“CSTO: history and prospects. Collective Security Treaty CSTO abbreviation decoding

BASIC INFORMATION

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO PA) is the statutory body of inter-parliamentary cooperation of the CSTO.

On November 24, 2016 and November 5, 2019, the Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation of the 7th convocation, Vyacheslav Viktorovich Volodin, was elected Chairman of the CSTO PA.

The working bodies of the CSTO PA are the standing commissions, the Coordination meeting of the chairmen of the committees (commissions) on defense and security of the parliaments of the CSTO member states under the Council of the CSTO PA, the Expert Advisory Council and the Information and Analytical Legal Center.

Functions for organizational, technical and other support for the activities of the Parliamentary Assembly are assigned to the Secretariat, whose activities
is headed by the Executive Secretary of the Parliamentary Assembly.

The official symbol of the CSTO is a flag, which is a rectangular blue panel, in the center of which is the CSTO emblem (a silver-bound blue shield in the form of a quadrangular fortress, along the edge of which there are silver rivets, in the field of the shield there is a golden ball, the shield is framed by a golden laurel-oak wreath).

HISTORY OF CREATION

In 1999, the Council of the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly adopted a special decision, according to which parliamentary delegations representing the CIS IPA states - parties to the Collective Security Treaty (CST) began to consider legal issues of the implementation of this treaty within the framework of the CIS IPA. The status of the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly as a parliamentary structure of the Collective Security Treaty was consolidated in 2000 at the session of the Collective Security Council of the CST (Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic), when the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly in the CST format was tasked with developing model laws and recommendations for the purpose of unification and harmonization of legislation countries party to the Treaty. On November 23, 2001, at their first meeting, members of the Council of the IPA of the CIS states – participants of the CST adopted the Program of legal support for the Plan of main measures for the formation of a collective security system of the states parties to the Collective Security Treaty for the period 2001–2005. This Program, approved by the chairmen of the Collective Security Council of the CST and the IPA Council of the CIS, became the basis for the work of parliamentarians until 2005 and was successfully implemented.

The main forms of work of the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly in the CST format were regular meetings of the members of the Council of the IPA of the CIS states - participants in the CST and the Standing Commission of the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly on Defense and Security Issues in the CST format. Interaction between the administrative bodies of the CIS IPA Council and the CST, the exchange of information between them, and cooperation in the development of draft documents aimed at strengthening the collective security of the CST member states were established. In addition, groups of IPA deputies of the CIS states - participants in the CST - studied the military-political situation in all regions of collective security (in Central Asia - in March 2001, in the Caucasus - in October 2004, in Western - in September 2005).

Taking into account the need to adapt the Treaty to the dynamics of regional and international security and in order to counter new challenges and threats, on May 14, 2002, at the Moscow session of the CST, a decision was made to transform the Treaty into a full-fledged international organization - the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

On June 23, 2006, the Minsk session of the CSTO Collective Security Council determined the need to develop the parliamentary dimension of the CSTO within the framework of the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly in order to harmonize national legislation, develop model laws for solving the statutory tasks of the CSTO, and organize interaction on issues of international and regional security. Based on this decision of the CSTO Collective Security Council and the Convention on the Interparliamentary Assembly of the Member States of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the chairmen of the parliaments of the CIS member states of the CSTO at their meeting on November 16, 2006 adopted a resolution on the creation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO PA) . Boris Vyacheslavovich Gryzlov, Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation of the fifth convocation, was elected Chairman of the CSTO PA.

Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation of the fourth and fifth convocations Gryzlov Boris Vyacheslavovich

The Chairman of the CSTO PA was Sergei Evgenievich Naryshkin, Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation of the VI convocation.

Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation of the sixth convocation Sergey Evgenievich Naryshkin

On November 24, 2016, Vyacheslav Viktorovich Volodin, Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation of the 7th convocation, was elected Chairman of the CSTO PA.

.

On November 5, 2019, V.V. Volodin was re-elected Chairman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Collective Security Treaty Organization.

20 years ago, the heads of Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and UzbekistanThe Collective Security Treaty was signed.

The Collective Security Treaty was signed on May 15, 1992 in Tashkent (Uzbekistan). Azerbaijan joined it in September 1993, and Georgia and Belarus joined in December of the same year. The treaty came into force for all nine countries in April 1994 for a period of five years.

In accordance with the Treaty, the participating states ensure their security on a collective basis: “in the event of a threat to the security, territorial integrity and sovereignty of one or more participating states, or a threat to international peace and security, the participating states will immediately activate the mechanism of joint consultations in order to coordinate their positions and take measures to eliminate the emerging threat."

At the same time, it is stipulated that “if one of the participating states is subjected to aggression by any state or group of states, this will be considered as aggression against all participating states” and “all other participating states will provide it with the necessary assistance, including military, and will also provide support with the means at their disposal in the exercise of the right to collective defense in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter."

In April 1999, the Protocol on the extension of the Collective Security Treaty was signed by six countries (except Azerbaijan, Georgia and Uzbekistan). On May 14, 2002, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) was established, currently uniting Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

On October 7, 2002, the CSTO Charter was adopted in Chisinau, according to which the main goals of the Organization are the strengthening of peace, international and regional security and stability, the protection on a collective basis of the independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of the member states, the priority in achieving which the member states give political means.

The Secretary General of the Organization is the highest administrative official of the Organization and manages the Secretariat of the Organization. Appointed by decision of the SSC from among the citizens of the member states and accountable to the SSC.

The advisory and executive bodies of the CSTO are: the Council of Foreign Ministers (CMFA), which coordinates the foreign policy activities of the CSTO member states; the Council of Defense Ministers (CMD), which ensures interaction between member states in the field of military policy, military development and military-technical cooperation; The Committee of Secretaries of Security Councils (CSSC), which oversees issues of ensuring national security.

In the period between sessions of the CSC, coordination in the implementation of decisions of the CSTO bodies is entrusted to the Permanent Council of the Organization, which consists of authorized representatives of the member states. The CSTO Secretary General also participates in its meetings.

The permanent working bodies of the CSTO are the Secretariat and the Joint Headquarters of the Organization.

