31, 1992, a meeting of the Council took place in Prague, at which the process of institutionalization was continued and changes were made regarding certain bodies and procedures.

  This important milestone was followed by the next one - the Helsinki Meeting of Heads of State and Government of the CSCE participating countries, which took place in the capital of Finland on July 9-10, 1992 (Helsinki-2). The document “The Challenge of Change” adopted at the Helsinki meeting consolidated the main results of the first stage of the CSCE's transition to a new quality - the quality of an international organization. 18 The CSCE received broad powers to take practical measures and various means of their implementation. The Helsinki Document includes the Summit Declaration and a package of decisions on the structure and main activities of the CSCE. The Helsinki Document continues to develop structures for ensuring that crises are overcome by political means and creates new mechanisms for conflict prevention and crisis management.

  In the field of the human dimension, the meeting in Helsinki demonstrated the growing concern of the participating States about violations of the rights of persons belonging to national minorities, the growing number of refugees and displaced persons. An important place was occupied by provisions aimed at strengthening the obligations of the participating states in these areas.

  Agreements were reached on intensifying economic, scientific, technical and environmental cooperation in the CSCE region.

  The Helsinki-2 meeting played an important role in creating the necessary prerequisites for the practical use of the CSCE as an instrument for maintaining peace, stability and security in the region.

  On December 14-15, 1992, a regular meeting of the CSCE Council took place in Stockholm. At this meeting, a document was adopted that summed up the 20-year-old efforts of the participating states of the pan-European process to develop a comprehensive system for the peaceful settlement of international disputes. 19 Work on it was carried out at regular meetings of CSCE participants, as well as at four special expert meetings (Montreux, 1978; Athens, 1984; La Valette, 1991; Geneva, 1992). At the last meeting, final recommendations were developed, which were adopted by the CSCE Council at the Stockholm meeting.

  And finally, on December 5-6, 1994, another meeting was held in Budapest, in which the heads of state and government of 52 CSCE countries, as well as Macedonia as an observer, took part, and which today is the last major step towards the formation OSCE.

  The process of transforming the Helsinki process from a forum of predominantly political dialogue into a regional Euro-Atlantic organization for maintaining military-political stability and developing cooperation is characterized by three main features: the institutionalization of the CSCE, changes in its powers and changes in procedure.

  As noted above, the beginning of a new stage of institutionalization, namely, the creation of permanent bodies, the presence of which is one of the main features of an international organization, was initiated at the Paris Summit in 1990. Then the following permanent bodies were created:

  1. Council of Foreign Ministers - the central forum for regular political consultations within the framework of the CSCE process. Its competence included the consideration of issues related to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the adoption of appropriate decisions, as well as the preparation of meetings of the Heads of State and Government of the participating States and the implementation of the decisions adopted at these meetings,

  2. Committee of Senior Officials (CSO), whose function was to prepare meetings of the Council, draw up the agenda and implement its decisions, review current problems and consider issues of the future work of the CSCE with the right to make decisions on them, including in the form of recommendations to the Council.

  3. Secretariat- body of administrative service of consultations of all levels.

  4. Center for Conflict Prevention to assist the Council in reducing the risk of conflict. Its role was to promote the implementation of the confidence- and security-building measures developed at the Stockholm Conference. These measures included a mechanism for consultation and cooperation regarding unusual military activities, the exchange of military information, a communication network, annual performance review meetings, and cooperation regarding dangerous incidents of a military nature.

  5. Bureau of Free Elections to facilitate contacts and exchange of information on elections in the participating States.

  6. Parliamentary Assembly as a body uniting members of parliaments of all participating states.

  Subsequently, the composition of the bodies and their powers were repeatedly changed towards expansion in order to make them more effective.

  Thus, at the Prague meeting, the Council of Foreign Ministers of the CSCE participating States transformed the Bureau for Free Elections into Bureau for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODHR) giving it additional features. 20 This was done with the aim of expanding practical cooperation between participating States in the field of the human dimension.

  At the Prague meeting was created within the framework of the Committee of Senior Officials Economic Forum, to give a political impetus to the dialogue on the transition to a free market economy and its development and to propose practical steps towards the development of free market systems and economic cooperation.

  For the Center for Conflict Prevention established at the Paris Meeting, the Prague Document set new tasks and measures to strengthen the functions and improve the working methods of the CPC.

  At the meeting of heads of state and government in Helsinki in 1992, decisions were made according to which the Council and the Committee of Senior Officials as the agent of the Council became the institutional core of the CSCE. 21 The role of the central and governing body of the CSCE was assigned to the Council, and along with the adoption of operational decisions, the CSO was entrusted with the functions of management and coordination. Direct the day-to-day activities of the CSCE entrusted to the Chairman-in-Office, who shall bring the decisions of the Council and the CSO to the attention of the institutions of the CSCE and give them, if necessary, appropriate recommendations on these decisions.

  To assist the President, a Troika Institute(consisting of the previous, current and subsequent chairpersons acting jointly), as well as ad hoc task forces set up on a case-by-case basis, in particular for conflict prevention, crisis management and dispute resolution, and personal representatives of the Chairperson.

  The post was established CSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, which operates under the auspices of the CSO and should contribute to the prevention of conflicts at the earliest possible stage.

  CSCE Forum for Security Co-operation was established as a permanent body of the CSCE to solve the following main tasks: conducting new negotiations on arms control, disarmament and confidence and security building; expansion of regular consultations, intensification of cooperation on issues related to security; reducing the risk of conflict.

  An important milestone in the process of institutionalization and expansion of the powers of the CSCE was the Convention on Conciliation and Arbitration within the CSCE adopted on December 14-15, 1992 in Stockholm and the Regulations on the CSCE Conciliation Commission. 22 The Convention provides for the creation Courts of Conciliation and Arbitration for the settlement by conciliation and, where appropriate, arbitration of disputes referred to it by the CSCE participating States.

  At the Budapest meeting, the Committee of Senior Officials was transformed into Leadership Council. Its functions include the discussion and formulation of guiding principles of a political and general budgetary nature. The Governing Council also convenes as an Economic Forum.

  In addition to the institutionalization of the CSCE process and the acquisition of new powers, one more main sign of its acquisition of a new quality can be cited: there has been a dynamic development of both formal and internal principles and procedures inherent in the CSCE, which have undergone significant changes.

  Let us consider the fundamental changes that have been made to the cornerstone of the CSCE - the rule of consensus.

  As mentioned above, the rules of procedure developed in the Final Recommendations of the Helsinki consultations provided that decisions at the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe would be taken by consensus. This was of great importance, as it encouraged the participating States to resolve differences of opinion regarding the content of any provisions. As a result, there were always such formulations that no state opposed, although it took a long time to achieve this.

  The use of consensus in dealing with critical issues is generally positive. “The use of consensus,” writes A. N. Kovalev, “is intended to serve to prevent the imposition of someone else's will on states with the help of a mechanical majority. At the same time, the consensus rule contains the potential for abuse by those who seek to delay, slow down the adoption of agreements, and obstruct the achievement of agreement. 23 However, in view of the potential for unproductive use of consensus, the participating States of the CSCE agreed that the rules of procedure of the Helsinki meeting would be applied by subsequent meetings.

  The rule of consensus is closely connected with another fundamental principle of the CSCE - the principle of non-interference in internal affairs (principle VI of the Final Act of the Helsinki Conference). 24 This principle has often been used as a sort of caveat: some states have viewed exposure of human rights violations in these countries as unacceptable interference in their internal affairs. In addition, the special nature of territorial conflicts, as well as conflicts related to minority problems and the collapse of states, requires the ability of international organizations to participate in their elimination in order to protect peoples and peoples.

  With the establishment of the Vienna Mechanism (1989), the foundations for the international control procedure were laid. The emergence of a mechanism of emergency and preventive measures meant that "there was an opportunity for international non-violent action to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law." 25 The end of the period of confrontation between the two systems made possible further progress in this direction: the result of the Moscow Conference on the Human Dimension was the possibility of sending a commission of experts also against the will of the state violating human rights. To achieve this goal, it was necessary to come into conflict with the CSCE principle named above: the rule of consensus.

  The next important step towards modifying the consensus principle was the Prague meeting of the CSCE Council, at which, in order to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law, an important decision was made that “the Council or the Committee of Senior Officials may, if necessary, - and without the consent of the state concerned, in cases of clear, flagrant and uncorrected violation of relevant CSCE commitments - appropriate action is taken.

  Such actions will consist of political statements or other political steps that will be taken outside the territory of such a state.” 26 As we can see, a new mechanism has appeared, called “consensus minus one”.

  Returning to the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, it should be noted that the participating States formulated their attitude to this issue in the preamble of the Moscow Document of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, which stated that “issues relating to human rights, fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of of law are of an international character” and that “the commitments they have made in the field of the human dimension of the CSCE are matters of direct and legitimate interest to all participating States and do not belong exclusively to the internal affairs of the state concerned” .

  The principle of consensus does not apply when decisions are taken in the CSCE Parliamentary Assembly, where a majority of votes is required, as well as when the mechanism of emergency measures and the mechanism of preventive measures for resolving crisis situations adopted in Helsinki are put into operation (the consent of 11 states is sufficient). gifts).

  A major change is the adoption at the Stockholm meeting of the CSCE Council of the “Regulations on directive reconciliation”. 27 According to this instrument, the Council of Ministers or the Committee of Senior Officials may order any two participating States to resort to conciliation in order to assist them in resolving a dispute which they have failed to resolve within a reasonable period of time. . However, “the parties to a dispute may exercise any rights they normally have to participate in all deliberations within the Council or the CSO regarding the dispute, but they will not participate in a decision by the Council or the CSO directing the parties to resort to conciliation proceedings. ". This element of the peace settlement system was called by the CSCE participants the "consensus minus two" procedure.

  Examples can be used to trace an important trend in the development of the all-European process - the modification of the rules of procedure during the transition of the CSCE to a new quality.

  The above changes that have taken place in the pan-European process since the convening of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1975 to the present day, and give reason to say that at present the CSCE corresponds to the signs of international organizations identified in the international -legal research. So, according to X. Shermers, an international organization is characterized by three main features: 1) the contractual basis of the organization, i.e. the existence of an international agreement of states on the creation of an organization that determines its functions and powers; 2) the presence of permanent bodies; 3) subordination of its establishment and activities to international law. 28

  E. A. Shibaeva noted that the concept of an international organization she formulated allows us to speak about five of its constituent features: 1) a contractual basis; 2) the presence of certain goals; 3) appropriate organizational structure; 4) independent rights;) and duties; 5) establishment in accordance with international law. 29

  It should be noted that the first and last signs in this definition repeat each other, since any international treaty must comply with international law.

  The broadest definition was given by E. T. Usenko, who believes that the signs of an international organization developed by the theory and practice of international relations cover the following: 1) the organization was created and operates on the basis of an interstate agreement; 2) its members are the states themselves; 3) it has its own will; 4) it has organs that form and express its will; 5) it must be lawful; 6) it promotes the cooperation of states or organizes the cooperation of states in the field of their exercise of their sovereign rights. thirty

  The main, integral and necessary features of an international organization are the contractual basis of the organization, the presence of permanent organs and its own will. An international organization is characterized by the organizational and legal unity of its member states, which can only be achieved on the basis of an agreement between them, which is usually referred to as a constituent act. Although, as a rule, such a constituent act is an interstate treaty in the sense given to this concept by the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the creation of an international organization on the basis of the so-called “informal treaty” does not change the essence of the matter. 31 In the case of the CSCE, we have a number of interstate agreements and, although none of them is a constituent act in the literal sense, in the aggregate they contain all the necessary provisions characteristic of constituent documents, namely: 1) the goals of an interstate association; 2) functions and powers; 3) conditions of membership; 4) organizational structure of the organization; 5) competence of bodies; 6) the procedure for the adoption by the bodies of acts within their powers.

  The specificity of the CSCE process is that the transition to the quality of an international organization occurred gradually and most of the signs of a constituent act listed above appeared in the Conference documents only after the Paris Summit in 1990. At this meeting, permanent bodies were created, the presence which is one of the main features of the organization. Another important condition that characterizes the essence of an international organization is the compliance of its activities with international law.

  According to Art. 2 of the UN Charter, the United Nations acts in accordance with the principles set forth in this article, that is, in accordance with the basic principles of international law. As for regional organizations, in paragraph 1 of Art. Article 54 of the UN Charter requires that “such agreements or bodies and their activities” be “consistent from Goals and Principles of the Organization”. A statement on this issue is contained in paragraph 25 of the Declaration of the Helsinki Summit of the CSCE in 1992, which, in particular, states that “reaffirming the commitment to the Charter of the United Nations, which our states proclaimed, we declare that we consider the CSCE as a regional a national agreement in the sense of Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations...Rights and duties remain unaffected and are preserved in full. The CSCE will carry out its activities in close cooperation with the United Nations, especially in the field of conflict prevention and settlement”. 32

  It is also necessary to note such a sign as the possession of an international organization by its own will. In this regard, the above modification of the consensus rule is of great importance. With the change in this principle, the CSCE began to have its own will, which does not always coincide with the will of all its members.

