OSCEs Parlamentariske Forsamling 2014-15 (1. samling)
OSCE Alm.del Bilag 23
Offentligt
1531224_0001.png
AS (15) RP 2 E
Original: English
REPORT
FOR THE GENERAL COMMITTEE ON
ECONOMIC AFFAIRS, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY
AND ENVIRONMENT
Recalling the Spirit of Helsinki
RAPPORTEUR
Ms. Marietta Tidei
Italy
HELSINKI, 5 – 9 JULY 2015
 OSCE, Alm.del - 2014-15 (1. samling) - Bilag 23: Praktik og procedurer i forbindelse med den årlige session i Helsingfors fra 6. til 10. juli 2015
1531224_0002.png
REPORT FOR THE GENERAL COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AFFAIRS,
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT
Rapporteur: Ms. Marietta Tidei (Italy)
Introduction
On the 40
th
anniversary of the Helsinki Final Act, which led to the establishment of our
Organization in 1975 (the CSCE, later to become the OSCE), it is worthwhile casting our mind
back to the reasons that led 35 nations to declare a reciprocal commitment to security and co-
operation. Today the OSCE numbers 57 countries. It has evolved as history as evolved, reflecting
the transformations that have intervened over the years, and proving that the road taken back then
was indeed the right path.
Forty years ago in Helsinki, when the interconnected dimensions of security were divided up into
the OSCE’s three conventional spheres (or baskets), a certain emphasis was given to economic co-
operation. In 1975, the OSCE’s founders understood that:
“The growing world-wide economic
interdependence calls for increasing common and effective efforts towards the solution of major
world economic problems such as food, energy, commodities, monetary and financial problems,
and therefore emphasizes the need for promoting stable and equitable international economic
relations”
(excerpt from the Helsinki Final Act preamble to the section on economic co-operation).
All too often, the sphere of economic co-operation has been considered worthy of marginal
attention compared with the two other spheres of political security and human rights. In actual fact,
a close analysis shows that it is precisely in this second sphere that the spirit of Helsinki has, over
the last four decades, succeeded in achieving tangible and stable results, on occasion foreshadowing
the scenarios pursued by our Organization’s political sphere.
There can be no doubt that the economic dimension encompasses several areas of undeniable
strategic importance, first and foremost economic co-operation between States – something on
which the Helsinki Final Act places great emphasis. In the spirit of Helsinki, economic co-operation
has served to drive co-operation in the political sphere in pursuit of shared security objectives.
Today, economic co-operation is a reality amongst all of our participating States; it exists even
where nations do not constructively work together at the political level. Although economic co-
operation as a whole has been one of the OSCE’s successes and strengths, there is still much to do
in order to achieve increasingly equitable and stable economic development: economic
development that responds to new challenges and caters to new types of co-operation through the
modern global market.
The economic downturn that began in late 2008, and which ever since has been devastating many
countries’ economies, has once again demonstrated how the deep currents of economic relations
directly impact the global geopolitical balance. Precisely for these reasons, implementation of the
programme in the second sphere is still, 40 years after it was formulated, one of the OSCE’s key
goals. It goes without saying that the significance of co-operation in the economic, environmental
and cultural realms must be updated to take into account the present-day agenda. It must be
reiterated that excessive rigidity and austerity are not demonstrating themselves to be appropriate
for the economic challenges of our millennium. Indeed, such measures run the risk of further
depressing the drive to produce, particularly for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs),
negating the primary macroeconomic goal of revitalizing the market in order to counter the
1
AS15RP2E
 OSCE, Alm.del - 2014-15 (1. samling) - Bilag 23: Praktik og procedurer i forbindelse med den årlige session i Helsingfors fra 6. til 10. juli 2015
1531224_0003.png
downturn. More than anything else, the downturn has affected the poorer classes. Given this fact,
budget consolidation must not eschew a healthy strategy for growth, social cohesion and investment
in science and technology, all elements vital to improving people’s living conditions. The OSCE
must play a role in prompting national governments to distance themselves from austerity-based
policies and instead leverage policy to boost investment; without this, healthy, balanced economic
co-operation is impossible. One way to achieve this is to strengthen measures against international
corruption and money laundering: illegal economic activities that deprive the public purse of
considerable resources which could, on the contrary, be used for the common good of all citizens.
As is the case with austerity and the economic downturn, we should bear in mind both the need for
continuity and the need for innovation in the spirit of Helsinki by undertaking an in-depth review of
the various points enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act and assessing what new challenges each one
entails forty years later.
A - Food and Water Security
Back in 1975, the Helsinki Final Act farsightedly perceived food security to be one of the world’s
most important economic issues, one that requires “increased
and effective efforts to resolve”.
