Future of European construction

17 September 1992

Doc. 6671

1403-16/9/92-1-E

Report

on the future of European construction

(Rapporteur: Mr FLÜCKIGER, Switzerland, Rad. Dem.)

Summary

The changes that have taken place in Europe since Recommendation 1129 (1990) on structures of European co-operation was adopted in September 1990 mean that European construction now requires a new approach. For decades the process of construction was limited to the countries of Western Europe alone, but today it concerns all the new democracies that have emerged in the East of the continent. Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals is the new framework of European co-operation.

The various institutions that are working to promote European union must adapt themselves to the new situation. Following the signing of the Maastricht Treaty, the European Community is witnessing a further increase in its economic and political influence. This remains undisputed, even though Maastricht has given rise to opposition and it is not possible to say at present if this will be strong enough to influence the text's future.

With its extensive scope for intergovernmental and interparliamentary co-operation, the Council of Europe is making an unparalleled contribution to the process of a politically structured Europe. By progressively integrating the new European democracies it is extending its role of guarantor for the respect of citizens' rights and freedoms to the whole of the continent.

For all matters relating to the consolidation of parliamentary democracy, respect for human rights and the human dimension of European co-operation, the Assembly is of the opinion that the Council of Europe is the most appropriate organisation. Its structures and its methods must, however, be adapted to its enlargement.

Accordingly, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers submits to the participants in the Summit of Member States' Heads of State and Government, to be held in Vienna in October 1993, such matters as the new role of the Organisation in European construction, the new spheres of activity, the essential revision of the Statute, the enlargement of the Organisation and conditions of membership, the protection of the rights of minorities, together with the reform of the mechanisms of the European Convention on Human Rights.

I. DRAFT RECOMMENDATION

1. The changes that have taken place in Europe since Recommendation 1129 (1990) on structures of European co-operation was adopted in September 1990, mean that European construction now requires a new approach.

2. For decades the process of construction was limited to the countries of Western Europe alone, but today it concerns all the new democracies that have emerged in the Eastern part of the continent.

3. The various institutions that are working in favour of European union are in the process of adapting themselves to the new situation. Following the signing of the Maastricht Treaty on European Union, the European Community is witnessing a further increase in its economic and political influence. This remains undisputed, even though the Maastricht Treaty has given rise to opposition and it is not possible to say at present whether this will be strong enough to influence the text's future.

4. The different organisations that are active on the continent must co-ordinate their work in order to avoid duplication of effort, wastage of available resources, conflicts of jurisdiction and legal uncertainty.

5. The Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) should assert itself in accordance with the essential role it has to play, in the sphere of security and crisis prevention, relying on the support of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the Western European Union (WEU). The Helsinki Declaration of 10 July 1992 establishes this direction for the CSCE's future activities.

6. As far as economic co-operation is concerned, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the European Community have the key task of helping the new democracies in their transition towards a market economy. In setting up the European Economic Area (EEA), the European Community and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) confirmed their pivotal role as the driving force of the European economy.

7. In terms of the consolidation of parliamentary democracy, respect for human rights and the human dimension of European co-operation, the Assembly believes that the Council of Europe is the most appropriate organisation. However, it must adapt its structures and working methods to the new requirements and to its own enlargement.

8. At the same time, it is essential to explain in clear terms outside Europe the objectives of European construction in order to overcome the image of a "fortress" Europe vis-à-vis developing countries. Dialogue and solidarity should inspire the foreign policies of European democracies.

9. The Assembly welcomes the decision of the Committee of Ministers to accept the invitation of the Austrian Government to hold, in Vienna in October 1993, a Summit of the Heads of State and Government of Member States to discuss the future role of the Council of Europe at pan-European level and the implications thereof.

10. Therefore the Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers:

i. submit to the participants of this summit such questions as:

a. the new role of the Organisation in European co-operation;

b. new spheres of activity;

c. the enlargement of the Organisation and conditions of membership;

d. the essential revision of the Organisation's Statute;

e. the reform of the mechanisms of the European Convention on Human Rights;

f. the protection of the rights of minorities, notably through an additional Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights as proposed in Recommendation 1177 (1992);

ii. define the principles and forms of co-operation between the Council of Europe and other European institutions.

II. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

by Mr Flückiger

Table of Contents

Paragraphs

I. INTRODUCTION 1 - 9

II. FOUNDATIONS OF EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION 10 - 16

III. INSTRUMENTS OF EUROPEAN CO-OPERATION 17

A. General 18 - 30

B. Economic 31 - 36

C. Defence 37 - 43

IV. PARLIAMENTARY DIMENSION 44 - 49

V. OBSTACLES TO EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION 50 - 55

VI. CONCLUSIONS 56 - 64

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Examining and debating the process of European construction have always been at the centre of the Assembly's work. Indeed, in the course of the last three years alone, the Assembly has adopted four recommendations directly concerning the subject.

2. In March 1989, on the eve of the changes which were to transform the continent, the Assembly adopted Recommendation 1103 (1989) on the future role of the Council of Europe in the process of European construction, in which it was already requesting that the Committee of Ministers develop European co-operation on a wider level in order to extend dialogue and co-operation to other European countries. In its reply, the Committee of Ministers expressed its willingness to enter into open and concrete talks with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe.

3. The adoption of Recommendation 1124 (1990) on relations with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in May 1990 following a debate on the general policy of the Council of Europe was to mark a turning point in the Assembly's approach. The text adopted no longer referred to the "situation in these countries" but to "relations with these countries". It is true that a few weeks earlier the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers and the Secretary General had paid a visit to eight European countries that were participants in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) but were not members of our Organisation. As part of preparations for the CSCE Summit that was to be held in Paris, the Assembly recommended that the Committee of Ministers avoid creating new institutions and take into account the structure and the experience of the Council of Europe in the spheres of parliamentary democracy and the protection of human rights. In its reply, the Committee of Ministers announced that it was prepared to study the contribution of the Organisation to the CSCE process together with forms of its participation in CSCE meetings.

4. A few months later (in September 1990), in Recommendation 1129 (1991) on structures for European co-operation, the Assembly urged the Committee of Ministers to ensure that the work of the Council of Europe was duly taken into account when the CSCE's aims were being implemented. The Committee of Ministers' reply to the Assembly informed it of the participation of the Council of Europe in the CSCE's Paris Summit in November 1990 and of the institution of multilateral co-operation with the CSCE in order to realise shared goals.

5. In January 1991 the Assembly adopted Recommendation 1139 (1991) on the institutional role of the Council of Europe in the "new Europe". In this recommendation, the Committee of Ministers was expressly invited to examine all measures, including revision of the Statute, to ensure that the Council of Europe would be in a position to shoulder its responsibilities in a continent aspiring to greater unity. Following an initial examination of the text, the Committee of Ministers formed an ad hoc working group that was instructed to study all issues raised by this recommendation and decided that this group should establish contacts with the ad hoc Committee on the Revision of the Statute set up by the Bureau of the Assembly.

6. The texts adopted by the Assembly and the Committee of Ministers' replies bear witness to the shift in the position of the Council of Europe's two organs in response to the changes that have taken place in Central and Eastern Europe. In going beyond the geographical boundaries of Western Europe over the course of the last two years, the Organisation has clearly displayed its pan-European vocation, which aims to bring together all the peoples of Europe in one framework of co-operation.

7. In the same way, the changes that have taken place in Europe have lent a new dimension to the CSCE process. The Paris Summit signalled the end of the cold war and the rallying of 34 countries around common democratic foundations without the ambiguities of the past. The Helsinki Summit of July 1992, which was attended by 51 countries, entrusted the CSCE with the role of custodian of the peace in Europe.

8. The European Community continued its progress towards union of its Member States. The European Union Treaty, signed in Maastricht on 7 February 1992, should turn the Community, once the reservations that have surfaced have been removed, into the hard core of European construction.

9. The Maastricht Treaty entrusts the WEU with the role of a peace-keeping instrument in Europe. The WEU is therefore destined to become an essential element of foreign policy and security in the future European union.

