Narrative Report on the

20th SUMMER ACADEMY ON OSCE

9-18 June 2016

At the Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR)

Under the Auspices of the

Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)

In the framework of In cooperation with

1

ORGANISED BY

Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution, Stadtschlaining

PROJECT TEAM

Academy Director & Moderator: Arie Bloed

Academy Co-Director: Walter Kemp

Academy Co-Director & Programme Coordinator: Ursula Gamauf-Eberhardt

Administrative Assistant: Claudia Hofer

Accountant: Martina Tader

RAPPORTEUR

Hana Đogović

Author’s note: The opinions and views expressed herein are the result of critical, thought-provoking

group discussion and should not be credited to any single participant or presenter.

2

Acknowledgement:

The Austrian Study Center for Peace and Conflict Resolution

would like to express its sincere gratitude and highest estimation to

Austria / the Permanent Mission of Austria to the OSCE,

Ireland / Permanent Mission of Ireland to the OSCE,

Germany/ the Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE and

The OSCE Chairmanship 2016 by Germany

for their financial support for the “Summer Academy on OSCE 2016”.

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction 1.1. 20th Summer Academy on the OSCE 1.2. Aims of the Academy 1.3. Participants 1.4. Speakers 1.5. Directors 1.6. The organizers: Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution

2. Methodology

3. Evaluation

4. Session reports

4.1. OSCE’s sui generis Status 4.2. Three Dimensions of OSCE 4.3. Minority Rights and Minority Issues 4.4. Gender Issues 4.5. Mediation, Negotiations and Diplomacy 4.6. Simulation: Special Meeting on the Refugee and Migrant Crisis 4.7. Visit to Hofburg – OSCE’s Headquarters in Vienna 4.8. Social Events 4.9. Roundup

5. Appendices

Appendix 1: Programme Appendix 2: List of Resource Persons Appendix 3: List of Participants

4

1. Introduction

1.1 20 th Summer Academy on the OSCE

The 20th Summer Academy on the OSCE took place from 9-18 June 2016 at the

Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) in Stadtschlaining, Austria.

The programme which celebrated its 20 anniversary was held under the auspices of the

Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and it was organised in

cooperation with the OSCE and supported by the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna.

1.2 Aims of the Academy

The ten-days programme gave an opportunity to the participants to develop their

own attitudes and opinions on the OSCE and its activities in general. The aim of the Summer

Academy on OSCE was to strengthen the participants’ understanding of OSCE, by providing

a detailed overview of the history, organisational structure, functions, values and current

activities of the OSCE. The 2016 Summer Academy focused on the concept of peace and co-

operation, providing the participants with a chance to exchange ideas, thoughts and to lead

lively discussions.

1.3 Participants

26 participants from 18 different countries attended the 20th Summer Academy on

OSCE. The heterogeneous group was comprised of experts and diplomats who already work

with the organisation through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the country they are coming

from, OSCE staff from field missions/presences, representatives of NGOs, students and

individuals who already have experience in working with or for the OSCE. The multi-facetted

group was very actively participating in all sessions of the Academy, sharing their respective

expertise and experience, raising key questions and defining creative ways forward. Critical

questions and courageous ideas provoked lively discussions both with speakers and inside

the group.

5

1.4 Speakers

The speakers invited to the 20th Summer Academy were high level diplomats, scholars,

experts from the OSCE Secretariat as well as from the field missions and lecturers with a

deep knowledge about the organisation’s functions, history, tasks, values and current

issues. A special emphasis was given to the OSCE’s current SMM in Ukraine. A close

cooperation with the German Chairmanship with a number of interactions throughout the

Academy was a clear asset.

1.5 Directors

Arie Bloed, co-founder and Academy Director, senior consultant for international

organizations such as the OSCE, UN and EU, was the programme-moderator. Bloed gave

interactive lectures, through which he stimulated inspiring discussions that led to a critical

reasoning and new ideas. By challenging the participants with his interesting questions and

topics, he motivated them to think about the organisation in a different manner – from the

perspective of an objective observer, as well as from the insiders’ point of view.

Academy Co-Director Walter Kemp, is Vice President and Chief Operating Officer at

the International Peace Institute (IPI). He joined IPI in August 2010 as Director for Europe

and Central Asia. Kemp provided a specific input on the HCNM, while managing to maintain

interesting and lively lectures on the practical level of diplomacy through the simulation of

the OSCE’s Permanent Council meeting on a refugee crisis.

Academy Co-Director Ursula Gamauf-Eberhardt, programme coordinator and a

member of academic staff of the ASPR, was - in consultation with her co-directors -

responsible for the planning of the 20th Summer Academy, the composition of the content,

the management of the lectures and speakers, and the overall organisation of the

programme in general.

6

1.6 The organizers: Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution

The Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) was founded in

September 1982 as an independent, non-profit and non-partisan organisation. The aim of

this centre is to contribute to the promotion of peace and peaceful conflict resolution,

which makes it an ideal place where such ideas could be discussed and supported, not only

on a national, but also on the international level. The ASPR provides several training

programmes – Capacity-Building in West Africa, Europe’s New Training initiative for Civilian

Crisis Management (ENTRi), Civil-Military Training Cooperation, International Civilian

Peacekeeping (IPT) Customised Trainings etc. Furthermore, the ASPR organises Peace

Weeks for more than one thousand Austrian pupils every year, also offering training for

teachers in the topics of team-building, conflict management It also engages in Peace and

Conflict Research, through which the ASPR contributes significantly to the Austrian and

European academic community in relation to the topics of peace and security.

Moreover, the ASPR set up the Peace Library in a former synagogue in

Stadtschlaining, as well as a Conference Centre in Schlaining Castle, where this Centre is

organising numerous conferences and meetings. For all the aforementioned, the ASPR was

awarded the UN "Peace Messenger" status in 1987, and, together with the EPU, the

UNESCO-Price for Peace Education 1995.

7

2. Methodology

The programme of the 20th Summer Academy on OSCE consisted of a combination of

lectures, group work, high level panel discussions, case studies, simulations and workshops.

Lectures were divided according to different topics, usually covering one thematic

unit within the day. This was done mostly by providing a theoretical lecture in the morning,

followed by workshops and discussions in the afternoon. Both lectures and workshops

provided the participants with the basis to understand in depth the three dimensions of the

OSCE and other relevant areas of organisation’s work. The lectures also covered issues

related to Freedom of the Media, High Commissioner on National Minorities, the Office for

Democratic institutions and Human Rights, Conflict Prevention Centre, etc. A considerable

amount of time was spent on discussing the topic of OSCE’s current SMM in Ukraine.