The CSTO carries out its activities in cooperation with various international organizations. Since December 2, 2004, the Organization has observer status in the UN General Assembly. On March 18, 2010, a Joint Declaration on Cooperation between the UN Secretariats and the CSTO was signed in Moscow, which provides for the establishment of interaction between the two organizations, in particular in the field of peacekeeping. Productive contacts are maintained with international organizations and structures, including the UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe), the European Union, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the International Organization for Migration and others. The CSTO has established close cooperation with the EurAsEC (Eurasian Economic Community), SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) and the CIS.

In order to counter the entire range of challenges and threats to the security of member states, decisions were made by the CSTO Special Security Council on the creation of Peacekeeping Forces, coordination councils for emergency situations, and the fight against illegal migration and illegal drug trafficking. There is a Working Group on Afghanistan under the CSTO Council of Foreign Ministers. The CSTO CSTO has working groups on issues of combating terrorism and combating illegal migration, information policy and security.

As part of military cooperation in the CSTO format, the Collective Rapid Deployment Forces of the Central Asian Collective Security Region (CRDF CAR) have been formed. Exercises of the CAR CRRF are conducted on a regular basis, including training in anti-terrorism tasks.

In February 2009, a decision was made to create the Collective Rapid Reaction Force (CRRF) of the CSTO. Uzbekistan refrained from signing the package of documents, reserving the possibility of joining the Agreement later. Joint comprehensive exercises are regularly held with the participation of contingents and operational groups of the CSTO member states.

Under the auspices of the CSTO, the international comprehensive anti-drug operation “Channel” and the operation to combat illegal migration “Illegal” are carried out annually. In 2009, joint activities were carried out for the first time to combat crimes in the information sphere under the code name Operation PROXY (Combating Crime in the Information Sphere).

The material was prepared based on information from RIA Novosti and open sources

On the prospects for the development of the CSTO. World of Changes publishes the full version of the document.

Brief historical background

The Collective Security Treaty (CST) was signed on May 15, 1992, six months after the collapse of the USSR. Its main task was to maintain interaction between the armies of the newly formed independent states in the post-Soviet space.

The founding states were Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. In 1993, Azerbaijan, Belarus and Georgia joined the treaty.

In 1999, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Uzbekistan refused to renew their membership in the CST and focused on working in GUAM ( GUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Moldova) is an anti-Russian organization created in 1997 to establish horizontal ties between post-Soviet republics in the interests of the United States and the European Union. During the periods of Uzbekistan's membership, the organization was called GUUAM. Currently, GUAM is not an active and actually working structure, despite the fact that no formal decision has been made to dissolve it, and the GUAM Secretariat located in Kyiv regularly issues press releases in Russian about its work).

In 2002, a decision was made to transform the CST into a full-fledged international organization.

On October 7, 2002, the Charter and Agreement on the legal status of the CSTO were adopted in Chisinau. The documents establishing the CSTO were ratified by all participating countries and entered into force on September 18, 2003.

On November 16, 2006, the heads of parliaments of the CSTO member countries adopted a resolution on the creation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO PA).

In 2009, the Collective Rapid Reaction Force (CRRF) was created. Their task is to repel military aggression, conduct special operations to combat international terrorism, transnational organized crime, drug trafficking, as well as eliminate the consequences of emergency situations. CRRF exercises are held on a regular basis.

On December 21, 2015, the heads of the CSTO member states adopted a Statement on Countering International Terrorism, in which they declared their intention to “consistently strengthen the power potential of the CSTO, increase its counter-terrorism component, and increase the combat readiness of the Collective Rapid Reaction Forces in order to effectively counter new challenges and threats.”

On October 14, 2016, the CSTO Collective Security Council (CSC) in Yerevan adopted a decision to approve the Collective Security Strategy until 2025, as well as additional measures to combat terrorism and create a Crisis Response Center.

The Secretary General of the CSTO since 2003 is Nikolai Bordyuzha.

CSTO: Birth traumas and irremovable contradictions

The largest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century - the collapse of the Soviet Union - had a particularly serious impact on the ability of states that suddenly and often unwillingly gained independence to maintain an adequate level of security - both external and internal.

If the European post-Soviet republics (with the exception of Moldova, which failed to curb its own nationalists and as a result lost Transnistria) faced a maximum increase in crime in the early 90s, the Central Asian countries found themselves alone with the threat of international terrorism and religious extremism.

The most serious situation was in Tajikistan, with its long border with Afghanistan. The civil war in this country threatened with extremely serious consequences not only for Tajikistan itself, but also for neighboring countries. That is why Russia, which took upon itself the protection of the Tajik-Afghan border, and Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan, actively participated in national reconciliation in the republic.

“Leading figures of Tajikistan have repeatedly noted the important military-political role of the CST in the process of achieving national reconciliation. And now, within the framework of the CSTO, this country is receiving significant political, military and military-technical assistance,” says the version of the CSTO website that worked until 2012 in the “General Information” section.

The CSTO was initially focused primarily on solving the problems of maintaining security in Central Asia. A few more quotes from the old version of the organization’s website:

“At the initial stage, the Treaty contributed to the creation of national armed forces of the participating states and provision of adequate external conditions for their independent state building. This is evidenced by the relevance of the Treaty in a number of cases of application of its provisions.

The capabilities of the Treaty were used in the fall of 1996 and the summer of 1998 in connection with the dangerous developments in Afghanistan in close proximity to the borders of the Central Asian states parties to the CST, in order to prevent attempts by extremists to destabilize the situation in this region.

In 1999 and 2000, as a result of promptly implemented measures by the states parties to the CST, with the participation of Uzbekistan, the threat created by large-scale actions of armed groups of international terrorists in the south of Kyrgyzstan and in other areas of Central Asia was neutralized."

The regulatory legal acts on the basis of which the CST structures worked are the “Declaration of the CST Participating States” adopted in 1995, the “Concept of Collective Security of the CST Participating States”, the document on the “Main Directions for Deepening Military Cooperation”, the implementation plan for the Collective Security Concept and Main directions for deepening military cooperation.

In 1999, the Plan for the second stage of the formation of a collective security system was approved, which provided for the formation of coalition (regional) groupings of troops (forces) in the Eastern European, Caucasian and Central Asian directions.

In the 90s, the CST had no chance of becoming a full-fledged and effective international organization due to the large number of claims its participants had against each other.

Armenia and Azerbaijan, both then and now, were essentially at war with each other. Georgia, both then and now, accused Russia of “separatism” in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, although it should be noted that Moscow in the 90s pursued a much harsher policy towards unrecognized states than in the 2000s. Abkhazia was actually under an economic blockade, South Ossetia and Transnistria were left to their own devices.

