CIVIL DIMENSION OF SECURITY 135 CDS 05 E Original: English NAT O   Pa rl i a me n t a ry  As s e mb l y SUMMARY of the meeting of the Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security White Hall, Grand Hotel Union, Lubljana, Slovenia Saturday 28 May 2005 International Secretariat May 2005

135 CDS 05 E i ATTENDANCE LIST Chairman Michael Clapham (United Kingdom) Vice-Chairman Lucio Malan (Italy) Special Rapporteur Lord Jopling (United Kingdom) Vice-Chairperson of the Sub-Committee Joann Emerson (United States) on Democratic Governance Rapporteur of the Sub-Committee Bert Middel (Netherlands) on Democratic Governance President NATO PA Pierre Lellouche (France) Secretary General Simon Lunn Member Delegations Canada Jane Cordy Czech Republic Radim Turek Vitezslav Vavrousek Estonia Tiit Matsulevits France Jérôme Rivière Germany Monika Heubaum Robert Hochbaum Andreas Weigel Greece Sofia Kalantzakou Latvia Aleksandrs Kirsteins Dzintars Rasnacs Lithuania Andrius Baranauskas Rasa Jukneviciene Juozas Olekas Alvydas Sadeckas Luxembourg Marc Spautz Poland Antoni Macierewicz Jerzy Wenderlich Portugal Vitalino Canas (elected General Rapporteur during meeting) Romania Tiberiu Barbuletiu Cristian Valeriu Buzea Slovakia Já n Kovarcik Slovenia Franc Kangler Spain Hilario Caballero Turkey Ahmet Faruk Ünsal Emin Bilgiç United Kingdom Donald Anderson Bruce George Alice Mahon Peter Viggers United States John Boozman Ben Chandler Mike Ross

135 CDS 05 E ii Associate Delegations Armenia Aleksan Karapetyan Mher Shahgeldyan Azerbaijan Rafael Gafarov Tapdig Kamalov Croatia Velimir Plesa Georgia George Arveladze David Gamkrelidze Nicholas Rurua Russian Federation Valery Bogomolov Shamil Zainalov Bato-Zhargal Zhambalnimbuev Vladimir Zhirinovskiy Andrey Zhukov Switzerland Edi Engelberger Hans Hess FYR of Macedonia Esad Rahic Ukraine Stepan Khmara Volodymyr Zaplatynskyi Mediterranean Associate Delegations Algeria Messaoud Chihoub Mauritania Matt Mint Ewnen European Parliament Ana Maria R.M. Gomes Teresa Riera Madurell Parliamentary Observers Bosnia and Herzegovina Halid Genjac Japan Masataka Suzuki Speakers Michael Powers, Senior Fellow at the Chemical and Biological Arms Control Institute (CBACI) Rashit Ashmetov, Senator of the Republic of Kazakhstan Toktarkhan Nurakhmetov, Member of the Mazhilis (Lower Chamber) of the Republic of Kazakhstan International Secretariat Raphaëlle Mathey, Director Isabelle Arcis, Coordinator, Silje Margrethe Andresen, Research Assistant

135 CDS 05 E 1 I. Introductory remarks 1.   The Chairman, Michael Clapham (UK) introduced the agenda of the meeting. The draft agenda and the minutes of the meeting of the Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security in Venice were adopted without comments.   II. Presentation    on    The    Role    of    Parliamentarians    in    Homeland    Security:    A    US Perspective, by Michael Powers 2. In his presentation, Mr Powers stressed the important role of parliamentarians in the area of Homeland  Security,  drawing  on  the  experiences  of  the  US  congress  in  its  role  of  shaping American  Homeland  Security  since  the  end  of  the  Cold  War.    In  the  wake  of  9/11  and  of  the Anthrax attacks, he said, the US Congress’ role was as central as that of the executive in defining policies for domestic security and counter-terrorism.   3. Congressional  initiatives  included  creating  the  Department  for  Homeland  Security  (DHS); ordering  a  government  takeover  of  airport  security  checks;  and  establishing  an  independent investigative  council  of  the  9/11  attacks  to  detect  weaknesses  and  failures  of  governmental prevention.  Congress  has  also  been  instrumental  in  shaping  the  public’s  perception  of  terror threats.  Because Congress continues to oversee the funding and budget policy of the DHS, it has maintained   an   important   role   in   shaping   United   States   foreign   policy.      Furthermore,   it   is responsible  for  appointing  the  National  Intelligence  Director;  for  instituting  Bio-Shield  1  and  2 legislations, which provide R&D funding for chemical weapons treatment; and improvements in the security of the New Jersey chemical facilities, most vulnerable to terrorist attacks. 