CIVIL DIMENSION OF SECURITY 258 CDS 05 E Original: English NAT O   Pa rl i a me n t a ry  As s e mb l y SUMMARY of the meeting of the Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security Faellessalen, Folketing, Copenhagen, Denmark Saturday 12 and Sunday 13 November 2005 International Secretariat November 2005

258 CDS 05 E i ATTENDANCE LIST Chairman Michael Clapham (United Kingdom) Vice-Persons Lucio Malan (Italy) Christine Boutin (France) General Rapporteur Vitalino Canas (Portugal) Rapporteur of the Sub-Committee Bert Middel (Netherlands) on Democratic Governance Special Rapporteur Lord Jopling (United Kingdom) President of the NATO PA Pierre Lellouche (France) Secretary General Simon Lunn Member Delegations Belgium Patrick Lansens Bulgaria Tchetin Kazak (elected chairman of the Sub-Committee on Democratic Governance during the meeting) Canada Jane Cordy Croatia Marin Jurjevic Velimir Plesa Czech Republic Vitezslav Vavrousek Estonia Tiit Matsulevits France Jean Michel Jean Puech Germany Uwe Beckmeyer Kurt Bodewig Monika Heubaum Robert Hochbaum Erwin Marschewski Kurt J. Rossmanith Iceland Ossur Skarphedinsson Italy Guido Brignone Antonio Mereu Latvia Dzintars Rasnacs Lithuania Alvydas Sadeckas Luxembourg Mark Angel Mark Spautz Netherlands Bart van Winsen Norway Erin Faldet Poland Jerzy Wenderlich Portugal Luiz Fagundes Duarte Antonio Ramos Preto Joaquim vasconcelos Da Ponte Romania Mihail Lupoi Marcu Tudor Slovakia Já n Kovarcik Slovenia Franc Kangler Spain Hilario Caballero

258 CDS 05 E ii Turkey Ahmet Faruk Ünsal Emin Bilgiç United Kingdom Bruce George Paul Keetch Peter Viggers United States John Boozman Dan Burton Ben Chandler Jo Ann Emerson Dennis Moore Mike Ross John Tanner Tom Udall Associate Delegations Armenia Aleksan Karapetyan Hranush Hakobyan Austria Katharina Pfeffer Finland Suvi-Anne Siimes Georgia David Gamkrelidze Nicholas Rurua Russian Federation Valery Bogomolov Oleg Tolkachev Shamil Zainalov Andrey Zhukov Switzerland Hermann Bürgi Barbara Haering the FYR of Macedonia* Esad Rahic Ukraine Stepan Khmara Oleg Zarubinskyi Mediterranean Associate Delegation Algeria Messaoud Chihoub Mostefa Khiar European Parliament Pawel Piskorski Teresa Riera Madurell Parliamentary Observers Japan Shintaro Ito Asahiko Mihara Masataka Suzuki Kazakhstan Rashit Akhmetov Toktarkhan Nurakhmetov Palestinian Legislative Council Mohammed Hegazi _______________ * Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name

258 CDS 05 E iii Speakers Jakob Scharf , Deputy National Commissioner of Police and Director of the National Police Department, Denmark Shirin Akiner, Lecturer in Central Asian Studies, Department of the Languages and Cultures of Near and Middle East, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) Ambassador Ján Kubiš , EU Special Representative for Central Asia, Council of the European Union Georgi Baramidze, State Minister on European and Euro-Atlantic Integration, Georgia Committee Secretary Emily Delfau International Secretariat Ruxandra Popa, Director Claire Watkins, Coordinator, Seda Ciftci, Research Assistant

258 CDS 05 E 1 I. Introductory Remarks 1. Chairman Michael Clapham (UK) introduced the agenda of the meeting. The draft agenda and the summary of the meeting of the Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security held in Ljubljana were adopted without comments. II. Presentation   on   Civil   Protection   and   Terrorism   Preparedness   in   Denmark,   by Jakob Scharf 2. In his presentation, Mr Scharf stressed the importance of efforts to improve counterterrorism preparedness  and  reinforce  international  co-operation.  He  also  addressed  the  need  for  proper co-ordination  of  civilian  and  military  structures  in  the  fight  against  terrorism,  insisting  that  the participation of the military should always come under strict political control. 3. Mr  Scharf  stated  that  major  challenges  for  Western  democracies  include  not  only  the identification  of  specific  terrorist  networks  and  activists,  but  also  the  ability  to  enforce  efficient counterterrorist    measures.    Therefore,    proactive    intelligence,    close    co-operation    between intelligence  and  other  law  enforcement  services,  as  well  as  broad  international  co-operation  on information and intelligence sharing are of vital importance. 4. Mr   Scharf   emphasised   that   emergency   preparedness   should   not   be   the   exclusive responsibility of a small number of public authorities, but rather a joint responsibility of the entire society.  