Transatlantic Security
Back to the main
page on Transatlantic Security
Conflict Prevention and Crisis Management
Civilian Crisis Management
Stepping Up to the Plate:
Can Europe Score With Crisis Management?
Washington, D.C., October 23, 2001
Participants
-
Ulrich Fischer, advisor on human rights and humanitarian
aid to the German Green Party
-
Jan Hoekema, Dutch parliamentarian
with the Democrats 66 Party
-
Andreas Körner, advisor to the German Green
Party
-
Anibal Villalba, major in the Spanish Army and
professor at the National Defense Studies Center in Madrid
-
Julie Smith (moderator), program officer with
the German Marshall Fund of the United States
Summary
The theme of the first roundtable discussion was whether
European leaders are motivated to fully develop civilian crisis
management (CCM). Speakers at the event agreed that CCM was
not a burning issue for the European public, and this makes
it more difficult to place the topic on the policy-making
agenda of politicians. As Andreas Körner acknowledged,
however, the issue has gained much more saliency in the past
decade. Panelists recognized the recent progress made by the
European Union (EU) and the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and how this progress demonstrates
that leaders do have the political will to support crisis
management projects.
Leaders are realizing the importance of CCM capabilities,
and are looking for ways to contribute to the endeavor. Jan
Hoekema mentioned how European parliamentarians have contributed
and should continue to contribute to crisis management policy-making
by offering their political expertise. For example, European
parliamentarians have tried to help political leaders in Albania
and the Ivory Coast cope with conflict in their countries,
including a parliamentary stalemate between government and
opposition parties (Albania). Various mechanisms exist to
deal with these challenges, including national and multinational
initiatives, and the use of assemblies and groups such as
the Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA, an international
network of action-oriented MPs). Körner discussed the
German Green Party's interest in strengthening civilian capabilities
and how the party has initiated programs to develop civilian
response units. The German government also is interested in
funding police officers for missions abroad.
The panelists noted the challenges Europe faces in developing
sound crisis management. Anibal Villalba pointed to the concern
among European leaders about duplication of CCM structures.
With the European Union, the OSCE, the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) and the United Nations (U.N.) all playing
roles in crisis management, European leaders must proceed
carefully so they do not waste scarce resources on crisis
management mechanisms that serve the same function but result
in overkill. Mr. Hoekema observed that the instruments for
crisis management were and will be increasingly diversified.
In the past, the military often was seen as one of the few
instruments available. Now police, administrative, legal and
other non-military means (next to diplomacy) are part of this
increasing diversification, and the new European Security
and Defense Policy is shaping-up according to this.
The recent crisis in Afghanistan is keeping Europe aware
of the demands of conflict on inter-state relations. Ulrich
Fischer reviewed the years of crisis in Afghanistan and how
outside military intervention has frequently worsened conflict
in the country. In particular, he pointed to the Soviet intervention
in Afghanistan during the 1980s. Weapons flowing from the
Soviet Union and the United States to Afghanistan helped to
fuel the Afghan civil war. Americans and Europeans alike will
need to become sensitive to the legacy of their countries'
role in Afghanistan, and let Afghans take the lead in rebuilding
their country.
In sum, European leaders want to carry crisis management
projects forward. CCM is not on the top of any political agenda,
however, because of a lack of public interest which may stem
from the less glamorous quality of CCM compared to military
projects. This means CCM will not face a period where thousands
of people instantaneously become motivated to form civilian
crisis intervention units to serve in Africa, Asia, Latin
America, or in Southeast Europe. Moreover, the challenge crisis
management poses may appear overwhelming for some, which could
weaken the will of those who might otherwise support the concept
in theory. For those who do want to continue devising new
ways of managing crises, the choice is for them to develop
frameworks for implementing crisis management.
Back to Civilian Crisis Management
Back to Trans-atlantic
Security Home Page
|