4. Mr  Powers  emphasized  that,  due  to  different  perceptions  of  the  CBRN  terror,  there  is  a growing  divide  between  the  United  States  and  Europe.  This  should  be  overcome,  so  that  the United States and Europe can cooperate and exchange information and find a common response to this global threat. To achieve this, he said, there should be greater parliamentary exchange on homeland   security   issues   between   Europe   and   the   United   States,   both   nationally   and internationally. He suggested that the NATO PA might be a good forum for such exchange. 5. The Chairman noted that much of the work on homeland security has been done in the US, and suggested that a mechanism be found to transfer this US knowledge and experience in this field to our parliamentarians. 6. Vladimir  Zhirinovskiy  (RU)  commented  on  anti-terror  measures  adopted  in  Russia,  the situation in Afghanistan and US monitoring of its border with Mexico.    7. Sofia Kalantzakou (GR) stated that the US/Europe divergence is not on homeland security, but on how the United States has decided to deal with terror. She asked if it would be possible for Europe  to  follow  the  US  example,  given  the  differences  in  governmental  structures.    She  also pointed out differences in threat perceptions among European countries. 8. Jane   Cordy   (CA)   pointed   out   the   difficulty   in   finding   the   right   equilibrium   between development of detection of threat and mechanisms for implementation of policies. 9. Donald Anderson (UK) asked if there is any sort of re-evaluation in the United States and if anyone is asking if the pendulum has swung too far in the measures taken after 9/11.

135 CDS 05 E 2 10. Joann  Emerson  (US)  commented  that  Congress  acted  quickly  in  creating  the  Patriot  Act after 9/11, and said that the question is one of balance, with the most important factor being the protection of American citizens.   11. Mr Powers noted that Homeland Security issues take place in a broader context, and said that  a  common  European  approach  to  homeland  security  is  needed.  However  he  insisted  that there clearly is an US/European divide on threat perceptions. He also noted that while homeland security is largely a local issue and thus affected by local interest, Congress has been important in shaping policies. III. Consideration  of  the  Draft  Special  Report  on  Chemical,  Biological,  Radiological,  or Nuclear (CBRN) Detection: a Technological Overview [055 CDS 05 E] by Lord Jopling 12. As  an  introduction,  Lord  Jopling  commented  on  a  number  of  amendments  to  the  draft report.  He noted that a vaccine for bubonic plague does exist.  He is now aware that a specific treatment for smallpox (aside from vaccination) is currently being developed.  As for Haemorrhagic Fever,  he  noted  that  there  are  many  viruses  only  associated  with  primates.  He  suggested  that paragraph   30   be   expanded   on   the   basis   of   research   conducted   in   the   United   Kingdom. Furthermore, he pointed out a technical error in paragraph 35, suggested expanding the definition of  detection,  and  noted  that  there  is  always  a  balance  of  investment  to  be  considered  between preventing  attacks  and  detecting  the  effects  later.  Finally,  he  emphasized  the  importance  of parliamentarians’ role in preparing their countries against attacks. 13. Mr Zhirinovskiy noted that the report only mentions biological weapons, and fails to mention other  weapons,  such  as  plasma,  lasers.    He  asked  if,  there  should  be  some  kind  of  division  of labour between detection and prevention, so that the threats can be met more efficiently.  Noting that  no  country  can  act  alone  against  bio-terrorism,  he  advocated  that  countries  act  collectively, pooling their efforts and using other countries’ experience. 14. Lord Jopling acknowledged that weapons of terrorism are constantly expanding, and noted that the draft reports states that there are over 1000 different forms of toxins.  