After providing the participants with a deeper insight in aforementioned topics,

theoretical knowledge was then applied within small working groups. Such workshops gave

an opportunity to rethink and elaborate more thoroughly on OSCE and related issues. The

participants then had a chance to apply practical skills through negotiations and team-work.

OSCE’s Permanent Council meeting simulation was comprised of interaction of

multinational teams, where the participants had to apply their communication and

diplomatic skills.

In order to prepare for the academy and its programme, participants were provided

three weeks ahead of its start with articles containing relevant introductory information.

Additional material was distributed during the programme itself and also via email. During

the Summer Academy, participants received a comprehensive reader on the OSCE, which

served to help their better understanding of organisation’s work and issues related to it.

8

3. Evaluation

On the first day of the Summer Academy in Schlaining an anonymous questionnaire

was distributed, which provided the participants with a chance to evaluate each and every

session during ten days of the programme. Participants had an opportunity to assess

individual daily sessions and the overall programme, but also to provide their own ideas and

suggestions for further improvements.

At the end of the programme at the OSCE Headquarters in Hofburg, Vienna, an oral

feedback session was facilitated by the directors of the Summer Academy. Participants

discussed their personal programme evaluation and gave inputs and propositions for the

further improvement in general.

The overall evaluation of the programme derived from the questionnaires can be illustrated

in pie.

1.1. Usefulness

for my professional development

Excellent 13

Good 12

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 1

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

9

1.2. Usefulness

for my personal development

Excellent 16

Good 9

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 1

1.3. Content

Excellent 16

Good 8

Fair 1

Poor 0

No Answer 1

1.4. Methodology of the programme:

(mix of lectures, working groups, exercises, readings)

Excellent 11

Good 13

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 2

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

10

2. OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE PROGRAMME

2.1 Usefulness for my professional development

Excellent 15

Good 9

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 2

2.1.2 Usefulness for my personal development

Excellent 16

Good 8

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 2

2.2 Basic Structure of the programme

Excellent 13

Good 12

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 1

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

11

2.3 Methodology of the programme (mix of lectures,

working groups, exercises)

Excellent 13

Good 12

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 1

2.4 Readings

Excellent 13

Good 12

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 1

2.5 Facilities - Hotel Burg Schlaining

Excellent 18

Good 7

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 1

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

12

- Seminar Rooms

Excellent 14

Good 11

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 1

- Library

Excellent 12

Good 9

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 5

2.6 Staff of the ASPR - Ursula Gamauf-Eberhardt

(helpfulness, efficiency, etc.)

Excellent 24

Good 1

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 1

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

13

2.7 Staff of hotel (helpfulness, efficiency, etc.)

Excellent 21

Good 4

Fair 0

Poor 0

No Answer 1

3. Future Development of the Programme

3.1 Would you recommend the programme to colleagues?

Yes 25

No 0

No Answer 1

From the oral feedback session, the following can be summarized:

Participants tended to feel that the Academy had achieved its objective of expanding and

deepening knowledge about the OSCE. Participants left the Academy with a better

understanding of the purpose, the current and future role of the OSCE, as well as of its

various distinct activities, enhancing their knowledge about the OSCE as well as the OSCE

participating states and providing training in working more effectively within the OSCE

diplomatic and OSCE-NGO milieus. In this respect, the range of input from speakers, the

experience of Arie Bloed, who directed the Academy and enhanced the critical dialogue

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

No Answer

Yes

No

No Answer

14

between resource persons and participants, and the multinational and diverse occupational

backgrounds of the participants proved beneficial.

From the written evaluation the following points can be raised:

Overall, the methodology and the content of the programme were evaluated very positively

(“Excellent” and “Good”). Participants found the focus on different topics to be positive,

though some desired greater attention to one or another specific issue depending on their

personal background – as this is always the case due to different backgrounds. Participants

stated that in general a proper balance had been reached between providing an overview in

a lecture and deepening the knowledge and skills in working groups. A greater practical

involvement of participants as recommended in earlier evaluations proved being effective.

Participants stated that interactive sessions and exercises helped them improving their

communication skills within a multicultural, international setting and provided them with

crucial insights and a better understanding of other OSCE participating states. The mix of

methods in communicating the content was assessed as effective, interesting and

challenging.

Participants considered the two-days excursion to Vienna, including the visit to the OSCE

Permanent Council, some presentations and the high level diplomats-panel as very useful

and interesting and for some of them even exciting since they had the chance to meet their

delegations.

Most participants praised the selection of speakers for the programme. The involvement of

current and former high-ranking OSCE officials, sharing not only their knowledge and vast

experience but also their specific insights in the OSCE, was considered particularly valuable.

Also the panel discussion of high level diplomats was clearly a highlight.

Participants especially welcomed that the Academy Director made himself readily available

throughout the 10 days, and that some resource persons were able to continue discussion

with them outside the seminar room during lunch or dinner. This greatly enhanced the

overall learning experience.

15

Apart from getting an extensive knowledge about the OSCE, its structure, functioning etc.

the Academy was appreciated as being an opportunity to communicate with colleagues

from other OSCE offices in an intercultural atmosphere.

Also the venue was assessed positively, being a perfect location for a great learning

experience and for socializing.

Overall, participants felt warmly welcomed and appreciated the friendly professionalism,

helpfulness and efficiency of the staff at the ASPR and the Hotel Burg Schlaining.

Some statements on the overall evaluation of the Academy by participants:

• In such tight schedule it was very informative and covered almost all across of the

OSCE

• The programme was rich. The presentations delivered during the week shed light on

what the OSCE is truly about.

• I find the overall week very useful for my development.

• This week one was the excellent opportunity to discover more about the OSCE.

• I have never participated in such events. This is my first experience. I am very

pleased to be a participant of this anniversary course

• A very well managed, professional programme, made by the well-known OSCE

personalities

• Sometimes lectures were very basic, which you can always find in any newspaper. It

would be better if there had been more information concerning the history of the

OSCE its process, reasons and of course more legislation basics.

• It was good to have theoretical and practical courses with experts worked/ working

within OSCE.

• A lot of information was given to us, very carefully chosen. It was a busy time, but

really interesting.

• Lecturers contributed to any professional as well as personal development content,

experience and people-wise

16

• It was very interesting. It was my first such practice and I was a little afraid in the

beginning, but everything was excellent and I now have 25 new friends and also

clear understanding, what OSCE is and what it is doing.

• Many interesting information. Opportunity to meet new people and share ideas

• It fostered in my mind new perspectives about international security and gave me

oversight what things I need to do for improvement.

• Thank you for the extended course. It has been a great opportunity to come and

meet all those diplomatic, high professionals working on OSCE field, understood the

sore of OSCE activities, challenges it faces. Wish the course much success and

happily recommend the programme to colleagues.