Uzbekistan tried to pursue what was called a “balanced” policy in Tashkent, but as a result it simply rushed between Moscow and Washington, either entering the CST, then moving from there to GUAM, then agreeing to the creation of an American military base, then demanding that the United States immediately leave its territory.

Of course, NATO also has examples of how members of the alliance are countries that “dislike” each other, such as Greece and Turkey, but there has not been such tension, much less direct clashes between them, as in the case of some former members of the CST, for a long time .

But, perhaps, the main problem of the CST, which was inherited by the CSTO, was the initial refusal of serious attempts to integrate the largest militarily post-Soviet republic after Russia - Ukraine.

Of course, Kyiv and Moscow in the 90s were subject to serious pressure from the West; the “neutrality” of Ukraine was one of the conditions for the withdrawal of nuclear weapons from its territory. But the absence of Ukraine in the defensive alliance created by Russia, of course, laid the preconditions for the drift of this country towards NATO and the growing anti-Russian orientation of Ukrainian politics, which reached its apogee during the so-called “Euromaidan”.

The CST in the form in which it existed in the 90s could not quickly respond to the challenges of the time; its reform or dissolution was inevitable.

Work to prepare for the reformatting of the organization began in 2000. An agreement was signed on the basic principles of Military-Technical Cooperation (MTC). In 2001, the Collective Rapid Deployment Forces of the Central Asian Region were created, which were staffed by four battalions from Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan with a total strength of 1,500 people.

At the same time, the bodies of political management and interstate consultations were improved. The Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Defense and the Committee of Secretaries of Security Councils were created. The CSC Secretariat was organized, a consultation process was established at the level of the CSC, the Council of Foreign Ministers and the Council of Defense with the participation of deputy ministers of foreign affairs and defense, experts of the participating states, and their Plenipotentiary Representatives to the Secretary General of the Collective Security Council.

The decision to transform the Collective Security Treaty into an international regional organization in accordance with Chapter VIII of the UN Charter was made in Moscow in May 2002 by the heads of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan.
Neutral Chisinau was chosen as the location for the creation of the CSTO. On October 7, 2002, a summit of the heads of state of the CIS was held in the capital of Moldova, during which the heads of the CST member countries signed statutory documents on the transformation of the latter into the CSTO.

Moldova, we note, just like Ukraine, from the very beginning of its independence, refrained from participating in military cooperation with Russia - due to dissatisfaction with the presence of Russian troops in Transnistria. The communist Vladimir Voronin, who headed this republic in 2002, was considered a “pro-Russian” president until November of the following year, when at the last moment he refused to sign the already initialed document on the Transnistrian settlement, the so-called “Kozak Memorandum.” After this, there was no longer any talk about Moldova’s possible membership in the CSTO.

CSTO in 2002-2016: through contradictions to strengthen the union

In 2002-2003, when the CSTO was created, most countries considered international terrorism to be the main global threat, as now. The United States was conducting operations in Afghanistan and preparing to invade Iraq. Russian-American relations have experienced a period of relative growth after a sharp deterioration in 1999, when the United States and NATO bombed Yugoslavia without UN authorization.

Initially, no serious political component was planned within the CSTO, only ensuring the security of the participating countries. Political dialogue in Central Asia was conducted either on the basis of the CIS or within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), created in 2001 on the basis of the Shanghai Five, formed as a result of the signing in 1996-1997. agreements between Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, China, Russia and Tajikistan on confidence-building in the military field. Uzbekistan also joined the SCO. The goals and objectives of the SCO were strengthening stability and security in a wide area uniting member states, combating terrorism, separatism, extremism, drug trafficking, developing economic cooperation, energy partnership, scientific and cultural interaction.

It should also be emphasized that the CSTO was not considered as an alternative to NATO. The objectives of the organization were security in Central Asia, as well as military-technical cooperation of the participating countries. The unrestrained, cancer-like expansion of NATO has never been an example to follow for the CSTO participants.

However, over time, it became clear that cooperation within the executive branch alone was not enough - to ensure the proper level of interaction, harmonization of legislation was required.

On June 23, 2006, the Minsk session of the CSTO Collective Security Council determined the need to develop the parliamentary dimension of the CSTO within the framework of the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly. Based on this decision and on the Convention on the Interparliamentary Assembly of the Member States of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the chairmen of the parliaments of the CIS member states of the CSTO at a meeting on November 16, 2006 adopted a resolution on the creation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO PA).

As stated on the CSTO PA website, “three permanent commissions have been created within the assembly - on defense and security issues, on political issues and international cooperation, and on socio-economic and legal issues.

In accordance with the Regulations on the Parliamentary Assembly of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the CSTO PA discusses issues of cooperation between the CSTO member states in the international, military-political, legal and other fields and develops appropriate recommendations, which it sends to the Collective Security Council (CSC) and other CSTO bodies and national parliaments. In addition, the CSTO PA adopts model legislative and other legal acts aimed at regulating relations within the sphere of competence of the CSTO, as well as recommendations for bringing the laws of the CSTO member states closer together and bringing them into line with the provisions of international treaties concluded by these states within the CSTO."

The full-fledged work of various CSTO structures, unfortunately, has repeatedly been made dependent on the current political or economic situation. For example, negotiations on the creation of the Collective Rapid Reaction Force (CRRF), the main fighting force of the CSTO, in June 2009 were overshadowed by the so-called “milk war” between Russia and Belarus. As a result, representatives of Minsk refused to participate in the CSTO meeting under the pretext that military security is impossible without economic security.

This cast doubt on the legitimacy of the decision to create the CRRF, because according to paragraph 1 of Rule No. 14 of the Rules of Procedure of the CSTO bodies, approved by the CSTO Decision of June 18, 2004, the non-participation of a member country of the organization in meetings of the Collective Security Council, the Council of Foreign Ministers, the Council of Defense Ministers , the Committee of Secretaries of Security Councils means the lack of consent of a member country of the organization to make decisions considered by these bodies.

President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko signed a package of documents on Belarus’ accession to the Collective Rapid Reaction Forces only on October 20, 2009.

