Main characteristics of regional organizations:

ü spatial unity of the member states, their placement within a more or less integral geographical region;

ü spatial limitation of the goals, objectives and actions of member states.

In addition to regional MMPOs, in the modern world there are a large number of subregional organizations of general and special competence. When creating such MMPOs, their founders are guided not by the interests of geographical regions, but by the principle of specific interests.

League of Arab States (LAS). Any independent Arab state can become a member of the League. Members of the Arab League are the non-Arab states of Somalia and Djibouti, which brings the structure of the League closer to subregional international international organizations. The goals of the Arab League are cooperation between member states, coordination of their political actions, ensuring their independence and sovereignty.

Organization of African Unity (OAU). Any independent and sovereign African state (about 50 members) can be a member of the OAU. The main goals are to condemn politically motivated murders and subversion; commitment to the complete liberation of African states; absolute non-alignment with any military blocs.

Organization of American States (OAS). OAS members include more than 30 states of Latin America and the Caribbean, the USA and Canada.

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Members: Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Myanmar (Burma), Laos, Indonesia, Kampuchea. The goals are to create a region of peace, freedom and neutrality; cooperation between states; establishment of a free trade zone.

Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). A subregional organization of general competence - all Muslim states located in different regions can be members of the OIC. Muslim minorities in non-Muslim countries have the right to send representatives to the OIC as observers.

Over 50 states are members of the OIC. The goals of the OIC are to strengthen Muslim solidarity; unification of Muslim peoples; assistance to the people of Palestine; rapprochement of political positions of Muslim countries.

European Union - created in 1957 on the basis of the Treaty of Rome bringing together the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM) and the European economic community(EEC). The Maastricht Agreements (1992) completed the process of legal registration of the European Union. The main goals of the EU are the complete transformation of the common market into an economic and monetary union; formation of a unified foreign policy; the acquisition of a “European defense identity” and the creation of a common EU armed force.

The EU is a special kind of international organization: member states gave up part of their sovereign rights to create supranational structures. The communities that make up the EU are independent IGOs. The international legal personality of the EU as a whole is limited and secondary in nature compared to the legal personality of the previous three European Communities.

Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). The agreement on the creation of the CIS was adopted in 1991 by the heads of state of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine. On December 21, 1991, the heads of 11 states (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine) signed the Protocol to the Agreement and the Declaration. In 1993, Georgia joined the constituent documents of the CIS. The CIS Charter was adopted in 1993.

The practice of creating sustainable international associations has its roots in the era of ancient Greece and Rome. In Ancient Greece, similar associations appeared in the 6th century. BC in the form of unions of cities and communities (symmachy and amphictyony). At the same time, Rome became the head of the Latin Union, which united 30 cities of Latium. Such alliances were created primarily for protection against a common enemy. International economic and customs associations began to emerge at a later stage. Formed in the 16th century. and the commercial and political union of North German cities led by the city of Lübeck, known as the Hanseatic Trade League, which formally existed until 1669, is one of such associations.

The prototype of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations in their modern understanding were the so-called international administrative unions that appeared in the 19th century. and were institutions endowed with, although rather narrow, their own competence for work in areas of public life closely related to the development of the economy, science, and technology. In addition, in contrast to 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.

Unions of this kind include the Central Commission for Navigation on the Rhine (1815), the International Union for Earth Measurement (1864), the Universal Telegraph Union (1865), the International Meteorological Organization (1873), the Universal Postal Union (1874), etc.

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

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

Intergovernmental organizations must be distinguished from non-governmental organizations (INGOs). While international in nature, they have fundamentally different legal natures.

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 were not created on the basis of an interstate treaty 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 presence of consultative status with international intergovernmental organizations; operating in at least two countries; creation on the basis of a constituent act. INGOs cannot include subjects of international law.

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

Classification of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations

International organizations can be classified on various grounds.

Based on the range 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 are the main source of income can be members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.

There are international organizations of general and special competence. The activities of the former cover all areas 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 by the nature of powers allows us to distinguish between interstate and so-called supranational (supranational) organizations.

The first group includes the vast 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 frequent 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, supernational formations that “absorb” the sovereign rights of states and dictate to them the rules and norms of behavior on the world stage. Their functioning is not associated with any infringement of the sovereignty of states or their delegation of their sovereign rights, because this would contradict the very nature of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations, which are unique 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, due to the transfer of certain sovereign powers to them by states, 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 enforcing its decisions.

Depending on the procedure for joining them, international organizations are divided into open (any state can become a member at its own request) and closed (membership is accepted 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: adoption of a constituent document; creation of its organizational and legal basis; convening of the main bodies, indicating the beginning of the organization’s functioning.

The most common way to legally formalize the will of states regarding the creation of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations is the development and conclusion of an international treaty, which becomes the constituent 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 a different, simplified procedure for establishing international organizations in the form of a decision being made by another international organization. The UN has repeatedly resorted to this practice, creating autonomous organizations (UNCTAD, UNDP) with the status of a subsidiary body General Assembly. In this case, the concerted will of states regarding the creation of an international organization is manifested by voting for a constituent resolution, which comes into force from the moment of its adoption.

At the second stage, the internal infrastructure of the organization is formed. For this purpose, 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 draw up draft rules of procedure for future organs of the organization, study issues related to the creation of headquarters, draw up a preliminary agenda for the main bodies, etc. This is how UNESCO, WHO, IAEA, etc. were created.

The convening of the main bodies and the commencement of their work usually means the completion of measures to create an international organization.

