On Nov. 13, the fifth session of the Baltic Assembly, an organization that brings together representatives of the parliaments of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, passed a resolution calling for the complete demilitarization of Russia's Kaliningrad region. The resolution also called on the member states of NATO and the Commonwealth of Independent States to turn the entire Baltic region into a nuclear-free zone.
The Baltic parliaments have argued that the demilitarization of Kaliningrad -- the western-most district of Russia, occupying about 15,000 square kilometers -- is an essential part of guaranteeing security in Central Europe. They have called for an international conference on the problem which, they argue, has become acute since the withdrawal of Russian forces from Germany and the Baltic states has concentrated a fairly imposing force of more than 100,000 men in the tiny enclave.
As might have been expected, Moscow reacted negatively and rather sharply to the proposal to convert its western district into an exclusively civilian administrative zone. Just two days after the Baltic Assembly's resolution, on Nov. 15, the Russian Foreign Ministry characterized it as "clear interference in the internal affairs of the Russian Federation." The statement said that the idea of demilitarization itself was "not a serious approach to the matter" and rejected the idea of an international conference, saying that it would simply complicate Russia's relations with the Baltic states.
The Foreign Ministry also declared baldly that the number of troops stationed in the region is determined solely by Russia's security needs and by the international conventions it has undertaken, none of which are currently being violated. It emphasized that the Defense Ministry is "gradually reducing" its forces in the district and that the process is guided by a consideration of the regional situation and the situation in Europe as a whole, not by the policies of neighboring countries. Current plans in the Defense Ministry call for a permanent force of about 25,000 troops in the district.
The Russian parliament has also spoken out against the proposal to demilitarize Kaliningrad, as has the local district legislature, which was offended that its representatives were not invited to attend the Vilnius meeting. The pro-government newspaper Rossiskaya Gazeta saw the proposal as an expression of the desire of the Baltic states to become full members of NATO as soon as possible.
It is hard not to agree with those calling for military reductions in Kaliningrad. The proposal coincides completely with the current atmosphere of stabile political-military relations in the region. Moreover, the process of reducing Russia's military force in the district has already begun and is continuing within the framework of regional reductions and cutbacks in Russia's entire military force.
However, demands for complete demilitarization are unrealistic. This idea of transferring the headquarters of the Baltic Fleet, for example, is simply absurd. Where is Russia to move it to, Nizhny Novgorod? The call for complete demilitarization is the equivalent of asking the Baltic states to demilitarize various regions of their countries.
The Kaliningrad issue, though, has overshadowed the Baltic Assembly's other proposal, to which Moscow has not yet responded at all. The idea of creating a nuclear-free zone in the Baltic region is considerably more attractive and realistic than the demilitarization of Kaliningrad.
The idea is practical for a number of reasons. For one thing, there are already no nuclear weapons in the region. Short- and medium-range missiles have been withdrawn under the terms of Russian-American disarmament agreements, and both Russia and the United States have removed their sea-based tactical weapons. There have never been any strategic systems there.
Moreover, there already exists a detailed project for creating the nuclear-free zone, which I worked out in 1990 and which appeared in the journal World Economics and International Relations in 1991. Unlike the propagandistic proposals of the old Soviet government to create such a zone covering only the Baltic Sea itself, my project also includes the territories (or portions thereof) of all 10 states bordering the Baltic. As far as Russia is concerned, it includes both the Kaliningrad and the Leningrad districts and, of course, Russia's territorial waters in the Baltic.
The draft project consists of 17 articles that outline the process for implementing the agreement and detail a strict verification mechanism. That mechanism includes no less than nine distinct forms of verification, including on-sight inspections, consultations, long-distance verifications and exchanges of information.
The proposal bans basing any form of nuclear explosive within the region, which would encompass more than 2.2 million square kilometers from Finland to Denmark and Germany. It also forbids transporting such weapons through the region on ships or aircraft and bans nuclear-powered naval vessels from entering the zone. Each country within the zone would undertake not to acquire or produce any nuclear explosives.
At the same time, the project does not create obstacles to the peaceful nuclear programs of the countries in the zone. It envisions the creation of a permanent consultative committee that would serve as a forum for all matters relating to the nuclear-free zone. Finally, the draft calls for the agreement to be permanently binding.
The positive changes in the political and military landscape of Europe over the last decade as well as the high level of anti-nuclear sentiment in many European nations -- including Russia -- create the ideal conditions for the formation of the first nuclear-free zone in Europe. It is high time that these proposals be transformed into reality.
Vladimir Kozin is a senior counselor at the Foreign Ministry. He contributed this comment, which reflects only his personal opinions, to The Moscow Times.
The Baltic parliaments have argued that the demilitarization of Kaliningrad -- the western-most district of Russia, occupying about 15,000 square kilometers -- is an essential part of guaranteeing security in Central Europe. They have called for an international conference on the problem which, they argue, has become acute since the withdrawal of Russian forces from Germany and the Baltic states has concentrated a fairly imposing force of more than 100,000 men in the tiny enclave.
