-1-
V. Krivokhiza
Systems of priorities in the field of international cooperation
to mitigate current terrorism: Russian interests and course
The scale and the complexity of the problem, which lays in the title, a lot of views on the subject itself, make necessary to start with few preliminary remarks.
This paper should be considered as one more attempt to attract attention to political context of international cooperation to mitigate terrorism and to such key aspect as better understanding of the basic interests of different states (in given case – Russian interests). Let us keep in mind but put aside in this paper the very difficult question for analysis (because of a lot of reasons) about specific weight of internal and external components in terrorist activity in different concrete cases. The correlation of these two factors may play a crucial role for readiness to cooperate on international level and the very results of such partnership. Although it seems to discover new and new divergences can turn to be easier.
Having got papers prepared by participants of PMP on terrorism we could in the process of comparative analysis come to some conclusions to what extent systems of priorities of different states coincide or overlap with each others. It is possible to suggest that the result first of all from viewpoint of at least partial identity will prove to be in the wide spectrum of concrete scenarios. But even such partial result could be considered as useful just because the visual possibility to identify concrete directions inside the concrete cases to elaborate further on practical recommendations to cope (more or less) with some forms of current international terrorism.
That is why it seems reasonable for PMP to produce a number of papers on different countries interests. Although no doubts that papers like this in a large measure will reflect personal views of authors. Fairly, for instance in Russia, two researchers can come to two totally identical viewpoints on countries interests and hierarchy of priorities in the sphere of international efforts to struggle against terrorism even looking thoroughly on official papers, speeches as well as taking into consideration the experts calculations. It has become quite obvious that this type of uncertainty is typical not only for the countries which go through next in turn transition period of their history with all accompanying attributes, but even for the states with relatively stable stage of development.
In spite of all the differences in politics and visions of the nature of different problems in the field already the call upon and the understanding of very necessity for cooperation has acquired axiomatic status. And in parallel way this circumstances produced pretty good and legally solid basis to move step by step forward in interstate cohesion.
In this sense I would like to accentuate that interest in multilateral efforts now in comparison with, for example, motives behind expressed readiness to recognize nuclear terrorism as actual acute international problem (in realities – to find new impressive arguments to widen the foundation in the 80-s for Soviet-American cooperation) is quite clear and obvious, especially taking in account the explosions which now and again are produced throughout the countries territory and first of all in the context of military situation in Northern Caucasus. And now we have got maybe not numerous but actual examples of cooperation. Among the last ones information received from French secret service concerning preparation of the explosions in Moscow metro. The plan was changed and two suicide bombers carried out attacks this spring. But nevertheless the information gave someclue for the working versions to unmask those extremistswho could be behind those acts of terrorism.
Another aspect, whatever the actual ordeclared function of national security concept (doctrine) of any given country is, it gives some orientation in the system of state interests.In this sense acquaintance with Russian National Security Concept opens a lot of evidence that struggle with current terrorism and international cooperation in this field are among countries high priorities.
Among the reasons why international terrorism became such acute problem one may elicit a few motives. First of all, the disintegration of the USSR has produced a lot of radical trends in the spheres of politics, economy, religion, self-identification in which a number of different social, ethnic, radical religious and, of course, criminal groups of population (some of them with strong transnational component) are involved in very active way.
The most radical among these groups which use terror, different forms of clandestine military operations as prime instrument of their course receive direct support from abroad ranging from finance and foreign military advisers (and combatants) to indoctrination of their future members in religious centers throughout the world, support in mass media. The permanent terrorist activity in the variety of forms in the sub-region of Northern Caucasus and explosions which have taken place now and again in some cities of the country give enough illustration to see Russian interest in mitigating terrorism on multinational basis.This interest includes conformable to realities in Northern Caucasus coverage of events in official comments and mass media in a lot of countries. Moreover, this interest has got longstanding nature just because the high level of the activity of current wave of terror is a result and an essential part of few dominant processes of global transformation for the time being. These processes originated in different quite distant from each other regions may intercross and produce in the most unexpected, whimsical way the whole knot of features which label some situations as having very strange but explainable post-factum logic in their development. The history of Taliban (in retrospect of its origin as well as organized moments, supporters, changing the rivals, some specific features of warfare and connections among the opponents in Afghanistan, and every new leak of classified information discloses new facts but does not change the known nature of situation itself, etc.) is a very interesting in this sense example.