Participants of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations

Among the participants of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations are:

• original members (founders) - states that participated in the development and adoption of the constituent act of the organization;
• affiliated members - states that joined the organization after the start of its activities by acceding to its constituent act;
• partial members - states that are not members of the intergovernmental (interstate) organization itself as a whole, but are members of its individual bodies;
• associate members (employee members, partial 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 take part in the work of any IGO 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. Thus, on July 1, 1991, at a meeting of the Political Consultative Committee in Prague, the states participating in the Warsaw Pact - Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the USSR and Czechoslovakia - signed the Protocol on the termination of the Treaty of 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 a liquidated organization, then the problem of succession arises. The objects of succession are property, funds, and some functions. Such succession took place with the liquidation of the League of Nations and its replacement by the UN in 1946. The latter took over a number of functions of the League. The property of the League passed to the UN according to the agreement concluded between them.

The ways to terminate the membership of states in the MIPO 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 group World Bank;
• exclusion from the organization - type international sanctions. As a rule, it is a consequence of systematic violation by the state of the charter of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations;
• termination of the existence of the state;
• the liquidation of the MIPO itself automatically terminates the membership of participating states.

Features of the legal personality of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations

Interparliamentary bodies are characteristic mainly of regional organizations. Their members are either directly elected by the population of member states through direct general elections (European Parliament) or appointed by national parliaments (Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe). In most cases, parliamentary bodies limit themselves to accepting recommendations.

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

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

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

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

For bodies with limited membership, issues of their composition are important. These bodies must be staffed in such a way that the decisions they make reflect to the greatest extent the interests of all states, and not just one or two groups. In the practice of international organizations, the following principles are most often used to form bodies of limited composition: fair geographical representation; specific interests; equal representation of groups of states with divergent 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 carried out taking into account, first of all, the degree of participation of UN members in the maintenance of international peace and security and in achieving 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 auxiliary), the frequency of meetings (permanent and sessional), etc.

The procedure for making decisions by international organizations and their legal force

Decisions of intergovernmental (interstate) organizations are made by its bodies. The decision of an international organization can be defined as the expression of the will of the member states in the competent authority in accordance with the rules of procedure and the provisions of the statute of the organization. The decision-making process begins with the manifestation of initiative coming from a state, from a group of states, from bodies or officials of an international organization. As a rule, the initiator proposes studying a specific problem. But in a number of cases, he can also introduce a draft future decision for discussion.

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

The decisive stage of decision-making is voting. In the vast majority of bodies of international organizations, each delegation has one vote.

Decisions in intergovernmental (interstate) organizations can be made:

a) on the basis of unanimity, which may be:

• complete - an 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 present and voting plus one vote;
• qualified - 2/3, 3/4 votes of all those present and voting;

c) based on weighted voting - the number of votes for each state is determined by various 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 population. In the IBRD, IMF, IDA, the number of votes of each participating state is determined in proportion to its financial contribution;

d) based on consensus, i.e. the decision is made in conditions of general agreement without voting in the absence of objections. The degree of agreement between states' positions is determined by the absence of direct objections to this decision. Acclamation (a type of consensus) is used when making decisions on procedural issues: the decision is made without voting in the absence of objections;

e) on the basis of decision-making in a package - several issues on which voting in each case could be carried out separately are combined into one package and voting is carried out on it. This ensures the decision is made.

The rules of procedure of each body establish the quorum necessary for making decisions and most often constitute a simple majority of the members of the body.

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

The doctrine distinguishes the concept of internal law of the International International Public Association, which covers a set of rules that define the structure, scope of competence and operating procedures of the International International Public Organizations 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, declare at any time that they recognize, without special agreement, ipso facto, in relation to any other State accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory in all legal disputes concerning the interpretation of the 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 compensation due for the breach of the international obligation. The above statements may be unconditional, or on conditions of reciprocity on the part of certain states, or for a certain time.

By the beginning of 2015, 70 out of 193 UN member states declared 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 issued about 90 decisions and 25 advisory opinions. The decisions of the Court are considered binding on the states parties to the dispute. If any party to a case fails to fulfill an obligation imposed on it by a decision of the Court, the Security Council, at the request of the other party, “may, if it considers it necessary, make recommendations or decide to take measures to give effect to the decision” (Clause 2 of Art. 94 of the UN Charter).

In addition to judicial jurisdiction, the International Court of Justice also exercises 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 matter. In addition, other UN organs and specialized agencies, which the General Assembly may at any time authorize to do so, may also request advisory opinions from the Court on legal questions arising within their terms of reference. Currently, three main organs of the UN, one subsidiary organ of the General Assembly, 19 specialized agencies of the UN and the IAEA (a total of 24 bodies) can request advisory opinions from the Court.

On February 3, 1994, the Court delivered its ruling in the case "Territorial Dispute (Libya v. Chad)", 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 4 May 1994, the Security Council decided to establish the United Nations Observer Group in the Aouzou Strip (UNOAG) to monitor the implementation of the agreement signed on 4 April 1994 between Libya and Chad, in which the parties pledged to comply with 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, assistance to the parties in implementing the decision of the Court.

In connection with the application in December 1994 of the UN General Assembly to the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on the question of the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons, the Court unanimously concluded on July 8, 1996 that neither in the ordinary course nor in the treaty Under international law, there is no specific authorization for the threat or use of nuclear weapons, there is no comprehensive and general prohibition on such actions, and that the threat of force or the 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 specifically relate to nuclear weapons. weapons. In the UN Millennium Declaration adopted at the September 2000 summit, leaders of all countries of the world declared their determination to strengthen the International Court in order to ensure justice and the rule of law in international affairs.

The UN Economic and Social Council (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 in the Charter (Article 61), with 18 members being elected annually for a three-year term to replace those 18 members who have a three-year term whose activities have expired. Decisions in ECOSOC are made by a simple majority of votes 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 discussion of international economic and social problems of a global and cross-sectoral nature and to develop policy recommendations on these issues for States and the UN system as a whole.

ECOSOC is responsible for convening numerous international conferences, preparation for submission to the General Assembly of draft conventions on various issues of interstate cooperation, negotiations with specialized agencies regarding agreements defining their relationship with the UN. The Council has the power to coordinate the activities of the specialized agencies through consultation with them and make recommendations to the agencies, as well as the General Assembly and members of the UN.