II. FOUNDATIONS OF EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION

10. Although European construction has many foundations, I believe that what which has most motivated Europeans since the end of the second world war is the need to live in peace both within the borders of their own country and with their neighbours.

11. But although peace is an essential element of harmonious cohabitation, it is not sufficient to ensure progress in the construction of Europe. With the totalitarian regimes existing in the countries of Eastern and Central Europe, it was impossible to make any progress in this direction. Only with the establishment of pluralist parliamentary democracies in these countries - the system of government that was wanted by all the peoples - did it become possible to expand European co-operation.

12. Pluralist parliamentary democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law are features common to the new constitutions of Eastern European countries.

13. Moreover, the justifiable desire of Europeans for greater economic prosperity favoured the expansion of the market economy in the whole of Europe. Transition from the centralised systems that were in place in the countries of the former communist bloc to such an economic model does, however, entail a number of difficulties, such as guaranteeing a minimum of social services to populations accustomed to a system of state support.

14. In addition to these unanimously accepted foundations common to all European countries, there are other principles that are referred to less often but are equally indispensable in the construction of the new Europe, viz. tolerance and respect for others. Europe's ethnic, cultural and religious diversity constitutes an asset that must be safeguarded and respected. The conflicts currently raging in certain parts of our continent are mainly the result of the flouting of these principles.

15. It is possible to build Europe on the basis of all these elements, but states must show their political will to become involved in this task and equip themselves with the necessary institutions, whilst at the same time guarding against authoritarian centralism that is contrary to a system acceptable to the individual.

16. Lastly, there is one further component of European construction that must be borne in mind. It is the support that European citizens, in both the East and West of our continent, give to the European idea, firstly as the cultural heritage of the West and secondly as a political reality. In their eyes it represents the values of the society in which they wish to live.

III. INSTRUMENTS OF EUROPEAN CO-OPERATION

17. It is not my intention to set out in detail in this chapter all the international organisations that are involved in European construction, but rather to list them and highlight their individual features. They are divided up into three main groups according to their spheres of activity: general, economic or defence.

A. General

a. Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe

18. With 52 participating states (Yugoslavia, however, had its participation suspended at the Helsinki Summit), the CSCE is a northern hemisphere organisation. In addition to European States, it includes the Asian republics of the former Soviet Union along with the United States and Canada. It should be noted that the number of participants has increased rapidly over the last few months. When the heads of state and government met in Paris in November 1990 the CSCE had only 34 participating states.

19. The Charter of Paris for a New Europe, which was adopted at the Paris Summit, was drafted at a time of optimism brought about by the end of the cold war and the return of democracy to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. When the heads of state and government met again this year in Helsinki, on 9 and 10 July, the political climate was completely different. For the first time ever, a participating State, Yugoslavia, was excluded from the summit. Moreover, in addition to the armed conflicts that were taking place in some of the former Yugoslav Republics, fighting had also broken out in Nagorno-Karabakh, Moldova and Ossetia. It was therefore not surprising that the Helsinki Summit concentrated on security issues.

20. In confirmation of the tendency that had surfaced in Paris of transforming the CSCE into an international organisation instead of considering it as a "process", the Helsinki Summit declared that the CSCE should be considered a regional agreement in the sense of Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations. At the same time, and this was the summit's most important innovation, a CSCE peace-keeping formula was created. To carry out this task, the CSCE might "benefit from resources and possible experience and expertise of existing organisations such as the EC, NATO and the WEU..." (paragraph 52 of the Helsinki Decisions). In addition, the Commonwealth of Independent States' (CIS) peace-keeping mechanism might be invited to support the CSCE's peace-keeping operations. However, the principle of consensus, which is used by the CSCE in its decision-making process, might present a serious obstacle to effective action. The Helsinki document specifies that CSCE peace-keeping operations will not entail any coercion and that they will require the consent of the parties directly involved. It is only natural to wonder whether the principle of consensus minus one, as used in case of serious violations of human rights in Yugoslavia, would also be used in other circumstances.