In June 2010, President of Kyrgyzstan Roza Otumbaeva appealed to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev with a request to introduce the CRRF into the territory of this country in connection with unrest and interethnic clashes in the Osh and Jalalab regions. Medvedev responded that “the criterion for the use of CSTO forces is the violation by one state of the borders of another state that is part of this organization. There is no talk about this yet, because all of Kyrgyzstan’s problems are rooted internally. They are rooted in the weakness of the previous government, in their reluctance to deal with the needs of the people. I hope that all the problems that exist today will be resolved by the authorities of Kyrgyzstan. The Russian Federation will help."

This statement became the subject of criticism from the President of Belarus. Alexander Lukashenko said that the CRRF must enter Kyrgyzstan and restore order there. As a result, a compromise decision was made - a reinforced battalion of the 31st Airborne Assault Brigade was delivered to the Russian Kant airbase in Kyrgyzstan to ensure security. Representatives of the CSTO, in turn, took part in the search for the organizers of the riots and ensured coordination of cooperation to suppress the activities of terrorist groups that actually influenced the situation from Afghanistan. Also, CSTO specialists were engaged in identifying instigators and instigators of hatred on the Internet. Non-lethal special equipment, special equipment, and vehicles, including helicopters, were sent to Kyrgyzstan.

Following the events in Kyrgyzstan, CSTO Secretary General Nikolai Bordyuzha issued a special statement, which, in particular, said that all CSTO member countries agreed that the introduction of peacekeeping troops into the republic during mass unrest was inappropriate: “The introduction of troops could would provoke an even greater aggravation of the situation in the region as a whole,” he noted.

In 2011, the same Alexander Lukashenko took the initiative to use the CRRF to prevent coups d'etat. “Because no one will go against us through war, at the front, but to carry out a constitutional revolution, many people’s hands are itching,” he noted then.

In 2012, the CSTO left Uzbekistan for the second time - among the reasons given were both disagreement with the organization’s policy towards Afghanistan and bilateral contradictions with Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. This was not a serious blow to the CSTO - Uzbekistan’s participation during its “second coming” was largely formal.

However, as the terrorist threat in the Middle East and Central Asia intensified and NATO forces approached the borders of Russia and Belarus, it became clear that there was no alternative to the CSTO in the current situation. Ensuring internal and external security, as well as military-technical cooperation between our countries, is possible only with constant and effective interaction between all structures responsible for security, including parliamentary interaction.

By 2016, the CSTO approached as a fairly united and cohesive organization. Exercises of both the CRRF and other structures are regularly held, concepts and strategies are being developed, and interaction has been established with the UN, SCO, CIS, EAEU and other international organizations.
On this occasion, CSTO Secretary General Nikolai Bordyuzha has repeatedly noted that coverage of the CSTO’s activities in Russia is not at the proper level.

“I would like to refer to our latest experience - holding a motorcycle rally in the CSTO member states, with the exception of Armenia, since there were purely technical problems. Representatives of some bike clubs, together with representatives of the Minsk Motorcycle Plant, traveled through all the states of the bloc, met with the population everywhere, and laid wreaths at the graves of military personnel who died in the Great Patriotic War. According to their estimates, in all states, including in small settlements, they know quite well about the CSTO, with the exception of the Russian Federation,” he noted at a press conference in 2013.

CSTO PA: great quality potential

Activation of inter-parliamentary cooperation within the framework of the CSTO PA with member countries of the organization, observers and all organizations interested in cooperation is becoming an important element of international security in the Eurasian space and throughout the world.

Some optimism about the development of the situation around the CSTO is inspired by the unanimous election of the Chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, Vyacheslav Volodin, to a similar post in the CSTO Parliamentary Assembly.

This, on the one hand, is a traditional decision - previously the CSTO PA was headed by the speakers of the State Duma of the previous and the year before last convocations Sergei Naryshkin and Boris Gryzlov, respectively. But, judging by the changes that took place at the initiative of Vyacheslav Volodin in the State Duma, his chairmanship of the CSTO PA will not be “traditional”.

“It is obvious that the priority direction of the Assembly’s work for the next four years will be the implementation of the program to harmonize the national legislation of the member states of the Treaty - work began this year, the program is designed until 2020. And enough tasks have accumulated; security issues are among the top priorities. Five draft documents on the reconciliation of national laws have already been prepared by the CSTO Standing Committee on Defense and Security. They concern issues of fighting corruption, drug trafficking, countering technological terrorism, training personnel in the area of ​​“Security in Emergency Situations,” and responding to crisis situations,” notes one of the Russian federal newspapers.

In his first speech in his new post, Volodin noted that the CSTO currently faces a number of priority tasks, including, in particular, accelerating the formation of a single legal space in the field of defense and security on the territory of the CSTO. Among other important areas of work, he named the parliamentary response to crisis situations not only in the CSTO space, but also beyond its borders.

Afghanistan and Serbia are already observers in the CSTO. Iran and Pakistan should receive this status in 2017. According to the Vice-Speaker of the CSTO PA, Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Yuri Vorobyov, Moldova showed interest in interaction with the CSTO - after the election of socialist Igor Dodon as president, who has repeatedly stated the need to restore ties with Russia, relations between Moscow and Chisinau may, if not radically improve, then at least become less ideological and more pragmatic.

Among the tasks facing the CSTO PA and the organization as a whole, one can also note the need to establish such interaction with the structures of the CIS, EAEU, SCO and others, which would eliminate duplication of functions and unnecessary competition between employees of the apparatus of these organizations. All of the above interstate organizations face different tasks, and a “hardware war”, or rather, not even a war, but excessive competition will only lead to a decrease in the effectiveness of interaction in all areas, including security.

The organization itself remains quite closed, too focused on very specific security issues, which do not always become public. Experts note that the new chairman of the CSTO PA will be able to give impetus to the public component of the work, firstly, of the Parliamentary Assembly itself, and secondly, of the entire CSTO as a whole.

Here we can say that security issues will require a clear, understandable, and relevant legislative process. The dialogue of civil societies on security issues is becoming an important factor. Today there is a kind of debate going on between those who believe that democratic procedures should dominate the system, and between those who believe that security issues today require a departure from some principles. In this case, Volodin’s participation in this discussion will modernize it and raise it to the level of development of the entire civil society. And at the same time it will bring it into line with legislative needs and constitutional status.

The international agenda in the world remains tense, and the election of US President Donald Trump has added unpredictability to the foreign policy of this strongest and most influential country. In such a situation, states interested in maintaining peace and internal tranquility should combine their efforts as much as possible both in the fight against international terrorism and against the desire of Western countries, disguised as “democratization” and “the fight for human rights,” to impose their values ​​and weaken traditional life as much as possible. way of life in the countries of Eastern Europe, Transcaucasia and Central Asia.