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

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

Throughout the year, the work of the Council is carried out in its subsidiary bodies, which meet regularly and report to the Council. The subsidiary bodies include five regional commissions located in Europe, Latin America, Africa, as well as in the Asia-Pacific and Western Asia regions. Auxiliary mechanism ECOSOC includes four standing committees and a number of permanent 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.

Guardianship 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 course of the Council's work. In accordance with Resolution 956, unanimously approved by the Security Council on November 10, 1994, the Trusteeship Agreement for the last Trust Territory was terminated. At the proposal 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, giving it the functions of guardian and trustee of the common heritage of mankind and environmental protection.

The fate of the Trusteeship Council did not go unnoticed in the Report of the High-Level Group on Threats, Challenges and Changes 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 endowment 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 global development, established in UN practice and proven by more than half a century of experience, would lead to inciting 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 Guardianship 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, directly 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 Chairman, or at the request of a majority of 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 Guardianship Council or vesting it with any new functions and powers, i.e. There is no need to write off this one of the main UN bodies.

UN Secretariat. One of the main bodies of the UN is the Secretariat. It consists of the Secretary-General and such personnel as may be required by the Organization. It serves other UN bodies and conducts practical work for the implementation of programs of activities and decisions approved by these bodies, provides conference services to all main and subsidiary bodies of the UN. The work of the Secretariat includes carrying out peacekeeping operations as authorized by the Security Council, organizing and conducting international conferences on issues of global importance (for example, the Law of the Sea Conference), 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 interpretation and translation of speeches and documents and distribution of documentation.

All personnel of the UN Secretariat are divided into four categories: specialists, field service staff, general service staff, and economic and technical service staff. The bulk of professional posts are subject to distribution among 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 the size of the population.

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

General Secretary. The Secretariat is headed 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 can be reappointed. The Secretary-General presents an annual report on the work of the Organization to the General Assembly and also brings to the attention of the Security Council issues that, in his opinion, may threaten the maintenance of peace.

Since January 2007, Ban Ki-moon (Republic of Korea) took up the duties of Secretary General.

UN specialized agencies

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

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

The important purpose of specialized intergovernmental organizations, programs and funds is that they should continue into the 21st century. play the role of a kind of mediator in order to resolve disagreements between states that differ in their power, culture, size and interests, and serve as forums for expressing the opinions and approaches of states and defending the interests of all humanity.

The UN specialized organizations are:

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

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) - focuses on improving agricultural productivity and food security, as well as improving the living conditions of rural populations;

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

World Health Organization (WHO) - coordinates 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 provision of essential medicines;

World Bank Group (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development - IBRD, International Association Development - IDA, International Finance Corporation - IFC, Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency - MIGA, International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes - ICSID) - provides loans and technical assistance to developing countries 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 international standards necessary to ensure the safety, reliability and efficiency of air services, and acts as the coordinator of international cooperation in all areas related to civil aviation;

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) - created 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 is: Assembly, Council, Maritime Safety Committee, Legal Committee and Marine Environment Protection Committee. Location - London (England);

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) - promotes international intellectual property protection 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 by providing 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 subregional structures and their interaction with the UN

Regional and subregional organizations and structures are an important part of the global system of collective security provided for by the UN Charter. The basis for increasingly broader interaction between the UN and regional organizations is Ch. VIII of the UN Charter, which, although it does not clearly define regional agreements and organizations, at the same time allows them to adapt their activities to the constantly changing situation in the world and contribute, together with the UN, 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 relation to coercion to the world.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) began its activities in 1972 as a multilateral forum for dialogue and negotiation. In 1975, the sphere of competence of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) was 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 into the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) from January 1, 1995. At present, although the OSCE Charter has not been developed, a fairly extensive structure of the OSCE has emerged, which consists of: a meeting of the heads of state and government of the OSCE; Council of Ministers, convened once a year; Governing Council; Standing Council; Forum for Security Cooperation (consists of representatives of delegations of participating states and meets weekly in Vienna); The OSCE Chairman-in-Office, who is responsible for the implementation of OSCE decisions (this post is held by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of a participating State for one year; the Chairman is assisted in the exercise of his functions by the previous and future Chairmanships, together forming the “troika”); OSCE Secretariat (the first OSCE Secretary General was appointed in June 1993); Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, headquartered in Warsaw; High Commissioner on National Minorities, based in The Hague; Office for Freedom of the Media and OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. Currently, 55 states are participating in the OSCE, including Russia. Location - Vienna (Austria).

The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was created in December 1991 and includes 12 countries, including Russia. In accordance with the CIS Charter adopted on January 22, 1993, the main goal of the Commonwealth is, among other things, cooperation in 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 of the CIS member states; Council of Commanders of the Border Troops; The CIS Executive Committee, which is a permanent executive, administrative and coordinating body headed by the Chairman - the CIS Executive Secretary, and the Inter-Parliamentary Assembly. The CIS is a regional organization within the meaning of Chapter. 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), which included Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, began to operate. Already on January 2, 2015, Armenia joined the EAEU. It is expected that Kyrgyzstan will 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 ministers of foreign affairs (FMAs), 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 range of issues related to strengthening security and stability in this area of ​​the world are regularly discussed. The ARF was founded in 1994. The ARF holds its annual sessions at the level of the foreign ministers of the participating countries. Ministerial sessions are the highest body of the Forum, during which ministers discuss the entire range of problems affecting the security of the participating countries and the region as a whole. From the first days of the ARF's existence, Russia has been actively participating in events held within the Forum.