He said that, the report is particularly keen on focusing on the importance of governmental preparedness, with an extra emphasis on “soft” security targets in Europe and United States. 15. Jérôme  Rivière  (FR)  addressed  the  gaps  in  public  security,  and  inquired  as  to  how  the broader   public   should   be   associated  to  anti-terror  policies  and  detection  efforts. He  also commented  on  the  importance  of  including  all  countries  within  the  World  Health  Organisation (WHO) networks so as to ensure an effective detection policy. 16. Peter Viggers (UK) also addressed the role of parliamentarians in shaping public awareness of  terrorist  threats  and  problems  related  to  it,  such  as  the  risks  of  being  overly  alarmist.  He recalled  that  the  ”horror  scenario”  would  be  the  contagious  effect  of  an  airport  attack,  where passengers don’t know there has been an attack. IV. Presentation   by   Rashit   Akhmetov,   Senator   of   the   Republic   of   Kazakhstan,   and Toktarkhan Nurakhmetov, member of the Mazhilis (Lower Chamber) of the Republic of Kazakhstan on NATO’s role in Central Asia 17. Both speakers shared information on the recent evolutions in Kazakhstan and in general in Central Asia. Kazakhstan, given its significant oil resources, is a potentially very rich country that is still   undergoing   important   structural   reforms.   They   stressed   the   efforts   of   the   Kazakhstani

135 CDS 05 E 3 leadership to strengthen the democratization process and foster institutional reform in the country. More  than a decade after independence the country has achieved a lot in this direction, but still faces  some  challenges  in  term  of  democracy  building.  The  whole  region  is  much  affected  by terrorist   attempts   to   destabilize   these   countries   and   export   Islamic   and   other   extremist movements.   The   vicinity   of   Afghanistan   and   other   states   suffering   civil   wars   and   serious destabilization  is  a  threat  to  the  entire  stability  of  the  region.  President  Nazarbayev  strongly believes that regional cooperation is a crucial opportunity to share efforts in order to reinforce the region’s stability. In view of this, he recently proposed all central Asian States to create a “Union of Central  Asia”.  Both  speakers  underlined  the  fruitful  and  positive  cooperation  with  the  NATO structures,  recently  reinforced  in  many  areas,  and  stated  that  the  security  of  the  continent demanded a strengthened cooperation of Central Asian states with the Alliance. 18. Asked   to   comment   about   reasons   of   the   recent   popular   outburst   in   Kyrgyzstan   and Uzbekistan, Mr Akhmetov stated that it is probable that some of the main causes of the security deficiencies in the two neighbouring countries are poverty and low socio-economic standards. 19. Alice  Mahon  (UK)  asked  about  Kazakhstan’s  position  on  licensing  religious  schools,  and enquired as to whether Kazakhstan has universal secular education. 20. Mr Nurakhmetov replied that, in Kazakhstan, church and state are separated. Traditionally, he  said,  different  religions  have  coexisted  peacefully.  In  recent  years,  however,  a  number  of religious  schools  have  been  established.  The  government  now  needs  a  clear-cut  and  balanced definition of licensing, in terms of who is in charge and what is really going on. 21. Stepan  Khmara  (UA)  called  for  a  definition  of  what  extremism  is.  He  also  stressed  the importance of the link between human rights and security. 22. Mr  Akhmetov  noted  that  Kazakhstan  does  have  a  law  on  extremism,  and  draws  on  the experience of other countries, such as Russia, in fighting terror. 23. Mr  Zhirinovskiy  stated  that  terrorism  in  Kazakhstan  is  a  recent  phenomenon  and  stressed the importance of regional alliances, including the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). Mr Zhirinovskiy  also  expressed  concern  about  the  challenges  of  environment  protection  and  the fight against drug and human trafficking across the Afghan border. 24. Lucio Malan (IT) asked how the war in Iraq impacted on Kazakhstani security. 