A
recent OSCE PA Annual Session looked into this very topic and considered it not just to be a
primarily economic issue but a question that lies at the very heart of what the Helsinki Final Act
defines as the
globality and indivisibility of security.
The concept was reiterated by Rapporteur
Roger Williams in his 2014 (Baku) Report to the Second Committee, and above all in the 2009
(Vilnius) Report to the First Committee, which was drafted by Riccardo Migliori, and focused
specifically on the topic of food security.
What primarily threatens food security is not only the lack of food, but also the lack of water, a
resource not available indefinitely. The lack of water and its uneven distribution among various
layers of the population is one of the largest and most unacceptable injustices in our current world.
According to many analysts, future wars will be fought not because of oil, but because of water.
Food is a fundamental right acknowledged by the international community and codified under
Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Many political upheavals and episodes of
violence have been triggered by crises associated directly with food security. One recent example
was the Arab Spring uprising, particularly in Tunisia, where popular protest was set off in part by a
rise in the price of grain. It is clear that appropriate and balanced management of food resources
fosters conflict prevention, which is one of the main (silent) ways in which the OSCE acts, helping
to tackle emerging security-related challenges.
For world population growth to be sustainable and malnutrition be defeated, a two-pronged
approach to the issue is required: the first is to frame “food security” as a cornerstone of
international stability and as a key factor of geopolitics; the second is to identify new technological
solutions and new ways of living. Mirroring this global, innovation-led approach, this year sees a
major event in Milan: Expo 2015, whose theme is “Feeding the Planet, Energy for Life.” Expo
Milano 2015 is an ideal opportunity to discuss potential solutions to the contradictions from which
our world suffers: on one hand, people are still going hungry (in the two-year period 2010-2012
approximately 870 million people were under-nourished), while at the same time people are dying
from health problems associated with poor diet and excessive food consumption.
Every year, approximately 1.3 billion tons of food are wasted. Striking the right balance between
resource availability and consumption is possible through informed political decision-making,
sustainable lifestyles and the adoption of cutting-edge technologies. One such initiative is the Milan
Protocol, which has already received backing from a number of organizations: the protocol was
2
AS15RP2E
 OSCE, Alm.del - 2014-15 (1. samling) - Bilag 23: Praktik og procedurer i forbindelse med den årlige session i Helsingfors fra 6. til 10. juli 2015
1531224_0004.png
conceived to stimulate renewed efforts by all nations to ensure the development of sustainable
agriculture and combat food waste. The OSCE can play a lead role as a facilitator and promoter of
initiatives along all of these paths. When it comes to food, some nations have better track records;
these nations can work together with others to help introduce healthier lifestyles and eating: for
example, what is known as the “zero food miles” movement, or purchasing groups (people who
club together to buy certified food direct from local producers). These are all healthy, bottom-up
reactions from civil society that should be publicized and promoted in order to raise the greatest
possible awareness that we can eat healthily and remain environmentally friendly at the same time.
Water is the number one food security and safety risk factor, because water is becoming an
increasingly key geostrategic resource. It is no coincidence that one of the UN’s millennium goals
at the start of the century was to halve the percentage of people in the world who do not have secure
access to sources of drinking water and basic health services. Like other major international
organizations, the OSCE should permanently add the issue of water to its agenda and consider it as
a must-have element of security and social stability. Today, a shortage of water is a problem on all
continents. It is estimated that around one-fifth of the world’s population lives in areas subject to
water scarcity; as many as one out of every four people on the planet are afflicted by economically-
caused water poverty. Given current economic and demographic trends, these figures are destined
to become much more critical, particularly as far too much water is wasted, and no adequate
sustainable water resource usage programmes exist. It is estimated that in a decade’s time
somewhere between half and two-thirds of the world’s population will be subject to what is known
as “water stress.”
Water-related issues link in to food security in two different ways: water is an indispensable
resource, and at least 70 per cent of the water we consume is used for irrigation to feed the world’s
population. According to current demographic trends, the world population will reach 8 billion
people in 2025. It will not be possible to feed all of these people without a decisive improvement in
how irrigation is managed around the globe. We must therefore appropriately develop and upgrade
irrigation techniques, conserve water resources and ensure that these resources do not dry up (on the
contrary, we must promote the recycling of water for agriculture), renew drinking water delivery
infrastructure, and protect water from any form of pollution. To fight water poverty around the
globe will require setting aside funds for long-term investments and ratifying nationally and
internationally adequate policies. This is a target that we cannot afford to miss; it affects each and
every one of us. As the Pope said on World Water Day (promoted by the United Nations on 22
March), “Water is a common good par excellence... the most essential element for life, and
humanity’s future depends on our ability to care for it and share it.”