• Overall, excellent experience and people liked this summer academy. I had the

opportunity to gain more knowledge on OSCE projects and generally of the

organisation. It is hard to add something or take out from this course. The speakers

were very interesting to listen. To sum up, there is always a space to fill in and

develop, such simulations and practical workshop, though these two weeks covered

almost everything and provided great knowledge. At last, I am glad the group was

interactive.

• The programme was useful and in time, special for those who is dealing OSCE,

offered the opportunity to understand what kind of organisation it stands how is

working the materials provided are useful for forward studying. Maybe it would be

more efficient if was a programme of two weeks. Thank you and wish you good luck

on future seminars!

• This academy is a very good opportunity not only to understand more, but also to

feel motivated while you go through the topic.

17

4. Session reports

4.1 OSCE’s sui generis status

Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) is the world’s largest

regional security organization: fifty-seven States participate in it today. OSCE deals with the

issues such as arms control, conflict prevention, promotion and protection of human rights,

crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation and adaptation. The OSCE had been

established in July 1973 as Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE),

during the period of Cold War in order to represent a kind of a multilateral forum for

negotiations between East and West, and it also has its origins in the Helsinki Conference,

which was held in 1975. The document that was signed in Helsinki contained several issues

that had been essential for the so-called Helsinki process, as well as the future

commitments of the CSCE.

The significant turning point in the functioning of the OSCE was the collapse of the

Soviet Union, which led to the great change of role for the CSCE. Until the beginning of

1990s, CSCE used to function mostly through organizing various meetings and conferences

that were dealing with the extension of commitments and obligations of participating

States’. The new path for this organization was set up during the Paris Summit in November

1990, when the permanent institutions were established. However, CSCE was renamed in

OSCE in the beginning of the 1995. Therefore, the period of 1990-1994 was marked by the

transformation of the functioning of this organization, because it was rather difficult to

adapt its aims and methods to the newly established geopolitical environment. There are in

total six official languages of this organization – English, German, French, Italian, Russian

and Spanish and its headquarters are in Vienna.

The Opening of the Academy was enriched by a key statement by the Ambassador of

Sweden Fredrik Löjdquist who willingly presented his countries positions and foci within the

OSCE and beyond, also touching upon sensitive issues within the OSCE.

18

During the first day of the Summer Academy, on Friday, 10 June, the main topic was

focused on explanation of OSCE as an organization with a specific status, as an entity

different in comparison to other international organizations. The OSCE is not a typical

international organization, since it doesn’t fulfil all characteristics which would necessary for

a certain organization to be considered as an international one. The OSCE’s organizational

structure is very complex, while the Chairman-in-Office, High Commissioner on National

Minorities and Representative on Freedom of Media play a huge role.

While Arie Bloed was committing a lot of time explaining the participants the basic

features of the OSCE and its institutional structures and budget, Lisa Tabassi, Head of Legal

Services at OSG, talked about highly disputable and complex legal status of the organization.

The OSCE does not have a legal personality, nor a classical constituent treaty. Its documents

are political decisions rather than legal ones. Furthermore, the OSCE itself confirms that the

intention was never to create legally binding commitments. A rather interesting and specific

aspect of the OSCE is the fact that the nature of its constitutive charter is non-binding – it is

a political commitment of all signatories rather than a formal treaty. Therefore, due to the

lack of legal effect of OSCE’s constitutive charter, this organization is formally deprived of

international legal personality. Taking into account that each and every international or

intergovernmental organization is specific in its way, the status of OSCE constitutive charter

shouldn’t be seen as something unusual. What is more, despite the non-binding status of its

charter, the OSCE was and continued to be very flexible when it comes to the adaptation

and evolution of its functions and commitments to the constantly changing world

environment.

The OSCE seems to be a very interesting example when it comes to the difficulty of

the determination of legal personality of a certain organization. In the case of the OSCE,

upon establishment of this organization, no international treaty was adopted. What is more,

many legal authors think that the existence of an international agreement, signed, adopted

and ratified by states is required and even necessary when it comes to determining the

nature of a certain organization. Since the OSCE was established and based on the Helsinki

Final Act, it is important to emphasize that this document was not considered to be a treaty

19

under international law. Therefore, for many authors, all of the basic documents of the

OSCE are not treaties and cannot have a legal character, and therefore, cannot be a source

of political commitments.

On the other hand, by analysing the text of the Final Act, it cannot be denied that

signing states agreed to establish future Summits and that it defines principles that truly are

international in their nature. However, many authors also consider that the original text of

Helsinki Act had no intention to include legal obligation of the states. Nevertheless, during

the period of the Cold War, states decided to maintain the periodical meetings, which

resulted in the creation of the term “Helsinki Process”. Therefore, these states were not

marked as “member states” but “participating states”. Taking into account the actual

activity of the OSCE nowadays, this organization does meet the main criteria required by the

general principles of international law and can be considered to be a proper international

organization, which is a subject of international law and which has an international legal

personality.

Moreover, the decision making in this organization is being made by a consensus of

all 57 participating (not member) states, which in the end makes decisions more effective

and strong, but at the same time it is very difficult to reach it. That is why the work of the

OSCE is based on the concept of equality of all states. In the decision-making process in the

OSCE, mechanisms of consensus minus one (C-1) and minus two (C-2) also exist. However,

the first one has only been enforced once, in the case of the conflict in Yugoslavia in the

early 1990s, while the latter one has never been used.

4.1.1 Decision-Making Powers

Each participating State has equal power in all OSCE decision-making bodies. The

main document to look at, when it comes to the rules for decision-making process are Rules

of Procedure, which was adopted in December 2006, by the Brussels Ministerial Council.

According to this document, decisions are adopted by consensus. By the consensus, it is

20

understood that, in the process of the adoption of decision is question, there is an absence

of any objection by participating State.

However, according to the Prague Document on Further Development of the CSCE

Institutions and Structure, in case of a State’s “clear, gross and uncorrected violation”,

decision should be taken without the consent of that State. Therefore, some exceptions

from the “consensus rule” do exist.

In addition, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly adopts its decisions by majority vote

of the all members.

For these reasons, the OSCE and all its organs are bound by the rules and principles

of international law and they can be legally responsible for their acts. In December 2008,

the Greek Chairmanship overtook the task of strengthening the legal framework of the

OSCE, with the help of participating States. However, a final decision regarding the lack of

legal personality has not been adopted. When it comes to the funding of this organization,

the OSCE budget consists of the contribution of its member states. The largest contribution

of the participant States is currently provided by Germany, Italy, France, the United States,

the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom.