25. Mr Akhmetov stressed that regional stability and cooperation is key to Kazakhstan’s security, as  long  as  sovereignty  and  territorial  integrity  of  states  are  respected.  He  also  noted  that Kazakhstan  has  deployed  a  battalion  of  27  to  Iraq  in  a  demining  unit,  which  he  called  a manifestation of trust in the peacekeeping process. 26. Ms Kalantzakou asked about the effects of the Soviet legacy on religious extremism.   27. Ahmet Faruk Ünsal   (TR) asked what kind of democratic measures Kazakhstan planned to use to prevent extremism and protect the freedom of speech and guarantee a free media? 28. Emin   Bilgiç    (TR)  pointed  out  the  need  to  nuance  the  links  drawn  between  religious awakening  and  extremism,  and  more  generally  to  be  careful  in  using  the  label  of  Islamic extremism. 29. Mr Akhmetov noted that an open dialogue on religion is crucial to the stability of Kazakhstan and of the whole region. He said that, within the framework of existing laws, every faith has a right

135 CDS 05 E 4 of existence and freedom of expression. He added that Kazakhstan does have private channels of media where different opinions can be freely expressed and that can act without any impediments. 30. Mr Nurakhmetov added that the country does not have “militant atheism” as a state policy, and  that  all  religions  are  tolerated  if  they  abide  by  Kazakhstani  laws.  However,  in  recent  years, Kazakhstan  has  had  to  adapt  its  legislation  to  respond  to  an  increased  activity  of  missionary movements. V. Consideration  of  the  Draft  General  Report  on  NATO  and  Kazakhstan  [053 CDS  05  E] presented  by  Michael Clapham  (UK)  on  behalf  of  João  Rebelo  (Portugal),  General Rapporteur 31. Michael  Clapham  briefly  introduced  the  content  of  the  report  linked  to  the  visit  of  the Sub-Committee to Kazakhstan in March of this year. He also presented the suggested changes to the  report,  including  changes  to  paragraphs  20  and  24,  regarding  democratic  development  and corruption  allegations,  an  update  of  recent  developments  in  paragraph  58  and  the  need  to emphasize the point made in paragraph 66 regarding NATO’s changing role. 32. Lord  Jopling  pointed  out  the  geographic  isolation  of  Kazakhstan  as  a  potential  factor  of instability and asked about possible arrangements regarding the exploitation of the Caspian Sea’s resources,  in  relation  with  the  new  Baku-Ceyhan  pipeline.  He  also  called  for  the  report  to emphasize problems of corruption more strongly. 33. Tapdig Kamalov (AZ) informed the Committee that there is an agreement in force, and that Kazakhstan  could  join  the  Caspian  pipeline  in  order  to  export  Kazakhstani  oil  through  he  Baku- Ceyhan routes. 34. Mr Ünsal   proposed amendments to the report (mainly paragraphs 6, 25 and 57). 35. Mr Malan asked for a more detailed analysis of Kazakhstan’s relations with China. 36. Mr Zhirinovskiy also warned of the consequences of the creation of the new pipeline and its potential effects on Sino-Kazakh relations. He also stressed the need to acknowledge the role and importance for Kazakhstani security of relations with Russia. 37. Mr Nurakhmetov stressed the importance of Kazakhstan's recent achievements and the new turn of its relations with NATO. In particular, he noted that the NATO PA visit was considered as a success by both sides. All these positive developments deserve to be emphasized more. 38. Mr Malan asked for a more detailed analysis of Kazakhstan’s relations with China. 39. Mr Nurakhmetov  insisted  that  relations  with  China  are  beneficial  and  common  problems should be solved through bilateral dialogue on an equal basis. As for Russia, it has always been and will remain a strategic partner of Kazakhstan. 40. Mr  Bilgiç  proposed  some  additions  to  the  report regarding  the  export  perspectives  of  oil supplies  from  Kazakhstan.  He  would  also  like  the  report  to  make  clear  that  not  all  terrorist movements are Islamic movements and vice versa. In this spirit it could be interesting to enquire all aspects of the religious re-awakening in Kazakhstan and Central Asia.