B - Energy Security
The international energy scenario is currently beset by a number of imbalances. Critical issues
above all include imbalances between producer and consumer countries, not to mention an
imbalance in the distribution of energy resources. If these critical issues are not appropriately
governed, circumstances may be exacerbated and insecurity maximized. This risk applies in
particular to the OSCE area and the Mediterranean basin. Taking our inspiration from the Helsinki
Final Act, we may identify four fields of action for intervention in order to mitigate energy
imbalances: energy supply, power flows, generation sources and energy savings.
The first of these aspects encompasses energy supply and associated issues at political level.
Several times in recent years, energy supply has been used as a weapon to wield political pressure;
this has included OSCE participating States as well. Clearly, this kind of attitude is not sustainable
as part of a co-operative approach. Being in possession of raw materials cannot be used as a tool of
3
AS15RP2E
 OSCE, Alm.del - 2014-15 (1. samling) - Bilag 23: Praktik og procedurer i forbindelse med den årlige session i Helsingfors fra 6. til 10. juli 2015
1531224_0005.png
power, and yet raw material producers require reassurances about the value of their assets, which
cannot be allowed to suffer wild, unfettered market fluctuations.
The question of energy supply leads directly into issues associated with energy transmission. It is
common knowledge that energy provision is not equitable around the globe. The OSCE area,
however, includes some parts of the world that are richer in hydrocarbon deposits (Central Asia and
the Caspian region). This gives our Organization enormous potential for managing and routing
power flows. However, to achieve this requires the right initiatives to stabilize power resource
flows. Co-operation in this sector is particularly indispensable to properly rationalize the entire
energy distribution system.
Last February in the three communications that make up the so-called “Energy Union” package, the
European Commission itself identified regional co-operation as one of the key factors for securing
the European energy system. In order to reach a fully integrated European energy market, the
Commission based its proposals acknowledging the excessive fragmentation of the European
energy market, characterized by insufficient investments, excessive concentration and weak
competition. There can be no rational economic/energy co-operation without the democratic
standards envisaged under the Helsinki Final Act. It is precisely this link that makes the process of
democracy-building crucial in the Central Asian nations that have a direct impact on a balanced
distribution of energy flows. Power transmission routes are the most important factor in achieving a
rational distribution of energy resources. The OSCE could be more involved in energy corridors and
all of the infrastructure that they entail. For example, greater attention can be focused on the TAP
Project, the gas pipeline from Azerbaijan to southern Italy: this is a vital supply line to South
Eastern Europe and the Balkans, areas that have always been essential to the OSCE’s security
architecture. Construction of this gas pipeline would make it possible to reduce energy dependency
in these areas, and transform the Mediterranean into a gas hub for central and southern Europe.
Another important issue to resolve in order to ensure energy security is to differentiate among
generation sources. Energy independence has always been a topic of key importance across the
OSCE area. Diversifying energy sources fosters sustainability and environmental balance. Once
again, as envisaged in the Helsinki Final Act, the regions of the planet with the largest deposits of
energy resources – such as Central Asia and the southern shore of the Mediterranean – have a
fundamental role to play within the framework of an open and balanced energy market; these are
geographical and geopolitical areas that belong to the OSCE and its traditional area of influence.
Energy-saving may be last, but it is by no means least, as far as security is concerned, both in terms
of reducing the quantities of power we consume and adopting energy-efficient sources of
generation. A significant amount of the power we consume in our everyday lives is not exploited to
its full potential. Above all others, the topic of energy-saving is about enhancing and upgrading
electricity grids to reduce the loss of power as heat. This entails fostering scientific research and
technological experimentation into forms of electricity transmission that boast high levels of energy
efficiency (savings), as established under the European Council’s 24 October 2014 “Climate and
Energy Policy Framework.” These are all public policies that can benefit from a strong co-
operation-led relationship among OSCE nations.
C - Research into New Sources of Energy
The Helsinki Final Act explicitly refers to joint research into new sources of energy, above all the
development of new technologies for the use of nuclear energy. Forty years on, after a string of
environmental problems caused by nuclear power stations, the attitude towards this source of
energy is one of greater prudence. And yet, as we are well aware, hydrocarbons are responsible for
4
AS15RP2E
 OSCE, Alm.del - 2014-15 (1. samling) - Bilag 23: Praktik og procedurer i forbindelse med den årlige session i Helsingfors fra 6. til 10. juli 2015
1531224_0006.png
significant environmental problems too. Moreover, the fossil fuel market underpins inter-State
economic equilibrium. For example, many potential motives for conflict may be ascribed to
fluctuations in oil prices and vulnerabilities affecting the supply system of a country or group of
countries. For this reason, over the coming decades we should foster a broader energy market, one
that is less dependent on certain geographical areas.
