Controlling Weapons in Turbulent Times

Abstract

INTRODUCTIONA security dilemma problem in international relations refers to a situation where sovereign states, in the context of an anarchic international system, will arm themselves for fear of being dominated by their neighbours.(1) Security dilemmas can be mitigated, but mitigation can lead to two divergent outcomes--peace or conflict. A state can mitigate the security dilemma problem by balancing the armed power of its neighbours--levelling the distribution of power among states by building up conventional armed forces. On its own, balancing can have both positive and negative effects on and stability at the regional and international level. Unregulated, it can lead to periods of peace--the long peace in Europe in the 19th century and the Cold War period from 1945-1989 are good examples. Unregulated balancing can also lead to devastating regional and international conflict: The outbreak of the First and Second World Wars highlight this problem. Unregulated balancing is unpredictable, and as such unstable.(2)A security dilemma problem can also be mitigated by balancing power through regulated regional and international cooperation, especially through the creation of arms control regimes. Regulated balancing should, theoretically, increase chances of peace. The 1990 Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE), and its subsequent modifications, has been a successful example of a rules-based balance of power mitigating significantly the security dilemma problem in Europe after the Cold War. The use of an international arms control regime (generally understood as a set of principles, norms, rules and decision making procedures)(3) can help significantly to mitigate the security dilemma problem by providing both an institutionalized forum for discussion and decision making, and by providing relatively unbiased information to the participants, removing that measure of uncertainty and unpredictability that traditionally taints relations between states. Taken in this light, the CFE has played an important role in ensuring stability in Europe after the Cold War, acting as its cornerstone.The CFE as a of European securityIt has been argued that the institutionalization of arms control in Europe played a relatively minor role in ensuring a peaceful transition, and the mitigation of the security dilemma, in Europe after the end of the Cold War. Critics highlight more important issues such as European integration, the spread of liberal democracy and capitalism into eastern Europe, or the evolution and enlargement of NATO as key explanatory variables. Others have argued that the CFE was only one of many contributing factors to the pace of disarmament in Europe after the Cold War.(4) The CFE is certainly not the sole factor contributing to post-Cold War stability in Europe, but without the hidden cornerstone of institutionalized arms control as embodied in the CFE (and more broadly through the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe's (OSCE) Confidence and Security Building Measures, CSBMs), it would have been much more difficult to overcome the transaction costs associated with security cooperation on issues such as the enlargement of NATO and the so-far peaceful integration of Russia into a European security community. It would also have been much more difficult to facilitate the spread of democracy and capitalism into the former Soviet bloc if the security dilemma problem, as it was known during the Cold War, had not first been mitigated after the Cold War by the CFE. The continuing importance of the CFE as a cornerstone for security cooperation has been highlighted by the negotiations for the accession of the Baltic States into NATO, which will be discussed further on. Without the CFE, Russia would be much less amenable to having NATO arrive at its doorstep. All of these contributions to European security prove the merit of studying the CFE's past contributions and future role. …