The introductory session held on 10 June by Zarko Puhovski, University Professor

from Zagreb, Croatia, was very informative when it comes to the topic of Security and

Cooperation in the OSCE Area: Conflicts and New Dividing Lines. Puhovski explained the

history of OSCE and talked about various “dividing lines” that OSCE was faced with

throughout its existence – Cold War, fall of Communism, EU issues and the recent conflict in

Ukraine. He discussed the possible consequences of Brexit and also focused his lecture on

the conflict in Yugoslavia, which, as he argued, was equally (if not even more) catastrophic

as the Ukrainian crisis, but highlighted that it is commonly perceived that the latter one is

more serious and important since it involves Russia as a great power, relating it to the Cold

War situation. Puhovski also talked about similarities and differences between referenda for

independence held in Kosovo and the one held in Crimea. Puhovski and participants

21

discussed EU’s failures when it comes to the refugee/migrant crisis, war in Yugoslavia,

economic crisis, etc., highlighting the importance of OSCE when it comes to all the

mentioned matters.

4.1.2 Institutional Structure

The OSCE functions with the help of the complex network of its institutions and

bodies, which are being created by decisions adopted during the Summits by the Heads of

State and Governments. The most important bodies with decision-making powers are the

Ministerial Council, the Permanent Council, the Senior Council, the Forum for Security-

Cooperation, Summits and review Conferences.

The Chairman-in-Office has the power to control all of the operational activities of

the OSCE and has a direct contact with the parties concerned, when it comes to the issues

such as conflict prevention and resolution, rehabilitation and co-ordination. As a supporter

and help-provider of the Chairman-in-Office there is the OSCE Secretariat with the

appointed Secretary General. Claus Neukirch, Senior Political Advisor of the German

Chairman-in-Office joined the group for a session, specifically looking at the role of the

chairmanship within the OSCE, highlighting possibilities, options and limitations, mandates

and aims, challenges and successes.

Additionally, there are other important institutions belonging to the OSCE and these

are:

• the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly,

• the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR),

• the Office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media,

• the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities (HCNM) and

• the OSCE Court of Conciliation and Arbitration

22

However, each and every one of them is a story for itself and a separate subject of

analysis. The part of the complex structure of the OSCE institutions and organs can be found

in the following chart.1

1 Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE Handbook Vienna 2007, s. 13

Summit (OSCE Heads of States or

governments

The Ministerial Council (Main and central decision-making and governing body � Foreign Ministers of

Permanent Council (permanent decision-making

body

Forum for Security Co-operation

(body arms control � meets weekly in

Senior Council (Political Directors

and Economic Forum

OSCE Parliamentary

Assembly (Parliamentarians from participating

States

Chairperson-in-Office (the Foreign Minister of a

participating state � system of “Troika”

� previous and succeeding

The Office of the OSCE

Representative on Freedom of

the Media

OSCE High Commissioner

on National Minorities (HCNM)

Secretary General

(support to the Chairmanship

and to the OSCE in general

the

OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human

Rights (ODIHR)

OSCE Secretariat

Vienna (co-ordination

23

It is for these reasons that the OSCE is often seen as a platform for a dialogue

between participating states. The debate which is still taking place even today is whether

the legalization of organization would be a good idea or not. On the other hand, the OSCE,

under some circumstances can be a subject of international law. For instance, in the case of

the Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) to Ukraine, the OSCE has legal personality under the

Ukrainian law.

The OSCE’s experienced a great evolution when it comes to its tasks. The CSCE was

created during the Cold War, when political, military and human security issues were major

ones for the international community. However, as the Helsinki Final Act was adopted in

1975, this organization served as a conference which would provide participating states

with a chance to discuss current issue. This practice has been kept until this day.

Of course, a very important segment of the OSCE’s institutional structure is surely its

field missions, through which OSCE supports rule of law, minority rights, media freedom etc.

OSCE’s Mission to Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, Skopje, Moldova, Kosovo, Ukraine, Estonia,

Latvia, Croatia, Georgia are only some examples of how OSCE’s field operations handle

various crises in the certain States and regions. David Campion, Operational Support Officer

at the CPC introduced participants to concepts and general issues of long term mission and

discussed with them lessons learned.

It can certainly be concluded that the OSCE’s institutional structure is based on

cooperation and on non-hierarchical, but still rational division of powers and duties

between the institutions.

4.2 Three dimensions of OSCE

It is wide-known that OSCE’s framework is divided into three dimensions –

economic-environmental, politico-military and human, all of which are interlinked.

24

Arie Bloed committed a great amount of time explaining the third, “human”,

dimension of the OSCE. However, this dimension is not limited only to human rights, which

may be commonly believed. On the contrary, this Human Dimension is dealing with many

different issues – democratic institutions, gender equality, protection of minorities, anti-

terrorism, election observation, rule of law, fundamental freedoms and rights etc.

Therefore, the Human Dimension in the OSCE is not only focused on security matters, but it

is at the same time a political process, making it more flexible. All of the aforementioned

topics are interconnected because of their huge importance for security.

Ambassador Halil Yurdakul Yigitguden, Coordinator of the OSCE Economic and

Environmental Activities held a lecture followed by discussion on the topic of Economic and

Environmental Dimension (EED). The second dimension (or basket, as it is often being

referred to), consists of Economic and Environmental Dimension Implementation Meeting

(EEDIM), Economic and Environmental Forum (EEF), and Economic and Environmental

Committee. The EEDIM was established in 2011 and it is mostly focused on enhancing

dialogue and cooperation, reviewing implementation of decisions and commitments in the

EED, setting the direction for future work and good governance. The EEF, for instance, deals

with different topics throughout the years, such as the Water governance in the OSCE area –

increasing security and stability through co-operation (2015), Responding to environmental

challenges with a view to promoting cooperation and security in the OSCE area (2014), etc.

Office of the Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities (OCEEA) and Field

Operations are the tools for implementation of the mandates of OSCE’s Economic and

Environmental Dimension (EED). Halil Yurdakul Yigitguden further elaborated on the major

economic acitivies, such as Good Governance and Anti-Corruption, Migration Management

and Transport.

Moreover, the Politico-Military Dimension of the OSCE was discussed by

Ambassador Marcel Pesko, who currently serves as Director of Conflict Prevention Centre

(CPC). Arnar Jensson from the Strategic Police Matters Unit (SPMU) introduced activities

relating to policing issues within the security dimension. Ambassador Alexey Lyzhenkov, Co-

ordinator of Activities to Address TNT, presented and discussed with the group

25

transnational threats including boarder security and terrorism. The participants were very

eager to learn more about different dimensions of the OSCE, since they are key points when

it comes to understanding the basic principles of security and cooperation of the OSCE. It

was certainly interesting to learn more about history of the organisation, since different

dimensions that exist today were created throughout the Cold War. While the Eastern and

Western part back then had different interests, it is natural that they had to find some kind

of compromise in order to establish a functioning security organisation.

