Quo Vadis? the New Proposals At the Csce Follow-Up Meeting in Belgrade
| DOI | 10.1177/004711787800600206 |
| Author | Geoffrey Edwards |
| Date | 01 October 1978 |
| Published date | 01 October 1978 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
462
QUO
VADIS?
THE
NEW
PROPOSALS
AT THE
CSCE
FOLLOW-UP
MEETING
IN
BELGRADE
GEOFFREY
EDWARDS
THE
CSCE
follow-up
meeting
held
in
Belgrade
between
October
1977
and
March
1978
provided
only
a
disappointingly
meagre
contribution
to
furthering
East-West
detente.
The
35
participating
states
agreed
only
on
a
reafhrmation
of
the
obligations
they
had
undertaken
in
the
Final
Act
and
on
a
further
meeting
to
be
held
in
Madrid
in
1980.
While
limited,
these
agreements
were,
none-
theless,
significant,
for
at
least
the
CSCE
’process’
continues.
The
reaf~rmation
of
the
provisions
of
the
Final
Act
is
also
useful
to
the
extent
that
the
Final
Act
has
proved
a
constraint
on
states,
however
marginally,
to
respect
their
obligations.
Moreover,
Bel-
grade
confirmed
the
legitimacy
of
demanding
that
states
should
fulfil
their
obligations
and
of
criticising
them
when
they
failed
to
do
so.
It
provided
a
vital
opportunity
for
participating
states
to
assess
comprehensively,
despite
continuous
Soviet
and
East
Euro-
pean
hostility
to
such
scrutiny
(deeming
it
to
be
interference
in
internal
affairs),
the
extent
to
which
the
provisions
of
the
Final
Act
had
been
implemented.
Nonetheless,
the
limits
of
East-West
agreement
were
clearly
shown
by
the
brevity
of
the
concluding
document.
None
of
the
proposals
put
forward
to
improve
the
im-
plementation
of
the
Final
Act
and
to
foster
detente
were
accepted
for
inclusion.
The
aim
of
the
Belgrade
meeting
was
two-fold:
i
...
a
thorough
exchange
of
views
both
on
the
implementation
of
the
provisions
of
the
Final
Act and
of
the
tasks
defined
by
the
Conference,
as
well
as,
in
the
context
of
the
questions
dealt
with
by
the
latter
on
the
deepening
of
their
mutual
re-
lations,
the
improvement
of
security,
and
the
development
of
cooperation
in
Europe,
and
the
development
of
the
process
of
detente
in
the
future.
Public
attention
focussed
primarily
on
the
first
of
these
two
elements,
the
assessment
of
implementation,
and
especially
imple-
mentation
of
the
human
rights
provisions
of
the
Final
Act.
This
was
in
part
due
to
the
emphasis
put
by
President
Carter
and
his
administration
on
human
rights,
an
emphasis
which
was
itself
in
part
a
response
to
the
increased
awareness
of,
and
concern
for,
the
abuse
of
human
rights
in
the
Soviet
Union
and
Eastern
Europe.
There
was
a
widespread
feeling
in
many
Western
countries
that
the
To continue reading
Request your trial