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

The main directions of EU activity at the current stage: movement from a common market to an economic and monetary union; implementation of expansion strategy; formation of the foundations of a common foreign and defense policy and the acquisition of a European defense identity; intensification of regional policy in the Mediterranean, Northern Europe, Asia, Latin America, Africa; further harmonization of the social sphere, interaction in the field of justice and internal affairs. The EU system of common bodies and institutions includes: European Council, the European Parliament (EP), the Council of the European Union, the Commission of the European Communities (CEC) and the European Court of Justice. final decision regarding the headquarters of the EU is not accepted, 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 North Atlantic Alliance Organization includes 26 states of Western, Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the USA and Canada.

The NATO structure 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 Secretary General NATO. Headquarters - Brussels (Belgium).

The African Union (until July 2000 had the name "Organization of African Unity (OAU)") is a regional organization uniting 53 African states, which was created by the decision of the Constituent Conference of 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 new realities in the international situation, including the fundamental changes that had occurred on the African continent, had clearly become urgent. 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 Lomé ( Togo) an Act was adopted on the establishment of the AC and the creation within its framework of an extensive system of bodies. On July 8-10, 2002, the 39th session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the OAU member countries was held in Durban (South Africa), which formally became the founding summit of the AU. The headquarters of the AU is located in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia).

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

The League of Arab States (LAS) is a voluntary association of sovereign Arab states, created on the basis of the Pact of the Arab League, signed on March 22, 1945. The activities of the League are based on its Charter, which came 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 IGOs, the number of non-governmental organizations (INGOs) has grown rapidly. Today in the world there are about 40 thousand INGOs dealing with economic, cultural, humanitarian and other issues.

For a long time there was no clarity on what was considered a non-governmental organization. A more or less satisfactory and very general definition was developed only on July 25, 1996, when the following definition was included in ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31 “Consultative relations between the UN and non-governmental organizations”: “Any such organization that is not established by any or by a government agency or by intergovernmental agreement, shall be considered a non-governmental organization for the purposes of these activities, including organizations that accept government-appointed members, provided that such membership does not interfere with the free expression of the organization's views." From this definition it follows that tens of thousands of non-governmental organizations around the world, from local to global levels, 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 various types of secret societies, closed clubs, terrorist organizations, drug syndicates with transnational connections, associations of persons involved in money laundering, illegal arms trade, trafficking in women and children and kidnapping cannot be considered as NGOs for the purpose of 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 international international organizations actively cooperate with international non-governmental organizations in order to improve 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 “make appropriate arrangements for consultation with non-governmental organizations interested in matters within its competence. Such measures may be agreed upon with international organizations, if necessary with national organizations, after consultation with the Member of the Organization concerned.” This article created the 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 INGOs must coincide with the areas of competence of ECOSOC, defined in Art. 62 of the UN Charter. Another necessary condition for obtaining consultative status is that the activities of INGOs comply with the goals and principles of the UN, as well as providing assistance to the UN in its work and disseminating information about the activities of the UN. In addition, the INGO itself must have a representative character and a strong international reputation, representing a certain part of the population.

Of significant importance is the provision of ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31 of 25 July 1996, according to which the granting, suspension and withdrawal of consultative status, as well as the interpretation of rules and decisions on this issue, are the prerogative of member states, exercised through ECOSOC and its INGO Committee.

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 demonstrate to ECOSOC's satisfaction that they can make a significant and sustained contribution to the achievement of the goals of the UN, and which are closely related to the economic and social life of the inhabitants of the represented countries their districts and whose membership broadly represents major sectors of society in various regions of the world.

2. Special consultative status for organizations having special competence in only a few areas of activity of ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies or specially dealing with these areas and known internationally in those areas in which they have or are seeking consultative status.

3. Other organizations which do not have general or special consultative status, but which, in the opinion of ECOSOC or the Secretary-General of the United Nations, 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 UN bodies within their competence are included in a list called the “register”.

By the end of the 20th century. Over 2 thousand INGOs have received consultative status with ECOSOC, including a number of Russian NGOs (International Association of Peace Funds, Women's Union of Russia, Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Russia, International Academy of Informatization, All-Russian Society of Disabled Persons, Association for Assistance to Families with Disabled Children, Russian UN Association, etc.).

The activities of numerous INGOs especially intensified after 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 inclusion of INGOs in all areas of UN activity, for the right of INGOs to participate on an equal basis with states in the 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 in the UN Charter.

In general, one cannot fail to recognize the positive influence of INGOs on the overall development of international relations, the rule-making process taking place in the world, the formation of a system of collective security in the global and regional levels and to strengthen 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 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 and modern stage, and its progressive democratic principles and goals remain relevant to this day.

In UN practice, 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, as it were, “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 1968, International Covenants on Human Rights 1966 g., etc.). As UN Secretary-General Perez de Cuellar rightly noted, 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 new world realities are the development and adoption of declarations and resolutions of the General Assembly, which specify the general statutory principles and provisions and have great moral and political weight and practical significance. Although resolutions and declarations of this kind are not binding, they nevertheless sometimes have a decisive impact on the policies of states and on the positive solution 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 and implement the decisions of the Security Council; 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 mandatory for all states.

The process of adapting the UN Charter to the changing conditions of the development of international relations was, without a doubt, particularly influenced by 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.

Thus, we can say that, based on the decisions of the Security Council, the process of evolutionary debugging of the UN crisis mechanism is taking place, which is acquiring the features of a capable peacekeeping instrument for preventing and suppressing future cases of violation of international peace and security.

An important part evolutionary process development and bringing the UN Charter into line with the emerging new needs for the normal functioning of the Organization is the achievement of generally acceptable agreements regarding the 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, were not used or were not fully implemented. Suffice it to recall Art. Art. 43 - 47 of the UN Charter, which provide for the provision of armed forces at the disposal of the Security Council at its request and in accordance with special agreements and the effective functioning of the Military Staff Committee (MSC) - a permanent subsidiary body of the Council, designed to assist it and give advice 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 increasingly multicomponent and multifunctional nature, the emerging shift of UN operations towards “peace enforcement”, the emergence of large number conflicts of a new generation, 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 provisions provided for them mechanisms, primarily the Security Council and its permanent subsidiary body - the Supreme Security Council. 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 to the Security Council, including those related to the adoption of preventive measures, assessing the effectiveness of sanctions, forecasting possible options for events, and the creation of multilateral naval forces under the auspices of the UN, not only for use in localizing conflicts, establishing a naval blockade and enforcing sanctions, but also to combat piracy, international terrorism, and hostage-taking.

