President of the Republic of Estonia at the CSCE Summit 5-6 December 1994, Budapest
05.12.1994

Mr. Chairman,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would begin my brief remarks by congratulating our Finno-Ugric cousins in Hungary on assuming the chairmanship of the CSCE and thanking Italy for a tenure of exemplary leadership.
Mr. Chairman,
The CSCE holds a very special place in the hearts and minds of all Estonians, and for me, personally. The inaugural Helsinki summit in 1975 lit a flame that we could see clear across the Gulf of Finland, a flame that grew to be a beacon of hope through the long, dark and cold years behind the Iron Curtain. We tried to attend the next summit in Paris in 1990. That year we were in the throes of our struggle for independence. I was then serving as Estonia's foreign minister, and I remember as though it happened yesterday how the Baltic delegations were not allowed into the meeting at the behest of the very delegation that coined the phrase "common European values." By the next summit in 1992 we had reinstated our independence and had become a CSCE Participating State. With the wording in the 1992 Final Document for the "early, orderly and complete" withdrawal of foreign troops from the Baltic states, the CSCE proved absolutely vital in helping us achieve the goal of a final Russian troop withdrawal by 31 August of this year.
That fact alone makes this, the fourth summit of the CSCE, an historic event. Today, we can truly say that the Second World War is over and its last vestiges are nearly all removed.
But where do we go from here?
Mr. Chairman,
I would like to focus on three key aspects, on qualities that, depending on our responses, may well shape the future of the CSCE. I am speaking here of European values, of the place of the CSCE within the European security architecture in promoting those values and of peacekeeping as a means of preserving them.
Allow me to begin with values. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, we have been at a loss to define Europe. The search for a geographical definition has escaped us, because an understanding of Europe is not something to be found in even the best atlas. We have had to probe deeper, and the determining quality we have come up with is a common heritage of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, of the great philosophical and social teachings of the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It is this common heritage that gives birth, in turn, to shared European, or Western, values.
The CSCE is a process based on those values. It follows, then, that if we wish to strengthen the CSCE, then we must also strengthen adherence to the underlying values.
At this juncture, we face a strategic choice. Either we change the values, water them down to fit new circumstances, or we maintain and strengthen them, thereby strengthening society as a whole. Estonia is clear on this issue. We believe that human and civil rights standards must be applied non-selectively. There can be no exceptions because of the size or geographic location of a nation, because of cultural heritage or history, because states are in transition, because states have nuclear weapons or because their domestic political situation is delicate. The standards that are applied to one must be valid for all other states in the CSCE area. In other words, there can be no rubber rulers.
This is not always easy, but we in Estonia have seen the concrete results of this process in our interaction with the CSCE. Through the High Commissioner on National Minorities and by way of the CSCE Mission in particular, Estonia has gained a lot. But the CSCE has benefited as well. By having further developed its capabilities in Estonia, the CSCE is in a better position to help other countries in the future.
As a whole, then, the experience of the CSCE for my state has been useful and constructive, but above all it has been positive. As we look for ways to strengthen the CSCE, we might bear in mind the experiences in the Baltic states as success stories to be emulated in those areas of the CSCE region that need CSCE expertise the most. Estonia believes, for instance, that the CSCE should devote increased attention and energy to members of the group called the Commonwealth of Independent States, and do so in a much more vigorous fashion.
I would add one more impromptu remark. This morning, I listened with great interest, as I am sure you did, Ladies and Gentlemen, to Mr. Yeltsin's remarks on the state of affairs with the Russian Orthodox Church in Estonia. I believe I do not err when I judge this remark to have been critical, but still the same, it came as a surprise. The fact is that the Russian Orthodox Church in Estonia reports to the Patriarch of Constantinople. As a result of the Soviet occupation of my country, the Church was subsumed under the auspices of the Moscow patriarch, but the Church in Estonia has now reinstated its prewar status.
This is an issue for the believers, not for the statesmen, to decide. I think that we should try to avoid such accusations and statements, and I call on all relevant parties to refrain from using human rights as a propaganda agent and a political tool.