Coherence  and  co-ordination,  both  at  the  operational  and  the  strategic  levels,  must  be ensured.  Denmark  for  example  had  set  up  a  joint  co-ordination  centre  with  all  stakeholders involved in an emergency in order to ensure swift decision-making. 5. Responding  to  a  question  by  Bert  Middel  (NL)  regarding  the  seemingly  limited  security in the Danish Parliament, Mr Scharf stated that the changing nature of the terrorist threat had made it very difficult to protect public areas in a traditional way. To respond to these new security threats, protection against terrorism had to rely on intelligence. 6. Lord  Jopling  (UK)  asked  about  specific  measures  taken  in  Denmark  to  prepare  for  a biological or radiological terrorist attack. Mr Scharf replied that although Denmark had significantly enhanced  its  CBRN  preparedness  capabilities,  it  was  impossible  to  prepare  for  every  possible scenario. 7. Responding to a question by Vitalino Canas (PT) on the co-ordination between intelligence and  law  enforcement  services  in  Denmark,  Mr  Scharf  explained  that  intelligence  services  in Denmark   are   part   of   the   police   department,   which   facilitates   national   co-ordination   and information-sharing. III. Presentations  on  EU  Policy  towards  Central  Asia by Ambassador Ján Kubiš, and on Political   and   Economic   Transformations   in   Kazakhstan   since   Independence,   by Shirin Akiner 8. Ambassador  Kubiš    noted  the  growing  interest  by  the  European  Union  towards  Central Asia, particularly in the wake of the September 11 attacks. Following the speedy recognition of the newly independent states, the Union established consultative mechanisms and signed Partnership and  Cooperation  Agreements  with  the  countries  in  the  region.  Recently,  it  also  created  the  new position of Special Representative for Central Asia. According to Mr Kubiš, this reflects the Union’s will  to  play  a  more  active  role  in  the  region  and  engage  in  a  more  co-ordinated  and  coherent

258 CDS 05 E 2 approach,   in   partnership   with   other   European   and   international   institutions.  He  stressed  in particular the importance of promoting good relations with Central Asian countries on the basis of common values and interests, while contributing to the strengthening of the rule of law, democracy and human rights. 9.   Ms  Akiner’s  presentation  focused  on  the  geo-strategic  importance  of  Kazakhstan  and  on major  political  developments  since  independence.  In  her  view,  there  were  three  main  concerns after  the  independence  of  Kazakhstan  in  1991.  The  first  main  issue  related  to  the  fate  of Kazakhstan’s  nuclear  arsenal.  Kazakhstan  responded  favourably  to  international  concerns  by agreeing in 1994 to either destroy all nuclear weapons or repatriate them to Russia in return for substantial  reward  packages.  On  the  second  issue,  the  exploitation  of  Kazakhstan’s  rich  energy resources,  the  country’s  leadership  managed  to  sign  very  profitable  contracts  with  Western-led consortiums  for  the  development  of  Kazakhstan’s  oil  fields.  Finally, a third uncertainty related to Kazakhstan’s  future  political  orientation.  This  was  decided  early  on  in  favour  of  a  pro-Western model,  but  the  country  maintained  strong  links  with  other  CIS  countries.  Kazakhstan  joined  the NATO  Partnership  for  Peace  program  in  1994,  while  also  participating  in  the  CIS  collective security arrangements. 10.     Addressing  the  second  point  of  her  presentation  on  political  developments  in  Kazakhstan since  independence,  Ms  Akiner  briefly  described  what  she  called  the  four  layers  of  power  in Kazakhstan, i.e. President Nazarbayev, his family, oligarchs, and opposition groups. In her view, President Nazarbayev has a remarkable political sense and managed to establish himself as a key figure in the international arena, while building strong support at home. His family, composed of three daughters and three son-in-laws, does not work as a unified body, and some characters play a more significant role than others. Oligarchs represent another very strong political and financial force  in  favour  of  the  regime.  