The OSCE’s is an organization created to ensure the security and co-operation in

Europe. Therefore, security is one of the most basic concepts for this organization,

introduced by the Istanbul Summit in 1999, when the Charter for European Security was

adopted. This year marked the inclusion of new threats to the security, such as

transnational ones. Nowadays, OSCE’s focus on security is seen in much broader terms. It is

called a “comprehensive security” for a reason and there are no enforcement mechanisms

or sanctions for implementation.

4.3 Minority Rights and Minority Issues

Lectures held by Arie Bloed on 12 June were focused on the issue of minority rights,

finishing with the case study on national minorities conducted by Walter Kemp, Senior Vice

President at the International Peace Institute and Co-Director of the Summer Academy on

OSCE. Aforementioned issues were highlighted as one of the crucial ones to be dealt with

when it comes to the OSCE, simply because of their predominant importance for security.

The High Commissioner on Minorities is a unique instrument of this organization, since it

does not exist in such form in other organizations. The mandate of Commissioner has a

special focus on conflict prevention and on minority rights, since it is generally accepted that

human rights themselves are not a sufficient tool to ensure security. This dimension gained

in value particularly during the war in former Yugoslavia since the international community

did not have effective tools to deal with the situation.

26

Very important aspect of minority rights in relation to the OSCE is to promote the

integration of minorities into the broader society, while ensuring that assimilation is being

avoided. During the session, particularly interesting aspect was the discussion on the aim of

the international regime of minority rights, since it is very disputable whether different

countries try to assimilate, separate or integrate their national minorities into the general

society. In OSCE’s view, it is crucial to ensure the possibility for minorities to preserve their

identity, in the case that is their wish. On the other hand, minority rights regime deals with

keeping a balance between rights and duties, since OSCE believes that minorities should not

be in possession of rights only, but certain obligations as well.

When it comes to the topic of minority rights, the most important OSCE’s political

instrument is the Copenhagen Document, which is sometimes considered to have relatively

vague formulation of rights in question. Many argue that the vagueness of this document is

due to the fact that governing elites in countries with minority issues often consider that

such rights only benefit minorities, and sometimes even harm the majority. Moreover, it

was also intended to be vague since the minority rights issues varies from country to

country and it is impossible to have one, strict, instrument to address all of the differences.

For all these reasons, the character of minority rights within the OSCE is often

comprehended as vague, as mainly political nature and as “principles” rather than “rights”.

Since the minority rights often require considering the territorial integrity of the

country, non-discrimination, self-determination and self-identification rights, one of the

most interesting examples was the current crisis in Ukraine. That is why a lot of time was

committed trying to understand the ongoing situation in this country from the view of OSCE

and High Commissioner on National Minorities.

Furthermore, it is important to emphasize that minority rights in the OSCE are not in

principle legally binding, but they are politically binding. This issue, as concluded by both

participants and lecturers, are a crucial issue to be dealt with at the OSCE, since they are

directly related to the principle of sovereignty. According to the Bolzano Recommendation,

sovereignty comprises the jurisdiction of the State over its territory and population, and is

27

constrained only by the limits established by international law. No State may exercise

jurisdiction over the population or part of the population of another State within the

territory of that State without its consent. In often discussed case of the conflict in Ukraine,

the argument that was used by Russia was significantly related to the issue of minority

rights. That is why the mentioned Recommendation is a very important instrument, stating

that although a state may have an interest – even a constitutionally declared responsibility –

to support persons belonging to national minorities residing in other states based on ethnic,

cultural, linguistic, religious, historical or any other ties, this does not imply a right under

international law to exercise jurisdiction over these persons on the territory of another state

without that state’s consent (as it was the case with Russia and Ukraine).

Sandra Sacchetti, Head of the External Co-operation Section of the OSCE Secretariat

complemented the topic by discussing with participants the question of migration and how

does the OSCE deal with it.

4.4 Gender Issues

One session during the Summer Academy was committed to the explanation of

gender issues in regard to the OSCE. Key note speakers in this session were the Deputy

Permanent Representative of Spain to the OSCE, M. Victoria Scola, the First Secretary of the

Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE, Cordula Geinitz, as representative of the

German Chairmanship, and the Programme Coordinator for the civil military co-operation

project at ASPR Susanne Brezina. The panel introduced the importance of gender issues

from different perspectives, emphasizing that the OSCE has included into its framework

several goals to improve and ensure gender equality. Minister Victoria Scola explained the

main achievements of Spain in this matter and the great importance of gender issues for the

OSCE. She referred to the OSCE commitments in the field, to the Gender Action Plan 2004

and to the need for an Addendum. She also referred to the Woman Peace and Security

agenda and explained the important role of OSCE in the implementation of UN Resolution

1325.

28

Ms Geinitz provided valuable information about achievements in Germany and explained

the importance of the issue for the German Chairmanship as a cross-dimensional topic. She

also shared information about aspects that the German Chairmanship had identified as

especially important and which therefore will be reflected in the main events of the

program of the Chairmanship, such as the conference to counter violence against women in

July and a conference on the Role of Women in Conflict Prevention and Settlement in

November. Ms Brezina provided a detailed and very well documented presentation of the

issue of the Security Sector Reform and explained the importance of gender perspective in

that respect.

4.5 Mediation, Negotiation and Diplomacy

Wilbur Perlot, training and research fellow from the Netherlands Institute of

International Relations Clingendael conducted a workshop on the topic of “Mediation,

Negotiation and Diplomacy” on 11 June in Stadtschlaining. The participants had a chance to

gather a basic understanding of the process of negotiations, which begins with a good

communication and applying appropriate methods. A particularly interesting part for the

participants was the discussion about stereotypes related to the body language, i.e.

behaviour of the people involved in negotiations. Perlot further elaborated on different

stages of negotiation processes, introducing participant to two commonly used terms –

BATNA (best alternative to negotiated agreement) and ZOPA (zone of possible agreement).

After providing the participant with a basic knowledge of negotiation skills, Perlot

carried out an exercise in which participants were split in groups of two, both having

different tasks related to the negotiations for the purchase of a car by a certain embassy.

Furthermore, another simulation game was conducted, in which participants were

representing different states within the OSCE and where they had to negotiate different

political actions due to the crisis in Algeria. Here, decisions were not only dependant on the

states that the participants were representing, but it was crucial to negotiate actions to be

further taken in order to reach a consensus, for any state which would consider to be in a

disadvantaged position would be able to use its veto power. These two exercises were

29

certainly useful because the participants experienced the difficulties of being involved in

negotiations where they had to represent their states, while at the same time they had to

reach a certain decision where all parties would be relatively satisfied.