21. With regard to CSCE institutions, the Helsinki Summit confirmed what had been established in Paris, viz. a Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs, a Committee of Senior Officials (CSO), a CSCE Secretariat in Prague, a Conflict Prevention Centre in Vienna and an Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) in Warsaw. The terms of reference given to the CSO are to examine the case for granting an internationally recognised status to the latter three institutions. This proposal has been given strong support by France, whilst the United States ha opposed it; its implementation is thus doubtful. It was also decided in Helsinki to appoint a CSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, whose job will be to avert conflicts at the earliest possible stage. The High Commissioner will not deal with individual cases where people belonging to a minority are victims of violations of CSCE commitments or with the problems of minorities in situations involving organised acts of terrorism.

22. Furthermore, a CSCE Forum for Security Co-operation has been set up to pursue negotiations on troop and arms reduction. This forum will comprise all the CSCE participants - not, as previously, only members of the continent's two military alliances.

23. The CSO will be meeting from time to time as an "Economic Forum" to consider issues relating to transport, telecommunications and the environment. Co-operation is planned with the OECD, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the European Community, the European Investment Bank, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe and the United Nations Environment Programme.

b. Council of Europe

24. I presume that members of the Assembly are sufficiently familiar with the role of the Council of Europe in a European context, its expertise in the field of human rights and its various activities. It is therefore unnecessary to detail these aspects in this report.

25. It thus suffices to recall that the Council of Europe is, after the CSCE, the organisation with the widest geographical scope. Like the CSCE, it is also in the process of expanding, although it is doing so at a slower pace as it is responding to different requirements. In just a few years, the number of its member states has gone from 23 to 27 and might exceed 30 in the first few months of 1993.

26. The repercussions of the enlargement of the Council of Europe, along with its possible limits, are set out in the report (Doc. 6629) that Mr Reddemann submitted to the Assembly on 30 June 1991. For its part the Bureau of the Assembly is continuing its examination of a report by its ad hoc Committee on the Revision of the Statute.

c. European Community

27. A report on the consequences of the Maastricht and Lisbon Summits will be submitted to the Assembly by Mr Pangalos (AS/Pol (44) 16). I might therefore simply refer you to this document for all matters pertaining to the structural and institutional reforms that are going to take place within the European Community and to its future role in European construction.

28. It is, however, essential to emphasise the development of this organisation which, having been created to promote the economic integration of its members, has now embarked on the path to political integration. European Union, which will eventually become a reality for twelve states in principle as a first stage, will be a experiment that might serve as an blueprint to be followed for the step-by-step integration of all Europeans.

29. Nevertheless, the limits of a common foreign policy have been clearly demonstrated by the disappointing Community response to the Gulf war and the Yugoslav crisis. This should serve as a warning against the illusions of the idea of a European confederation.

30. In the years to come, the enlargement of the European Community is set to become a major issue with the applications submitted by Turkey, Cyprus, Malta and certain members of the European Free Trade Association (Austria, Sweden, Finland and Switzerland). Whether or not the deepening of union is compatible with this widening is one of the major issues the Community will have to face.

d. Regional organisations

31. Benelux and the Nordic Council are two of the oldest and most effective regional organisations that exist in Europe. More recently, the Baltic Co-operation Council and the Black Sea Co-operation Zone have been set up.

B. Economic

a. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

32. The OECD's activities are the subject of an annual debate in our Assembly, which is attended by the OECD's Secretary General and parliamentary delegations from non-European members of the OECD. These debates and the reports that are examined on these occasions are the best way of finding out the role that the OECD intends to play on the European stage.

33. There are not only nineteen Council of Europe member states in the OECD but also Australia, Canada, the United States, Japan and New Zealand. The organisation thus has a non-European dimension.

34. The aim of the OECD is to promote policies designed to bring about the greatest possible growth in the economy and employment and a rise in living standards in its member states, while at the same time safeguarding financial stability and contributing to the development of the world economy. The OECD also helps its members to draw up policies aimed at contributing to sound economic growth in developing countries, regardless of whether they are members.

b. European Free Trade Association (EFTA)

35. In the course of over thirty years of existence, EFTA has devoted itself to developing trade between its seven member States, which are all also members of the Council of Europe. The development of the European Community and of trade between it and the EFTA countries led to the signing of agreements between the two organisations, the most recent one concerning the creation of a "European Economic Area" (EEA), which aims to establish, as from 1 January 1993, a single market comprising the member states of the two organisations.