Cooperation within the CSTO is a striking example of how the most militarily powerful member of the organization, Russia, does not seek to impose its own values ​​on other participants and does not interfere in the internal politics of its partners.

On May 15, 1992, in Tashkent, the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan, and the Republic of Uzbekistan signed Collective Security Treaty (DKB). The document of accession to the Treaty was signed by the Republic of Azerbaijan on September 24, 1993, by Georgia on December 9, 1993, and by the Republic of Belarus on December 31, 1993.

In the Treaty, the participating states confirmed their obligations to refrain from using force or the threat of force in interstate relations, to resolve all disagreements among themselves and with other states by peaceful means, and to refrain from joining military alliances or groupings of states.

As the main mechanism for countering emerging threats (security, territorial integrity, sovereignty, threats to international peace), the Treaty specifies “joint consultations with a view to coordinating positions and taking measures to eliminate the emerging threat.”

In the event of an act of aggression against any of the participating states, all other participating states will provide him with the necessary assistance, including military assistance, and will also provide support with the means at their disposal in order to exercise the right to collective defense in accordance with Art. 51 of the UN Charter (Article 4 of the Treaty). Article 6 states that the decision to use

The Armed Forces, in order to repel aggression, is adopted by the heads of participating states. The agreement also creates (SKB)

consisting of the Heads of the participating states and the Commander-in-Chief of the United Armed Forces of the Commonwealth of Independent States. It is entrusted with coordinating and ensuring joint activities of the participating states in accordance with the Treaty. Article 11 provided that the Agreement would be concluded for five years with subsequent extension. It is subject to ratification and enters into force upon delivery of the instruments of ratification of the signatory states.

The Treaty entered into force on April 20, 1994, thus, its validity expired on April 20, 1999. In this regard, a number of states, based on the desire to continue cooperation within the framework of the Treaty and ensure the continuity of its validity, signed in Moscow on April 2, 1999 . Protocol on the extension of the Treaty on collective security of May 15, 1992. In accordance with this Protocol, the States Parties to the Treaty are the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation,

The Republic of Tajikistan. In May 2000, in Minsk, the heads of state parties to the Treaty signed Memorandum on increasing the effectiveness of the Collective Security Treaty of May 15, 1992 and its adaptation to the modern geopolitical situation. The Memorandum not only expressed readiness to increase the efficiency of the activities of interstate bodies of the collective security system on issues related to the implementation of the Treaty and the formation of an effective system of collective security, but also to intensify activities aimed at a decisive fight against international terrorism. The participating states advocated for a more complete use of the Treaty's capabilities in the interests of preventing and resolving conflicts on their territory and, along with the use of the provided consultation mechanisms, agreed to consider the issue of creating a consultative mechanism on peacekeeping issues under the SSC. The mention of “peacekeeping” in the text of the Memorandum, in our opinion, can have significant consequences. The fact is that quite often the CST is considered as an independent regional organization in the sense of Ch. 8 of the UN Charter, just like the Commonwealth of Independent States, is a regional organization in the same sense. The DKB has created its own organizational structure; from the very beginning it was taken outside the CIS. The impossibility of conducting peacekeeping operations within the framework of the CST, bypassing the CIS, created a certain hierarchy of these structures. Organization of the Collective Security Treaty. The fact of creating its own bodies also speaks in favor of defining the DKB as a regional organization. The final institutionalization of the treaty occurred in 2002, when it was adopted Charter of the Collective Security Treaty Organization . Article 1 of this document is devoted to the establishment of an international regional Collective Security Treaty Organizations.

The bodies of the collective security system are:

Collective Security Council(SSC) is the highest political body that ensures coordination and joint activities of the participating states aimed at implementing the Collective Security Treaty. The Council includes heads of state, foreign ministers, defense ministers of the participating states, and the Secretary General of the SSC. Council of Foreign Ministers(SMID) is the highest advisory body of the Collective Security Council on issues of coordinating foreign policy. WITHCouncil of Defense Ministers(SMO) is the highest advisory body on military policy and military development. Committee of Secretaries of Security Councils of States– an advisory body on issues of interaction between government bodies ensuring the national security of the participating states in the interests of their joint counteraction to challenges and threats to national, regional and international security. Committee of Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces States Parties to the Collective Security Treaty was created under the Council of Defense Ministers with the aim of implementing the tasks of forming a security system in the military sphere on the basis of the Collective Security Treaty and managing the collective defense of the participating States.

Secretary General of the Collective Security Council appointed by the Collective Security Council from among civilians of the states parties to the Treaty, is a member of the Collective Security Council and is accountable to it.

Secretariat of the Collective Security Council– a permanent working body for the implementation of current organizational, information-analytical and advisory work to ensure the activities of the Collective Security Council, the Council of Foreign Ministers, the Council of Defense Ministers, the Committee of Secretaries of the Security Councils of the Treaty Parties, as well as for storing documents adopted by the Collective Security Council security. The mechanism of military-technical cooperation plays an important role in the activities of the CSTO. In 2000, a corresponding agreement was signed, which provided for a number of preferences and the implementation of interstate supplies of military products for the allied armed forces (based on domestic prices). Later, decisions were made to supplement military-technical cooperation with a mechanism of military-economic cooperation, which makes it possible to implement joint R&D programs, modernization and repair of weapons and military equipment in the CSTO format. The main instrument of interaction in this area is the one created in 2005. Interstate Commission on Military-Industrial Cooperation(ICVPS CSTO).

Commonwealth in the fight against international terrorism and other challenges of the 21st century. Due to their geopolitical position, the CIS member states found themselves at the forefront of the fight against international terrorism, extremism And drug mafia.

Terrorism and organized crime. On July 4, 1999, it was signed in Minsk Agreement on cooperation CIS member states in the fight against terrorism (participants – the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Armenia, Georgia, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan). By decision of the Council of State Duma

On June 21, 2000 it was approved Program to combat international terrorism and other manifestations of extremism for the period until 2003. In accordance with this Program, a Anti-terrorism center– a permanent specialized industry body designed to coordinate the interaction of competent authorities of the CIS states in the fight against international terrorism and other manifestations of extremism. One of the priority areas of activity of the Commonwealth states is the fight against organized crime. The collapse of a single law enforcement system and a single legal field on the territory of the former USSR did not lead to the destruction of a single criminal space; on the contrary, it received further development, which is greatly facilitated by the “transparency” of borders between the CIS countries.