This circumstance allows understanding why the problem of international terrorism displays itself not only in regions which are considered to be the regions of traditional conflicts with active foreign involvement (such as Near East or Southern Asia) but also in the most developed, politically stable and safe states – in the USA and Western Europe.
Although because of the very specific policy (but rational in certain sense) of promulgation on the attempts of the acts of terror, for instance, on the US territory the real level of terrorism activity there is not much transparent and clear.
Expansion of the areas, spheres of implication and increase in danger of terrorism with emergence of its new forms (potentially – WMD), unsettled, sometimes latent nature of various quarrel situations in which terrorism has its roots as well as growing participation of structures of the transnational organized crime in international terrorist activity, appreciable increase in scales of illegal circulation of drugs (Afghanistan is a very bright example), weapons and dangerous materials represent in total serious global threat to international community. So the foundation for international cooperation seems to be quite clear: the international character of the challenges which are common (more or less) for a number of countries dictates necessity for international cooperation to cope with these common problems. It is next to impossible to argue with this thesis and nobody does it, but if it was not for divergence or contradiction of the national interests of involved states in any concrete case.
And if we consider the problem of current international terrorism in link with actual global problems of present international agenda (these ones which unite and divide international community) it turns to be that many basic characteristics peculiar to these problems are general for and inherent to origin and development of current forms of international terrorism. It is possible to single out following characteristics and features:
process of globalization have sharpened the vivid differentiation of states on the rich and those are believed in their righteousness, on the one hand, and more large and motley group of the countries, on the other. On this surface – the adherence to traditional ways of life inherent to the societies of the last group of countries allowed them during centuries under pressure of often forceful outward influence to withstand and to survive in quest for traditional values. And inevitably in the depths more or less well hidden motives conditioned by today pragmatic political interests of different type of participants;
in different periods of their history because of various reasons (often – rivalry among great powers) the mentioned above group of countries (poor, developing) not rare succeeded in their struggle for national identity and heritage. But great powers rivalry in parallel way put some limitations on the forms, instrument and scale of different types of quarrels.
Today in the conditions of globalization, current structure of world influence and dominance, situation is becoming for number of countries more and more challenging. Plus different strata of their population face not only peculiar for each social group but some common problems, and what is important – in almost all basic spheres which define possibility to live successfully in the world community. So it should not be much strange that the problem of current international terrorism is directly connected with such spheres as social life, policy and economy, religion, activity of criminal communities, influence of national politics, etc;
in its own turn revolution in information, wide circulation of mass media establish conditions to use achievements of technical progress as effective tool to manipulate with public opinion, consciousness;
there are a lot of places of regional instability which create combustible material to escalate further by acts of terrorism the permanent level of certain confrontation;
from time to time there are as well displays of the acts of state terrorism conditioned by attempts to eliminate popular foreign politicians, including heads of other states, to provoke coup d'états. Sometimes terrorist activity in such areas may play in the interests of one or another country;
among a lot of other circumstances may be mentioned such aspect of the problem as close ties between corrupted government officials, functionaries of different levels and criminal, radical political groups.
The list of characteristics of terrorism may be continued. But it is already quite clear that terrorism has become an essential part of today international system and that situation is aggravated by its transitional nature. The current economic crisis only contributes additionally in the very complex problem of contemporary terrorism.
But future of the system of international relations is still quite vague. After the era of bi-polar confrontation interests of the members of world community are appeared were again divided between two possible perspectives. The first is shown in strengthening relative influence, economic and political positions of significant number of states and their various integration associations not very successful yet in development and establishing mechanisms of more adequate to multisided participation in managing the key international processes. Russian is known as one of the most noticeable protagonists in favor of such tendency.