36. As Mr Demiralp pointed out in the last report he submitted to the Assembly on EFTA activities in 1989 and 1990 (Doc. 6457), some parts of the EEA treaty concern spheres other than economic integration and trade in the strictest sense of the terms, for example education and culture, social protection, health, the environment and legal co-operation. I share the opinion of Mr Demiralp, who in his report stressed the necessity of ensuring that these arious activities do not duplicate those that are already under way within the Council of Europe.

C. Defence

a. North Atlantic Treaty Organisation

37. According to its present Secretary General, NATO has embarked on a long-term transformation so as to move from the current collective pact limited to defence to a core of Euro-Atlantic security. The creation of the North Atlantic Co-operation Council (NACC) can be considered the first step in this direction. The NACC now comprises the member states of NATO, five Central and Eastern European countries, the Baltic republics and the CIS republics. Its aim is to allow consultation and co-operation on political and security issues. Although it does not offer any formal guarantees of security, it does bring the countries of Central and Eastern Europe closer to those of NATO and thus helps to improve the security situation in these countries and ensures that a dangerous vacuum does not appear. Although membership is ruled out for these countries at present, NATO has scrupulously made a point of leaving this possibility open for the future.

38. The Council meets every two months at ambassadorial level and once a year at ministerial level. Its activities involve defence planning, arms control, the co-ordination of civilian and military air traffic and the conversion of military production to civilian production.

b. Western European Union

39. The WEU is the only exclusively European organisation that is competent in defence matters. At present, it comprises nine member states of the European Community, which committed themselves mutual aid and assistance in case of attack - through the Treaty of Brussels of 1954. The involvement of its members is more binding than in the case of NATO, and there is no geographical limits to its sphere of activity.

40. It is therefore quite natural, following the changes that have taken place on our continent, that the WEU should have been perceived by many European political leaders as the organisation that could serve as the foundation for a Community defence system (EEC).

41. In the Maastricht Treaty on European Union, the WEU is therefore invited to draw up and implement the European Union decisions and policies that have implications in the defence field.

42. More recently, the CSCE Helsinki Summit declaration recalls that the WEU is an integral part of the development of European Union, that it is the means of consolidating the European pillar of the Atlantic alliance and that it has offered to supply resources for supporting the CSCE. It should also be pointed out that the WEU is one of the organisations upon which the CSCE intends to rely when it undertakes peace-keeping operations.

43. It is not possible in this report to go into such issues as the operational role of the WEU and its future beyond Maastricht. For those who are particularly interested in these aspects, I sugest reading the reports submitted by Sir Dudley Smith and Mr Goerens to the WEU Assembly in June 1992 (Documents 1307 and 1308), together with Mr Caro's report on a new European security order (Document 1309).

IV. PARLIAMENTARY DIMENSION

a. CSCE Assembly

44. The possibility of adding a parliamentary dimension to the CSCE process has emerged as a result of the democratic changes that have taken place in Central and Eastern Europe. Our Assembly is the institution that has given the most support to this idea. In 1990 and 1991, it held debates on the CSCE to which it invited parliamentary delegations from all those states participating in the CSCE. During the debates, it expressed its willingness to be the basis of a CSCE assembly. Opposition from the United States has prevented this initiative from being put into effect.

45. However, in response to the invitation in the Charter of Paris for a New Europe to create a CSCE Assembly formed by parliamentary delegations from the participating states, a parliamentary meeting was held in Madrid in April 1991. The meeting resulted in an agreement to set up a CSCE assembly which would meet once an year.