  Thus, the recent major meetings of the CSCE, namely the Paris Summit, which marked the beginning of a new stage of institutionalization, the Berlin, Prague and Stockholm meetings of the Council, the Helsinki and Budapest meetings of heads of state and government, summed up and consolidated the main results of the first stage. transforming the OSCE, in terms of its capabilities, status and competence, into a regional organization for maintaining military-political stability and developing cooperation in Europe. As a basis, a comprehensive vision of the problems of ensuring security is preserved, accordingly, the OSCE mandate is confirmed to intensify not only political and military cooperation, but also interaction in the field of the human dimension; in the field of economics, ecology, science and technology. The OSCE has received broad powers to take practical measures and various means of their implementation.

  The necessary adjustments will be made to the functioning of the OSCE, as it acquires the relevant experience. Work will continue on improving the mechanisms for resolving disputes and settling conflicts, on improving interaction with other organizations. However, the necessary prerequisites have already been created for the practical use of the OSCE as an instrument for maintaining peace, stability and security in the Euro-Atlantic region.

  *Postgraduate student of St. Petersburg State University.

  ©A.B. Makarenko, 1997.

  1 Meeting Heads of State and Government of the CSCE Member States // Diplomatic Bulletin. No. 1. 1995.

  2 Sobakin V.K. Equal security. M., 1984.

  3 Talalaev A. N. Helsinki: Principles and Reality. M., 1985.

  4 For details, see: Mazov V. A. Helsinki principles and international law. M, 1979. S. 16.

  5 In the name of peace, security and cooperation: On the results of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, held in Helsinki on July 30 - August 1. 1975 M., 1975.

  7 final document of the 1986 Vienna meeting of the representatives of the participating states of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. M, 1989.

  8 Lukashuk I.I. International political norms for the conditions of detente // Soviet state and law. 1976. No. 8.

  9 Malinin S. A. Meeting in Helsinki (1975) and international law // Jurisprudence. 1976. No. 2. S. 20-29; Ignatenko G.V. The final act of the all-European meeting in Helsinki // Ibid. No. 3.

  10 For more on this, see: Malinin S. A. Meeting in Helsinki (1975) and international law; Ignatenko G.V. The final act of the all-European meeting in Helsinki.

  11 Talalaev A. N. Helsinki: Principles and Reality. S. 184.

  12 For more see: Alov O. Stockholm Conference on Confidence, Security and Disarmament Building Measures in Europe // International Yearbook: Politics and Economics. M., 1985.

  13 final document of the Vienna meeting in 1986 of the representatives of the states-participants of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

  14 Ibid. pp. 50-51.

  15 Document Copenhagen Meeting, 5-29 June 1990: Conference on Human Change of the CSCE. M., 1990.

  16 For more see: Kofod M. Moscow meeting on human change // Moscow Journal of International Law. 1992. No. 2. S. 41-45.

  17 Pan-European Summit, Paris, November 19-21, 1990: Documents and materials. M.. 1991.

  18 CSCE. Helsinki Document 1992 II Moscow Journal of International Law. 1992. No. 4. S. 180-204.

  19 results CSCE Meetings on the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes (Geneva, October 12-23, 1992) // Moscow Journal of International Law. 1993. No. 3. S. 150 171.

  20 Prague document on the further development of CSCE institutions and structures // Moscow Journal of International Law. 1992. No. 2. S. 165-172.

  21 CSCE. Helsinki Document 1992.

  22 results CSCE Meeting on the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes (Geneva, October 12-23, 1992).

  23 Kovalev A. N. ABC of diplomacy. M., 1977. S. 251.

  24 In the name of peace, security and cooperation: On the results of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, held on 8 Helsinki 30 July - 1 Aug. 1975, p. 20.

  25 Kreikemeier A. On the way to a unified system of values ​​within the framework of the CSCE // Moscow Journal of International Law. 1993. No. 3. S. 66.

  26 Prague document on the further development of CSCE institutions and structures.

  27 results meeting of the CSCE on the peaceful settlement of disputes (Geneva, October 12-23, 1992).

  28 Schermer H. international institutional law. Leiden, 1972. V.I.

  29 Shibaeva E. A. Law of international organizations. M., 1986.

  30 Usenko E. T. The Council for Mutual Economic Assistance is a subject of international law // Soviet Yearbook of International Law, 1979. M, 1980. S. 20, 42.

  31 For details, see: Ibid. pp. 22-23.

  32 CSCE. Helsinki Document 1992.

Information updated:24.04.2000

Related materials:
| Books, articles, documents

The practice of creating sustainable international associations has its roots in the era of ancient Greece and Rome. In ancient Greece, such associations arise in the VI century. BC. in the form of unions of cities and communities (symmachy and amphiktyony). At the same time, Rome becomes the head of the Latin Union, which united 30 cities of Latium. Such alliances were created mainly to protect against a common enemy. International economic and customs associations began to emerge at a later stage. Formed in the 16th century and the trade and political union of the North German cities, which formally existed until 1669, headed by the city of Lübeck, known as the Hanseatic Trade Union, is one of such associations.

The prototype of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations in their modern sense was the so-called international administrative unions that appeared in the 19th century. and representing institutions endowed with, albeit rather narrow, but their own competence to work in areas of public life that are closely related to the development of the economy, science, and technology. In addition, unlike such forms of interstate communication as international conferences, commissions and committees, international administrative unions had permanent bodies in the form of so-called international bureaus.

Such unions include the Central Commission for Navigation on the Rhine (1815), the International Union for Land Measurement (1864), the Universal Telegraph Union (1865), the International Meteorological Organization (1873), the Universal Postal Union (1874), etc.

The League of Nations (1919) became the first political international organization created to maintain peace and international security. In 1945 it was replaced by the United Nations (UN). It is with it that the recognition of the quality of a subject of international law for the MMPO is connected. After the creation of the UN, a number of international administrative associations received the status of its specialized agencies, while others function as IMPOs for special problems.

The emergence of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations was dictated by the practical needs of states to unite their efforts to solve problems that they were no longer able to effectively deal with alone.

Interstate organizations must be distinguished from non-governmental organizations (INGOs). Being international in nature, they have a fundamentally different legal nature.

An interstate organization is characterized by such features as membership of states, the presence of a constituent international treaty, the presence of a headquarters and a system of permanent bodies, respect for the sovereignty of member states, as well as their international legal personality, etc.

An essential feature of INGOs is that they are not created on the basis of an interstate agreement and unite individuals and (or) legal entities (International Law Association, Doctors Without Borders). INGOs are also characterized by: lack of profit-making goals; recognition by at least one state or consultative status with international intergovernmental organizations; carrying out activities in at least two states; creation on the basis of the founding act. INGOs cannot include subjects of international law.

According to the resolution of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) 1996/31 of July 25, 1996, an INGO is any non-governmental organization established not on the basis of an intergovernmental agreement and not pursuing the goal of commercial profit.

Classification of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations

International organizations can be classified on various grounds.

According to the circle of participants, intergovernmental (interstate) organizations are divided into universal, open to the participation of all states of the world (UN, its specialized agencies), and regional, whose members can be states of the same geographical region (African Union, Organization of American States, etc.).

In other cases, the possibility of membership is determined by other criteria. Thus, only those countries for which oil exports constitute the main source of income can be members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.

Allocate international organizations of general and special competence. The activities of the former cover all areas of international relations: political, economic, social, cultural, etc. (UN, OAS). The latter are limited to cooperation in one special area (UPU, ILO, etc.) and can be divided into political, economic, scientific, religious, etc.

Classification according to the nature of powers makes it possible to single out interstate and so-called supranational (supranational) organizations.

The first group includes the overwhelming majority of international organizations whose purpose is to organize interstate cooperation and whose decisions are addressed to member states.

There is no consensus on the issue of supranationality of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations.

Some believe that, contrary to the often encountered statements of the MMPO, which by the beginning of the 21st century. there were about 300, and the central place among which is occupied by the UN, are not some kind of global, supranational formations that "absorb" the sovereign rights of states and dictate rules and norms of behavior on the world stage. Their functioning is not connected with any infringement of the sovereignty of states or the delegation of their sovereign rights, because this would contradict the very nature of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations, which are a kind of centers for harmonizing the interests of states and coordinating their efforts to solve various international problems. The participation of states in the work of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations gives them additional opportunities to exercise their own sovereignty, coordinate actions in the international arena with other states to achieve the goals set in the constituent documents of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations.

Supporters of the concept of supranationality of international organizations believe that they become such, in particular, as a result of the transfer by states of certain sovereign powers, the ability to make decisions addressed not only to member states, but also to their national individuals and legal entities (EU), the presence of such organizations mechanism for the enforcement of their decisions.

Depending on the procedure for joining them, international organizations are divided into open (any state can become a member at will) and closed (members are admitted at the invitation of the original founders). An example of a closed organization is NATO.

Creation of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations

International organizations as secondary, derivative subjects of international law are created by states. The process of creating a new international organization goes through a number of stages: the adoption of a constituent document; creation of its organizational and legal basis; convening of the main bodies, indicating the beginning of the functioning of the organization.

The most common way of legalizing the will of states regarding the creation of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations is the development and conclusion of an international treaty, which becomes the founding act of the organization. In this regard, we can talk about the contractual-legal nature of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations. The names of such an act can be different: statute (League of Nations), charter (UN, Organization of American States), convention (Universal Postal Union), etc. The date of entry into force of the founding act is considered the date of creation of the organization.

There is another, simplified procedure for the establishment of international organizations in the form of a decision by another international organization. The UN has repeatedly resorted to this practice by creating autonomous organizations (UNCTAD, UNDP) with the status of a subsidiary body of the General Assembly. In this case, the agreed expression of the will of the states regarding the creation of an international organization is manifested by voting for a constituent resolution that enters into force from the moment it is adopted.

At the second stage, the internal infrastructure of the organization is formed. For this, a special preparatory body, established on the basis of a separate international treaty or annex to the charter of the organization being created, can be used, designed to draft rules of procedure for future bodies of the organization, work out issues related to the creation of headquarters, draw up a preliminary agenda for the main bodies, etc. This is how UNESCO, WHO, IAEA and others were created.

The convening of the main organs and the beginning of their work usually means the completion of the activities for the creation of an international organization.

Members of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations

Among the participants of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations are:

• initial members (founders) - states that participated in the development and adoption of the founding act of the organization;
• affiliated members - states that joined the organization after the start of its activities by joining its constituent act;
• partial members - states that are not members of the intergovernmental (interstate) organization itself as a whole, but are part of its individual bodies;
• associate members (associate members, non-full members). As a rule, such members do not participate in voting, do not elect and cannot be elected to the bodies of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations;
• States and other international organizations that may participate in the work of any IMGO as an observer.

Termination of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations and membership in it

The termination of the existence of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations is most often carried out by signing a protocol on dissolution. So, on July 1, 1991, at a meeting of the Political Consultative Committee in Prague, the Warsaw Pact member states - Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the USSR and Czechoslovakia signed the Protocol on the Termination of the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance of May 14, 1955. and the Protocol on the extension of its validity, signed on April 26, 1985. Similarly, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance was liquidated in the same year.

If a new organization is created instead of the liquidated one, then the problem of succession arises. The objects of succession are property, funds, some functions. This succession took place during the liquidation of the League of Nations and its replacement by the UN in 1946. The latter took over a number of the League's functions. The property of the League passed to the UN in accordance with the agreement concluded between them.

Ways to terminate the membership of states in the MMPO are:

• voluntary withdrawal from the organization;
• automatic exit - the state is forced to terminate its membership in the organization; for example, if a state ceases to be a member of the IMF, then it automatically leaves the membership of the IBRD and other organizations of the World Bank Group;
• expulsion from the organization is a type of international sanctions. As a rule, it is the result of a systematic violation by the state of the charter of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations;
• the cessation of the existence of the state;
• the liquidation of the IIGO itself automatically terminates the membership of the participating states.

Features of the legal personality of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations

Inter-parliamentary bodies are characteristic mainly of regional organizations. Their members are either directly elected by the populations of the member states through direct universal suffrage (European Parliament) or appointed by national parliaments (Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe). In most cases, parliamentary bodies limit themselves to adopting recommendations.

An important structural link in almost all intergovernmental (interstate) organizations are administrative bodies. They consist of international officials who are in the service of an international organization and are responsible only to it. Such persons are recruited in accordance with the quotas established for Member States on a contractual basis.

A significant role in the activities of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations is played by bodies consisting of persons in their personal capacity (for example, arbitration and judicial bodies, committees of experts).

