The UK is happy to have the chance to consider how the economic and environmental forum and dimension are operating.
As shown by the fact that we have recently been successful in reaching agreement on certain concerns, this dimension presents unique chances for conversation and collaboration that may not be available to our colleagues working on other problems.
Greater economic connectivity can strengthen ties between States, strengthening resilience to conflict, while environmental confidence-building measures like transnational water cooperation or forestry protection can better protect both sides from environmental disasters, whether they are natural or man-made. Of course, the second component is now more important than ever due to the existential danger posed by climate change.
In this city in 1992, the OSCE Ministers decided to increase the organization’s emphasis on the development and transition to free-market economy as a crucial component of the process of constructing democracy.
The OSCE’s original goal of fostering better relations through regional connectivity and cooperation remains as important as ever, despite the addition of environmental issues to the organization’s mandate. This is especially true now that one of the participating States has chosen economic isolation and weaponization over cooperation and partnership.
Like with the addition of environmental concerns, what matters is the Forum’s and the larger dimension’s capacity to address emerging difficulties. For instance, the OCEEA should concentrate more on this issue since climate change becomes a danger to regional security. We appreciate their doing so.
In a similar manner, the OCEEA should react to this new issue as the economies of the OSCE area, particularly Ukraine, are challenged. We also approve with their suggested work schedule.
In this session, we are invited to think about new subjects.
We have seen the end of the economic collaboration required for economic recovery and development as a result of Russia’s reluctance to interact with the international community.
The OSCE is still a helpful venue for economic cooperation, but it won’t be able to fulfil its potential as long as Russia opposes global standards and conduct, isolates itself from the world, and flouts the organization’s economic tenets.
We will not stop urging Russia to honour the agreements it voluntarily entered into.
The UK supports collaboration on these challenges throughout all of Europe. With nations from the OSCE, we have had good economic cooperation experiences. For instance, our Central Asian development programme supports initiatives aimed at reducing corruption, promoting innovation, fostering the expansion of small enterprises, diversifying the private sector, and implementing economic policy.
Building local capacity and using best practises from settings similar to one’s own are both parts of this task, which is precisely the kind of work the OSCE excels at.
Through the CASA-1000 energy transmission project, which connects hydropower plants in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, we further regional connectivity and collaboration in Central Asia.
We appreciate the OCEEA’s contribution to improving commerce, transportation, and digital facilitation as we recognise the advantages of greater economic connectedness across the area. We cannot depend on those who could attack us, thus connectivity and collaboration among peaceful governments are essential to resilience.
We applaud the OCEEA’s efforts to strengthen energy security in Central Asia and safeguard vital energy infrastructure.
We also acknowledge the significant role the OSCE may play in water management and diplomacy. Strong results have been obtained from the work done on the Dniester river basin since 2004. Transboundary cooperation will only grow more crucial as water shortage is made worse by climate change.
In the OSCE, there is no separation between sub-regions when it comes to our capacity to work together on environmental and economic challenges. And doing so is in the best interests of all states.
However, if one state persists in rejecting offers of collaboration and waging a violent, unilateral campaign against a different OSCE participant State, it would negatively impact the whole area.
We must reexamine how we mobilise our economic and environmental instruments to strengthen our collective resistance against such barbarism as we evaluate the future direction of the second dimension.