46. This Assembly's first meeting was held in Budapest from 3 to 5 July 1992. Parliamentary delegations from all the participating states were present with the exception of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Georgia, Uzbekistan, San Marino and Turkmenistan. The Holy See was represented by an observer. A final declaration was adopted at the end of the meeting. The CSCE Assembly decided to set up a permanent secretariat in Copenhagen. However, the Budapest meeting brought to the surface considerable differences between the delegations with regard to the continuatioin of this Assembly's proceedings, its functioning and its future development.

b. Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe

47. By way of a brief reminder, I would simply like to point out that our Assembly comprises almost as many parliamentarians as the CSCE Assembly: those from the 27 delegations of the member states, eight special guest delegations and one observer delegation. Five further requests for special guest status are currently being examined. As already pointed out, the Assembly is in the process of studying the possibility of amending the Council of Europe's Statute, including matters relating to its own role within the Organisation; in particular, it lacks the power to decide on its budget and adopt texts of a binding nature.

c. European Parliament

48. The position of the European Parliament will emerge strengthened from the ratification of the Maastricht Treaty on European Union, as the treaty gives it the right of co-decision in certain matters, particularly in the appointment of the Commission. Moreover, the approval of the European Parliament will be required for all international agreements reached by the Community, not only for association agreements as has been the case up until now. The European Parliament has also been granted the right to set up Commissions of inquiry. This increase in its powers should help to increase the turnout in European elections, which is very low in some countries.

d. Other parliamentary bodies

49. The other European parliamentary bodies are the WEU Assembly, the Assembly of the Nordic Council and the Benelux Assembly, the Baltic Assembly and the Assembly of the Central European Initiative. Although NATO does not have a parliamentary body, parliamentarians from its member states meet within the North Atlantic Assembly, a parliamentary association.

V. OBSTACLES TO EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION

50. Having briefly reviewed the institutions that are striving to advance the European idea, I now turn to the obstacles that lie in the path of union, with due respect for the diversity of the various partners. Even if, as stated earlier, a majority of citizens may declare themselves in favour of more or less integrated European institutions based on the values of democracy, pluralism and the market economy, there is still a section of the population that is mistrustful of the effects of an authoritarian union that diminishes the identity of nations as areas of freedom of each of its component entities. The Danish "no" to the ratification of the Maastricht Treaty is in a sense a display of this mistrust, which sometimes extends to all aspects of politics.

51. This mistrust is generating introversion that verges on narrow-minded nationalism, xenophobia and even racism, with the result that in some respects Europe seems to be built on paradoxes, if not on misunderstandings. For example, in clarifying the scope of national and supranational policies, the Maastricht Treaty ought to have dispelled certain misgivings. However, it has had the opposite effect. These complex reactions show that too little emphasis has been placed on the replies to the political questions raised by union.

52. It must also be acknowledged that war is again raging in our continent after decades of peace. As long as there are armed conflicts on European soil, the main task that states and European organisations should tackle is that of restoring peace. It is inconceivable that the new Europe can be built as long as human lives are being lost in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Moldova, Nagorno-Karabakh or Ossetia.

53. These conflicts of ethnic origin are at the same time extreme displays of a nationalism that had been stifled for generations. This reappearance of nationalism entails obvious risks, as the national rights of a majority of the population cannot be recognised at the expense of the rights of minorities. Here again it is the whole question of the respect for others that is arising in particularly stark terms.

54. The transition of the former authoritarian regimes of Central and Eastern European countries towards democracy is also causing a number of problems of which the most serious is the economic crisis accompanying the change-over to market economy. Such a situation entails dangers of destabilisation for young democracies, because it can lead to public dissatisfaction with the new regime and give rise to complications that would be fatal to the future of Europe.

55. Finally, reference should be made to the mistrust of non-European particularly that of developing countries, vis-à-vis a united, rich, powerful and inward-looking Europe. Everything must be done to ensure that Europe is not perceived in this way. It is more than ever important to stress the need to place Europe's relations with these countries on a basis of solidarity and interdependence, concepts to which our Assembly is especially attached.

VI. CONCLUSIONS

56. As already pointed out, the changes that have taken place in Europe since Recommendation 1129 (1990) on structures of European co-operation was adopted in September 1990 mean that a new approach to European construction is required. Having been limited to the countries of Western Europe for decades, it now concerns all the new democracies that have emerged in the East of the continent. Greater Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, is thus becoming the new framework for European co-operation.