Another exercise which the participants found particularly interesting was a test

comprised of 30 questions to be answered without thinking too much. The goal of the test

was to analyse the negotiation skills of participants, so they could understand what kind of

negotiations would be successful for them and which not. One could argue that this exercise

helped the participants to understand their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to

negotiation skills and to evaluate their personal input.

4.6 Simulation: Special Meeting on the Refugee and Migrant Crisis

One of the highlights of the entire 20th Summer Academy on OSCE was certainly a

simulation of the OSCE’s Permanent Council meeting on the refugee and migrant crisis on

15 June, moderated by Walter Kemp and Arie Bloed. After providing the participants with an

insight regarding the basics of the functioning of Permanent Council and after assigning

them different roles, Kemp and Bloed explained the main rules of the simulation.

This part of the Summer Academy was particularly interesting for participants, since they

had a chance to experience the functioning of one of the crucial parts of the OSCE in

practice, after which they have realized that negotiations and the work of the OSCE in

general is very challenging and demanding. Moreover, the topic was very timely and

relevant since the refugee and migrant crisis is one of the most important and most

discussed topics nowadays. Georg Klussmann, First Secretary of the Permanent Mission of

the Federal Republic of Germany to the OSCE joined the group and commented on the

outcome of the simulation exercise from a practitioners point of view. He welcomed the

engagement of people and their creative ways of dealing with the issue and took note of

some of the outcomes.

30

4.7 Visit to Hofburg – OSCE’s Headquarters in Vienna

One of the major events that took place during the 20th Summer Academy on OSCE

was the visit to the OSCE headquarters in the Hofburg palace in Vienna. Unlike all previous

years, this year’s visit was the first time when the Summer Academy was concluded by the

visit to Vienna, after which all participants departed for their home countries. It was a two

days long programme, which included a visit to the Permanent Council’s meeting on 16

June, followed by an interesting discussion with Ruth Pojman, Deputy Co-ordinator at the

Unit for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, on this very current issue.

During the visit to the Permanent Council, the participants were provided with a chance to

see the work of OSCE in practice. A great amount of time was committed to the statements

and condolences to the United States regarding the recent Orlando shooting incident.

The Freedom of the Media, explained and introduced by Gunnar Vrang, Senior

Adviser to the Representative for the Freedom of Media (RFOM), was very informative for

the participants, particularly because of the importance of freedom of speech for

democratic societies and OSCE in general. Vrang’s presentation was concentrated on

analysing different issues that the RFOM is dealing with on a daily basis – safeguarding

freedom of speech, protecting lives of journalists, and issues related to the difficulties of

propaganda, misinformation and misusage of data, all particularly related to the current

conflict in Ukraine.

The first day of the visit to Hofburg was concluded with a stimulating discussion at

the High Level Panel, moderated by Walter Kemp, on the topic of “Back to Diplomacy – But

How?” The panel consisted of several experts – Ambassador Christian Strohal (Austria),

Minister Christine Weil (Deputy CiO – Germany), Valeri Maslin (Senior Counsellor, RF) and

Fred Tanner (Senior Adviser to the SG). The panellists proceeded with a very complex topic

of deciding upon and discussing the best way of how to go back to the roots of diplomacy

and deal with multiple issues that threaten it every day, such as ongoing conflicts around

the world and focusing on the importance of the OSCE for the entire topic.

31

The second day at Hofburg, and at the same time last official day of the 20th Summer

Academy on OSCE was marked by the talk of Ambassador Christian Strohal, the

representative of the Austrian delegation to the OSCE and former director of ODIHR, which

focused on the function of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR)

and the importance of election observation missions of the OSCE. The Ambassador tackled

main goals of election observation missions, which is to ensure fair and democratic elections

in all OSCE participating states. One of the interesting discussion questions that came up

after Ambassador’s presentation was certainly the issue of focusing the observation of

election process mostly on the countries in the East, with almost no focus on the elections

occurring in the western countries. Furthermore, the participants were very interested in

the discussion of actual efficiency of OSCE’s election observation missions, since in the past

this was not the only organisation that was dealing with such issues, sometimes causing

confusion since different observers would come up with different conclusions regarding the

fairness of election process in certain countries.

Afterwards Robert Hampshire, former SPMU staff who had recently served at the SMM to

Ukraine, shared with the groups his experiences from the field, starting with the setup of

the mission, also dealing with challenges and highlighting successes. His presentation was

complemented by input from one of the participants, John Yuhas who is currently serving at

the SMM.

The final day of the Academy was closed by a wrap-up statement by Walter kemp who

summarised the Academy by looking at the OSCE as a phenomenon which is nowadays

again more relevant but more divided.

4.8 Social Events

The organisers of the Summer Academy provided participants with the variety of

social events, such as a visit to a typical winery (Heurigen), a barbecue dinner with music at

the Hotel Burg Schlaining and a guided tour visit through the castle of Schlaining and the

32

Peace Museum. At the end of the Academy, participants enjoyed a farewell lunch together

in Vienna.

A social highlight took place on the PC day when participants had a chance to attend a

reception celebrating “20 Years of Summer Academy on OSCE” at the OSCE Headquarters in

Hofburg, Vienna. A number of high level diplomats, representatives of the secretariat,

national delegations and cooperation partners and also former Academy participants who

are today serving in the diplomatic corps attended the reception. Ambassador Pesko

forwarded the guests the best regards by the Secretary General and his sincere

congratulations for the anniversary. He highlighted the Summer Academy as an important

and unique training possibility for OSCE diplomats and partners and appreciated the efforts

of the ASPR in the area of international training and research. He also expressed his highest

estimation for the fruitful cooperation the OSCE shares with this Austrian Peace Institute

since more than 20 years.

4.9 Roundup

OSCE is, in general, a very successful “story”. This organization’s contribution to the

peaceful conflict resolutions was and continues to be immense, especially when it comes to

the transformation of Eastern Europe’s States after the Cold War period. Since the security

presents a very important aspect of every day’s life, it has become necessary to keep such

organization existing. The OSCE deals with three important aspects of security: economic-

environmental, politico-military and human, and therefore its role in establishing a

framework for co-operation between these fields is large. Although its main weakness is a

legally non-binding character of its decisions, they nevertheless have a huge impact on the

behaviour of its participating States. Considering the fact that conflicts appeared in the

history of mankind and that they will continue to emerge in the future, OSCE surely

represents one of the essential organizations in the contemporary world.