At the same time, the collective experience of counteraction has shown the close relationship of terrorism with other security problems, primarily with drug trafficking, the criminal proceeds from which are often used to finance terrorist and extremist activities. The development of international relations between organized criminal communities of the CIS countries poses a great danger to each of the states that are members of the Commonwealth. If initially the strengthening of these ties was determined by the desire of members of organized criminal groups to avoid responsibility for the crimes committed, taking advantage of the “transparency” of borders, the difference in the norms of criminal and criminal procedural legislation in the CIS countries, now their general consolidation is observed for penetration into power, criminal laundering earned income and achieving other goals. At the same time, criminal communities of now independent states are actively establishing interstate and transnational ties. This is especially true for such types of crime as trafficking in weapons and radioactive materials, drug trafficking, counterfeiting, robbery and robbery, and crimes in the credit and banking sector. Individuals who are citizens of different countries are often involved in the commission of these crimes. In 1993, the Bureau of Coordination of the Fight against Organized Crime and Other Types of Dangerous Crimes in the CIS was established by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Commonwealth states. Interdepartmental agreements on cooperation between internal affairs bodies of individual states are working successfully. Of great importance Minsk Convention 1993 on legal assistance and legal relations in civil, family and criminal cases. Article 4 of the CIS Charter defines that the scope of joint activities of member states, implemented on an equal basis through common coordinating institutions in accordance with the obligations assumed by member states within the Commonwealth, includes, among other provisions, the fight against organized crime. Thus, in 1995, the CIS Executive Secretariat hosted Interdepartmental consultation meeting on problems of coordinating joint efforts in the fight against crime. At the proposal of the Republic of Belarus, the Council of Heads of Government

CIS formed Working group, which did useful analytical and practical work and developed the project Interstate program . After consideration and elaboration of this project in the member states of the Commonwealth, the Council of Heads of State of the Commonwealth on May 17, 1996 approved the Interstate Program of Joint Measures to Combat Organized Crime and other types of dangerous crimes until the year 2000. The Program contains a mechanism for control and implementation. To implement cooperation between law enforcement agencies in the fight against crime, 14 agreements and decisions arising from this Program were adopted. Thanks to the implementation of activities provided for by the Interstate Program and the active participation of law enforcement agencies in 1996–1997. joint coordinated large-scale and special operations to combat crime were carried out. For example, at the end of 1996, as a result of joint activities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation with the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, a group of militants was arrested, who committed a series of murders in several regions due to the division of spheres of influence.

The concept of interaction between law enforcement agencies. In 1997, Moscow hosted Joint session prosecutors general, ministers of internal affairs, heads of security agencies, border troops, customs services and tax police of the Commonwealth states. The participants of the joint meeting unanimously expressed the opinion that the fight against transnational crime can only be waged through joint efforts. In this regard, the draft Concept of interaction between law enforcement agencies of the CIS member states was considered. Concept of interaction between law enforcement agencies – member states of the Commonwealth of the Independent States in the fight against crime was signed in April 1999 (not signed by Turkmenistan). Its goal is to expand and strengthen cooperation and interaction of the CIS member states in the fight against crime.

The main forms of interaction in the fight against this phenomenon include:

implementation of joint investigative, operational-search actions and other activities in the territories of the CIS member states;

providing assistance to employees of the competent authorities of one state by employees of another state in the suppression, detection and investigation of crimes, the detention of persons suspected of committing crimes, and the search for criminals;

exchange of information and experience between competent authorities in preventing, suppressing and solving crimes, holding joint seminars, exercises, gatherings, consultations and meetings;

fulfillment of inquiries and requests received from the competent authorities of other CIS member states;

extradition of persons for prosecution, execution of sentences and transfer of convicts for further serving of sentences in the manner prescribed by the relevant treaties;

ensuring the prosecution of citizens of their state for committing crimes on the territories of other CIS member states;

conducting joint scientific research;

cooperation of competent authorities of the CIS member states in international organizations;

cooperation in training personnel of competent authorities;

development of agreed forms and methods for the prevention of crimes and other offenses.

The problem of migration. A new problem for the CIS countries has become the growing migration flows, which, in the absence of uniform rules for the movement and employment of migrants and collective principles of visa policy, created a clear additional danger, fueling organized crime and increasing the resource of international terrorism.

The key issue of any competent migration policy is a set of measures to suppress illegal entry into the country, committed in violation of the legislation on the entry and transit of foreigners. At the same time, it is obvious that the modern community can no longer live in isolation. But the chaos created by illegal migration is one of the most important threats to international stability and the security of states. Illegal migration from more economically backward regions disrupts security at the point of arrival. Due to the peculiarities of their geopolitical situation, a number of CIS countries are located on the main routes of transit migration from Asian, Arab and African countries with unfavorable internal political, economic and environmental conditions, as well as from the Central Asian and Transcaucasian republics of the Commonwealth itself to the countries of Western Europe and Scandinavia, to the USA and Canada . Criminal organizations take advantage of the unprecedented technological freedom to operate financial, information, organizational and other resources that globalization has given, and develop their own, “parallel” globalization through illegal migration. It has already become the most profitable criminal business, even on a global scale 90 .

On the territory of Belarus and Russia, well-conspiracy criminal groups participate in operations for the illegal transportation of people, which ensure the development of transportation routes, the selection and placement of “personnel,” the legalization of illegal migrants and sending them abroad. Ukraine is also involved in this business. The main flows of illegal migration from non-CIS countries come from the Manchurian (border with North-East China), Central Asian (border with China, Afghanistan, Iran), Transcaucasian (border with Iran, Turkey), as well as Western (mainly from the territory of Ukraine and republics of the former Yugoslavia) directions. Thus, in Belarus, every second border violator is from Asia or Africa. On the territory of the Russian Federation, according to experts from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, there are up to 5–7 million foreign citizens and stateless persons who do not have a specific legal status. Moreover, in most cases, immigrants enter the country quite legally, but then remain on its territory in violation of the rules of stay. The free and poorly controlled movement of foreigners is greatly facilitated, on the one hand, by Bishkek Agreement on visa-free movement of citizens of participating states across the territory of parties to this Agreement of 1992, as well as Moscow Agreement on the mutual recognition of visas from 1992, which gives the right to a foreigner with a visa of one of the CIS member states of the Agreement to freely enter the territory of another, on the other hand, the lack of infrastructure of the internal borders of the CIS In accordance with Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 641 of August 30, 2000. On December 5 of the same year, Russia withdrew from the Bishkek Agreement on visa-free movement of citizens of the CIS state across the territory of its participants, which was the basic document regulating the legal relations of the Commonwealth countries in this area. The Russian side explained that the adoption of such a responsible decision was due to the need to strengthen the fight against increasing illegal migration, international terrorism, and drug smuggling. This meant preserving visa-free regime with most partners in the CIS. In 1997, corresponding bilateral agreements were concluded with Ukraine and Azerbaijan, during 2000 - with Armenia, Moldova, Uzbekistan and Ukraine, as well as a multilateral Agreement between the governments of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan. Thus, as of today, for 91 days, a visa-free border regime has been in effect with all Commonwealth countries, with the exception of Georgia and Turkmenistan (withdrew from the agreement).