Thus, the problem of adaptation cannot be reduced to a 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 unlimited time process, which includes various forms and methods of creative development and transformation of the institutions and mechanisms of the Organization in relation to new realities.

These include, in particular, the method of natural obsolescence of individual provisions, loss of their original meaning and meaning. This method makes it possible to avoid the use of the lengthy and cumbersome procedure for introducing appropriate amendments to the UN Charter provided for by the UN Charter. For example, clause 3 of Art. has not been applied for a long time and cannot be applied in the future. 109 of the Charter, which provides for the possibility of adopting before the 10th annual session of the General Assembly or at the 10th session itself a decision on convening 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 up with the times and successfully cope with the challenges imposed on it. with increasingly responsible and complex tasks. Moreover, any attempt to fundamentally change the UN Charter is fraught in the current conditions with the emergence of an effect snow avalanche, which, growing, 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 inciting disputes and disagreements between states, distract the Organization’s attention from solving pressing problems of our time, and undermine people’s faith in the enduring value and universal applicability of the fundamental goals and principles of the UN Charter.

In the current conditions of rapid change, it would be imprudent to revise the structure and functions of the UN and its bodies. The issue of amending the UN Charter should be approached from a very cautious and balanced position, taking into account all possible negative consequences 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 designs, to which there is currently no alternative. 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, and to fill the forms and methods of its activities with new content.

Autonomous organizations of the OECD

One of the most powerful organizations within the OECD system is the G7 group, created in 1975 to resolve global financial and monetary issues at the level of heads of government of leading Western countries. In 1997, Russia joined this organization, and the group began to be called " Big Eight"(Great Britain, Germany, Italy, Canada, USA, France, Japan, Russia).

At the meetings of the organization, issues of achieving a balanced growth dynamics of the main exchange rates, coordination and harmonization of economic development strategies, and development of a common economic course for the leading countries of the world are discussed.

An autonomous body within the OECD, the International Energy Agency (MEA), created in 1974, with the participation of all OECD member countries, with the exception of Iceland and Mexico.

The MEA's organizational structure includes: a Governing Council, which consists of senior representatives from each state responsible for energy issues; permanent groups and special committees (on long-term cooperation in the field of energy, emergency situations, oil markets, etc.); A secretariat consisting of experts in the field of energy and performs supporting functions.

Main goals and objectives of MEA:

Cooperation on the development and application of various energy sources;

Measures to improve energy efficiency;

Ensuring the constant functioning of the information system on the state of the international oil market;

Establishing cooperation with non-MEA countries and international organizations to resolve global problems energy development;

Improving the system for overcoming disruptions in the power supply.

The OECD system also includes the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), established in 1958 with the participation of OECD member countries, with the exception of New Zealand and the Republic of Korea. The purpose of this organization is cooperation between the governments of participating countries in the use of nuclear energy as a safe, economical source.

The main functions of the Nuclear Energy Agency include: - assessing the contribution of nuclear energy to the overall energy supply; - Development of a system for the exchange of scientific and technical information; - Organization of international research, preparation of nuclear energy development programs; - Encouraging cooperation to harmonize nuclear energy regulatory policies and practices (protecting people from radiation and protecting the environment).

The organizational structure of the Agency includes the following divisions: OECD Council; Nuclear Energy Executive Committee; five specialized committees (on the development of nuclear energy and the fuel cycle; on regulation of activities in the field of nuclear energy; on the safety of nuclear devices, radiation protection; on health protection).

International organizations of general competence within the framework of economic cooperation

Organizations of general competence include organizations formed after the collapse of colonial empires or as a result of macro-regionalization of world economic relations.

The most important of them are the Council of Europe, the Commonwealth of Nations, the Northern Cooperation Organization, the League of Arab States, the Organization for Security and Cooperation, and the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

1. The Council of Europe (has 46 countries, founded in 1949) is a broad-based organization that covers the following areas of activity: human rights, media, cooperation in the legal field, social and economic issues; healthcare, education, culture, youth, sports, environmental protection. The Council of Europe develops pan-European conventions and agreements, which form the basis for corresponding changes in national legislation with a view to their harmonization.

Ukraine has chosen a democratic path of development that meets the standards of the European community. On November 9, 1995, at the headquarters of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg (France), a solemn ceremony of Ukraine's accession to this organization took place. The Council of Europe has developed a number of programs to promote democratic and legal reforms in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, for the implementation of which approximately $10 million was provided. The programs concerned local self-government, legal proceedings, and elections. Thus, the “Demosthenes” program provided for an expert analysis of draft bilateral agreements to ensure the rights of national minorities, which Ukraine proposed to conclude with the newly independent states on the territory of the former USSR. The Council of Europe provides advice in developing curricula for training lawyers in Ukraine (for example, at the Institute of International Relations of T. Shevchenko University of Kyiv). Representatives of our state participate in the work of the main and special committees of the Council of Europe, in particular on human rights, social security, migration, cultural heritage, and the media. Ukrainian experts worked in the committee on legal problems refugees and stateless persons, the rights of national minorities and their linguistic rights. Ukraine has become one of the contracting parties to some conventions of the Council of Europe, the European Cultural Convention, the European Framework Convention on Trans-Border Co-operation between Territorial Communities and Authorities, the European Convention on Information on Foreign Legislation, as well as conventions on the fight against crime, the protection of the rights of national minorities.