33

5. Appendices

APPENDIX 1

20th SUMMER ACADEMY ON OSCE

9 – 18 June 2016

At the Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR)

Under The Auspices of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)

P R O G R A M M E

1

DATE & TIME

SESSION

SPEAKER

METHOD

Thursday, 9 June

Until 16.00

Arrival of Participants / Check-in

16:30 – 17:00

Coffee-Break served break-out room in the Castle/Seminar Centre

17.00 – 18.30

Introduction of Participants and Team &

Introduction to the Programme

ARIE BLOED

Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE

URSULA E. GAMAUF-EBERHARDT Co-Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE/ ASPR

Interactive

Introduction Session

18:45

Group photo in the courtyard of the castle

19:00 – 19:45

Official Opening Ceremony

AMBASSADOR FREDRIK LÖJDQUIST, Head of Swedish

Delegation to the OSCE ARIE BLOED

BLANKA BELLAK, Director, ASPR

Ceremony

in the Knights Hall

20:00

Welcome Cocktail & Welcome Dinner

2

Friday, 10 June

09:00 – 10:30

Security and Cooperation in the OSCE Area:

Conflicts and New Dividing-Lines

ZARKO PUHOVSKI

University Professor, Zagreb / Croatia

Lecture

Q&A

11:00 – 12:30

Basic Principles of Security and Cooperation:

1975-2016

ARIE BLOED

Presentation

Q&A

14:00 – 15:00

OSCE’s Legal Status

LISA TABASSI

Head of Legal Services, OSG

Presentation

Q&A

15:00 – 16:30

The OSCE’s Organisation: Basic features

ARIE BLOED

Presentation

Q&A

17:00 – 18:30

The OSCE’s organisation: Institutional Structures

and Budget

ARIE BLOED

Presentation

Q&A

Saturday, 11 June

09:00 – 12:30 (incl. breaks)

Workshop 3: Mediation, Negotiation and

Diplomacy

WILBUR PERLOT Training and Research Fellow, Netherlands Institute of

International Relations Clingendael

Interactive Workshop:

Presentation, Q&A Role Plays Simulation Discussion

14:00 – 18:30 (incl. breaks)

Continued

3

19:00

Social Event at a Winery

Sunday, 12 June

Free time

11:00-12:30

The Human Dimension of the OSCE

ARIE BLOED

Presentation

Q&A

15:00 – 16:00

Minority Rights and Minority Issues Within the

OSCE

ARIE BLOED

Presentation

Q&A

16:30 – 18:30

Case Study on National Minorities

WALTER KEMP

Senior Vice President, International Peace Institute (IPI) Co-Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE

Workshop

4

Monday, 13 June

09:00-10:30

The Politico-Military Dimension of the OSCE

AMBASSADOR MARCEL PESKO

Director, Conflict Prevention Centre (CPC)

Presentation

Q&A

11:00 – 12:30

The Security Dimensions: Policing Issues

ARNAR JENSSON

Strategic Police Matters Unit (SPMU), Transnational Threats (TNT) Department

Presentation

Q&A

15:00 – 16:30

Migration– How does the OSCE deal with these

Issues?

SANDRA SACCHETTI

Head of the External Co-operation Section of the OSCE Secretariat

Presentation

Q&A

17:00 – 18:30

Experts Panel on Gender Issues

M. VICTORIA SCOLA PLIEGO, Deputy Permanent

Representative, Spain CORDULA GEINITZ, First Secretary / Human Dimension /

Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE SUSANNE BREZINA, Programme Coordinator/ASPR

Panel Discussion

Q&A Discussion

Tuesday, 14 June

09:00 – 10:30

Economic and Environmental Dimension (EED) of

the OSCE

HALIL YURDAKUL YIGITGÜDEN

Coordinator of the OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities

Presentation

Q&A

5

11:00 - 12:30

Transnational Threats

(incl. Terrorism & Boarder Security)

ALEXEY LYZHENKOV

Coordinator of Activities to Address TNT / OSCE TNTD

Presentation

Q&A

15:00 – 16:30

Introduction, Concepts and General Issues of Long

Term Missions & Lessons Learned

DAVID CAMPION

Operational Support Officer, Operation Service, Conflict Prevention Centre (CPC)

Presentation

Q&A Discussion Case Study

17:00 – 18:30

Continued

Wednesday, 15 June

09:00 – 10:30

The Role of the Chairmanship

CLAUS NEUKIRCH

Senior Political Advisor, German 2016 OSCE Chairmanship

Presentation

Q&A

11:00 - 12:30

Simulation: Special Meeting on the Refugee and

Migrant Crisis

WALTER KEMP & ARIE BLOED

Role Play, Simulation

14:00 – 18:30

Continued (incl. Coffee Break)

GEORG KLUSSMANN

First Secretary, Permanent Mission of the Federal Republic of Germany to the OSCE

6

Thursday, 16 June

VIENNA EXCURSION (day 1) to the OSCE Conference Centre / PC / Hofburg

10:00 – 11:00

Visit of the Permanent Council (PC)

11:00 – 12:00

Room 201

Trafficking

RUTH POJMAN

Deputy Coordinator, Unit for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings

12:00 – 13:00

Room 201

Freedom of the Media (FoM)

GUNNAR VRANG

Senior Adviser to the RFOM

Presentation

Q&A

13:00 – 15:30

Lunch-break, Check-In Hotel, Free-Time

individually

16:00 – 18:00 Room 201 /

2nd Floor

High Level Panel: Back to Diplomacy – But How?

AMBASSADOR CHRISTIAN STROHAL / AUSTRIA

MINISTER CHRISTINE WEIL / DEPUTY CIO-GERMANY VALERY MASLIN, SENIOR COUNSELLOR / RF FRED TANNER, SENIOR ADVISOR TO THE SG

Moderator: WALTER KEMP

Presentations by Panellists

Q&A Discussion

18:00 – 20:00

RECEPTION

“20 Years of Summer Academy on OSCE”

Reception

7

Friday, 17 June VIENNA EXCURSION (day 2)

09:30 – 10:30

Room 201

ODIHR, EO, HR

AMBASSADOR CHRISTIAN STROHAL (INV.)