However,  should  they  withdraw  their  support  to  Nazarbayev, Ms Akiner  claimed that it would be difficult for the President to stay in power. Finally, opposition groups include some young and Moscow-educated figures, several of which received support from Western powers. 11.   Regarding   the   presidential   elections   planned   for   December,   Ms   Akiner   claimed   that Kazakhstan   had   made   significant   progress   in   reforming   its   electoral   processes.   Unless international criticism was well founded, it would not have much impact. 12.     Bruce  George  (UK)  underlined  the  importance  of  Central  Asian  countries,  while  drawing attention  to  Kazakhstan’s  incomplete  implementation  of  democratic  standards.  He  expressed strong  doubts  regarding  the  transparency  and  fairness  of  upcoming  elections  and  called  upon international observers to play their part seriously and professionally. Kazakhstan should be aware of  the  potential  consequences  of  its  breaking  its  commitment  to  hold  free  and  fair  elections, particularly in terms of its bid for the chairmanship of the OSCE in 2009. 13.     Mr  Clapham  stressed  that  achieving  value  neutrality  is  important,  although  one’s  values necessarily influence one’s assessments and judgements. 14.     Mr  Canas  enquired  about  the  governability  of  the  political  system  in  Afghanistan  after  the recent   parliamentary   elections.   He   also   asked   about   the   impact   of   the   re-election   of President Nazarbayev  on  the  democratic  process  in  Kazakhstan.  Mr  Kubis  replied  that  if  the elections  in  Afghanistan  were  deemed  fair,  it  would  encourage  President  Karzai  in  his  reform projects. As for Kazakhstan, elections were a major step in the process of gradual democratisation of   the   country.   Ms   Akiner   argued   however   that   unless   something   extraordinary   happens, President Nazarbayev  would  be  re-elected.  The  consequence  would  be  political  stability  and continuity in the limited reforms already engaged by President Nazarbayev.

258 CDS 05 E 3 15.     Responding to a question from Mr Clapham about prospects for EU-China co-operation on Kazakhstan, Mr Kubis insisted that, although co-operation was desirable, China and the EU were also competitors in the region. Ms Akiner described China as the rising star of the global economy. China had also been investing very large amounts in Central Asia. 16.     Stepan  Khmara  (UA)  asked  whether,  given  the  picture  described  by  Ms  Akiner  regarding the layers of power, the development of civil society in Kazakhstan was still possible. Ms Akiner acknowledged that it was very difficult to predict today what form of civil society would prevail in Kazakhstan. However, Kazakhstanis were getting increasingly aware of and concerned about their rights  and  freedoms,  albeit  not  necessarily  following  Western  models.  Kazakhstanis  should  be able to consider various alternatives and choose which one best suits their own traditional identity. 17.     Toktarkhan Nurakhmetov (KZ) acknowledged that Ms Akiner’s assessment of the situation in  his  country  was  correct.  He  also  agreed  that  oligarchs  were  powerful,  whereas  there  was  no constructive opposition, but rather young figures hungry for power. He assured the Committee that Kazakhstan would have free and transparent elections in December. However, he cautioned that changing the leader halfway through a major reform process would be unwise.   IV. Consideration of the draft General Report on NATO and Kazakhstan [165 CDS 05 E] by Vitalino Canas (Portugal), General Rapporteur 18.     The  General  Rapporteur  introduced  the  report,  which  underlines  major  challenges  and developments in Kazakhstan since independence. He insisted that the report reached a balanced conclusion.  Relations  between  Kazakhstan  and  NATO  were  part  of  a  dynamic  process,  fed  by both Kazakhstan’s transition and NATO’s transformation.  The report called upon Kazakhstan to demonstrate that it can play the role to which it aspires of a model for the region. 19.     Rashit Akhmetov (KZ) claimed that the report is biased in its assessment of Kazakhstan’s democratic  structures  and  uses  second-hand  and  unverified  data.  He  objected  in  particular  to paragraph 27, which concludes that the human rights situation in Kazakhstan is deteriorating. He acknowledged that corruption was a major challenge, but underlined recent measures adopted by the  authorities  to  combat  corruption.  