Based on the number of members, two types of bodies can be distinguished: plenary, consisting of all member states, and bodies of limited composition. The plenary body, as a rule, determines the general policy and principles of the organization's activities, making decisions on the most fundamental issues. The scope of its competence includes budgetary and financial issues, the adoption of draft conventions and recommendations, the revision of the charter and the adoption of amendments to it, issues related to membership in the organization - admission, exclusion, suspension of rights and privileges, etc.

At the same time, in the activities of a number of international organizations, especially the UN specialized agencies, there is a tendency to increase the role of limited membership bodies in managing their activities (for example, in the ILO, IMO, ICAO).

For bodies with limited membership, issues of their composition are important. These bodies should be staffed in such a way that the decisions they make reflect the interests of all states to the greatest extent, and not just one or two groups. In the practice of the activities of international organizations, the following principles are most often used to form bodies of a limited composition: fair geographical representation; specific interests; equal representation of groups of states with diverging interests; the largest financial contribution, etc.

When forming organs, one of the principles is most often applied. In some cases, organs are formed taking into account two or more criteria. For example, the election of non-permanent members of the Security Council is conducted with regard primarily to the degree of participation of UN members in the maintenance of international peace and security and in the achievement of other goals of the Organization, as well as equitable geographical representation.

To characterize the bodies of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations, it is possible to use other criteria, for example, the hierarchy of bodies (main and subsidiary), the frequency of meetings (permanent and sessional), etc.

Procedure for making decisions by international organizations and their legal force

Decisions of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations are taken by its bodies. The decision of an international organization can be defined as the will of the member states in the competent body in accordance with the rules of procedure and the provisions of the charter of this organization. The process of forming decisions begins with the manifestation of an initiative coming from the state, from a group of states, from bodies or officials of an international organization. As a rule, the initiator proposes the study of a certain problem. But in a number of cases, he can also introduce a draft of a future decision for discussion.

In most international organizations, decisions, before they are submitted for discussion by the plenary body, are submitted for consideration by subsidiary bodies, where, in essence, a draft decision is developed, its supporters and opponents are identified.

Voting is the decisive step in decision-making. In the overwhelming majority of bodies of international organizations, each delegation has one vote.

Decisions in intergovernmental (interstate) organizations can be made:

a) by unanimity, which may be:

• complete - unambiguous vote of all members of the organization. The absence of any member of the organization or his abstention from voting excludes the possibility of making a decision;
• relative - unanimity of the Member States present and voting. Abstention from voting or the absence of any member of the organization does not prevent the adoption of a decision;

• simple majority - 50% of the votes of those present and voting plus one vote;
• qualified - 2/3, 3/4 of the votes of all those present and voting;

c) based on weighted voting - the number of votes for each state is determined by different criteria depending on the nature and goals of the organization. In the Council of the European Union, the number of votes is determined in proportion to the size of the territory and the number of population. In the IBRD, IMF, IDA, the number of votes for each member state is determined in proportion to its financial contribution;

d) based on consensus, i.e. the decision is taken by consensus without a vote in the absence of objections. The degree of consistency in the positions of states is determined by the absence of direct objections to this decision. Acclamation (a kind of consensus) is used when making decisions on procedural issues: the decision is made without a vote in the absence of objections;

e) on the basis of making decisions in a package - several issues that could be voted on separately in each case are combined into one package and voted on. This ensures decision making.

The rules of procedure of each body establish the quorum required for decision-making, which is most often a simple majority of the members of the body.

The foregoing indicates the existence of an independent branch of international law - the law of international organizations, which is a set of norms and principles governing the process of creation and functioning of the IMPO.

The doctrine distinguishes the concept of internal law of MMPO, covering a set of rules that determine the structure, scope of competence and the procedure for the work of MMPO bodies, regulating the recruitment procedure and the legal status of their personnel. These norms are contained in the constituent acts, in the decisions of the MMPO itself, aimed at regulating intra-organizational relations, in contracts concluded by organizations with their employees.

General characteristics of the structure and activities of the UN

States may, according to Art. 36 of the Statute, to declare at any time that they accept, without special agreement to that effect, ipso facto, in respect of any other State which has accepted the same undertaking, the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory in all legal disputes concerning the interpretation of a treaty; any question of international law; the existence of a fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of the international obligation, and the nature and extent of the reparation due for the breach of the international obligation. The above declarations may be unconditional, or on conditions of reciprocity on the part of certain states, or for a certain period of time.

By the beginning of 2015, 70 out of 193 UN member states declared their recognition of the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 36 of the Statute, and many statements are accompanied by such reservations that make this consent essentially illusory.

During the existence of the Court, it has issued about 90 judgments and 25 advisory opinions. The decisions of the Court shall be considered binding on the states parties to the dispute. In the event that a party to a case fails to comply with the obligation imposed on it by the decision of the Court, the Security Council, at the request of the other party, “may, if it deems it necessary, make recommendations or decide to take measures to enforce the decision” (paragraph 2 of Art. 94 of the UN Charter).

In addition to judicial jurisdiction, the International Court of Justice also has advisory jurisdiction. According to Art. 96 of the UN Charter, the General Assembly or the Security Council may request advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice on any legal question. In addition, other UN organs and specialized agencies, which may at any time be authorized to do so by the General Assembly, may also seek advisory opinions from the Court on legal questions arising within the scope of their activities. At present, three principal organs of the UN, one subsidiary organ of the General Assembly, 19 specialized agencies of the United Nations and the IAEA (a total of 24 organs) can request advisory opinions from the Court.

On February 3, 1994, the Court delivered its judgment in the Territorial Dispute (Libya v. Chad) case, according to which the border between Libya and Chad is determined by the Treaty of Friendship and Good Neighborliness concluded on August 10, 1955 by France and Libya. In its Resolution 915 of May 4, 1994, the Security Council decided to establish the United Nations Aouzou Strip Monitoring Group (UNOGPA) to monitor the implementation of the agreement signed on April 4, 1994 between Libya and Chad, in which the parties pledged to abide by the decision of the International Court of Justice . The decision of the Security Council is the first example of the provision by the Security Council in accordance with Art. 94 of the UN Charter to assist the parties in complying with the decision of the Court.

In connection with the appeal in December 1994 by the UN General Assembly to the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons, the Court unanimously concluded on 8 July 1996 that neither in conventional nor in treaty international law does not contain any specific authorization for the threat or use of nuclear weapons, there is no comprehensive and general prohibition on such actions, and that the threat or use of force using nuclear weapons, which is contrary to the provisions of paragraph 4 of Art. 2 of the UN Charter and does not meet all the requirements provided for in Art. 51, illegal. The Court unanimously concluded that the threat or use of nuclear weapons must also comply with the requirements of international law applicable to armed conflicts, especially those enshrined in the principles and rules of international humanitarian law, as well as specific treaty obligations and other obligations that relate directly to nuclear weapons. In the September 2000 UN Millennium Declaration, world leaders declared their determination to strengthen the International Court of Justice in order to ensure justice and the rule of law in international affairs.

The Economic and Social Council of the United Nations (ECOSOC) consists of 54 members who are elected by the General Assembly for a term of three years in accordance with the procedure provided for by the Charter (Art. 61), with 18 members elected annually for a term of three years to replace those 18 members, a term of three years whose activities have expired. Decisions in ECOSOC are taken by a simple majority of those present and voting.

ECOSOC coordinates the economic and social activities of the UN and its 19 specialized agencies, as well as other institutions of the UN system. It serves as a central forum for discussing international economic and social issues of a global and cross-sectoral nature and for developing policy recommendations on these issues for states and for the UN system as a whole.

ECOSOC is responsible for convening numerous international conferences, preparing draft conventions on various issues of interstate cooperation for submission to the General Assembly, and negotiating with specialized agencies on agreements defining their relationship with the UN. The Council is empowered to harmonize the activities of the specialized agencies through consultation with them and to make recommendations to the agencies, as well as to the General Assembly and the members of the United Nations.

ECOSOC holds an organizational session in New York at the beginning of the year and a main session in the summer of each year, alternately in Geneva and New York.

With regard to states, the resolutions of the ECOSOC and the General Assembly on economic, monetary and financial issues are advisory in nature. However, resolutions addressed to subsidiary bodies, to specialized agencies, in a number of cases have a different quality, of course, depending on the provisions of the agreements of these agencies with the UN. Thus, the general principles of economic and technical cooperation can be of a binding nature and, as such, can serve as an important starting point in the current intensive process of norm-setting activity of states in the socio-economic, scientific, technical, and humanitarian fields.

During the year, the work of the Council is carried out in its subsidiary bodies, which meet regularly and report to the Council. Subsidiary bodies include five regional commissions based in Europe, Latin America, Africa, Asia and the Pacific and Western Asia. The subsidiary mechanism of ECOSOC includes four standing committees and a number of standing expert bodies.

In addition, ECOSOC works in close cooperation with such institutions as the UN Children's Fund, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the UN Development Program, the World Food Program, etc.

Guardian Council. It currently consists of five members (Russia, USA, England, France and China). The Council meets once a year in New York. Of the original 11 Trust Territories, all gained independence during the Council's work. In accordance with Resolution 956 of November 10, 1994, unanimously approved by the Security Council, the Trusteeship Agreement with respect to the last Trust Territory was terminated. At the suggestion of Malta, an item entitled "Review of the role of the Trusteeship Council" was included in the agenda of the 50th session of the General Assembly.

During the discussion of this issue, various proposals were made, including the abolition of the Trusteeship Council and its transformation into the Human Rights Council, the empowerment of it with the functions of the guardian and trustee of the common heritage of mankind and the protection of the environment.

The fate of the Trusteeship Council was not left without attention in the Report of the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change dated December 1, 2004, the authors of which proposed, without any justification, to exclude from the UN Charter the chapter dedicated to the Trusteeship Council. XIII.

The proposals put forward regarding the abolition of the Trusteeship Council or the possible assignment of some new functions to it seem unacceptable for a number of reasons. This would be a departure from the system of methods and forms of adaptation of the UN Charter to the changing conditions of world development, established in the practice of the UN and tested by more than half a century of experience, would lead to incitement of disputes and disagreements between states and would sow doubts about the enduring value of the main provisions of the UN Charter. It should also be taken into account that the Trusteeship Council has not yet exhausted the possibilities provided for in Art. 77 of the UN Charter, according to which territories voluntarily included in the trusteeship system by the states responsible for their administration may be transferred to the jurisdiction of the Council. This was confirmed in Resolution 2200/LXI of May 25, 1994 adopted by the Trusteeship Council, which, in particular, explicitly provides for the possibility of convening this body in the future. In accordance with this Resolution, the Trusteeship Council may be convened by its own decision, or by decision of the President, or at the request of a majority of the members, or at the request of the General Assembly or the Security Council. Therefore, at this stage, there are neither legal nor practical grounds for abolishing the Trusteeship Council, endowing it with any new functions and powers, i.e. it is not necessary to write off this one of the main organs of the UN.

United Nations Secretariat. One of the main organs of the UN is the Secretariat. It shall consist of the Secretary-General and such personnel as the Organization may require. It serves other UN bodies and carries out practical work to implement the programs of activities and decisions approved by these bodies, provides conference services to all the main and subsidiary bodies of the UN. The work of the Secretariat includes conducting peacekeeping operations under the authority of the Security Council, organizing and holding international conferences on issues of global importance (for example, the Conference on the Law of the Sea), compiling reviews of world economic and social trends and problems, preparing studies on issues such as disarmament, development, human rights. The functions of the Secretariat also include the interpretation and translation of speeches and documents and the distribution of documentation.

All staff of the UN Secretariat is divided into four categories: specialists, field service, general service, economic and technical service. The main part of the posts of specialists is subject to distribution among the Member States on the basis of the principle of equitable geographical representation, taking into account the size of the contribution to the UN budget and population.

There are two types of recruitment in the UN Secretariat: based on the conclusion of permanent (until retirement age) contracts and fixed-term (temporary) contracts. At present, about 60% of the staff of the Secretariat are on permanent contracts.

General Secretary. The head of the Secretariat and the chief administrative officer is the Secretary General, appointed by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council for a five-year term, after which he may be reappointed. The Secretary-General submits to the General Assembly an annual report on the work of the Organization, and also brings to the attention of the Security Council matters which, in his opinion, may threaten the maintenance of peace.

From January 2007, Ban Ki-moon (Republic of Korea) assumed the duties of Secretary General.

United Nations specialized agencies

The specialized agencies, bodies, programs and funds of the UN are an important part of the entire UN system. Their creation, operating procedure and legal status are expressly provided for by the UN Charter (Chapters IX and X). According to Art. 57 of the Charter, the specialized agencies are created on the basis of intergovernmental agreements and are vested with international responsibilities, broadly defined in their constituent acts, for the purpose of promoting the improvement of the standard of living; full employment of the population; creation of favorable conditions for economic and social progress and development; resolution of international problems in the areas of economic, social, health care; international cooperation in the field of culture and education; universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.