2. The Commonwealth of Nations (including 53 countries and founded in 1931) operates in the following main areas: supporting political and economic cooperation; assistance sustainable development economies of participating countries; consulting, representation and information tasks; development and implementation of Commonwealth development programs; organizing and holding conferences to adopt declarations on various issues of world politics. In 1987, the Declaration on World Trade was adopted; in 1991 - the Declaration of Fundamental Rights.

3. The Nordic Cooperation Organization, including five countries, was established in 1971. its main objectives are: improving the quality and competitiveness of products northern region; ensuring environmental protection and environmentally sustainable use of natural resources; growth in employment, improvement of working conditions and social security.

4. The League of Arab States (LAS) was created in 1945. its members are 21 Arab country and the Palestinian Authority. The purpose of operation is thorough and coordination of participating countries in various fields, protection of national security and independence.

5. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), created in 1975, has 55 countries, with 6 main objectives: achieving sustainable economic development; improving contacts and practical cooperation on environmental protection; promoting the strengthening of international peace and security.

6. The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) includes 57 Muslim states. II was created in 1969 with the aim of deepening cooperation in economic, social and scientific issues, holding consultations between participating countries in international organizations, and strengthening Muslim solidarity.

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

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

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

Material(s):

• OSCE - 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 the States Parties to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in Budapest (5-6 December 1994) package of documents (Political Declaration “Towards a Genuine Partnership in a New Era” and “Budapest Decisions”) 1 contains a number of important decisions aimed at restructuring 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 transforming it 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 enormous 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.

  The peculiarity 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 role of the founding act is a set of decisions taken at the highest level meetings of the participating states.

  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 of the final document of the meeting, the Final Act, by the leaders of 33 European states, the United States and Canada. 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 strengthen confidence; thirdly, agreements on cooperation in the field of economics, science and technology and the environment, humanitarian and other fields; fourth, a statement of determination to continue the multilateral process initiated by the Meeting and an agreement on activities carried out by participating States after the Meeting; fifthly, creating the basis of 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 records the goals and intentions of its participants, collectively developed and agreed upon recommendations, and also contains specific legal norms.

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

  Without a doubt, the Final Document of the Helsinki Meeting is not an international treaty. 3 This conclusion can be made based on 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 treaty form.

  This fact was a prerequisite for differences of opinion regarding the obligation 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 final documents of all subsequent summit meetings within the CSCE are imbued with statements by the participating countries of the “intention to implement”, “determination to give full effect” to the provisions of the Final Act of the Conference. In the section of the Act dedicated to the principle conscientious fulfillment obligations under international law, states that participants “will... take due account and fulfill(emphasis mine. - A.M.) provisions of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe." 5 The wording of the Madrid Final Document is more decisive: confidence- and security-building measures will be “mandatory and will be ensured by adequate forms of verification consistent with their content.” 6 In the Final Document of the Vienna Meeting, the participants expressed their determination “to accept responsibility for the full implementation of the commitments contained in the Final Act and other CSCE documents.” 7

  Currently, it has become generally accepted to view agreements within the CSCE as being of a binding nature. However, the question of the nature of the binding force of these documents is still controversial.

  There are two main points of view on this question: according to the first, CSCE acts are in the nature of political agreements, and their binding force is of a moral and political nature; 8 the second recognizes the legal force of these docents, 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 outlined below, have proven the correctness of the second point of view.

  International legal doctrine is based on the theory of coordination of the wills of states as a way of creating international legal norms. The most common source of international law is an international treaty, but it cannot be considered as the only form of coordination of wills. In addition to it, there are other generally recognized sources, such as international customs and mandatory normative resolutions of international organizations, as well as a special form of coordination 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 instructions it contains differ in the nature of their binding nature. It contains both legal norms and non-normative provisions; there are both mandatory and recommendatory provisions. But the combination of normative and non-normative provisions in one document does not eliminate its qualification as a source! rights, since the rules of law are still present in it. 10

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

  The meeting in Helsinki marked the beginning of the organizational process of building a system of security and cooperation in Europe. In the section of the final document “Next steps after the Meeting,” the participating states stated 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 state representatives at various levels was planned. Even then, in the totality of these meetings, a certain organizational unity was seen, as well as the possibility of giving the process a more organized form.

  The first was the Belgrade Meeting of States Parties to the All-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 détente 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, unilaterally, bilaterally and multilaterally, all the provisions of the Final Act.” 11

  At the Madrid meeting, the participating states managed to reach agreements that create new opportunities for expanding their cooperation in a variety of areas, to intensify their efforts in the interests of strengthening European and world peace. The meeting ended on September 9, 1983 with the adoption of a 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 strictly respect and implement in practice the ten Helsinki Principles, which the states participating in the pan-European conference pledged to guide their relationships. The intention was also confirmed to take further steps to reduce or gradually eliminate all kinds of obstacles to the development of trade, and to expand economic, scientific and technical ties.

  An important agreement of the Madrid meeting was the decision to convene a conference of states on confidence-building measures, security and disarmament in Europe, which began work on January 17, 1984 in Stockholm. The main achievement of this conference was the adoption of a set of mutually reinforcing confidence- and security-building measures. The Stockholm Conference document is a politically significant achievement, and the measures it contains are an important step in efforts to reduce the risk of military confrontation in Europe. 12

  The next main stage of the CSCE process was the Vienna meeting of representatives of the participating states of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The meeting took place 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 previously been the focus of attention, unlike military issues. The final document of the Vienna meeting significantly expanded the provisions of the Final Act relating to human rights and humanitarian cooperation. 13 It is fundamentally important that a permanent mechanism was created to monitor the implementation of obligations in this area by participating states - the so-called Vienna Mechanism. On this issue, significant differences arose between East and West. The question arose: would the human dimension mechanism 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 accepting relevant obligations, can to a certain extent limit the scope of their internal competence that is not subject to interference. The primacy of universal human values ​​over national or group ones is also directly related to ensuring human rights. The above is of particular importance in connection with the issue of recognition of the binding force of agreements within 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 to representations made to it by other participants on issues relating to the human dimension of the CSCE;

  2) hold bilateral meetings with other participating States for the purpose of studying issues relating to the human dimension of the CSCE, including situations and specific cases, with a view to resolving them;

  3) that any participating State which deems it necessary may draw the attention of other participating States through diplomatic channels to situations and incidents relating to the human dimension of the CSCE;

  4) that any participating State may provide information on contacts in accordance with the above points at CSCE meetings. 14

  The Vienna Conference decided that three meetings should be held on the human dimension. Three meetings and conferences on the human dimension took place: 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 rule of law.