It is consequently essential to invest in new sources of energy. Additional development of
renewables is necessary to rebalance the mix of energy sources. It should further be highlighted that
the enormous potential represented by the green economy is of vital importance to energy
efficiency and security, sustainable development, new job creation and, more generally, achieving
Millennium Development Goals that specifically envisage environmental sustainability as a target
to be reached by 2020.
D - The Environment
The Fifth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report (COP 20 Lima, December
2014) decries the fact that greenhouse gas emissions are still rising and pose a very serious risk
through a global increase in temperatures. It is a scientific certainty that climate change is
underway, as are the negative effects of greenhouse gas emissions like
ocean warming
and
glacial
melt.
The starting point for managing climate change can only be global measures to bring down
emissions. Having said that, every citizen and every State must do their bit.
The consensus-based Lima Conference adopted the
Lima Call for Climate Action,
a document that
sets guidelines for a final agreement on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions for signature at
COP 21 in Paris this coming December. This is set to be the most important agreement on the
environment since the Kyoto Protocol (1997) and will serve as a roadmap for protecting the
environment up to 2020. We must hope that in the months leading up to the Paris meeting, signs of
goodwill will emerge towards a common approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Any future agreement will be based on a consensus on INDSCs (Intended Nationally Determined
Contributions: contributions individual countries commit to in order to achieve the climate targets).
Countries are due to quantify their commitments by the end of Q1 2015. The OSCE Parliamentary
Assembly can raise awareness among member country parliaments and governments so that they
ratify global agreements on reducing emissions and adopt COP-compliant provisions. It should be
highlighted that we can draw on the OECD’s strategy for green growth, a package of guidelines and
strategies based on the direct relationship between sustainable development and economic growth.
E - Economic Co-operation
Against the backdrop of the Cold War and potential military conflict, the Helsinki Final Act gave
broad scope to economic and industrial co-operation between nations. This approach remains valid
even in our more multipolar world. What modest improvements in the global economy we have
seen are piecemeal; the recovery is fragile and even imperceptible for broad swathes of the
population. The main cause of the crisis was the collapse of major financial institutions as a result
of poor management. The OSCE must lobby States to adopt regulations that limit risk-based
speculation, while allowing financial institutions to provide capital for investments that spur the
recovery. Economic co-operation is vital to this purpose. The crisis in Ukraine has prompted a
number of nations to adopt economic sanctions against Russia, in turn prompting Russia to adopt
counter-sanctions. Above and beyond the political reasons why certain nations adopted these
sanctions, the result has been to imperil economic recovery in Europe and worldwide, leading to a
situation that is out of sync with the “spirit of Helsinki”. Both Russia – which is the target of the
5
AS15RP2E
 OSCE, Alm.del - 2014-15 (1. samling) - Bilag 23: Praktik og procedurer i forbindelse med den årlige session i Helsingfors fra 6. til 10. juli 2015
sanctions – and the countries that have imposed the sanctions are acting outside the template
established by the OSCE in Helsinki in 1975. The dysfunctional mechanism of sanctions not only
damages the target, it also harms the people who apply them: this is especially true of economies in
countries where, for over a decade now, the business world has cultivated excellent trade and
commercial relations with Russia, triggering an uneconomic spiral that directly affects stability.
Lastly, we wish to suggest that the OSCE use the Helsinki +40 process to strengthen co-operation
with its Mediterranean partners, acting as a mediator for initiatives deployed by these nations to
promote growth and attract investment. The Mediterranean aspect of economic co-operation was
highlighted in the Helsinki Final Act which extended dialogue and co-operation to “all
Mediterranean States, whether or not they participate in the OSCE.” Given the current challenges
affecting this area on the OSCE’s borders, we should strengthen co-operation between Southern
European States and partners in Northern Africa in order to identify shared strategies to manage
migratory flows, increase the benefits, minimize potential negative repercussions, and ensure that
tragedies like the ones we have witnessed in recent years, in which thousands of migrants have lost
their lives, never happen again.
And finally, if the OSCE proves to be incapable of looking beyond its borders, it will find it
impossible to tackle the economic challenge of China: in 2015, China is set to become the world’s
largest international investor, earmarking €110 billion for foreign countries around the globe.
Chinese investments have grown tenfold over the last decade, and no longer solely cover the
traditional export market for low-cost products. Chinese companies and financial systems are today
part of modern economic reality, first and foremost in technology, the high-tech market, credit and
finance and a large number of infrastructure projects and services in many OSCE countries. This is
one reason why China’s economic ascent should not be viewed as a threat but as a major
opportunity we should seize in order to involve a new partner in building a common scenario of
prosperity and security.
6
AS15RP2E