Thus, specialized institutions have a limited scope of activity, mainly related to responsibility in the economic, social, cultural, educational, health and similar fields. From Art. 57 of the UN Charter it directly follows that, for example, military organizations cannot become specialized agencies. This is why, in particular, such an important organization as the IAEA, which has a recognized authority on international nuclear energy issues, does not have the status of a specialized agency, although it is mentioned in many international documents together with specialized agencies. Within the meaning of Art. 57 can not be specialized agencies and numerous regional organizations.

An important purpose of specialized intergovernmental organizations, programs and funds is that they must continue in the XXI century. play the role of a kind of mediator in order to resolve differences between states that differ in their power, culture, size and interests, and serve as forums for expressing the views and approaches of states and defending the interests of all mankind.

The specialized organizations of the UN are:

International Labor Organization (ILO) - develops policies and programs aimed at improving working conditions and increasing employment, and sets international labor standards used by countries around the world;

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) - directs efforts to increase agricultural productivity and food security, as well as to improve the living conditions of the rural population;

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) - promotes the implementation of the goals of universal education, the development of culture, the preservation of the world's natural and cultural heritage, international scientific cooperation, ensuring freedom of the press and communication;

World Health Organization (WHO) - coordinates the implementation of programs aimed at solving health problems and achieving the highest possible level of health for all people. Works in areas such as immunization, health education and the supply of essential drugs;

The World Bank Group (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development - IBRD, International Development Association - IDA, International Finance Corporation - IFC, Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency - MIGA, International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes - ICSID) - provides loans and technical assistance to developing countries in to reduce poverty and promote sustainable economic growth;

International Monetary Fund (IMF) - promotes international monetary cooperation and financial stability and serves as a permanent forum for consultation, advice and assistance on financial matters;

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) - establishes the international standards necessary to ensure the safety, reliability and efficiency of air traffic, and acts as a coordinator of international cooperation in all areas related to civil aviation;

The Universal Postal Union (UPU) - establishes international standards for postal services, provides technical assistance and promotes cooperation in the field of postal services;

International Telecommunication Union (ITU) - promotes international cooperation to improve all types of telecommunications, coordinates the use of radio and television frequencies, promotes security measures and conducts research;

World Meteorological Organization (WMO) - encourages scientific research related to the study of the Earth's atmosphere and climate change, and promotes the worldwide exchange of meteorological data;

International Maritime Organization (IMO) - established on March 17, 1958. Since 1959, it has become a specialized agency of the UN. IMO members are 166 states, including Russia. The structure of the IMO consists of: the Assembly, the Council, the Maritime Safety Committee, the Legal Committee and the Committee for the Protection of the Marine Environment. Location - London (England);

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) - encourages international protection of intellectual property and promotes cooperation in matters relating to copyrights, trademarks, industrial designs and patents;

United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) - promotes the industrial development of developing countries through the provision of technical assistance and advisory services and training;

World Tourism Organization (WTO) - serves as a global forum for policy issues related to tourism and a source of practical experience in the field of tourism.

Regional organizations and sub-regional structures and their interaction with the UN

Regional and sub-regional organizations and structures are an important part of the global system of collective security provided for by the UN Charter. Ch. VIII of the UN Charter, which, although it does not give a clear definition of regional agreements and organizations, at the same time allows them to adjust their activities to the constantly changing situation in the world and, together with the UN, contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security.

The experience of more than half a century of UN cooperation with regional organizations shows that regional organizations have played and continue to play an increasingly active role in ensuring regional security, not only in the areas of preventive diplomacy, peacekeeping and confidence building, but also in terms of enforcement to the world.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) began its activities in 1972 as a multilateral forum for dialogue and negotiations. In 1975, the terms of reference of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) were fixed in the Final Act approved at the first summit in Helsinki.

At the CSCE summit in Budapest in December 1994, it was decided to rename the CSCE as of January 1, 1995 into the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). At present, although the OSCE Charter has not been developed, a rather ramified structure of the OSCE has developed, which consists of: a meeting of the heads of states and governments of the OSCE; Council of Ministers, convened once a year; Governing Council; Permanent Council; Forum for Security Cooperation (consists of representatives of the delegations of the participating States and meets weekly in Vienna); The OSCE Chairman-in-Office, who is entrusted with responsibility for the implementation of OSCE decisions (this post is held by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the participating State for one year; the chairman is assisted in the exercise of his functions by the previous and future chairmen, together forming a "troika"); OSCE Secretariat (the first OSCE Secretary General was appointed in June 1993); Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights based in Warsaw; the High Commissioner for National Minorities based in The Hague; Office for Freedom of the Media and OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. Currently, 55 states are members of the OSCE, including Russia. Location - Vienna (Austria).

The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was established in December 1991 and includes 12 countries, including Russia. In accordance with the Charter of the CIS adopted on January 22, 1993, the main goal of the Commonwealth is, among other things, cooperation in the political, economic, environmental, humanitarian, cultural and other fields. The main bodies of the CIS are: the Council of Heads of State; Council of Heads of Government; Council of Foreign Ministers; Economic Council; Economic Court; Council of Defense Ministers; Headquarters for the coordination of military cooperation between the CIS member states; Council of Commanders of the Border Troops; The Executive Committee of the CIS, which is a permanent executive, administrative and coordinating body headed by the Chairman - the Executive Secretary of the CIS, and the Inter-Parliamentary Assembly. The CIS is a regional organization within the meaning of Ch. VIII of the UN Charter and, like other regional organizations, has observer status in the UN General Assembly. Location - Minsk (Belarus).

On January 1, 2015, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) began to operate, which included Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Already on January 2, 2015, Armenia joined the EAEU. Kyrgyzstan is expected to join the union in May 2015.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was founded on August 8, 1967 in Bangkok. The main bodies of ASEAN are the meetings of heads of state and government, the meetings of foreign ministers (FMC), the Standing Committee and the Secretariat. Location - Jakarta (Indonesia).

The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) is an intergovernmental structure in the Asia-Pacific region, within which a set of issues related to strengthening security and stability in this region of the world is regularly discussed. The ARF was founded in 1994. The ARF holds its annual sessions at the level of the ministers of foreign affairs of the participating countries. Ministerial sessions are the highest body of the Forum, during which the ministers discuss the whole range of problems affecting the security of the participating countries and the region as a whole. From the first days of the existence of the ARF, Russia has been actively participating in the events held within the framework of the Forum.

The European Union (EU) is the largest political and economic integration association of 25 European countries.

The main directions of the EU's activity at the current stage are: moving from a common market to an economic and monetary union; implementation of expansion strategy; the formation of the foundations of a unified foreign and defense policy and the acquisition of a European defense identity; activation of regional policy in the Mediterranean, in the North of Europe, in Asia, Latin America, Africa; further harmonization of the social sphere, interaction in the field of justice and internal affairs. The system of general bodies and institutions of the EU includes: the European Council, the European Parliament (EP), the Council of the European Union, the Commission of the European Communities (CES) and the European Court of Justice. No final decision has been made regarding the EU headquarters, and meetings of its main bodies are held in Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was created on the basis of the Washington Treaty of April 4, 1949 as a defensive political and military alliance. At the moment, the Organization of the North Atlantic Alliance includes 26 states of Western, Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the USA and Canada.

The structure of NATO is an extensive network of political and military bodies, which include: the highest political body - the NATO Council, the Political Committee for Military Planning, the International Secretariat headed by the NATO Secretary General. Headquarters - Brussels (Belgium).

The African Union (until July 2000 it had the name "Organization of African Unity (OAU)") is a regional organization uniting 53 African states, which was established by decision of the Constituent Conference of the Heads of State and Government of African countries, held on May 22 - 25, 1963. in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia). By the end of the 20th century, the problem of reorganizing and increasing the effectiveness of the OAU and its adaptation to the new realities in the international situation, including those fundamental changes that had taken place on the African continent, was clearly overdue. Under these conditions, Libya officially put forward the idea of ​​transforming the OAU into the African Union, which was approved at the 4th Extraordinary Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the OAU member countries in Sirte in September 1999. In July 2000, at the OAU summit in Lome ( Togo), the Act on the establishment of the AU and the creation within its framework of an extensive system of organs was adopted. On July 8 - 10, 2002, the 39th session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the OAU member countries took place in Durban (South Africa), which became formally the founding summit of the AU. The headquarters of AS is located in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia).

The Organization of American States (OAS) was created on the basis of the Charter of the OAS, signed in Bogotá in 1948. 35 states are members of the OAS (Cuba's participation was suspended in 1962). The main organs of the OAS are the General Assembly, the Permanent Council and the General Secretariat. Since 1971, the institution of permanent observers under the OAS has been operating. Currently, the European Union and 42 states, including Russia, have this status. Location - Washington (USA).

The Arab League (LAS) is a voluntary association of sovereign Arab states created on the basis of the Arab League Pact, signed on March 22, 1945. The League's activities are based on its Charter, which entered into force on May 11, 1945. The League has its own representative offices or information bureaus in a number of countries, including since January 1990 in Russia. Location - Cairo (Egypt).

International non-governmental organizations and forms of their cooperation with the UN

Throughout the existence of the UN and the creation of other IMGOs, the number of non-governmental organizations (INGOs) has grown rapidly. Today there are about 40 thousand INGOs in the world dealing with economic, cultural, humanitarian and other issues.

For a long time it was not clear what constitutes a non-governmental organization. A more or less satisfactory and very general definition was only reached on 25 July 1996, when the following definition was included in ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31 "Consultative relations between the United Nations and non-governmental organizations": "Any such organization which is not established by any or by a governmental body or by intergovernmental agreement, shall be considered a non-governmental organization for the purposes of these events, including organizations that accept government-appointed members, provided that such membership does not interfere with the free expression of that organization." From this definition it follows that tens of thousands of non-governmental organizations around the world - from the local to the global level, engaged in issues such as sustainable development, environmental protection, human rights and the democratization of public life, can be considered as genuine NGOs. On the other hand, it follows from this definition that secret societies, closed clubs, terrorist organizations, drug syndicates with transnational connections, associations of persons involved in money laundering, illegal arms trafficking, trafficking in women and children and kidnapping cannot be considered NGOs. for ransom, and other elements and organizations of the so-called anti-civil society. It is not legitimate, from the point of view of the UN Charter, to identify INGOs with such powerful international economic complexes as transnational corporations.

Many IMGOs actively cooperate with INGOs in order to increase the efficiency of their work. The UN and its specialized agencies have very developed ties with INGOs. According to Art. 71 of the UN Charter, ECOSOC is authorized "to take appropriate measures for consultation with non-governmental organizations interested in matters within its competence. Such measures may be agreed with international organizations, if necessary with national organizations, after consultation with the interested member of the Organization." This article created a legal basis for developing mechanisms for cooperation between the UN and INGOs.

UN practice has developed criteria for determining those INGOs that can be granted consultative status in ECOSOC. First of all, the area of ​​activity of the INGO should coincide with the areas of competence of ECOSOC, as defined in Art. 62 of the UN Charter. Another necessary condition for obtaining consultative status is the compliance of INGO activities with the goals and principles of the UN, as well as the provision of assistance to the UN in its work and the dissemination of information about the activities of the UN. In addition, the INGO itself must have a representative character and a stable international reputation, representing a certain part of the population.

Of great importance is the provision of ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31 of July 25, 1996, according to which the granting, suspension and cancellation of consultative status, as well as the interpretation of norms and decisions on this issue, are the prerogative of member states, carried out through ECOSOC and its committee on INGOs.

ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31 provides for three categories of consultative status for INGOs.

1. General consultative status for organizations associated with most of the activities of ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies, which can satisfactorily demonstrate to ECOSOC that they can make a significant and permanent contribution to the achievement of the goals of the United Nations, and which are closely connected with the economic and social life of the inhabitants of the represented their districts and whose membership is broadly representative of the main sections of society in various regions of the world.

2. Special consultative status for organizations that have special competence in only a few areas of activity of ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies, or are specifically involved in these areas and are known internationally in those areas in which they have consultative status or seek it.

3. Other organizations not in general or special consultative status but which, in the opinion of ECOSOC or the UN Secretary-General, in consultation with ECOSOC or its NGO Committee, may from time to time make useful contributions to the work of ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies or other bodies of the United Nations, within their competence, are included in a list called the "registry".

By the end of the XX century. More than 2,000 INGOs have received consultative status with ECOSOC, including a number of Russian NGOs (the International Association of Peace Foundations, the Women's Union of Russia, the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Russia, the International Informatization Academy, the All-Russian Society of the Disabled, the Association for Assistance to Families with Disabled Children, the Russian United Nations Association, etc.).