Mr  Akhmetov  finally  asked  for  allegations  regarding  the president and his family to be taken out from the report. 20.     Mr  Canas  replied  that  the  report  did  not  only  contain  critical  aspects,  but  that,  on  the contrary, the concluding remarks were very encouraging. He insisted that the report was based on reliable and neutral information. 21.     Lord  Jopling  suggested  several  corrections  to  the  report  to  emphasize  lagging  democratic reforms,  pervasive  corruption,  as  well  as  Kazakhstan’s  worries  on  China’s  encroachment  in  its internal  affairs.  He  also  requested  a  correction  in  paragraph  22  regarding  the  final  number  of registered candidates for the presidential election. 22.     Ahmet Faruk Ünsal   (TR) suggested the replacement of all references to the Xinjiang region by “Xinjiang-Uighur Autonomous Region”. In paragraph 70, he argued that “international Islamic extremist organisations” should be replaced by “extremists claiming an affiliation with Islam”. Finally, he supported the addition of a sentence in the concluding remarks balancing Kazakhstan’s progress and shortcomings in the implementation of democratic standards. 23.     Ossur Skarphedinsson (IS) also expressed concerns about violations of human rights and press freedom, as well as the repression of opposition groups.

258 CDS 05 E 4 24.     Tchetin Kazak (BG) stressed that the report provided an accurate and balanced picture of Kazakhstan’s situation. It encouraged the country to fully comply with international standards and underlined why and how Kazakhstan can be an important partner for both NATO and the EU. 25. The draft General Report was adopted unanimously, with the changes agreed by the General Rapporteur. V. Consideration  of  the  draft  Special  Report  on  Chemical,  Biological,  Radiological  or Nuclear (CBRN) Detection: A Technological Overview [167 CDS 05 E and 186 CDS 05 E] , by Lord Jopling, United Kingdom, Special Rapporteur 26.     Lord Jopling briefly introduced the report, stating that it stresses the importance of an early and  prompt  reaction  against  CBRN  agents.  The  report  identifies  various  forms  of  CBRN  threats and examines available techniques, focusing largely on the US and UK responses. The purpose of the report was to raise awareness of currently available techniques, while underlining that none of these are perfect and totally comprehensive. 27.     Jo  Ann  Emerson  (US)  thanked  Lord  Jopling  for  his  presentation  and  announced  that  her delegation would submit some changes in writing. 28. The draft Special Report was adopted unanimously. VI. Presentation on Reform Processes in Georgia, Two Years after the Rose Revolution, by   Giorgi   Baramidze,   State   Minister   on   European   and   Euro-Atlantic   Integration, Georgia. 29.     Mr Baramidze opened his intervention by stating Georgia’s strong commitment to becoming a  full-fledged  member  of  the  European  Union  and  NATO.  Following  the  Rose  Revolution,  the Georgian government had set as priorities for the country the establishment of a democratic state, the fight against corruption and the revival of the economy. Mr Baramidze highlighted recent steps taken by the Georgian government in favour of the peaceful resolution of the conflicts in Abkhazia and  South  Ossetia.  He  called  upon  the  international  community  to  start  a  new  dialogue  with Russia,  which,  in  his  view,  still  played  an  unconstructive  role  by  providing  military  and  financial support  to  separatist  forces.  The  Georgian  government  was  promoting  a  “win-win”  solution, including broad autonomy for the two regions, as well as essential social, cultural and economic guarantees. 30.     Regarding  the  issue  of  NATO  and  EU  membership,  Mr  Baramidze  acknowledged  that although EU integration was a long-term prospect, NATO integration could be achieved relatively soon.  In  that  sense,  NATO  would  take  a  historic  decision  by  granting  Georgia  and  Ukraine Membership  Action  Plans  in  2008.  Mr  Baramidze  pleaded  for  a  joint  decision  on  Georgia  and Ukraine. Leaving out Georgia would unleash very negative dynamics in the region. 31.     Mr  Middel  asked  for  additional  information  on  three  issues.  He  first  enquired  about  which resources  were  used  to  finance  the  Georgian  government’s  anti-corruption  measures.  He  then raised concern about the potential risk that President Saakashvili would be tempted to use his high popularity  rates  –  about  90%  -  to  introduce  a  strong  presidential  regime  in  Georgia.  Finally, Mr Middel asked about current efforts in Georgia to define the rights of religious minorities. 32.     On the first question, Mr Baramidze replied that the fight against corruption had produced its own revenues, since the great amounts that were embezzled by corrupt officials in the past were

