CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Presentation at the OSCE’s Security Committee (17 February 2014)
Strengthening the role of the OSCE in supporting security sector governance and reform
Prepared by the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF)
Your Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Allow us to first of all thank you for granting us the opportunity to speak a few words on possibilities to
strengthen the role of the OSCE in supporting Security Sector Governance and Reform. Last year, a DCAF
team visited four field operations where we found that the OSCE is already heavily engaged in
supporting activities related to Security Sector Governance and Reform. Besides the field operations, the
Secretariat and institutions are also delivering concrete support by dispatching a variety of experts to
participating States and by devising a range of comprehensive and widely-recognized guidance, for
example on police reform in the context of criminal justice reform, policing in multi-ethnic societies, or
human rights in counter-terrorism.
Security sector governance and security sector reform are relatively new concepts which have emerged
over the past two decades in response to new challenges presented by the changing global security
environment. Security sector governance – abbreviated as SSG – stands for the principle that the
military, police and other security forces provide comprehensive security for the state and its people,
effectively and efficiently, and within a framework of democratic civilian control, the rule of law, and
respect for human rights. Security sector reform – abbreviated as SSR – is a political and technical
process through which a country seeks to enhance the effectiveness and accountability of its security
forces – in other words: to strengthen security sector governance. In this process, many countries draw
on external support provided by international actors such as intergovernmental organizations, including
1
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
the OSCE. For the OSCE, evidence shows that use of these concepts of SSG and SSR – in short: SSG/R –
has been widely established practice for years. However, the lack of an overarching framework and
guidance is hampering the effectiveness and efficiency of the OSCE’s efforts in this area. Yet there are
ways and means to overcome this gap, and the OSCE is by far not the first organization that would do so
successfully.
Our presentation is based on DCAF’s mapping study on the role of the OSCE in supporting SSG/R. The
study was mandated by the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs with the support of the OSCE
Secretary General and was submitted in December 2013. It is based on extensive desk research as well
as targeted field research and draws on interviews with over 170 interlocutors. Let me seize this
opportunity to express our thanks and gratitude to all interview partners, field operations, and host
countries for their important support and excellent co-operation.
The study contains a mapping of the normative framework and operational roles of the OSCE, as well as
a comprehensive review of the organization’s “de facto” approach on the strategic, thematic and
programmatic levels. The study identifies ten key lessons from OSCE experience in SSG/R support and
concludes by producing a set of general and specific recommendations. In today’s presentation, we will
focus on three areas: the main findings of the study, the key messages, and some reflections on the way
ahead.
Key Findings
The key findings of the DCAF mapping study are threefold: they relate to the multi-dimensional nature
of the SSG/R concept, the involvement of the principal bodies of the OSCE in supporting SSG/R, and the
organization’s de facto approach to supporting SSG/R.
The first key finding relates to the fact that SSG/R is a broad concept that cuts across the divide of
military and non-military, as well as state and human security, and is based on the principle of both
effective and accountable provision of security. Indeed, the SSG/R concept very much reflects the
OSCE’s comprehensive approach to contemporary security issues. Therefore, it does not come as a
2
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
surprise that the concept of SSG/R extends well beyond the OSCE’s first dimension of security and
embraces aspects of all three dimensions: politico-military, economic and environmental, and human.
One of the most important normative documents with regard to SSG/R is embedded in the first
dimension. The Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security is to be considered unique
because it establishes both inter- and intra-state norms of behaviour. It is a cornerstone of the concept
of democratic control of armed forces and provides the basis for a range of SSG principles, such as
ensuring democratically controlled, effective, efficient, accountable and transparent provision of
security. The second dimension offers a few yet important principles, for instance the recognition of the
connection between economic advancement and security through the OSCE’s Border Management and
Security Concept. The third dimension provides vital contributions by emphasizing, for example, the
respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and humanitarian law by security forces, or the
importance of gender mainstreaming and prevention of discrimination. Many norms have a strong
complementary character and cannot be contained strictly within a single dimension. This is especially
true for issues such as policing, border management or counter-terrorism, which are very complex yet
vital concerns of the OSCE and which demand cross-dimensional approaches.
A second key finding is that all of the OSCE bodies are actively involved in supporting SSG/R on an
operational level and have accumulated rich experiences. The Secretariat provides support through its
structures and is actively involved in, for example, police reform, border management reform, counterterrorism, and countering human trafficking. With regard to the institutions, the High Commissioner on
National Minorities plays a vital role in supporting non-discrimination, and in particular, multi-ethnic and
minority-sensitive policing. The Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights emphasizes, among
other things, human rights and gender-awareness in SSG/R. Lastly, through its 15 current field
operations, the organization supports efforts to enhance SSG/R on the ground in participating States.
Many field operations are engaged in the areas of police, border, defence, judiciary, penitentiary, and
oversight and management of the security sector.
Although there exists neither a defined nor a formalized approach to SSG/R, the third key finding is that
a thorough analysis of the organization’s normative and operational framework leads to the
understanding of a “de facto” approach on three levels: strategic, thematic, and programmatic.
3
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