Numerous INGOs have been especially active since the end of the Cold War. Many INGOs began to advocate for a revision of their role in the UN system, for the creation of an "Assembly of Peoples" in the UN as a parallel partner of the current UN General Assembly, for limiting the principle of state sovereignty, for the involvement of INGOs in all areas of UN activities, for the right of INGOs to participate on an equal basis with states in work of UN bodies and meetings and conferences held under its auspices. However, such plans are at odds with the criteria and procedures for the activities of INGOs provided for by the UN Charter.

In general, one cannot fail to recognize the positive impact of INGOs on the overall development of international relations, the norm-setting process taking place in the world, the formation of a collective security system at the global and regional levels, and on strengthening the role of the UN and other international interstate organizations in the 21st century.

The process of updating and adapting the UN and its Charter to the new world realities and changes

In its approach to the UN Charter, Russia proceeds from the fact that this most important international document is currently the only act whose provisions are binding on all existing states of the world. This document fully meets the needs of the development of international relations at the present stage, and its progressive democratic principles and goals remain relevant to this day.

In the practice of the UN, various forms and means of adapting the UN Charter to the changing conditions of world development have developed. One of these ways is the preparation, under the auspices of the UN, of international treaties and agreements that seem to "catch up" with the UN Charter and many of which are of key importance for the development of broad international cooperation (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1968, International Covenants on Human Rights of 1966 etc.). As UN Secretary-General Perez de Cuellar rightly pointed out, over the years of its existence, the UN has done more in the field of codification of international law than in the entire previous period of human history.

Among the proven ways and means of adapting the UN Charter to the new world realities are the development and adoption of declarations and resolutions of the General Assembly, specifying the general statutory principles and provisions and having great moral and political weight and practical significance. Although resolutions and declarations of this kind are not of a binding nature, nevertheless they sometimes have a decisive influence on the policy of states and on the positive resolution of major international problems.

Another way to "match" the provisions of the UN Charter with the changing conditions of the development of international relations is the adoption by the Security Council of decisions and statements that develop the provisions of the UN Charter in relation to specific situations and problems of international life. Considering that, in accordance with Art. 25 of the UN Charter, its members agree to obey the decisions of the Security Council and carry them out, its decisions acquire a certain normative significance. Such decisions include, for example, the adoption by the Security Council of Resolution 1373 of September 28, 2001, which is a kind of international set of norms and measures to combat terrorism that are binding on all states.

Undoubtedly, the resolutions adopted by the Security Council on various aspects of UN peacekeeping activities, the establishment of sanctions regimes against states that violated the provisions of the UN Charter, etc., had a special impact on the process of adapting the UN Charter to the changing conditions for the development of international relations.

Thus, it can be said that on the basis of the decisions of the Security Council, a process of evolutionary fine-tuning of the UN crisis mechanism is taking place, which is acquiring the features of a viable peacekeeping instrument to prevent and suppress future violations of international peace and security.

An important component of the evolutionary process of development and bringing the UN Charter in line with the emerging new needs for the normal functioning of the Organization is the achievement of generally acceptable agreements on an agreed "understanding" and "interpretation" of certain provisions of the UN Charter.

It is appropriate to recall that this unique international document contains a number of provisions that, for various reasons, have not been implemented or have not been fully implemented. Suffice it to recall Art. Art. 43 - 47 of the UN Charter, which provide for the placing at the disposal of the Security Council, at its request and in accordance with special agreements, the armed forces and the effective functioning of the Military Staff Committee (MSC) - a permanent subsidiary body of the Council, designed to assist and advise it on all issues relating to the military needs of the Security Council in the maintenance of international peace and security. These most important obligations of states under the UN Charter to create UN armed forces in order to protect peace, prevent war and suppress aggression were virtually forgotten during the Cold War.

Meanwhile, the end of the Cold War, the unprecedented growth in the number of UN peacekeeping operations, their assertive multicomponent and multifunctional nature, the emerging tilt of UN operations towards "peace enforcement", the emergence of a large number of new generation conflicts, including those related to interethnic, interfaith and other contradictions both between states and within them, inevitably lead many states to the conclusion that the most rational course of action in the current situation is to use the potential of the UN Charter and the mechanisms provided for by it, primarily the Security Council and its permanent subsidiary body - VSHK. At the same time, the MSC could, on an ongoing basis, engage in a comprehensive operational analysis of the military-political situation in conflict zones and prepare recommendations for the Security Council, including those related to the adoption of preventive measures, assessing the effectiveness of sanctions, forecasting possible scenarios, creating multilateral naval forces under the auspices of The UN is not only used to localize conflicts, establish a naval blockade and enforce sanctions, but also to combat piracy, international terrorism, and hostage-taking.

Thus, the problem of adaptation is not limited to the revision of the UN Charter and cannot be solved by changes in the text of the Charter alone. This is not a one-time act, but a multidimensional and timeless process that includes various forms and methods of creative development and transformation of the institutions and mechanisms of the Organization in relation to new realities.

Among them, in particular, is the method of natural obsolescence of certain provisions, the loss of their original meaning and meaning. The operation of this method makes it possible to avoid the application of the lengthy cumbersome procedure provided for by the UN Charter to introduce appropriate amendments to the UN Charter. For example, for a long time it has not been applied and cannot be applied in the future, paragraph 3 of Art. 109 of the Charter, providing for the possibility of adopting, before the 10th annual session of the General Assembly or at the 10th session itself, a decision to convene a General Conference to revise the UN Charter.

An analysis of the main forms and methods of adapting the UN Charter to the changing conditions of the evolution of international life clearly shows that the revision of the UN Charter is not the only way for the United Nations to gain new strength and capabilities so that it can keep pace with the times and successfully cope with the challenges imposed on it. more and more responsible and complex tasks. Moreover, any attempt to radically break the UN Charter is fraught in the current conditions with the appearance of an avalanche effect, which, if it grows, can destroy the entire Organization. It should also be borne in mind that attempts to revise the Charter in its main provisions may lead to incitement of disputes and disagreements between states, divert the attention of the Organization from solving urgent problems of our time, undermine the faith of peoples in the enduring value and universal applicability of the fundamental purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

In the conditions of the current turbulent changes, it would be imprudent to revise the structure and functions of the UN and its organs. The question of amending the UN Charter should be approached from a very cautious and balanced position, taking into account all possible negative consequences of such a step. The dynamics of international relations dictate the task of achieving a carefully calibrated and consensus-based adaptation of the Charter, expanding and clarifying the scope of its purposes and principles. To do this, it is necessary to find the right balance between reformist sentiments and the preservation of proven structures that have no alternative yet. Now it is important to fully realize the potential that the UN has, to improve the structure of the Organization on the basis of the UN Charter, to fill the forms and methods of its activity with new content.

FEDERAL FISHING AGENCY

KAMCHATKA STATE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

CORRESPONDENCE FACULTY

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMY AND MANAGEMENT

CONTROL WORK ON DISCIPLINE

"WORLD ECONOMY"

OPTION NUMBER 4

TOPIC:International organizations of general competence and their activities in the field of economic cooperation: Council of Europe; Commonwealth of Nations; League of Arab States; Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe - OSCE.

Performed Checked

Student of group 06AUs IO head

Distance form of education of the Department of Economics and Management

Miroshnichenko O.A. Eremina M.Yu.

record book code 061074-ZF

Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky

Introduction. page 3 - 5

Council of Europe. pages 6 - 12

Commonwealth of Nations. pp. 13 – 15

League of Arab States. pp. 15 – 18

Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe - OSCE

pp. 19 – 26

Bibliography.

Introduction.

In modern international relations, international organizations play a significant role as a form of cooperation between states and multilateral diplomacy.

Since the establishment of the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine in 1815, international organizations have been vested with their own competence and powers.

Modern international organizations are characterized by further expansion of their competence and complication of the structure.

Currently, there are more than 4 thousand international organizations, of which more than 300 are intergovernmental. At the center of them is the UN.

An interstate organization is characterized by the following features:

state membership;

existence of a constituent international treaty;

permanent bodies;

respect for the sovereignty of member states.

Taking into account these features, it can be stated that an international intergovernmental organization is an association of states established on the basis of an international treaty to achieve common goals, having permanent bodies and acting in the common interests of member states while respecting their sovereignty.

The main feature of non-governmental international organizations is that they were not created on the basis of an interstate agreement (for example, the Association of International Law, the League of Red Cross Societies, etc.).

According to the nature of membership, international organizations are divided into interstate and non-governmental. According to the circle of participants, international organizations are divided into universal (UN, its specialized agencies) and regional (Organization of African Unity, Organization of American States). International organizations are also subdivided into organizations of general competence (UN, OAU, OAS) and special (Universal Postal Union, International Labor Organization). Classification according to the nature of powers makes it possible to single out interstate and supranational organizations. The vast majority of international organizations belong to the first group. The goal of supranational organizations is integration. For example, the European Union. From the point of view of the procedure for joining them, organizations are divided into open (any state can become a member at its own discretion) and closed (admission with the consent of the founders).

International organizations are created by states. The process of creating an international organization takes place in three stages: the adoption of a constituent document, the creation of the material structure of the organization, and the convening of the main bodies.

The first step involves convening an international conference to develop and adopt the text of the treaty. Its name may be different, for example, statute (League of Nations), charter (UN, OAS, OAU), convention (UPU, WIPO).

The second stage involves the creation of the material structure of the organization. For these purposes, specially trained bodies are most often used, which prepare draft rules of procedure for future bodies of the organization, process the entire range of issues related to the creation of headquarters, etc.

The convening of the main organs completes the arrangements for the creation of an international organization.

Council of Europe.

It is an international regional organization uniting the countries of Europe. The Charter of the Council was signed in London on May 5, 1949, and entered into force on August 3, 1949. The Council of Europe was founded in 1949 and currently includes 41 states. The purpose of this organization is to achieve rapprochement between the participating States by promoting the expansion of democracy and the protection of human rights, as well as cooperation in matters of culture, education, health, youth, sports, law, information, environmental protection. The main bodies of the Council of Europe are located in Strasbourg (France).

The Council of Europe plays an important role in the development of common European legislation and, in particular, in addressing legal and ethical problems arising from scientific and technological progress. The activities of the Council of Europe are aimed at developing conventions and agreements, on the basis of which the unification and changes in the legislation of the member states are subsequently carried out. Conventions are the main elements of interstate legal cooperation that are binding on the states that have ratified them. Among the conventions related to the legal support of entrepreneurial activity is the convention on laundering, detection, seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of crime.

Twice (in 1993 and 1997) meetings of the heads of state and government of the countries of the Council of Europe were held. Within the framework of the Committee of Ministers, which is the highest body of the organization and meets twice a year as part of the foreign ministers of the member countries, the political aspects of cooperation in these areas are discussed and recommendations are adopted (on the basis of unanimity) to the governments of the member countries, as well as declarations and resolutions on international political issues related to the sphere of activity of the Council of Europe. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, recently created as an organ of the Council of Europe, aims to promote the development of local democracy. Several dozens of committees of experts organize intergovernmental cooperation in areas falling within the competence of the Council of Europe.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which is an advisory body of the Council of Europe, and in which parliamentarians of national legislative bodies (including from opposition parties) are represented, is very active. The Parliamentary Assembly is an advisory body and has no legislative powers. It consists of representatives of the parliaments of the member states of the Council of Europe. Each national delegation is formed in such a way that it represents the interests of various political circles in its country, including opposition parties. It is the main initiator of the activities carried out by the Council of Europe and holds its plenary meetings three times a year, adopting by majority vote recommendations to the Committee of Ministers and national governments, organizing parliamentary hearings, conferences, colloquia, forming various committees and subcommittees, study groups, etc. supervising the following economic and social areas:

economic and development issues;

agriculture and rural development;

science and technology;

social issues;

Environment.

Significant is the political role of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, who is elected by the Parliamentary Assembly, organizes the organization's daily work and speaks on its behalf, making diverse contacts in the international arena.

In all the main areas of its activity, the Council of Europe carries out numerous activities that contribute not only to the development of cooperation between member states, but also to the formation of some common guidelines for them in the organization of public life. The number of representatives from each country (from 2 to 18) depends on the size of its population. The Council of the Assembly consists of the Chairman and 17 deputies. Elections of the President of the Assembly are held every year. The Parliamentary Assembly holds its plenary sessions three times a year. It adopts by a majority of votes recommendations to the Committee of Ministers and the governments of the member states, which form the basis of specific areas of activity of the Council of Europe. The Assembly organizes conferences, colloquia, open parliamentary hearings, elects the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and judges of the European Court of Human Rights. In 1989, the Parliamentary Assembly established the status of a specially invited country to grant it to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe before their admission to full membership. This status is still retained by the Republic of Belarus.

The structure of the Council of Europe includes an administrative and technical secretariat headed by the Secretary General, who is elected for five years.