  The Copenhagen Document strengthened the Vienna Mechanism by setting specific deadlines for responses to requested information. 15 It was followed by the Moscow Document, the three main parts of which, dealing respectively with strengthening the human dimension mechanism, the rule of law and human rights obligations, complemented and strengthened the Copenhagen Document. Its preamble stated unequivocally for the first time that “questions relating to freedoms, democracy and the rule of law are of an international nature” and that “the obligations assumed by them V areas of the human dimension of the CSCE are issues of direct and legitimate interest to all participating States and are not exclusively the internal affairs of the State concerned,” 16 The innovation of the Moscow Conference was the possibility of sending independent missions of experts and rapporteurs to including against the will of the state that violates human rights. To achieve this goal, the participating states took the important step of contradicting an important CSCE principle: the rule of consensus (see below). Thus, the foundations for the international control procedure were laid.

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

  The result 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 occurred in Eastern Europe, and contained a statement that “the era of confrontation and division in Europe is over.” 17 The meeting participants once again confirmed their commitment 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 everyone and the freedom to choose how to ensure one’s own security.

  We especially note this meeting due to 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 Paris Charter entitled “New Structures and Institutions of the CSCE Process,” the participating States stated that “joint efforts to ensure respect for human rights, democracy and the promotion of 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 creation of these structures were contained in the “Additional Document”, which was adopted along 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 the construction of specific structures of the system.

  One of the bodies created at the Paris meeting was the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the CSCE participating 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 “Challenge of the Time 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 Declaration of the Summit and a package of decisions on the structure and main areas of activity of the CSCE. The Helsinki Document continues to develop structures to ensure that crises are overcome through political means and creates new mechanisms to prevent conflicts and overcome crises.

  In 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 and the growing number of refugees and displaced persons. Provisions aimed at strengthening the obligations of participating States in these areas took an important place.

  Agreements were reached regarding the intensification of economic, scientific, technical and environmental cooperation in the CSCE region.

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

  On December 14-15, 1992, the next meeting of the CSCE Council took place in Stockholm. At this meeting, a document was adopted that summed up the 20-year 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 meetings of experts (Montreux, 1978; Athens, 1984; La Valletta, 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 took place in Budapest, in which the heads of state and government of 52 CSCE countries, as well as Macedonia as an observer, participated, and which today is the last major step towards the establishment 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: institutionalization of the CSCE, changes V his 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 laid at the Paris Summit in 1990. Then the following permanent bodies were created:

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

  2. Committee of Senior Officials (SCSO), whose functions included preparing meetings of the Council, drawing up the agenda and implementing its decisions, reviewing current problems and considering issues future work CSCE with the right to make decisions on them, including in the form of recommendations to the Council.

  3. Secretariat- administrative service body for consultations at all levels.

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

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

  6. Parliamentary Assembly as a body that unites 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 was transformed into Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) giving it additional functions. 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 it was created within the Committee of Senior Officials Economic Forum, to give political impetus to dialogue on the transition to a free market economy and its development and to propose practical steps, aimed at developing free market systems and economic cooperation.

  The Prague Document set new tasks and measures for the Conflict Prevention Center created at the Paris meeting 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 taken according to which the Council and the Committee of Senior Officials as an agent of the Council became the institutional core of the CSCE. 21 The Council was assigned the role of the central and governing body of the CSCE, and the CSO, along with making operational decisions, was entrusted with management and coordination functions. Manage the ongoing activities of the CSCE was entrusted to the Chairman-in-Office, which must bring the decisions of the Council and the CSO to the attention of the CSCE institutions and give them, if necessary, appropriate recommendations on these decisions.

  To assist the Chairman, it was established Troika Institute(consisting of the previous, current and subsequent chairmen, acting jointly), as well as special task forces created on a case-by-case basis, in particular for conflict prevention, crisis management and dispute resolution, and the personal representatives of the Chairperson.

  A 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 created as a permanent body of the CSCE to solve the following main tasks: holding new negotiations on arms control, disarmament and strengthening confidence and security; expanding regular consultations, intensifying cooperation on security-related issues; 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 and the Statute of the CSCE Reconciliation Commission adopted on December 14-15, 1992 in Stockholm. 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 Governing Council. Its functions include discussing and formulating guiding principles of a political and general budgetary nature. The Governing Council is also convened 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 of the CSCE, which have undergone significant changes.

  Let us consider the fundamental changes that have undergone 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 stipulated that decisions at the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe would be taken by consensus. It had great value, as it encouraged participating States to eliminate differences of opinion regarding the content of any provisions. As a result, there were always formulations that no state opposed, although it took a lot of time to achieve this.

  Application of consensus in decision critical issues in general it has a positive meaning. “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 rule of consensus contains the potential for its abuse by those who seek to delay, slow down the adoption of agreements, and obstruct the achievement of agreement.” 23 However, given the potential for unproductive use of consensus, the CSCE participating States agreed that the rules of procedure for the Helsinki meeting would be applied at subsequent meetings.

  The rule of consensus is closely related to 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 was often used as a kind of caveat: some states considered the exposure of human rights violations in their 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 people.