258 CDS 05 E 5 now re-injected in the economy. As a result of increased incomes and tax revenues, the state had tripled its budget within a year. Private foundations and governments also provided Georgia with some  financial  assistance.  Mr  Baramidze  argued  that  President  Saakashvili’s  scores  were  only due to the enthusiasm of the Georgian people for his election and ambitious reform programmes. Georgia  was  considering  a  decentralisation  of  power  rather  than  a  strengthening  of  the  centre. Local elections to be held next year would reinforce the powers granted to local authorities. Finally, regarding the protection of minorities, Mr Baramidze pointed out that Georgia had ratified the main international conventions, thereby ensuring equal rights for every citizen and a culture based on tolerance. VII. Brief Presentation by Michael Clapham on The Monitoring of Parliamentary Elections in Azerbaijan 33.     Mr Clapham briefly presented the NATO PA’s participation in an election observation mission to  Azerbaijan  and  shared  his  observations  regarding  the  pre-election  situation,  the  co-ordination between  international  organisations  participating  in  the  joint  observation  mission,  as  well  as  the conduct  of  the  elections.    He  also  presented  the  common  findings  and  conclusions  of  the international election observation mission on the election process. 34.     Azerbaijan’s  Ambassador  to  NATO, Kamil  Khasiyev,  argued  that  these  elections  were  a clear  departure  from  previous  ones.  Several  presidential  executive  orders  had  introduced  new measures to improve the electoral process, which was monitored very closely from the start. He also  underlined  that  his  government  was  investigating  the  allegations  of  voting  irregularities  and had already dismissed 2 regional governors and 4 elected officials. 35.     Mr George argued that the way the November parliamentary elections were conducted was bad, although certainly better than previous presidential elections, which were truly appalling. This was all the more distressing, since, given the weakness of the opposition, President Aliyev could have  won  even  without  cheating.  Mr  George  warned  that,  if  Azerbaijan  continued  to  run  shady elections, it would never be taken seriously by the international community. VIII.    Consideration  of  the  draft  Report  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  Democratic  Governance, Minorities   in   the   South   Caucasus:   Factor   of   Instability?   [166   CDSDG   05   E],   by Bert Middel, Netherlands, Rapporteur 36.     The  Rapporteur  briefly  introduced the context and rationale for a report on the situation of ethnic and religious minorities in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. The situation of minorities was indicative of many other challenges facing the region, including democratic, economic and social transition, the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the issue of unresolved conflicts. The report addressed all these issues and provided a balanced assessment of the three countries’ efforts to integrate and protect their minority populations. 37.     Mr Middel also acknowledged receipt of written comments from the Azerbaijani delegation, who was unable to attend the session due to the recent parliamentary elections in the country. He insisted that some of these comments had been taken into account in the latest draft of the report. 38.     Nicholas  Rurua  (GE)  argued  that  data  used  in  several  portions  of  the  report  needed  an update. He suggested modifications in paragraphs 16, 19, 21, 24, 29 and 43, to remove excessive statements and take into account recent developments in Georgia following the Rose Revolution, which brought about a radical shift in policy in many areas, including the protection of minorities.