The international political confrontation that existed on the continent made it impossible for the socialist countries to participate in the Council of Europe. With the end of the Cold War, the activities of this organization were given a new impetus, prompting it to focus on issues of democratic transformation. As a result, even joining the Council of Europe became an additional incentive for their implementation. Thus, the states newly admitted to the Council of Europe had to undertake the obligation to sign the European Convention on Human Rights, which entered into force in 1953, and to accept the totality of its control mechanisms. The conditions for the accession of new members to the Council of Europe are also the existence of a democratic legal system and the holding of free, equal and general elections. It is also important that many issues of the formation of civil society in post-socialist countries have become the subject of attention within the framework of the Council of Europe. Among them are the problems of protecting national minorities, issues of local self-government.

The Council of Europe is an authoritative international organization, the mere participation in which serves as a kind of evidence for all member states of their compliance with the high standards of pluralistic democracy. Hence the possibility of influencing those countries that are members of the Council (or candidates for accession to the Council of Europe), where this or that problem arises on this basis. At the same time, this may raise fears of the countries concerned regarding unacceptable interference in their internal affairs. In other words, the activity of the Council of Europe often turns out to be inscribed in one or another international political context and is viewed by the participants primarily through the prism of their immediate foreign policy interests; Naturally, quite serious collisions can arise as a result. This happened more than once in practice, for example, in connection with the internal political situation in Turkey in Belarus, the problem of the rights of the Russian-speaking population in some Baltic countries, the separatist movement in Chechnya (Russia), when discussing the issue of Croatia joining the Council of Europe.

FEDERAL FISHING AGENCY

KAMCHATKA STATE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

CORRESPONDENCE FACULTY

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMY AND MANAGEMENT

CONTROL WORK ON DISCIPLINE

"WORLD ECONOMY"

OPTION NUMBER 4

TOPIC:International organizations of general competence and their activities in the field of economic cooperation: Council of Europe; Commonwealth of Nations; League of Arab States; Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe - OSCE.
Performed Checked

Student of group 06AUs IO head

Distance form of education of the Department of Economics and Management

Miroshnichenko O.A. Eremina M.Yu.

Code of the record book 061074-ZF

Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

1. 
   Introduction. page 3 - 5
2. 
   Council of Europe. pages 6 - 12
3. 
   Commonwealth of Nations. pp. 13 – 15
4. 
   League of Arab States. pp. 15 – 18
5. 
   Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe - OSCE

pp. 19 – 26

1. 
   Bibliography.

Introduction.

In modern international relations, international organizations play a significant role as a form of cooperation between states and multilateral diplomacy.

Since the establishment of the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine in 1815, international organizations have been vested with their own competence and authority.

Modern international organizations are characterized by further expansion of their competence and complication of the structure.

Currently, there are more than 4 thousand international organizations, of which more than 300 are intergovernmental. At the center of them is the UN.

An interstate organization is characterized by the following features:

• 
  state membership;
• 
  existence of a constituent international treaty;
• 
  permanent bodies;
• 
  respect for the sovereignty of member states.

Taking into account these features, it can be stated that an international intergovernmental organization is an association of states established on the basis of an international treaty to achieve common goals, having permanent bodies and acting in the common interests of member states while respecting their sovereignty.

The main feature of non-governmental international organizations is that they were not created on the basis of an interstate agreement (for example, the Association of International Law, the League of Red Cross Societies, etc.).

According to the nature of membership, international organizations are divided into interstate and non-governmental. According to the circle of participants, international organizations are divided into universal (UN, its specialized agencies) and regional (Organization of African Unity, Organization of American States). International organizations are also subdivided into organizations of general competence (UN, OAU, OAS) and special (Universal Postal Union, International Labor Organization). Classification according to the nature of powers makes it possible to single out interstate and supranational organizations. The vast majority of international organizations belong to the first group. The goal of supranational organizations is integration. For example, the European Union. From the point of view of the procedure for joining them, organizations are divided into open (any state can become a member at its own discretion) and closed (admission with the consent of the founders).

International organizations are created by states. The process of creating an international organization takes place in three stages: the adoption of a constituent document, the creation of the material structure of the organization, and the convening of the main bodies.

The first step involves convening an international conference to develop and adopt the text of the treaty. Its name may be different, for example, statute (League of Nations), charter (UN, OAS, OAU), convention (UPU, WIPO).

The second stage involves the creation of the material structure of the organization. For these purposes, specially trained bodies are most often used, which prepare draft rules of procedure for future bodies of the organization, process the entire range of issues related to the creation of headquarters, etc.

The convening of the main organs completes the arrangements for the creation of an international organization.

1. 
   Council of Europe.

It is an international regional organization uniting the countries of Europe. The Charter of the Council was signed in London on May 5, 1949, and entered into force on August 3, 1949. The Council of Europe was founded in 1949 and currently includes 41 states. The purpose of this organization is to achieve rapprochement between the participating States by promoting the expansion of democracy and the protection of human rights, as well as cooperation in matters of culture, education, health, youth, sports, law, information, environmental protection. The main bodies of the Council of Europe are located in Strasbourg (France).

The Council of Europe plays an important role in the development of common European legislation and, in particular, in addressing legal and ethical problems arising from scientific and technological progress. The activities of the Council of Europe are aimed at developing conventions and agreements, on the basis of which the unification and changes in the legislation of the member states are subsequently carried out. Conventions are the main elements of interstate legal cooperation that are binding on the states that have ratified them. Among the conventions related to the legal support of entrepreneurial activity is the convention on laundering, detection, seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of crime.

Twice (in 1993 and 1997) meetings of the heads of state and government of the countries of the Council of Europe were held. Within the framework of the Committee of Ministers, which is the highest body of the organization and meets twice a year as part of the foreign ministers of the member countries, the political aspects of cooperation in these areas are discussed and recommendations are adopted (on the basis of unanimity) to the governments of the member countries, as well as declarations and resolutions on international political issues related to the sphere of activity of the Council of Europe. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, recently created as an organ of the Council of Europe, aims to promote the development of local democracy. Several dozens of committees of experts organize intergovernmental cooperation in areas falling within the competence of the Council of Europe.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which is an advisory body of the Council of Europe, and in which parliamentarians of national legislative bodies (including from opposition parties) are represented, is very active. The Parliamentary Assembly is an advisory body and has no legislative powers. It consists of representatives of the parliaments of the member states of the Council of Europe. Each national delegation is formed in such a way that it represents the interests of various political circles in its country, including opposition parties. It is the main initiator of the activities carried out by the Council of Europe and holds its plenary meetings three times a year, adopting by majority vote recommendations to the Committee of Ministers and national governments, organizing parliamentary hearings, conferences, colloquia, forming various committees and subcommittees, study groups, etc. supervising the following economic and social areas:

• 
  economic and development issues;
• 
  agriculture and rural development;
• 
  science and technology;
• 
  social issues;
• 
  Environment.

Significant is the political role of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, who is elected by the Parliamentary Assembly, organizes the organization's daily work and speaks on its behalf, making diverse contacts in the international arena.

In all the main areas of its activity, the Council of Europe carries out numerous activities that contribute not only to the development of cooperation between member states, but also to the formation of some common guidelines for them in the organization of public life. The number of representatives from each country (from 2 to 18) depends on the size of its population. The Council of the Assembly consists of the Chairman and 17 deputies. Elections of the President of the Assembly are held every year. The Parliamentary Assembly holds its plenary sessions three times a year. It adopts by a majority of votes recommendations to the Committee of Ministers and the governments of the member states, which form the basis of specific areas of activity of the Council of Europe. The Assembly organizes conferences, colloquia, open parliamentary hearings, elects the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and judges of the European Court of Human Rights. In 1989, the Parliamentary Assembly established the status of a specially invited country to grant it to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe before their admission to full membership. This status is still retained by the Republic of Belarus.

The structure of the Council of Europe includes an administrative and technical secretariat headed by the Secretary General, who is elected for five years.

The international political confrontation that existed on the continent made it impossible for the socialist countries to participate in the Council of Europe. With the end of the Cold War, the activities of this organization were given a new impetus, prompting it to focus on issues of democratic transformation. As a result, even joining the Council of Europe became an additional incentive for their implementation. Thus, the states newly admitted to the Council of Europe had to undertake the obligation to sign the European Convention on Human Rights, which entered into force in 1953, and to accept the totality of its control mechanisms. The conditions for the accession of new members to the Council of Europe are also the existence of a democratic legal system and the holding of free, equal and general elections. It is also important that many issues of the formation of civil society in post-socialist countries have become the subject of attention within the framework of the Council of Europe. Among them are the problems of protecting national minorities, issues of local self-government.

The Council of Europe is an authoritative international organization, the mere participation in which serves as a kind of evidence for all member states of their compliance with the high standards of pluralistic democracy. Hence the possibility of influencing those countries that are members of the Council (or candidates for accession to the Council of Europe), where this or that problem arises on this basis. At the same time, this may raise fears of the countries concerned regarding unacceptable interference in their internal affairs. In other words, the activity of the Council of Europe often turns out to be inscribed in one or another international political context and is viewed by the participants primarily through the prism of their immediate foreign policy interests; Naturally, quite serious collisions can arise as a result. This happened more than once in practice, for example, in connection with the internal political situation in Turkey in Belarus, the problem of the rights of the Russian-speaking population in some Baltic countries, the separatist movement in Chechnya (Russia), when discussing the issue of Croatia joining the Council of Europe.

The European Commission on Human Rights operates within the Council of Europe. European Court of Human Rights, European Youth Centre. Permanent Conference of Local and Regional Authorities in Europe, Social Development Fund.

The Council of Europe develops and adopts pan-European conventions on various issues of cooperation. More than 145 such conventions have already been adopted. Some of them, such as the European Convention on Human Rights, are open only to member states of the Council of Europe, while others, such as the European Convention on Culture, are open to all European states.

The Pompidou Group, an interdisciplinary ministerial cooperation body (including 28 Member States), deals with the fight against drug addiction and illicit drug trafficking.

In the field of environment and regional planning, the Council of Europe has provided a number of normative acts aimed at protecting the environment in Europe and at developing integrated development and planning for the development of the territory.

The Convention on the Conservation of Wildlife and the Environment in Europe, known as the Berne Convention, covers all aspects of nature conservation. It entered into force in 1982.

The European Conference of Ministers Responsible for Regional Planning (CEMAT), convened regularly since 1970, aims to implement a regional planning policy that will ensure sustainable economic and social development and environmental protection in an enlarged Europe.

The European Charter for Regional Planning puts forward a global, functional and long-term concept of regional planning, which, along with others, sets goals: harmonious socio-economic development of regions; environmental protection and rational use of land.

In the social sphere, the Council of Europe aims to improve the level of social protection and promote employment, training and the protection of workers' rights. In 1997 Two recommendations were accepted:

• 
  on the organization, activities and role of public employment services;
• 
  for the development of small and medium enterprises.

Work is underway in the following areas:

• 
  initiatives to create jobs outside the mainstream labor market;
• 
  social and economic consequences of structural changes in the economy of European states.

The Social Development Fund, established in 1956 as the financial body of the Council of Europe "acts as a development bank", has taken on a social dimension in recent years. The Fund provides up to 40% of the total cost of investment loans to finance the following areas:

• 
  creation of jobs at small and medium-sized enterprises in economically disadvantaged areas;
• 
  for vocational training programs;
• 
  housing construction and creation of social infrastructures;
• 
  environmental protection: treatment facilities, waste processing;
• 
  modernization of rural areas - creation of basic infrastructures.

An important activity of the Council of Europe is the creation of a consumer health protection system. A system of control over the use of chemicals hazardous to the consumer in food production, as well as in medicines, cosmetics and their packaging is being developed.

1. 
   Commonwealth of Nations.

It is a voluntary association of independent sovereign states for the implementation of cooperation, consultations and mutual assistance. It is not based on a treaty, has no written constitutional act or charter. The relationship between member countries is defined in the 1931 Statute of Westminster. as relations of independent, equal and voluntarily united countries. The Declaration on the Principles of the Commonwealth, adopted in 1971, confirms the voluntary nature of the association into the Commonwealth of countries with a wide range of common interests: the preservation of international peace and order; equal rights for all citizens; strengthening international cooperation to ensure progress; closing gaps in countries' wealth levels; the right of citizens to participate in democratic political processes. Members of the Commonwealth - 53 countries.

The main activities are:

• 
  support for political and economic cooperation;
• 
  promoting the sustainable development of the economy of the member countries;
• 
  performance of consulting, representative and informational functions;
• 
  development and implementation of Commonwealth programs, organization and holding of conferences, seminars, workshops and other events on the following issues: economic and social development, technology, science, education, vocational training, human rights, democracy and others. The conferences adopt declarations on various problems of world politics and economics. So, in 1987. the Declaration on World Trade was adopted; in 1989 – Declaration on the environment; in 1991 – Declaration of Fundamental Rights and others.

The member states recognize the monarch of Great Britain as head of the Commonwealth.

Meetings of heads of government of the Commonwealth countries are held once every two years. They discuss issues of the international situation, regional problems, economic, social, cultural issues, programs of the Commonwealth. Decisions are made by consensus. Meetings of ministers of an advisory and consultative nature are held regularly with the participation of the ministers of finance, trade, education, health, labor, etc.