The strategic level refers to the existence of a common, overarching goal around which
operational support is structured. The organization’s “de facto” approach to SSG/R generally
lacks clear strategic direction to guide efforts in this area. This is partly a result of the shortfalls
of broader long-term strategic planning in the organisation, linked to the one-year budget
cycles. It also relates to the reality that projects are often ad hoc and not inserted into a chain of
activities that aim to achieve a broad goal. This results in missed opportunities to build on
synergies. In the case of the field operations, it also affects the credibility of the OSCE’s work.
Indeed, it is difficult to emphasise the importance of a coherent and comprehensive approach to
SSG/R to host governments, when the organisation has not yet developed its own internal
approach that draws on these principles.

On the thematic level, the organization covers a range of important issues, including the
provision of security and justice, management and oversight, and cross-cutting issues. The
Secretariat often has a strong focus on issues related to transnational threats. Both the
Secretariat and the institutions are less engaged in support to the democratic oversight and
management of the security sector. Field operations differ in mandates and contexts, and thus
also in thematic priorities. However, there are three general areas of reform that are clearly an
overall priority: the police, the judiciary, and border management. Besides a few exceptions,
oversight and management are also largely neglected. As they are key components of SSG/R,
more systematic support would be desirable.

On the programmatic level, the broad priorities defined in the organization’s normative
framework guide the design, planning and implementation of the OSCE’s support. Overall, the
organization has expanded well beyond its traditional role of offering a platform for dialogue. It
is now recognized as a significant provider of operational support, for example through training
and technical advice. The Secretariat and institutions rely on the organization of meetings to
raise awareness on the commitments of participating States and to exchange expertise. They
also provide trainings to support the acquisition of skills among security sector actors. Similarly,
the field operations gear the delivery of trainings to enhancing technical skills, and organise
seminars and roundtables with the goal to raise awareness on specific issues. A key challenge is
that operational support is often not based on the systematic use of prior needs assessments.
4
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
In sum, the organization pursues an unformalized, multidimensional approach to SSG/R, with all
principal bodies involved in supporting SSG/R, covering a broad range of thematic issues and engaging in
a variety of operational activities in an ad hoc manner, but lacking clear strategic direction to guide the
delivery of more effective, efficient and coherent support.
Key Messages
DCAF’s mapping study contains a number of key messages, including ten lessons identified from the
OSCE’s experience in supporting SSG/R as well as a set of tailor-made recommendations. Regarding the
ten lessons identified, these can be grouped into three clusters, namely strengthening the crossdimensional approach to SSG/R; enhancing effective cooperation and coordination in support to SSG/R;
and, adopting a more sustainable approach to support to SSG/R.

First, as highlighted earlier, a comprehensive strategy for SSG/R support is highly compatible
with the OSCE’s approach to security based on the three dimensions. The organization has
recognised in numerous documents that enhancing cross-dimensional cooperation would
increase the overall impact of the OSCE’s efforts. However, more efforts are needed to convert
this rhetoric into practice – particularly in the area of SSG/R. Stovepiped approaches have
resulted in missed opportunities to build on the comparative advantages of the OSCE. As an
example, strengthening anti-corruption initiatives in the security sector has often fallen
between the cracks because it requires bringing the first and second dimension together.
Similarly, while the human-dimension structures have much experience engaging with civil
society organisations, in the case of some of the first-dimension structures, engagement has
been much weaker. This represents a missed opportunity to build civil society capacity for
oversight functions and to support national ownership of reforms. Strengthening crossdimensional approaches is necessary to maximise the impact of the organisation’s work.

Second, increasing the effective coordination of support provided requires a clear delineation
of roles and responsibilities, especially between the field operations and the Secretariat and
institutions. The mapping study concluded that cooperation and coordination is too often
personality driven, rather than institutionalized. High staff fluctuation exacerbates this difficulty
5
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
and makes coordination even less sustainable. Establishing internal networking mechanisms
offer a way forward in institutionalizing cooperation and coordination. This would also respond
to strong calls from the field for strengthened experience-sharing between the field operations
on the provision of SSG/R support. However, successful networks rely on a strategic vision and
promotion at the highest level.