258 CDS 05 E 6 39.     Mr Ünsal suggested that the proble  ms of Meskhetian Turks should be emphasised. He also argued that the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh should be referred to as a case of occupation, not conflict.  Finally,  he  requested  that  the  reference  to  the  “Armenian  genocide”  be  put  in quotation marks or replaced by “so-called genocide.” 40.     Hranush  Hakobyan  (AM)  objected  to  the  inclusion  within  the  report  of  the  problem  of Nagorno-Karabakh  under  the  title  of  minorities  and  requested  modifications  in  paragraphs  44 (address the real origins of the conflict), 45 (replace “occupy” by “control”), 46 (clarify that Armenia does  not  consider  the  conflict  over),  49  (insist  on  the  destabilising  effect  of  Azerbaijan’s  war rhetoric), 51 (balance the statement by explaining that Armenian refugees from Nagorno-Karabakh were   also   unable   to  participate  in  land  privatisation),  55  (remove  the  excessive  statement regarding  exclusive  ethnic  identity  and  suspicion  of  outsiders  among  the  Armenian  minority  of Samtskhe-Javakheti), 59 (acknowledge Armenia’s opposition to the Kars-Akhalkalaki railroad), 93 (distinguish Armenia’s situation from that of the other countries of the South Caucasus in terms of ratification of relevant treaties). 41.     Lord   Jopling   thanked   the   Rapporteur   for   improving   the   report   and   suggested   minor modifications in paragraphs 16 (replace “paralysed by the fear of” by “wary of”), 22 and 93 (update the report following Georgia’s ratification of the Council of Europe Framework Convention). 42.     The  draft  Report  was  unanimously  adopted  with  the  amendments  agreed  to  by  the Rapporteur. 43.     Shintaro  Ito (JP) stressed that the democratisation and stability of the South Caucasus is crucial.  He  said  that  his  country  has  been  co-operating  with  the  countries  in  the  region  and supplied  refugees  with  humanitarian  aid.  He  asked  how  Japan  could  make  its  assistance  more effective. IX. Consideration of the draft Resolution on The Protection and Integration of Minorities as a Contribution to Stability in the South Caucasus [197 CDS 05 E], by Bert Middel, Netherlands, Rapporteur of the Sub-Committee on Democratic Governance 44.     The Rapporteur presented the principles underlying the resolution, which are strongly related to the findings and conclusions of the report. 45.     Mr  Clapham  presented  the  amendments  that  had  been  introduced  by  members  of  the Committee. He suggested new language to take into account amendments number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 10, which were all found acceptable and approved by the Rapporteur and the Committee. Amendments 7 and 9 were withdrawn.   46.     Mr  Clapham  then  asked  the  Committee  to  accept  the  Resolution  as  amended.  The draft Resolution  was  unanimously  adopted  as  amended.  Mr  Clapham  thanked  all  delegations  for their  goodwill  and  the  good  spirit  of  the  discussion.  He  commented  that  accepting  this  type  of resolutions is crucial in building hope and confidence. 47.     Lord Jopling expressed his gratitude to the Chairman and thanked him for working so hard to find a common ground among the delegates.

258 CDS 05 E 7 X. Tentative Summary of the Future Activities of the Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security and of the Sub-Committee on Democratic Governance 48.     The preliminary working programme of the Committee was adopted as follows: Report General Report Sub-Committee on Democratic Governance Special    Report    on Civil Protection Rapporteur Vitalino CANAS Bert MIDDEL Lord JOPLING Preliminary title of the reports Bosnia, 10 Years After Dayton Regional   Co-operation in the Black Sea Region NATO and Civil Protection Visits - Bosnia-Herzegovina - The Hague (Netherlands) -  Georgia  /  Armenia  / Azerbaijan - Ukraine Time of the visit End  of  February  /  Beginning of March 2006 - South Caucasus: beginning of June 2006 (joint visit with DCS) -   Ukraine:   September 2006    (joint    visit    with ESC) XI. Elections 49.     All   Committee   and   Sub-committee   officers   eligible   for   re-election   were   re-elected. Tchetin Kazak  (Bulgaria)  was  elected  as  the  Chairman  for  the  Sub-Committee  on  Democratic Governance to replace Jon Lilletun (Norway). 50.     Jane Cordy (Canada) was elected member of the Ukraine-NATO Interparliamentary Council to replace Jon Lilletun (Norway) and Lucio Malan (Italy) was elected as alternate member. ____________