Presentation

Q&A

10:30– 11:30

Room 201

OSCE Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine – Experiences from the Field & Lessons Learned

ROBERT HAMPSHIRE

JOHN YUHAS

Interactive Session

Q&A

11:45 – 13:00

Room 201

The OSCE - More Relevant but More Divided

(Wrap-Up)

WALTER KEMP

Interactive Session

Q&A

14:00

Farewell Lunch in Vienna

Closing & Farewell

ARIE BLOED, WALTER KEMP,

URSULA GAMAUF

APPENDIX 2

LIST of Lecturers/Moderators/Facilitators

Nr Mr/Ms NAME Position

01 Mr. Arie BLOED

International Consultant, Lecturer and Trainer, Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE

02 Mr. Walter KEMP

IPI - Director for Europe and Central Asia and Co-Director of the Summer Academy on OSCE

03 Ms. Ursula GAMAUF-EBERHARDT

Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) - Programme Director for ASPR-OSCE Cooperation

04 Mr. Fredrik LÖJDQUIST

Ambassador of Sweden to the OSCE

05 Ms. Blanka BELLAK

Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) - Director

06 Mr. Zarko PUHOVSKI

University of Zagreb - Professor; Chairperson of the Croatian Helsinki Committee for Human Rights

07 Ms. Lisa TABASSI

OSCE Secretariat, Legal Service - Head of Unit

08 Mr. Wilbur PERLOT

Clingendael Academy - Senior Training and Research Fellow, International and European Negotiations

09 Mr. Marcel PESKO

OSCE Secretariat, Vienna - Director of the OSCE Conflict Prevention Centre

10 Mr. Arnar JENSSON

OSCE Secretariat, Vienna - Head of Strategic Police Matters Unit at OSCE

11 Ms. Sandra SACCHETTI

External Co-operation Section of the OSCE Secretariat - Head

12 Ms. Susanne J. BREZINA

Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution (ASPR) - Programme Coordinator Civil-Military Relations, SSR, Peacebuilding and Training

13 Ms. Maria Victoria SCOLA

Permanent Mission of Spain to the OSCE - Deputy Permanent Representative

14 Ms. Cordula GEINITZ

Permanent Mission of the Federal Republic of Germany to the OSCE - First Secretary, Human Dimension

15 Mr. Halil Yurdakul YIGITGÜDEN

The Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities (OCEEA)

16 Mr. Alexey LYZHENKOV

OSCE Secretariat, Transnational Threats Department (TNTD) - Co-ordinator of Activities to Address Transnational Threats

17 Mr. David CAMPION

Conflict Prevention Centre for Operations Service at OSCE - Operational Support Officer

1

Nr Mr/Ms NAME Position

18 Mr. Claus NEUKIRCH

Conflict Prevention Centre for Operations Service at OSCE, German Delegation to the OSCE - Deputy Director

20 Mr. Georg KLUSSMANN

Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE - First Secretary

21 Mr. Gunnar VRANG

Office of the OSCE reprsentative on Freedom of the Media - Spokesperson

22 Ms. Ruth POJMAN

OSCE Secretariat, Office of the Special Representative and Co-ordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings - Special Representative

23 Mr. Christian STROHAL

Ambassador of Austria to the OSCE, Vienna

24 Ms. Christine WEIL

Permanent Mission of Germany to the OSCE - Deputy Head of Mission, Chairperson of the Preparatory Committee

25 Mr. Valery MASLIN

Senior Counsellor of the Russian Federation to the OSCE

26 Mr. Fred TANNER

Senior Advisor to the OSCE Secretary General

27 Mr. Robert HAMPSHIRE

2

APPENDIX 3 List of Participants

Nr Sex NAME citizen Position

1 Ms. Elira ÇANGA

Albania OSCE Presence in Albania - Senior Media Development Assistant, Media Development Unit

2 Ms. Anna SARKISYAN

Armenia Caucasus Research Resource Centre, Armenia - Senior Programme Manager

3 Ms. Tamara SHAHINYAN

Armenia Office to the President of the Republic of Armenia - Expert at the Department of External Relations

4 Mr. Martin HARRICH

Austria Freelance

5 Ms. Nubar SALMANOVA

Azerbaijan Council of Europe Office in Azerbaijan - Project Assistant

6 Mr. Aleksandr SAKOVICH

Belarus Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus - Second Secretary, Department of Europe

7 Mr. Yaroslav MARTINKEVICH

Belarus Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus - Attaché, Unit of the EU and Subregional organisations, European Cooperation Department

8 Ms. Hana ĐOGOVIĆ

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Australian Embassy and Permanent Mission to the United Nations, Austria - Intern

9 Mr. Philip MASCHKE

Denmark Danish Helsinki Committee for Human Rights, Denmark - Manager Secretariat and Magazine Producer

10 Ms. Tatiana KHROL-LAPPALAINEN

Finland UN Assistance Mission to Afghanistan (UNAMA) - Political Affairs Officer

11 Mr. Beka KIRIA

Georgia Ministry of Defence, Georgia - Senior Specialist in Policy and Planning Department

12 Ms. Maia SHOGIRADZE

Georgia European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia, Field Office Zugdidi - Administrative Assistant

13 Ms. Irina TSERTSVADZE

Georgia Ministry of Defence, Georgia - Head of Division, International Relations and Euro-Atlantic Integration Department, Division of European Integration and Relations with the International Organizations

14 Mr. Andreas HERRMANN

Germany Saxonian Parliament, Dresden, Germany - Policy Advisor and Journalist

15 Mr. Madi KONAKBAYEV

Kazakhstan Permanent Mission of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the International Organizations in Vienna - Attaché

16 Ms. Eivina ZIZIUNAITE

Lithuania Beckley.Institute, Vienna, Austria - Sales & Training Coordinator, Project Management Responsible

3

Nr Sex NAME citizen Position

17 Ms. Ludmila NOFIT

Moldova Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Moldova -Attaché, International Security Division, General Directorate of Multilateral Cooperation

18 Ms. Tatiana BUDECI

Moldova OSCE Office of the Secretary General, Austria, Vienna - Temporary Assistant at the Records Management Unit

19 Ms. Anna MASLOVA

Russia Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russia - Third Secretary, OSCE Section, Department of All-European Cooperation

20 Ms. Madina KURBANOVA

Tajikistan OSCE Office in Tajikistan - Senior Assistant to Head of Office

21 Ms. Suray SEYILBAYEVA

Turkmenistan Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan - Attaché at the International Organizations Department

22 Mr. Arslan MELYAYEV

Turkmenistan OSCE Centre in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan - Procurement & Asset Management Assistant

23 Ms. Maral RAHYMOVA

Turkmenistan Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan - The American Desk Officer

24 Ms. Kateryna HONCHARENKO

Ukraine High Court, Kyiv, Ukraine - Assistant to the Judge in High Specialized Court of Ukraine of Civil and Criminal Cases

25 Ms. Olena SYRINSKA

Ukraine Junior Editor-in-Chief of TERAZE.org.ua website; Junior Researcher at A.Yu Krymsky Intstitute of the Oriental Studies; Expert at Association of Middle East Studies; Coordinator of International Projects and Training Programmes at Maidan Monitoring Inf.Ce

26 Mr. John YUHAS

USA OSCE Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine - Cease fire monitor