The Commonwealth's international relations are developing rapidly. Thus, the UN Economic Commission for Europe cooperates with the CIS in conducting economic and statistical analysis. Technical assistance and economic cooperation are also provided through UNDP. Components of this work for the future include the ecological and economic revival of areas such as the Aral Sea. Cooperation between the CIS and the UN system also includes the implementation of extensive programs jointly with the Bretton Woods institutions: the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

An important milestone in the biography of the CIS was the presentation of observer status to the Commonwealth by the UN General Assembly in March 1994. Similar status was granted to the Commonwealth and Trade and Development Board of UNCTAD in the same year.

In 1994, a Cooperation Agreement was signed between the UNCTAD Secretariat and the CIS Executive Secretariat, and in 1996, a Cooperation Agreement was signed between the Secretariat of the UN Economic Commission for Europe and the CIS Executive Secretariat. In 1995, business contacts were established with the International Labor Organization, the World Health Organization, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

The Minsk headquarters of the CIS was visited by the UN Secretary General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali (1994), the UNECE Executive Secretary, Mr. Yves Bertellot, and the Secretary General of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, Mr. Wilhelm Heunck (1994). ), Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization Mr. Arpad Bogsch (1994), Secretary General of the OSCE Mr. Giancarlo Aragona (1996), Secretary General of the Nordic Council of Ministers Mr. Per Steinbeck (1996), President of the Crans-Montana Forum, Mr. Jean-Paul Carteron (1997).

In turn, representatives of the CIS Executive Secretariat take part in the work of major meetings and forums held by the UN, EU, OSCE, UNECE, ESCAP, ASEAN, UNESCO, FAO, OAS, UNHCR and other international organizations.

The formation of a collective security system in the post-Soviet space began almost immediately after the collapse of the USSR. Thus, on February 14, 1992, a decision was made to create the Council of Ministers of Defense (CMO) and the Main Command of the United Armed Forces of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS Joint Forces), and on March 20 of the same year, the Agreement on Joint Forces for the transitional period was signed.

Thus, an attempt was made to preserve a common defense space and transform the former Soviet Army into a common armed force for all members of the CIS. However, in parallel with this, diametrically opposite trends developed and intensified - many former USSR republics began to form their own armies. This actually led to the division and nationalization by the newly independent states of the armed forces, equipment and property of the Soviet Army stationed on their territories.

Thus, already in the spring of 1992 it became clear that it was impossible to maintain a centralized CIS army under unified control. There were many reasons for this: from the strengthening of centrifugal forces and the collapse of the military command and control system to the conflicts that flared up between the former republics of the USSR. At the same time, the leadership of most republics had a growing understanding that qualitatively new forms and mechanisms of integration in the military-political sphere were needed, which would make it possible to create a more effective security system with significantly lower economic, scientific and technical costs, and reduce the escalation of armed conflicts in the post-Soviet space. It was with these factors in mind that on May 15, 1992, in Tashkent, representatives of Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan concluded a Collective Security Treaty. During September - December 1992, the Republic of Azerbaijan, Georgia and the Republic of Belarus acceded to the Treaty.

On April 20, 1994, immediately after the submission of instruments of ratification by the signatory states, the Treaty entered into force. On November 1, 1995, the agreement was registered with the Secretariat of the United Nations, in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of which the CST was concluded.

After the Treaty entered into force, a number of important legal documents were adopted that promoted the process of military

political integration in various areas within its competence. Among them, it is worth noting the “Declaration of the States Parties to the CST” and the “Concept of Collective Security of the States Parties to the CST” adopted in 1995. In the same year, the “Plan for the Implementation of the Concept of Collective Security” and the “Main Directions for Deepening Military Cooperation” were adopted, which set the task of organizing regional collective security systems. The “Plan for the second stage of the formation of a collective security system”, approved in 1999, already provided for the formation of regional coalition groupings of troops in the Eastern European, Caucasian and Central Asian directions.

At the Session of the Collective Security Council on April 2, 1999 in Moscow, the “Protocol on the extension of the Collective Security Treaty” was signed and then ratified. The Protocol provided for the automatic extension of the Treaty for successive five-year periods.

A qualitatively new stage in the development of the Treaty was opened by the “Memorandum on increasing the effectiveness of the CST and its adaptation to the modern geopolitical situation” adopted by the Collective Security Council in 2000, the implementation of which aimed the Treaty at reflecting new challenges and threats to regional and international security.

At the same time, the “Regulations on the procedure for making and implementing collective decisions on the use of forces and means of the collective security system”, “Model of a regional collective security system”, “Basic provisions of the coalition strategy” were approved, designed to form an organizational and legal basis for the activities of the CST in the field of ensuring on a collective basis for the security of its member states.

Of fundamental importance in this regard were the “Agreement on the status of formations of forces and means of the collective security system” and “Protocol on the procedure for the formation and functioning of forces and means of the collective security system of the CST member states” signed in 2000-2001.

The logical step in the formation and development of the military component of the CST was the creation, by decision of the CSC in 2001, of the Collective Rapid Deployment Forces of the Central Asian Collective Security Region, which were staffed by four battalions from Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan (one from each state) with a total strength of one and a half thousand people with a military command authority.