135 CDS 05 E 5 VI. Consideration  of  the  draft  Report  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  Democratic  Governance on  Minorities  In  The  South  Caucasus:  A  Factor  Of  Instability?  [054 CDSDG  E]  by Bert Middel (Netherlands), Rapporteur 41. The  Rapporteur  underlined  the  high  sensitivity  to  write  on  such  a  delicate  question  as minorities  in  such  a  complicated  region  as  the  Caucasus,  in  particular  with  regard  to  the  terms used (separatism/national movements for example) and the wording. The formulation of opinions on such issues must be carefully expressed. The Rapporteur added that he had written this report with all these elements in mind and that even if some countries directly concerned by the report had some critics or comments on the content of the report, the most important thing was that all parties were here to discuss and participate to genuine exchange of information on this subject. 42. Mr  Zhirinovskiy  said  that  a  distinction  must  be  made  between  nationalists  and  separatists.   He advocated that the Committee must speak out against separatism. 43. Volodymyr  Zaplatynskyi  (UA)  noted  that  the  separatist  movements  in  Georgia  represent not  only  a  real  threat  to  security  in  the  region  and  integrity  of  the  Georgian  state  but  also  the greatest point of tension in the former Soviet sphere. All factors of instability and all actors had to be considered, including key states in the region.   44. Lord Jopling requested that a map be included in the final report.    45. Mr Ünsal   suggested few modifications in paragraphs 10, 29, and 46.   46. Mr Kamalov requested that events that took place between 1988 and 1991 be addressed in greater detail. 47. Bruce George (UK) stressed the need to address in the report all possible solutions to the problems identified. 48. Mher  Shahgeldyan  (AM)  pointed  out  the  need  to  update  the  report  on  some  issues, including the passing in 2004 of a law on civil service in Armenia. 49. George Arveladze (GE) welcomed the report and stressed that it was important to debate critical issues in an international forum like the NATO PA, it is crucial to recognise the existence of problems  in  order  to  solve  them!  He  informed  the  Committee  members  that  the  Georgian authorities  made  some  constructive  steps  and  proposals  towards  resolution  of  local  conflicts.  In addition,  there  is  a  real  wish  to  improve  policies  with  regard  to  Minorities.  For  example,  efforts were made to promote and improve the infrastructure for the teaching of national languages and for  the  first  time  the  TV  news  were  broadcasted  in  minority  language  (Abkhaze).  Similarly  the government is seriously addressing issues of religious discriminations and intolerance. 50. Mr Bilgiç suggested some changes to the chapter on Nagorno-Karabakh and stated that the term  “balkanisation”  was  not  probably  appropriate  in  this  context.  He  also  regretted  that  the Rapporteur had not taken a more visible position with regard to the occupation of Azeri territories and with regard to the question of Armenian genocide. 51. Andrey  Zhukov  (RU)  declared  that  in  his  view  the  resolution  of  conflicts  should  be  seen through  the  development  of  economical  ties  and  interest  between  these  countries.  There  is  no other  way  to  decrease  the  number  of  secessionist  movements  than  to  give  the  local  population satisfactory economic and social conditions.

135 CDS 05 E 6 VII. Tentative Summary of the Future Activities of the Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security and of the Sub-Committee on Democratic Governance.         3-7 October 2005 Visit to Washington DC and New York 6-8 October 2005 Rose Roth seminar in Yerevan Beginning November 2005 (dates tbc) Visit   of   the   Sub-Committee   on   Democratic Governance (CDSDG) to Russia and Northern Caucasus 11-15 November 2005 51^st Annual Session: Copenhagen, Denmark VIII.    Elections Vitalino  Canas  (PT)  was  elected  General  Rapporteur  to  replace Joã o  Rebelo  who  is  no longer a member of the Portuguese delegation to the NATO PA. ____________________