The Secretariat, established in 1965, is the central coordinating body and head of the intergovernmental structure. and headed by the general secretary. The Secretary-General and his three deputies (for political affairs; for economic and social affairs; for technical cooperation) are appointed by the heads of government. The secretariat develops programs and organizes conferences, seminars and various events. The Secretariat maintains links with almost 300 organizations, of which 200 are non-governmental. In its work, the Secretariat relies on the Commonwealth Fund, which promotes the expansion of links between professional groups in member countries; encourages the formation of associations; provides support for conferences and assistance in the organization of vocational training.

The activities of the secretariat are financed by five different budgets, funds:

• 
  financial resources allocated from the Commonwealth budget;
• 
  funds allocated from the budget of the Scientific Council of the Commonwealth;
• 
  through the Technical Cooperation Fund;
• 
  through the Commonwealth Youth Program;
• 
  funded by the Technology Management Advisory Group.

The Commonwealth Technical Cooperation Fund, established in 1971, is funded by voluntary contributions from governments. It is the main source of financial support for the Secretariat in its development work. The Fund provides assistance to member states, finances the services of experts, advisers, consultants, training of national personnel.

1. 
   Arab League.

The League of Arab States (LAS) was established in 1945 and currently has 22 member states. This is a voluntary association of sovereign Arab states, the purpose of which is to streamline relations and coordinate the policies and actions of member countries in various fields. The tasks of the League, in addition to organizing cooperation in the political, economic, social, financial, trade, cultural and other fields, include the settlement of disputes and conflicts between the participants, as well as taking measures against external aggression. But the main thing in the League's activity is politics, not economics, so it does not aim to create a free trade zone or a common market.

The supreme body of the League is the Council, which meets twice a year, in which each member state has one vote. , adopted unanimously, are binding on all countries, adopted by a majority of votes - only for those who voted "for" Since 1964, conferences of heads of state and government of the countries of the League have been regularly convened. Located in Cairo, the General Secretariat of the League ensures its current activities. Within the framework of the Arab League, there are over two dozen different structures - the Economic Council, the Joint Defense Council, the Administrative Tribunal, specialized organizations (dealing with issues of industrial development, agriculture, education, culture, science, telecommunications, crime control, etc.).

The Arab League has founded a number of institutions and specialized organizations, including those that assist in the development of entrepreneurship. This:

• 
  Arab Management Organization;
• 
  Arab Labor Organization;
• 
  Council for Arab Economic Unity;
• 
  Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development;
• 
  Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa;
• 
  Arab Organization for Agricultural Development;
• 
  Arab Organization for Standardization and Meteorology;
• 
  Arab Academy of Maritime Transport;
• 
  Arab Telecommunications Union;
• 
  Arab Monetary Fund;
• 
  Arab Institute of Petroleum.

The Arab League plays an important role in maintaining close relations between the Arab countries, coordinating their actions in connection with their common problems. For a long time, this organization has been the main tool for revealing "Arab solidarity" in the confrontation with Israel and at the same time a field for clashing the approaches of different Arab countries to the problem of a Middle East settlement. The League was also active during the Gulf War (1990-1991) and the inspection crisis in Iraq, suspected of producing weapons of mass destruction, and US threats to carry out aerial bombardments (1997-1998).

In order to resolve issues affecting the interests of the Arab countries, special committees are being formed within the framework of the Arab League (“committee of eight” on the situation in the territories occupied by Israel, “committee of three” on Lebanon, “committee of three” on the Middle East settlement, “committee of seven” on Libya, "committee on Jerusalem", "committee of seven" on Iraq, etc.).

The member states of the League are at the same time members of specialized agencies under the Arab League, such as: Arab Organization for Industrial Development and Extractive Industries, Arab Organization for Agricultural Development, Arab Atomic Energy Organization, Arab Labor Organization, Arab Postal Union, Arab Organization for Satellite Communications (ARABSAT) and etc.

The Arab League provides financial assistance to controlled institutions and organizations. The LAS also has a Council for Economic Affairs, including the ministers of economy and their representatives, who discuss and agree on the economic and social policies of the member countries.

The members of the Arab League are: Algeria, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Yemen, Qatar, Comoros, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, UAE, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Tunisia.

1. 
   Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

The forerunner of the OSCE as an international organization proper was the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, convened in 1973 on the initiative of the USSR to overcome tensions in relations between East and West. The United States, Canada and most European states with different political, economic and social systems participated in its work. The main goal of the participating countries was to strengthen international detente and stability on the European continent, develop mutual understanding between peoples and establish international private contacts in the field of culture. At the Budapest Summit of the CSCE in 1994, it was decided to rename the CSCE to the OSCE. Thus, the OSCE was a logical continuation of the CSCE. Therefore, the CSCE/OSCE is often written in journalism and scientific literature as two organically complementary phenomena in international relations.

The political significance of the OSCE lies primarily in its uniqueness compared to other international governmental organizations in Europe. It is practically the only European security organization directly involved in early warning, conflict resolution and post-crisis recovery in crisis regions, as well as preventive diplomacy, election observation, and environmental security in Europe.

The founding document of the CSCE/OSCE is the Helsinki Final Act, signed on August 1, 1975 by the USSR, the USA, Canada and 33 European states. This document was intended to consolidate the existing "status quo" on the European continent and continue further movement along the path of detente in relations between the West and the East. It contained the basic principles that determined the norms of mutual relations and cooperation of the participating countries and consisted of three sections (or three "baskets"), corresponding to the number of the main tasks of the Conference.

55 countries are members of the OSCE. A distinctive feature of the CSCE/OSCE is the universal nature of this organization: not only almost all European states, but also the USSR, the USA and Canada became its participants, and the main basic provisions of the Conference/Organization are aimed at ensuring security in Europe. It is quite obvious that the universal nature of the CSCE/OSCE was also ensured by procedural rules, namely: the principle of consensus in decision-making and the principle of equality of participating countries. The Final Act was also considered as documentary confirmation of the existing balance of power between the two military-political blocs ( NATO and ATS) and non-aligned countries.

After the collapse of the USSR and the end of the ideological confrontation between West and East, the former adversaries attempted to turn the CSCE (and then the OSCE) into a pan-European organization involved in maintaining security in Europe, resolving conflicts, developing new arms control agreements, as well as taking measures to strengthen military confidence. It was at this time that such key documents as the Charter of Paris for a New Europe, the Treaty on Conventional Arms in Europe (CFE Treaty), the Open Skies Treaty, documents on the “third generation of confidence and security building measures” and other agreements were developed and signed. Thus, the participating countries tried to "adjust" the OSCE to the new realities that have developed on the continent after the end of the Cold War.

NATO's eastward expansion and the increased level of cooperation between the North Atlantic Alliance and Russia have led to significant geopolitical changes, without, however, calling into question the role of the OSCE as the only pan-European international governmental organization. This organization is practically inseparable from the “key link” between NATO and the EU; it is often used by individual member countries to indirectly “sound out” their own national interests. For example, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Mikhail Gorbachev and Francois Mitterrand tried to oppose the OSCE to NATO. In fact, Paris and Moscow were not interested in further strengthening NATO, as they did not have sufficient organizational resources to influence the decision-making process within NATO, which is heavily influenced by the United States. Moreover, in 1994, French Prime Minister Edouard Balladur proposed making the CSCE/OSCE the main peacekeeping organization in resolving the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. Russia also supported this position and until the 1999 Istanbul summit tried to "promote" the OSCE as the main actor in the field of European security. However, criticism of Russian actions in Chechnya at the OSCE Istanbul Summit, as well as Moscow's increased cooperation with NATO, eventually led to a partial loss of Russian interest in the OSCE as an organization for maintaining security in Europe. At the beginning of the 21st century Russia pursues a pragmatic foreign policy and recognizes NATO as a key organization in the field of European security.

The Permanent Council of the OSCE consists of representatives of the participating States and, in fact, is the main executive body of the OSCE. The Council meets once a week at the Vienna Hofburg Congress Center to discuss the current state of affairs in the OSCE area of ​​territorial responsibility and take appropriate decisions. Like the Council, the Forum for Security Co-operation meets once a week in Vienna to discuss and decide on issues related to the military dimension of pan-European security. This applies in particular to the Confidence and Security Measures. The Forum also deals with issues related to new security challenges and conflict resolution in the OSCE area of ​​responsibility. In turn, the OSCE Economic Forum meets once a year in Prague to discuss economic and environmental issues affecting the security of the participating countries.

The Summit or OSCE Summit is a periodic meeting of the Heads of State or Government of OSCE member states. The main task of the summits is to determine the political guidelines and priorities for the development of the Organization at the highest level. Each meeting is preceded by a preparatory conference during which diplomats from the contracting parties oversee the implementation of key legal commitments made by the OSCE. They agree on the positions of the participants and prepare basic documents for the upcoming summit. During the existence of the OSCE, 6 summits were held. The most significant were:

the Helsinki Summit (1975), which ended with the signing of the Final Act, which is the founding document of the CSCE/OSCE;

The Paris Summit (1990), which culminated in the signing of the Charter for a New Europe and the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. The Charter confirmed the decisions of the OSCE Vienna Meeting (1986) and documented the priority of international law over national law, which further led to the strengthening of separatist movements in the USSR and Eastern Europe;

The Budapest Summit (1994) ended with a series of institutional reforms. The CSCE was turned into a permanent organization of the OSCE, the contracting parties paid additional attention to the problems of resolving the Karabakh conflict, etc.;

Istanbul Summit (1999), which ended with the signing of the European Security Charter. During the meeting, the Russian delegation was severely criticized because of Moscow's policy in Chechnya. Russia pledged to reduce its military presence in Transcaucasia and Transnistria.

The functions of the OSCE in the economic field are determined by the following provisions:

• 
  Strive to achieve sustainable economic development;
• 
  Strengthen contacts and practical cooperation on environmental protection;
• 
  Contribute to strengthening international peace and security, as well as ensuring fundamental human rights, economic and social progress and the well-being of all peoples.

The OSCE defines the rights of every citizen and among them establishes the right to own property and engage in entrepreneurial activities, and also indicates that everyone has the right to enjoy their economic, social and cultural rights. Among the ten principles that the OSCE adheres to, we single out two:

• 
  Cooperation between states;
• 
  Conscientious fulfillment of international legal obligations.

In practice, the OSCE is led by the Chairman-in-Office, who is re-elected every year and who is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of one of the countries that are members of the OSCE. The Chairman is responsible for the direct implementation of the decisions taken by the Ministerial Council and the Summits. He also carries out the overall coordination of the activities of the OSCE. The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly is composed of approximately 300 deputies representing the legislative branch of the OSCE participating States. The main purpose of the Assembly is parliamentary control and the involvement of European deputies in the activities of the Organization. The Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights is, in fact, the main division of the OSCE for monitoring the observance of human rights, basic democratic freedoms in the OSCE participating States. The Bureau is also called upon to assist in the development of demographic institutions in the "zone of responsibility" of the OSCE. In turn, the Representative on Freedom of the Media monitors the development of the situation with the media in the OSCE states and issues the first warning to the governments of participating States about violations of freedom of speech in their countries. In particular, such a warning was recently issued in 2002 to Turkmenistan.

Within the framework of the OSCE structures dealing with the observance of human rights, attention should be paid to the office of the High Commissioner on National Minorities (The Hague). This unit deals with the early warning of ethnic conflicts that threaten stability, peace on the continent and friendly relations between the participating States of the CSCE.

A special place in the organizational structure of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is occupied by Confidence and Security Building Measures. This program was created with the aim of easing tension and strengthening mutual trust on the European continent. Within its framework, such documents were signed as: a) CFE (Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe), which establishes quotas for conventional weapons in Europe for the contracting parties; The Open Skies Treaty, which allows the participating states to exercise mutual control over each other's actions, especially in the field of security. As part of the Confidence and Security Building Measures, the Chairman-in-Office appointed his personal representatives to oversee the implementation of a number of articles of the Dayton Peace Accords. The Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, located in Geneva, was established to resolve conflict situations and disputes between the participating States that have signed the OSCE Convention on Conciliation and Arbitration, which is internal to the OSCE.

In 2003 the budget of the OSCE amounted to 185.7 million euros and mainly consists of the membership dues of the participating states. About 84 per cent of all funds are spent on military missions and projects carried out by the Organization in the field.

About 370 employees work directly in the OSCE headquarters, and in various missions and projects of this organization - more than 1,000 international employees and 2,000 citizens of those countries on whose territory these missions are carried out.

One of the fundamentally important issues in the activities of the OSCE concerns the definition of its future role. There is general agreement that it will occupy one of the central places in the organization of international political life in Europe. However, in practice, due to the desire of a large group of countries in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the Baltic States to join NATO and the European Union, there is a tendency to marginalize the role of the OSCE. Attempts initiated by Russian diplomacy to raise the status and real significance of this organization are often seen only as aimed at setting it in opposition to NATO. The Charter for European Security being developed within the framework of the OSCE could neutralize this trend and contribute to a fuller use of the potential of this organization in the interests of strengthening stability on the continent.