The second principle and also probable perspective is shown through attempts of forming by western group of countries the international structure based on typical for last decades projection of their dominance and/or substantial influence throughout the world. This circumstance explains partly why among some of these states one can find in official rhetoric an enthusiasm and unanimity concerning the goal to overcome challengers of modern economic crisis, although the preferable concrete approaches to overcome common by appearance challengers may be very different. Problem here derives from a different source – it seems that primarily purpose for the countries is not just to terminate with crisis but to occupy better position in the hierarchy of the most influential world actors. There is the weight of examples to the viewpoint that global crisis is tried to be used as a tool in forming the future international system just because its results for different states will predetermine a lot of basic features of world politics for next historical period.
All mentioned above and many other aspects create some system of orientation for the countries in world politics as well as in the process of elaboration of their course in sphere of international cooperation to mitigate international terrorism of today.
For the purpose of analysis it has sense to keep in mind also that two principle expert approaches may be used: one is concentrated on the struggle of secret services to prevent, first of all, the very acts of terrorism or on the process of post-factum actions (“hot pursuit” to some degree) to annihilate or inflict as much damage and punishment to terrorism organizations as possible. For a number of reasons not a lot of information about this area of international cooperation is available. That is why it is next to impossible to estimate in the most correct and well balanced way the real situation there.
And there is another more productive in “positive” clue analytical vision – to pay attention to mechanisms, norms and legal procedures, declared priorities of military-diplomatic activity to withstand terrorism. Occupying position like this one may in the process of analysis come to more optimistic position on international cooperation, especially if not to concentrate main attention on the implementation of achieved agreement and on the principle goal to minimize terrorist activity and to exclude probability of most destructive forms of terror. To what extent actions of secret services throughout the world are adequate to internationally accepted norms and procedures of behavior largely is “grey” area. But in any case it is quite obvious that extraordinary situations demand extraordinary means of reaction to cope with concrete challenges and that any given case is marked with its own degree of individuality.
Analysis of international cooperation mostly concentrates on the problems in the realm of the last one approach and allows, as mentioned, to come to quite positive and optimistic conclusions, especially when it concerns to the considerable extent mostly potential threats or bridges the divergent positions of the actors and achieved agreements lay in the framework of already internationally accepted trend.
Good example in this sense is greetings sent by President D.Medvedev to the participants of plenary meeting on the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism (GICNT) gathered in Abu Dhabi, the United Arab Emirates, on June 29, 2010 (as it was stated in the mass media):
“Your meeting agenda includes key issues of strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime and the search for optimal tools for combating the threat of nuclear terrorism. These global challenges can be addressed only through joint coordinated actions. To a great extent, their success will determine stability and security on the planet.
At this stage it is of great importance to find effective mechanisms precluding unsanctioned procurement of nuclear materials and technologies. This approach was supported by the recent Nuclear Security Summit and the NPT Review Conference.
The agreements reached must be followed up with tight monitoring of the trafficking in nuclear materials, adherence to the highest security standards in the nuclear industry and the implementation of the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism and the amended Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material.
We are satisfied to note the growing constructive role of the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. The initiative became even stronger over the past year; now it unites 81 states and is firmly moving along the path to practical realization. We fully expect that the number of its participants, united by shared goals, will continue to steadily increase.
Russia is focused on achieving optimal results at this meeting and continuing active efforts of improving and strengthening the global non-proliferation regime.”
The Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism was launched jointly by the Presidents of Russia and the United States in July 2006 during the G8 Summit in St Petersburg.
Even inside “positive” analytical vision the disorder of opinions concerning an estimation of efficiency of the international cooperation to mitigate terrorism is rather wide. And the results of such divergences in opinions lay not only in the circumstances that different aspects of the problem are taken to estimate effectiveness of the pool of agreed measures but because of noticeable difference in the system of criteria for separate experts.
Certainly, hierarchy of priorities for any groups or pairs of states may be different as well. For instance hierarchy of Russian priorities inside the CIS and concerning other outwardgroups can differ. But in any case in spite of vivid reasons which allow characterizing some situations as the result of the politics of “double standards” (as though earlier the mankind lived under and strictly followed the whole indivisible system of political standards) international community has accumulated a lot of positive experience.