57. The affirmation of clearly perceived aims of co-operation that encompass all European countries would contribute to better public understanding of the process under way. In particular, it would be advisable to remove the uncertainty surrounding such formulas as European union or European confederation, pending desirable introduction of a statute for non-Community countries prior to their progressive association with the Community.

58. European states should become aware of the need to co-ordinate the work of the various organisations of which they are members in order to avoid duplication of effort, the wasting of available resources, conflicts of jurisdiction and legal uncertainty. The Council of Europe, particularly the Assembly, in receiving new members and showing rigour in its principles but flexibility in its procedures, has allowed States who have regained their sovereignty along with democracy to fulfil their legitimate hopes of a "return" to Europe pending the above mentioned institutional solutions.

59. In the sphere of security and crisis prevention, the CSCE has an essential role to play. With the support of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the Western European Union (WEU). The Helsinki Summit declaration (of 10 July 1992) establishes this direction for the CSCE's future action.

60. In the realm of economic co-operation, the Organisation for European Co-operation and Development (OECD), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the European Community have a key mission to aid the new democracies in their transition towards a market economy, without detracting from the value of bilateral assistance.

61. For everything concerning the consolidation of parliamentary democracy, respect for human rights and the human dimension of European co-operation, the best placed organisation is the Council of Europe. I nevertheless believe that the Council of Europe must adapt its structures and working methods to the needs of the new Europe.

62. Likewise, it is essential to clarify the aims of European construction outside Europe in order to overcome the image of a "fortress" Europe vis-à-vis the developing countries. Dialogue and solidarity must inspire the external policies of European democracies.

63. Finally, the Rapporteur welcomes the recent decision of the Committee of Ministers to accept the invitation of the Austrian Government to hold, in Vienna in October 1993, a Summit of Heads of State and Government of Council of Europe Member States.

64. In the light of the above, the Rapporteur proposes that the Assembly recommend that the Committee of Ministers:

i. submit to the participants in this summit such questions as:

a. the new role of the Organisation in the construction of greater Europe;

b. the new spheres of activity;

c. the enlargement of the Organisation and conditions of membership;

d. the essential revision of the Organisation's Statute;

e. the reform of the mechanisms of the European Convention on Human Rights;

f. the protection of the rights of minorities, notably through an additional Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights as proposed in Recommendation 1177 (1992);

ii. define the principles and forms of co-operation between the Council of Europe and other European institutions.

Reporting committee: Political Affairs Committee.

Budgetary implications for the Assembly: None.

Reference to committee: Standing mandate.

Draft recommendation: Unanimously adopted by the committee on 10 September 1992.

Members of the committee: MM. Reddemann (Chairman), Sir Dudley Smith (Vice-Chairman) (Alternate: Sir Anthony Durant), Mrs Baarveld-Schlaman (Vice-Chairman), MM. Alvarez Cascos (Alternate: de Puig), Antretter, Baumel, Björn Bjarnason, Bokov, Bratinka, Caro, Cem (Alternate: Maruflu), Cimoszewicz (Alternate: Iwinski), Espersen, Fahey (Alternate: Nolan), Lord Finsberg, MM. Fioret, Fiorini, Flückiger, Gabbuggiani, Galanos (Alternate: Hadjidemetriou), Mrs Haller, Mrs Halonen, MM. Hardy, Hellström, Irmer, Kelchtermans, König, Mrs Lentz-Cornette, MM. van den Linden, Machete, Martins, Masseret, Mimaroglu (Alternate: Güner), Moya, Oehry, Pangalos, Panov, Papadogonas, Psaila Savona, Schieder, Sebej, Seeuws, Simko, Mrs Suchoka, MM. Szent-Ivanyi, Tarschys, Thoresen, N ... (Alternate: Mezzapesa).

NB. The names of those members who took part in the vote are underlined.

Secretaries to the committee: MM. Sorinas and Kleijssen.