Strengthening European security: UK statement to the OSCE
Minister for Europe, Lord Wood of Anfield, sets out the UK’s priorities as Chair of the OSCE Forum for Security Co-operation, focusing on Ukraine, dialogue and managing security risks.
Thank you, Chair.
President Clinton’s National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, once observed that: “History is seen through a rear-view mirror, but it unfolds through a foggy windshield.” That feels apt in these uncertain times.
We can see clearly enough how Russia’s aggression has changed Europe. We can see its consequences in Ukraine, and the pressure on the institutions underpinning European security, including this one. What is less clear is what comes next. But we know that this Forum faces a very important time in its history.
So, as the UK takes the Chair, we do so with a strong sense of purpose and ambition. We take very seriously our responsibility, not just for each meeting and each agenda item over the next four months, but for the long-term health of this valuable institution.
I want to make three points.
The first is that we must all ask whether we are doing enough to ensure this organisation remains effective in a more dangerous Europe.
We should always be clear about the consequences of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. They are measured, of course, in Ukrainian families forced from their homes, in communities torn apart by war, in children growing up amid violence and uncertainty, and in damage to the fundamental tenets of European security, including the Helsinki principles, which are as relevant today as ever.
Russia’s actions have changed the assumptions on which European security has rested for decades, and they have forced us all to think again about how we preserve it.
That is why the UK intends to use our time as Chair not simply to manage the agenda of the day, but to focus attention on the challenges ahead. We want to ensure that the OSCE can support stability in our region for years to come.
My second point is about principles and dialogue. These are sometimes presented as incompatible, as competing priorities. I think that is wrong. Indeed, the moments when dialogue feels most difficult are also the moments when it matters the most.
The United Kingdom, of course, will continue to stand firmly with Ukraine. We will continue to hold Russia accountable for its aggression and for actions that violate the principles on which this organisation was built.
Sovereignty matters. Territorial integrity matters. And the Helsinki principles matter.
At the same time, this is one of the few places where countries across our region still sit around one table and still discuss the security challenges we all face. That matters too.
Because when trust breaks down, the risks grow: misunderstanding, miscalculation and unintended escalation.
In this context, the purpose of dialogue is not to brush over or ignore important areas of disagreement. It is to stop disagreement escalating into something worse. That is the Forum’s purpose. We can only manage risks if all sides commit to that effort.
My third point is about the future.
One lesson from the last few years is that security cannot be taken for granted. Nor can the institutions that help protect it.
With this in mind, we should think critically about whether the mechanisms and instruments that we have can manage risk in a far more dangerous Europe. During our time as Chair, we want to encourage discussion about whether these mechanisms are fit for the future.
This is not the moment for rushed answers. But neither is it the moment to drift through the fog.
If we fail to strengthen the relationships and institutions that we need today, we will look back with regret.
Thank you very much.