^ BIBLIOGRAPHY.

1. 
   Gerchikova I.N. International economic organizations: regulation of world economic relations and entrepreneurial activity. M. Publishing house of JSC "Consultbanker", 2001.
2. 
   A. Kireev "International Economics", part II, Moscow, 1999
3. 
   World economy. Textbook / Ed. Bulatova A.S., M. ECONOMIST, 2004
4. 
   World economy. Textbook for universities / Ed. prof. I.P. Nikolaeva, ed.3, - M. UNITY-DANA, 2005
5. 
   Neshataeva T.N. International organizations and law. New trends in international legal regulation. - M., 1998
6. 
   Shrepler H.A. . Directory. - M., 1997.

The basic law of evolution says that there is nothing more fickle than success. Paradoxically, the most prosperous firms today become the most vulnerable tomorrow. A company whose core competencies, assets, distribution channels, and mentality are perfectly matched to meet existing needs and fend off competitive attacks risks losing ground as soon as consumer needs change.

The strategy determines the direction in which the company moves, performing its tasks. At the heart of the strategy are marketing and innovation solutions. The most important strategic decision is the choice of markets, on the development of which the main efforts will be directed. The second most important is the decision about positioning, about what competitive advantages will provide the company with a leading position in the market. Strategic decisions determine the core competencies required by the company, the set of its product lines, production and distribution infrastructure.

Usually the mission statement of diversified companies is formulated in rather general terms, which are often perceived as parental instructions, devoid of specific content and development incentives. Many business unit managers develop their own mission statements that describe in greater detail the unit's goals, perspectives, core employee competencies, and competitive advantages. Like the company's mission statement, they are aimed at instilling in employees a sense of pride in their work, involvement in common goals, as well as determining the direction of SBU development and developing internal priorities.

After the company's management has determined the strategic direction of development and the required core competencies, the company begins work on acquiring new skills.

Increasing competition has forced companies to focus on their core business. During the boom years of the 1960s and 1970s many companies were engaged in a wide variety of completely unrelated activities. Oil companies were interested in retail, tobacco companies in insurance, grocery companies were acquiring electronics businesses. However, as competition and economic conditions tightened, conglomerates were found to be experiencing a shortage of core competencies. Company leaders have realized that maintaining competitive advantage is determined by focusing on core competencies in a limited area of ​​the market and technology.

First, firms maximize returns on internal resources by focusing their investment and effort on exactly what the firm does best. Secondly, a well-developed core competency creates formidable barriers to existing and potential competitors seeking to penetrate the company's interests, thus maintaining and protecting the strategic advantages of occupied market share. Third, perhaps the greatest impact is achieved by the fact that the company gets the maximum benefit from investments, innovations and specific professional abilities of suppliers, which would be prohibitively expensive or even simply impossible to duplicate again on their own. Fourth, in a rapidly changing market and technology environment, collaborative strategies reduce risk, shorten cycle times, reduce required investment, and create the conditions for a more efficient response to customer needs.

The manager's understanding of reality can turn out to be erroneous not only as a result of changes that have taken place in the world around him, but also because the company has moved into a new field of activity where the game is played by different rules. When a company achieves significant success in a sector that does not provide opportunities for further growth, it often tries to apply its core competencies to other markets that at first glance seem very similar. At the same time, she does not notice the hidden differences of the new market, requiring from her a different approach than before.

The search for and mobilization of factors for increasing revenues is, to a certain extent, within the competence of the top management of the company, as well as its marketing service, the role of the financial service is reduced mainly to substantiating a reasonable pricing policy, evaluating the feasibility and economic efficiency of a new one, monitoring compliance with internal benchmarks in terms of profitability in relation to existing and new industries.

This model takes into account all three parameters for selecting a business - the attractiveness of the market, the competitiveness of the business, the degree of connection with the core competencies of the corporation. On fig. 5.1 shows an example of a business portfolio of one of the small Russian engineering plants. The main production - machine tools - is in the area of ​​low attractiveness, although it is included in the core competencies of the company and the strength of the company is great. Another type of production and, accordingly, another business - the production of auto-

A classic example of companies-integrated analyzers can be branches of the world's leading audit and consulting companies (PriceWaterhouseCooper, Deloitte And Touche and others) operating in the Russian market. The main competence of such companies is the availability of proven work algorithms and a high level of confidence on the part of Western investors. This is what allows companies to set prices for their services, on average, significantly higher than the prices of Russian audit and consulting firms.

If we consider the firm as a set of core competencies and focus on products and markets that are secondary or indirect to the main organizational units of the firm, then it is possible to go beyond the existing market of the firm. For example, Motorola was considered the market leader in wireless communication (core competency). Then, in addition to its existing products and markets (such as mobile phones and pagers), it explored other markets in search of opportunities to use its core competency - the global positioning of satellite receivers. Similarly, the search for "white space" between major organizational units has allowed Kodak to explore the gap between traditional chemical products (photographic film) and electronic imaging devices (photocopiers) and carve out a new market for photo storage and viewing. Accordingly, the concept of the company is to develop a process that allows you to view photos on TV.

The third favorable condition for creating your share of a new market is the possibility of realizing the company's existing strengths. For example, asio, using its core competencies in microelectronics, moved from making calculators to making watches. Marx and Spener's reputation as a reliable and trustworthy retailer has led it to create low-risk, medium-return investment trust funds.

Among the most important Danish companies, the concept of technology ratings has attracted interest from executives who have found such ratings to be an important tool that they lack. Although some financial institutions have rated technologically advanced firms using their own methodology, most often they have focused on technology rather than other aspects. Traditionally, financial institutions in the Netherlands served the market only for a small number of technologically advanced firms, which was stimulated by the government or was part of their core competence. And now, however, they have decided to change their approach to technologically advanced firms. Technology ratings have come to be seen by these financial institutions as adding value to the marketplace, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises.

White spots. These opportunities include creating new products or services and entering new markets in other ways using the company's core competencies. Such an opportunity for Sony was the Walkman audio player. The parent company outsourced its business capabilities to the tape recorder and headphone business units.

One of the ways to prolong the period of obtaining super profits from technological leadership is innovative competence. The more numerous and complex the technological parameters of a new product, the more difficult it is for competitors to determine the main characteristics with which to compete. And if we add to complex technologies a special internal culture of the company, which in itself generates innovations, it is almost impossible to imitate this product. In addition to this, innovators always seek to establish close relationships with suppliers and distributors, which enhances the competence and know-how of the company. The main competitive strategies for maximizing the profitability of innovation are discussed in detail in Chapter 3, Planning for Innovation.

By using other firms as providers of a variety of inputs, a company can benefit in a variety of ways. Given that the resources for any firm are limited, there is a need to collaborate with other organizations. Modern business requires a focus on core competencies where competitive advantage can be developed (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990). Companies need to invest their resources in the core, core business. Those areas of activity that are not key can be fairly easily delegated (or transferred within the framework of alliances) to external organizations that are able to produce the required product or service at the proper level. Even within the core competencies, there may be opportunities for cooperation where it is much more difficult to manage alone, or where the internal resources of the firm are simply not enough. An important advantage that firms should not easily ignore is being the first to market with a new or improved product or service. By concentrating on core competencies and collaborating with other organizations that specialize in other areas, a firm can simultaneously benefit from both economies of scale and economies of differentiation or product variety. Alliances and partnerships can free up scarce resources for core functions, allowing them to be performed more effectively by organizations that focus more on core competencies. It is important to understand that other companies that have already explored this area may be able to perform some functions more effectively. Duplication of work already done by others and the invention of the bicycle are unlikely to lead to significant growth of the company and increase its profitability. And, although in most cases such a conclusion may sound paradoxical, dependence on external organizations may well be the basis of firm independence (Lewis, 1995). Following or relying on the internal or organic growth of an organization is just one of the possible alternatives. A very diverse range of options is formed on the basis of general self-confidence, on the one hand, and on the basis of the trust of resources, on the other hand. Firms should consider all options and choose the best one that can help develop and maintain long-term competence in the areas of the company's core activities.

Competencies that are most likely to predict long-term career success for candidates that are difficult to develop through training or work experience. This includes core competencies, such as achievement or impact orientation and influencing, which are better made as a selection criterion than later developed. For example, a company hiring technical people might want to hire 10% of newcomers for the influence and influence competencies. By selecting some candidates who not only have good grades, but have a history of being a captain of a sports team or a leader of a student organization, the company will receive a reserve of technical employees with sufficient competencies to become managers in the future.

In addition, as we reviewed the information we received, we also reconsidered our initial assumptions about whether the particular case was indeed a serious corporate error that caused the company to fail. For example, many people say that when developing the original concept of the PC in 1979, IBM made a blunder by giving operating systems to Microsoft, and microprocessors to Intel. While there is no doubt that operating systems and microchips account for the lion's share of the industry's value, it seems unreasonable to us that IBM should have known this almost twenty-five years ago. Few of us, no matter who we are, have a magical crystal that allows us to see into the future. In addition, IBM's strategy of outsourcing the operating system and microprocessor - both areas outside of the hardware company's core competencies - reflects a desire to focus on the core business, ha-

The company's core competency - product innovation - laid the foundation for its resounding success. Rubbermaid's innovative spirit and ability to bring innovations to market quickly gave Rubbermaid a monopoly in many product categories, allowing its products to establish themselves before competitors could even copy their designs. By the end of the 1980s, Rubbermaid was producing 365 titles a year, a record that testified to a well-oiled new product development process that allowed the company to close the gap between the moment an idea was born and the appearance on the counter of its physical embodiment as much as possible. The main components of this process - close contact with consumers, a minimum of market testing and the creation of cross-functional teams - provided a deadly combination of speed and innovation.

Are Mergers and Acquisitions Your Core Competence Successful companies always have a set of core competencies that help them execute their chosen competitive strategies. Accordingly, M&A companies must develop the core competencies that will enable them to become effective acquirers. This problem cannot be solved if each acquisition is treated as an exceptional phenomenon. The experience gained by people involved in a particular transaction needs to be captured, shared with others, and complemented by knowledge gained from subsequent mergers and acquisitions, as iso, GE, Eaton and other recognized experts in this field do.

This concludes our story of negative transference. It is possible that many of our readers will be able to draw a parallel between these stories and what is happening in their own companies, for which, in fact, this whole conversation was started. Familiarity with negative transference helps us learn a serious lesson experience and intellectual potential are not always beneficial, moreover, in some cases, experience becomes a source of great trouble. Negative transference can exist in a wide variety of forms, sometimes masked by the immaculate logic of core competencies. Therefore, we should always remember how carefully we need to approach the definition of these competencies. In the next section, we will move from negative values ​​to zero, and consider

Despite solidarity with the Libyan side, expressed by eight members of OPEC and including practical proposals from the Andra, Iran, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates to provide it with immediate assistance by sending oil personnel, Saudi Arabia vetoed the draft resolution, stating that, due to its political nature, this issue is not included to the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. However, the most important real value, in our opinion, is still not Saudi demarches of this kind, but the preservation of the advantages for the shareholders of Aramco, which are enjoyed by the privileged counterparties of this Arabian monarchy. It seems that the access of outsider firms in one form or another to the development of its oil resources, the largest in the capitalist world, has not been significantly facilitated by the nationalization of the main concession. Having strong rears here and being largely protected from competition, the leading American energy concerns can afford a tougher raw material policy towards other newly-free states than the bulk of independent companies.

In the late 1990s a survey of the world's leading firms was conducted on the identification and development of core competencies1. CEOs and other executives from companies such as Boeing, Citicorp, Lockheed Martin, Okidata and others have attempted to articulate their core technology competencies, processes and key relationships and envision ways to strengthen and develop core competencies. The most popular way to maintain the reliability of processes was recognized as the creation of a corporate culture aimed at maintaining standards for the performance of operations, minimizing waste in every sense. The most popular method of strengthening external relations was recognized as the absorption of other firms and the use of the potential of relations accumulated by them. As for technological competencies, here the opinions of the leaders of the world's leading corporations are divided to the greatest extent. A significant part of the leaders pointed to the need to fully take into account all factors of the economic and technological environment when planning and developing technological know-how. However, almost the same proportion of managers emphasized the need to partially or completely ignore prevailing opinions about existing technological or operational constraints in the production and marketing of products.

Particular attention should be paid to the analysis of the third question. Here it can be pointed out that the CSD tends to become more and more a purely investment company, concentrating on investments in high technology areas. This is both a strength and a weakness of the chosen development model. The concentration of all investments in one, although very promising sector (high technology), makes the company vulnerable to all the perturbations of this sector. And, indeed, in March 2001 CSD Industries published its financial results