As might have been expected, Moscow reacted negatively and rather sharply to the proposal to convert its western district into an exclusively civilian administrative zone. Just two days after the Baltic Assembly's resolution, on Nov. 15, the Russian Foreign Ministry characterized it as "clear interference in the internal affairs of the Russian Federation." The statement said that the idea of demilitarization itself was "not a serious approach to the matter" and rejected the idea of an international conference, saying that it would simply complicate Russia's relations with the Baltic states.
The Foreign Ministry also declared baldly that the number of troops stationed in the region is determined solely by Russia's security needs and by the international conventions it has undertaken, none of which are currently being violated. It emphasized that the Defense Ministry is "gradually reducing" its forces in the district and that the process is guided by a consideration of the regional situation and the situation in Europe as a whole, not by the policies of neighboring countries. Current plans in the Defense Ministry call for a permanent force of about 25,000 troops in the district.
The Russian parliament has also spoken out against the proposal to demilitarize Kaliningrad, as has the local district legislature, which was offended that its representatives were not invited to attend the Vilnius meeting. The pro-government newspaper Rossiskaya Gazeta saw the proposal as an expression of the desire of the Baltic states to become full members of NATO as soon as possible.
It is hard not to agree with those calling for military reductions in Kaliningrad. The proposal coincides completely with the current atmosphere of stabile political-military relations in the region. Moreover, the process of reducing Russia's military force in the district has already begun and is continuing within the framework of regional reductions and cutbacks in Russia's entire military force.
However, demands for complete demilitarization are unrealistic. This idea of transferring the headquarters of the Baltic Fleet, for example, is simply absurd. Where is Russia to move it to, Nizhny Novgorod? The call for complete demilitarization is the equivalent of asking the Baltic states to demilitarize various regions of their countries.
The Kaliningrad issue, though, has overshadowed the Baltic Assembly's other proposal, to which Moscow has not yet responded at all. The idea of creating a nuclear-free zone in the Baltic region is considerably more attractive and realistic than the demilitarization of Kaliningrad.
The idea is practical for a number of reasons. For one thing, there are already no nuclear weapons in the region. Short- and medium-range missiles have been withdrawn under the terms of Russian-American disarmament agreements, and both Russia and the United States have removed their sea-based tactical weapons. There have never been any strategic systems there.
Moreover, there already exists a detailed project for creating the nuclear-free zone, which I worked out in 1990 and which appeared in the journal World Economics and International Relations in 1991. Unlike the propagandistic proposals of the old Soviet government to create such a zone covering only the Baltic Sea itself, my project also includes the territories (or portions thereof) of all 10 states bordering the Baltic. As far as Russia is concerned, it includes both the Kaliningrad and the Leningrad districts and, of course, Russia's territorial waters in the Baltic.
The draft project consists of 17 articles that outline the process for implementing the agreement and detail a strict verification mechanism. That mechanism includes no less than nine distinct forms of verification, including on-sight inspections, consultations, long-distance verifications and exchanges of information.
The proposal bans basing any form of nuclear explosive within the region, which would encompass more than 2.2 million square kilometers from Finland to Denmark and Germany. It also forbids transporting such weapons through the region on ships or aircraft and bans nuclear-powered naval vessels from entering the zone. Each country within the zone would undertake not to acquire or produce any nuclear explosives.
At the same time, the project does not create obstacles to the peaceful nuclear programs of the countries in the zone. It envisions the creation of a permanent consultative committee that would serve as a forum for all matters relating to the nuclear-free zone. Finally, the draft calls for the agreement to be permanently binding.
The positive changes in the political and military landscape of Europe over the last decade as well as the high level of anti-nuclear sentiment in many European nations -- including Russia -- create the ideal conditions for the formation of the first nuclear-free zone in Europe. It is high time that these proposals be transformed into reality.
Vladimir Kozin is a senior counselor at the Foreign Ministry. He contributed this comment, which reflects only his personal opinions, to The Moscow Times.
A Message from The Moscow Times:
Dear readers,
We are facing unprecedented challenges. Russia's Prosecutor General's Office has designated The Moscow Times as an "undesirable" organization, criminalizing our work and putting our staff at risk of prosecution. This follows our earlier unjust labeling as a "foreign agent."
These actions are direct attempts to silence independent journalism in Russia. The authorities claim our work "discredits the decisions of the Russian leadership." We see things differently: we strive to provide accurate, unbiased reporting on Russia.
We, the journalists of The Moscow Times, refuse to be silenced. But to continue our work, we need your help.
Your support, no matter how small, makes a world of difference. If you can, please support us monthly starting from just $2. It's quick to set up, and every contribution makes a significant impact.
By supporting The Moscow Times, you're defending open, independent journalism in the face of repression. Thank you for standing with us.
Not ready to support today?
Remind me later.
Remind me later.
×
Remind me next month
Thank you! Your reminder is set.
We will send you one reminder email a month from now. For details on the personal data we collect and how it is used, please see our Privacy Policy.