Mr. Chairman,
I will turn now to the role of the CSCE within the evolving European security framework. Estonia welcomes strengthening the CSCE as a regional organization and turning it into the instrument of first choice. This kind of bolstered role would take advantage of the CSCE's unique position in Europe, and would complement the UN, which, as Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali mentioned this morning, enshrines the role of regional organizations in its Charter. I am hopeful that we can agree upon this concept by the end of this summit.
Estonia also welcomes proposals for greater coordination among various international organizations and processes. I believe that lateral coordination will increase effectiveness by avoiding a duplication of effort and by making use of the complementary aspects of various bodies.
One such case in point is the Council of Europe. As the oldest European organization that guards individual rights and the rule of law, the Council of Europe is an excellent partner for inclusive organizations such as the CSCE. By maintaining its high standards for admission, the Council of Europe provides an incentive for would-be members to put their own house in order, thereby further strengthening our common European home.
We speak from experience. Over 20 fact-finding missions and special commissioners of human rights, ranging from the Council of Europe to the CSCE and the UN, have visited my country and have given Estonia a clean bill-of-health. This track record paid off last year in May when the Council of Europe voted on our full membership, thereby underlining that Estonia is a democratic, law-based state that respects human and civil rights.
Like our experience with the CSCE, our experience with the Council of Europe has been positive, and we recommend it highly to others. As you know, there is some debate in the Council of Europe over how best to help would-be members reach the standards required for membership. As an inclusive organization, however, the CSCE is already in a position to encourage the development of the rule of law in Russia and is already equipped with the mechanisms with which to monitor human rights.
Another significant mechanism for enhancing stability is the Pact for European Stability. Estonia welcomes this European Union initiative, which, through the Baltic Roundtable, creates the atmosphere for resolution of concerns regarding borders and the integration of populations of foreign origin. We also see the Pact as a means to prepare ourselves for future membership in the European Union. Through the Pact, we can demonstrate our willingness and capability to work together to solve problems that require resolution in our pre-accession period. In this regard, we welcome the participation of the Russian Federation as an observer at the Baltic Roundtable as a confidence-building measure. We believe Russia's fuller participation would enhance confidence even more.
Finally, the expansion of NATO in the security sphere goes hand-in-hand with the CSCE's role in preventive diplomacy. There has been much discussion here over changing the first "C" in the CSCE to an "O," but I think we should pay more attention to the "S." For this reason, I warmly welcome the North Atlantic Council's decision last week to start working on the nuts and bolts of expansion. Security is multi-dimensional, and we regard the CSCE and NATO to be complementary channels toward the same goal of a safer and more humane continent.
Mr. Chairman,
I turn now briefly to the topic of peacekeeping. I have said it once, and I will say again that the principles of peacekeeping outlined in Chapter III of the Helsinki Document of 1992 remain valid today. It is up to the CSCE to improve mechanisms for assuring compliance with those principles, and it is up to Participating States to find the political will to guard against any watering down of those principles.
Part of the debate during this Review Conference has been over the creation of a multinational peacekeeping force for Nagorno-Karabakh. Estonia strongly supports such a move, and we are hopeful this will be decided here today. Another point of debate has been whether to allow the use of so-called "third party forces" in peacekeeping operations. Here we come back to the principles I spoke of earlier. We believe that if we are considering the use of force, then the UN Security Council must approve such a move. If we are considering peacekeeping operations, then it must transpire under the principles set down in Chapter III. If those conditions are met, then how we name those forces is not a concern. If, however, those principles are not maintained, be it for reasons of political expediency, to save money or to avoid quarrels with a partner, then we will soon arrive at a slippery slope. When peacekeeping or peace enforcement or peacemaking is used as a mask behind which to achieve political aims, then a new division of Europe cannot be far behind. For this reason, I believe very strongly that peacekeeping should be a mechanism to keep the peace, rather than to keep the pieces.
Mr. Chairman,
I conclude by wishing Hungary a successful year as Chairman, and welcoming Switzerland as the Chairman-Elect of the CSCE.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.