The article analyses the concept of conflict prevention (a comparative analysis of the approaches and strategies) of the European Union (EU) and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The analysis is based on a methodological framework consisting of two parts: first, structured interviews with high-level civilian bureaucrats/experts within the EU/OSCE and, second, an analysis of primary and secondary sources (legal and other documents related to conflict prevention in the EU/OSCE). The primary results of the analysis show that the approaches and strategies of the EU/OSCE are adequately defined on the normative level (in addition, the EU/OSCE have a wide spectrum of mechanisms and instruments for conflict prevention available), but the concrete conflict prevention measures/actions of the EU/OSCE are not always applied when needed to avert bloodshed. Therefore, the article analyses the policy of conflict prevention since inconsistent policy is the core "problem" of conflict prevention in the modern era. Namely, the analysis reveals that it is not only the lack of political will for active conflict prevention that is the main obstacle to averting conflicts, but the lack of co-ordination among the EU and the OSCE is also problematic in that respect. If better co-ordination is achieved, the chances of preventing more conflicts would rise because both actors have important comparative advantages in the area of conflict prevention. The analysis also demonstrates that both the EU and the OSCE are likely to have recourse to such conflict prevention measures/actions that do not "incite" influential countries (we label this phenomenon as "pleasing conflict prevention"). The article concludes with recommendations to make the conflict prevention of the EU/OSCE more successful.
|
