Կոլեկտիվ անվտանգության տարածաշրջանային կազմակերպությունների առանձնահատկությունները. Քաղաքագիտական վերլուծություն ՆԱՏՕ-ի և ՀԱՊԿ-ի օրինակով / Peculiarities of regional collective security organizations: Politological case study of NATO and CSTO

Abstract

Comparative analysis of alliance models of regional collective security systems, carried out at the level of theoretical developments, including corresponding official documents of leading states and concepts, as well as performance of NATO and CSTO, enables drawing out some structural principles, typical of such models, and acitivity mechanisms of such organizations with specific peculiarities, inherent to particularly NATO and CSTO. More specifically, the principle of indivisibility of security, meaning that the security of one state ought not to be gained on another state’s expense, is underlying the idea of collective security. The willingness of each of the members to view any aggression against one as aggression against all the members, and the exclusion of power solution of any contradictions within the given organization are a basic term for shaping an alliance model of collective security. NATO was established as a counterweight to the Socialist Camp, setting up in Eastern Europe. The goal for this union of states within the NATO system was to ensure the military security of separate states on account of collective military, political and economic power of the Organization as a whole, i. e., the corporate power of all of its members. At present, NATO at times undertakes functions, not provided by its founding treaty. The USA, being nowadays the world’s leading power, steps up as the leader of NATO, this greatly providing for the Alliance’s strength and authority in the international relations system. Though CSTO has been set with the same goals as NATO, but it remains purely regional organization with limited area of responsibility. In this regard, in the course of the years the Organization has carried out only one peacemaking operation (Kazakhstan, 2022). CSTO is characterized by certain specific features, which allow for a number of objective and subjective factors hindering its efficient performance. Thus, for instance, the membership of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan in CSTO, while being at the same time members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation and Organization of Turkic States, has led to the fact that in the CSTO framework, Armenia has practically cooperated and still cooperates in the bilateral format only with Russia (Belarus “having leant towards” Islam). No wonder that CSTO has to some degree ignored numorous acts of aggression Azerbaijan carried out against Armenia, and avoided real in-depth political assessments of these acts. As a main hindrance for CSTO’s efficient performance can be viewed the fact that the titular nations of the majority of members didn’t have their own statehood, and lacked any experience in shaping international realtions before.