Representatives of specialised ministries and experts took part in the discussion at the Federation Council.
First Deputy Chair of the Federation Council Committee on Foreign Affairs Sergei Kislyak chaired a roundtable discussion, “The advisability of the Russian Federation’s continued participation in the work of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights.”
Attendees included Deputy Federation Speaker Konstantin Kosachev, Russian senators, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko, Member of Russia’s Central Election Commission Pavel Andreyev, Executive Secretary of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation Sergei Pospelov, and Director of the International Institute for Monitoring Democracy Development, Parliamentarianism and Suffrage Protection of Citizens of IPA CIS Member Nations, Ivan Mushket.
According to Konstantin Kosachev, the OSCE has been degrading since 1990. “The OSCE could remain in high demand, particularly at the current stage, but it has been destroyed from within by Western countries, which at a certain stage received the majority of votes there. The 32 NATO countries account for about 56 percent of the organisation’s membership; this predetermines the outcome of any actions and decisions.” The senator believes that, by taking advantage of their numerical superiority, these countries consistently and aggressively exceed the boundaries of their competences and prerogatives. The OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) has appropriated many prerogatives and acts in accordance with documents drafted by the US National Democratic Institute – documents that stipulate the relevant norms – without consulting member states.
Konstantin Kosachev noted the need for overhauling the OSCE and ODIHR in order to specify the prerogatives, competences, rights and duties of these entities. “Without this, we will each time de facto face tough anti-Russia and, in the long run, anti-democratic activity.”
Following these remarks, the senator outlined two possible scenarios for Russia’s actions. Under the first scenario, it would be appropriate to suspend Russia’s participation in OSCE activities. The second scenario calls for influencing the organisation’s activities from within, promoting Russian approaches, and downplaying a priori biased assessments and actions that the organisation still displays.
Vladimir Dzhabarov expressed the opinion that, in their current state, the OSCE and its Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights are unable to fulfil the functions that had been vested in them. The senator suggested making broader use of the potential of organisations such as the SCO, BRICS, and the Inter-Parliamentary Union.
According to Sergei Kislyak, the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights has long become a collective Western tool for exerting political pressure that is used extensively to discredit elections when a pro-Western candidate loses them. Consequently, it interferes in the domestic affairs of sovereign states. Often after election monitoring missions, ODIHR makes statements completely outside its remit; such statements contain unacceptable, politically motivated assessments and declarations. Recently, ODIHR expressed the same biased opinions regarding monitoring compliance with the rights of its own observers and monitors, the senator noted.
Alexander Grushko offered a detailed insight into ODIHR activities. In this context, he cited examples of the organisation’s activities and the response of Western countries to election results in Georgia and Moldova.
Pavel Andreyev discussed the main trends in dialogue between Russia and ODIHR. “We estimate that, in the past five years, the OSCE’s ODIHR has organised 125 election monitoring missions of varying scale. Russian representatives only took part in the 21st mission. These missions cover post-Soviet territory and Serbia; our activities are confined to these regions alone. The mechanism for preparing specific reports does not aim to take into account the opinions of our observers. We should stop playing by the rules determined and dictated by ODIHR and proceed from our own interests,” Pavel Andreyev noted.