Finally, a more sustainable approach to SSG/R demands moving beyond the organization’s ad
hoc support. In its present form, it lacks the flexibility to adapt to quickly changing
circumstances. Thus, potential entry points might be missed. There is a need to more clearly
define goals and exit strategies, in tandem with the development of more robust needs
assessment and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. Sustainability also requires reflecting
on the type of support provided. The current high focus on trainings and seminars has often
been undertaken to the detriment of institutional reform – thus, while security sector personnel
participate in activities, reform of the structures within which they work is often neglected.
While such activities do not enable as much visibility, they are likely to lead to more sustainable
change in the security sector.
Based on the comprehensive review and the lessons identified, the mapping study provides different
sets of recommendations. First, on a general level, the results of the mapping study could potentially
contribute to the Helsinki +40 process, as the recommendations seek to enhance the OSCE’s
effectiveness and efficiency in its support to the security sector. Among some of the general
recommendations that could be considered in this process include reviewing the roles and
responsibilities of the Secretariat and institutions and the field to increase the reliance on the
organization’s comparative advantages, strengthening the organization’s approach to planning to
overcome ad hoc approaches, and reinforcing the OSCE’s approach to monitoring and evaluating
support.
Second, on the strategic level, it is suggested to raise political awareness on the organization’s approach
to SSG/R, for example by establishing a group of friends of SSR among participating States. A further
strategic recommendation is the development of a coherent framework for SSG/R. Such a framework
would define the goals of SSG/R from an OSCE perspective, clarify how all three dimensions can
contribute to these goals, and incorporate many of the lessons outlined in the study. Other
6
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
recommendations include developing an inter-institutional working group on SSR, establishing a focal
point system, and seeking engagement with other multilateral organizations, particularly the United
Nations, on exchanging experiences and lessons learned in supporting SSG/R.
Finally, on an operational level, the study recommends supporting experience-sharing across the
Organization and between all OSCE bodies, and developing best practices on SSG/R. Furthermore,
supporting joint field assessments and developing a strategic vision within the field operations are
suggested. Specifically for field operations, setting up focal point networks and enhancing crossdimensional coordination, providing training for all relevant staff on SSG/R, as well as capitalizing more
on the much appreciated field offices are some of the recommendations.
The Way ahead
When reflecting on the way ahead, it must be emphasized that developing a clear vision of SSG/R is the
paramount challenge the organization faces. Such a vision must pursue long-term goals and needs to
consider mechanisms that make the organization’s support in this domain more sustainable and needsbased. In the spirit of the OSCE’s ambition to increase its cross-dimensional cooperation, a truly viable
vision will be transversal and rely on the experiences and expertise of all dimensions. Its
comprehensiveness will be defined by the degree of coordination and cooperation across the
dimensions and across the organization’s bodies. Ideally, a vision for SSG/R will provide an overarching
framework which offers guidance and orientation for the support of all OSCE bodies.
The development of such a vision may sound very idealistic. Therefore, it is of great importance to
pursue a pragmatic approach. Any development in this regard will realistically take place below the
consensus threshold. It should focus on bottom-up processes. While developing a vision is admittedly a
long-term project, there are a range of measures that can be taken up within a shorter timeframe and
that are comparably easy to implement. For example, the organization could establish a task force or
working group on the subject. Within this task force, first steps towards the development of guidance
for SSG/R, as well as the earlier mentioned focal point network could be taken. Both are measures the
organization is already familiar with and that would not demand unrealistic human and financial
resources.
7
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
It is important to emphasize, that the OSCE has many comparative advantages, which should be
accounted for when developing a vision for SSG/R. Through its field operations and its vast network of
field presences, the OSCE is already directly involved with many security actors and thus can develop a
comprehensive understanding of the national needs of the security sector. Furthermore, the
organization is often appreciated as a coordinator of international efforts. Coupled with its direct
engagement in the security sector, the OSCE has a significant political and operational value that would
enable it to support SSG/R in a needs-oriented and credible manner.
The OSCE is not the first organization that would make the decision to develop a vision and a framework
to enhance the coordination of its efforts and their efficiency, effectiveness and impact. Sharing
expertise and experiences with other multilateral organizations would further consolidate existing
relationships in the field on an institutional level. An ideal partner for such an endeavour could be found
in the United Nations. All participating States of the OSCE are also members of the UN, and both
organizations have signalled interest in cooperating with other important international and regional
organizations. The UN has recently undergone a process to formalize its support to SSG/R. Thus, sharing
its experience would certainly offer valuable insights and inspirations for the OSCE in moving forward in
strengthening its approach to SSG/R support.
Your Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We thank you for your attention.
8