  With the creation of the Vienna Mechanism (1989), the foundations for the international control procedure were laid. The emergence of the 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 a state that violates human rights. To achieve this goal it was necessary to come into conflict with the above-mentioned CSCE principle: the rule of consensus.

  The next important step towards modifying the principle of consensus was the Prague meeting of the CSCE Council, at which, in order to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law, it was adopted important decision 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 - take appropriate action.

  Such actions will consist of political statements or other political steps that will be taken outside the territory of such state.” 26 As we see, a new mechanism has emerged, 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 law law are of an international character" and that "the commitments they have undertaken in the field of the human dimension of the CSCE are matters of direct and legitimate interest to all participating States and are not exclusively the internal affairs of the State concerned" .

  The principle of consensus does not apply when making decisions in the CSCE Parliamentary Assembly, where a majority vote is required, as well as when introducing the mechanism of emergency measures and the mechanism of preventive measures to resolve crisis situations adopted in Helsinki (the consent of 11 states is sufficient). gifts).

  A major change is the adoption of the “Regulations on Directive Reconciliation” at the Stockholm meeting of the CSCE Council. 27 According to this document, the Council of Ministers or the Committee of Senior Officials may order any two participating States to resort to a conciliation procedure in order to assist them in resolving a dispute that they were unable to resolve within a reasonable period of time . In this case, “the parties to a dispute may exercise any rights which they ordinarily have to participate in all discussions within the Council or SAO regarding the dispute, but they will not participate in the adoption by the Council or SAO of a decision 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.

  Using examples, one can trace an important trend in the development of the pan-European process - the modification of the rules of procedure during the transition of the CSCE to a new quality.

  The above changes that have occurred in the pan-European process since the convening of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1975 to the present day give grounds to say that at present the CSCE corresponds to the characteristics of international organizations identified in international -legal research. Thus, according to H. Schermers, an international organization is characterized by three main features: 1) the contractual basis of the organization, i.e. the presence of an international agreement of states on the creation of an organization, defining its functions and powers; 2) the presence of permanent organs; 3) the subordination of its establishment and activities to international law. 28

  E. A. Shibaeva noted that the concept of an international organization that she formulated allows us to talk about five of its constituent features: 1) a contractual basis; 2) the presence of certain goals; 3) appropriate organizational structure; 4) independent rights;) and obligations; 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 characteristics of an international organization developed by the theory and practice of international relations cover the following: 1) the organization was created and functions on the basis of an interstate treaty; 2) its members are the states themselves; 3) she has her own will; 4) she has organs that form and express her will; 5) it must be legal; 6) it promotes cooperation between states or organizes cooperation between states in the implementation of their sovereign rights. 30

  The main, integral and necessary features of an international organization are the contractual basis of the organization, the presence of permanent bodies and its own will. An international organization is characterized by the organizational and legal unity of all member states, which can only be achieved on the basis of an agreement between them, which is usually called a constituent act. Although, as a rule, such a constituent act is an interstate treaty in the sense given to this concept by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, the creation of an international organization on the basis of a 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 strict sense, together they contain all the necessary provisions characteristic of constituent documents, namely: 1) the goals of the interstate association; 2) functions and powers; 3) conditions of membership; 4) organizational structure organizations; 5) competence of the authorities; 6) the procedure for the adoption by 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 features of the founding act listed above appeared in the documents of the Conference only after the Paris Summit in 1990. At this meeting, permanent bodies were created, the presence which is one of the main characteristics of the organization. Another important condition characterizing 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 “compatible With Goals and Principles of the Organization.” A statement on this issue is contained in paragraph 25 of the 1992 CSCE Helsinki Summit Declaration, which states in particular that “reaffirming the commitment to the Charter of the United Nations that our States have proclaimed, we declare that we regard the CSCE as a regional a national agreement in the sense stated in Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations...Rights and obligations remain unchanged 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 resolution.” 32

  It is also necessary to note such a feature as the possession of an international organization of its own will. In this regard, the modification of the consensus rule discussed above becomes 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 main 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. A comprehensive vision of security issues is retained as a basis, and accordingly the OSCE mandate to intensify not only political and military cooperation, but also interaction in the human dimension is confirmed; in the field of economics, ecology, science and technology. The OSCE has received broad powers to take practical measures and a variety of means for their implementation.

  Necessary adjustments will be made to the functioning of the OSCE as it gains relevant experience. Work will continue to improve mechanisms for resolving disputes and conflict resolution, and to improve 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.

  *PhD student at St. Petersburg State University.

  ©A.B. Makarenko, 1997.

  1 Meeting heads of state and government of the CSCE member countries // 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 more details see: Mazov V. A. Helsinki principles and international law. M, 1979. P. 16.

  5 In the name peace, security and cooperation: Towards 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 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. P. 20-29; Ignatenko G. V. The final act of the pan-European conference in Helsinki // Ibid. No. 3.

  10 For more information about this, see: Malinin S. A. Helsinki Meeting (1975) and international law; Ig-natenko G.V. Final act of the pan-European meeting in Helsinki.

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

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

  13 Final document of the 1986 Vienna meeting of representatives of the participating states of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

  14 Ibid. pp. 50-51.

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

  16 For more details see: Kofod M. Moscow meeting on human change // Moscow Journal of International Law. 1992. No. 2. P. 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. P. 180-204.

  19 Results CSCE meeting on the peaceful settlement of disputes (Geneva, October 12-23, 1992) // Moscow Journal of International Law. 1993. No. 3. P. 150 171.

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

  21 CSCE. Helsinki Document 1992.

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

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

  24 In the name peace, security and cooperation: To the results of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, held on 8 Helsinki, July 30 - August 1. 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. P. 66.

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

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

  28 Schermers H. International institutional law. Leiden, 1972. V. I.

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

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

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

  32 CSCE. Helsinki Document 1992.

Information updated:24.04.2000

Related materials:
| Books, articles, documents