At the same time, the creation and improvement of the activities of the CST advisory bodies - the Councils of Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Defense, the Committee of Secretaries of Security Councils - was underway. An efficient Secretariat of the SSC was created, a consultation process was established both at the level of the SSC, the Council of Foreign Ministers and the Council of Defense, and with the participation of deputy ministers of foreign affairs and defense, experts from the participating states, and their authorized representatives to the Secretary General of the SSC.

Finally, in the fall of 2002, an epoch-making event occurred in the life of the Collective Security Treaty - a new international organization was created on the basis of the treaty. On October 7, 2002, the presidents of the member states of the Collective Security Treaty signed two important documents on May 15, 1992 - the “Charter of the Collective Security Treaty Organization” and the “Agreement on the Legal Status of the Collective Security Treaty Organization.” Almost a year later, on September 18, 2003, these documents came into force. According to them, the CSTO participants are the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation, and the Republic of Tajikistan. On December 2, 2004, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution granting the Collective Security Treaty Organization observer status in the UN General Assembly.

The official goal of the CSTO was to jointly prevent, and, if necessary, eliminate a military threat to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the participating states. To counter new challenges and threats to national, regional and international security, Russia, Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan agreed to intensify activities in this area, taking specific actions aimed at decisively combating international terrorism. Thus, in the fall of 2003, cooperation under the Treaty was transformed into a full-fledged international intergovernmental regional organization, which is designed to play a leading role in ensuring security in the Eurasian space in general, and the CIS space in particular.

In fact, the decision to transform the Collective Security Treaty into an international organization was a response to the challenges of the changing geopolitical environment. There is an urgent need to adapt the Treaty to the dynamics of regional and international security and counter new challenges and threats. The main task of the created Organization was the coordination and deepening of military-political interaction, the establishment of multilateral structures and cooperation mechanisms designed to ensure, on a collective basis, the national security of the participating states, and to provide the necessary assistance, including military assistance, to the participating state that has become a victim of aggression.

It was fundamentally important to include in the CSTO Charter a provision that one of the main goals of the Organization and the directions of its activities is the coordination and unification of efforts in the fight against international terrorism and other non-traditional security threats. At the same time, the obligation of member states to coordinate and coordinate their foreign policy positions on international and regional security issues was recorded.

The creation of the Collective Security Treaty Organization was also an important political event in the life of the states parties to the Treaty. There is no doubt that membership in the new regional organization really helps to strengthen their political weight and positions in the international community and ensure stability and security at the international and regional levels.

In terms of wording, the fundamental documents of the CSTO are quite strong. In accordance with the Treaty, the participating states ensure their security on a collective basis. Article 2 of the Treaty states: “In the event of a threat to the security, territorial integrity and sovereignty of one or more participating states, or a threat to international peace and security, the participating states will immediately activate a mechanism of joint consultations in order to coordinate their positions and adopt measures to eliminate the emerging threat.”

At the same time, Article 4 provides: “In the event

committing an act of aggression against any of the participating states, all other participating states will provide him with the necessary assistance, including military assistance, and will also provide support with the means at their disposal in order to exercise the right to collective defense in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter.” At the same time, the Charter of the Collective Security Treaty Organization provides for the mandatory implementation of decisions made and sanctions for their failure to comply.

Thus, the main document of the Collective Security Treaty Organization expresses the purely defensive orientation of the military policy of the participating states, with priority given to political means of preventing and eliminating military conflicts. In its content, the Treaty is primarily a factor of military-political deterrence.

The states parties to the Treaty especially emphasize that they do not consider anyone as an enemy and advocate mutually beneficial cooperation with all states. The Treaty remains open to accession by other states that share its goals and principles. Individual states or international organizations are granted observer status in the CSTO by the Charter.

The very essence of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the principles and forms of cooperation laid down in its Charter, as well as the stated positions of the member states, predetermined the real opportunity for it to become an integral part of the system of common and comprehensive security for Europe and Asia. “In the event of the creation of a collective security system in Europe and Asia,” stated in Article 1 of the Treaty, “and the conclusion of collective security agreements for this purpose, to which the contracting parties will steadily strive, the participating states will enter into immediate consultations with each other with a view to making the necessary changes to this Agreement." This fundamental point is constantly confirmed in subsequent documents of the CST.

The transformation of an interstate treaty into a full-fledged international organization could not but affect the internal structure of the latter. Back on April 28, 2003, at the session of the CSC in Dushanbe, regulations were developed regulating the activities of the organization and the structure of the CSTO was clearly formalized. The competence of the main bodies of the Collective Security Treaty has expanded significantly - the Council of Foreign Ministers, the Council of Foreign Ministers and the CSSC have now become not only advisory, but also executive bodies.

At the moment, the structure of the CSTO is as follows. The highest body of the Organization is the Collective Security Council (CSC). The Council considers fundamental issues of the Organization's activities and makes decisions aimed at achieving its goals and objectives, and also ensures coordination and joint activities of member states to achieve these goals. The Council is composed of heads of member states.

In the period between sessions of the CSC, the Permanent Council, which consists of authorized representatives appointed by the Member States, deals with the coordination of interaction between member states in the implementation of decisions taken by the bodies of the Organization. The advisory and executive body of the Collective Security Treaty Organization on issues of coordinating the interaction of member states in the field of foreign policy is the Council of Foreign Ministers (CMFA).

In turn, the advisory and executive body of the CSTO on issues of coordinating the interaction of member states in the field of military policy, military development and military-technical cooperation is the Council of Defense Ministers (CMD). The place of the CSTO advisory and executive body on issues of coordinating the interaction of member states in the field of ensuring their national security is given to the Committee of Secretaries of Security Councils (CSSC).

The highest administrative official of the organization is the Secretary General, who manages the CSTO Secretariat. The Secretary General of the organization is appointed by decision of the SSC from among the citizens of the member states and is accountable to the Council.

Finally, in order to intensify work to strengthen the military component of the CSTO, the CSTO Joint Headquarters was formed.

During its short but eventful history, the Collective Security Treaty Organization has more than once given occasion to talk about itself. At the initial stage, the Treaty contributed to the creation of national armed forces of the participating states and provision of adequate external conditions for their independent state building.

The capabilities of the Treaty were directly used in the fall of 1996 and summer of 1998 in connection with the dangerous developments in Afghanistan in close proximity to the borders of the Central Asian states parties to the CST, in order to prevent attempts by extremists to destabilize the situation in this region.

In 1999 and 2000, as a result of promptly implemented measures by the CST member states, with the participation of Uzbekistan, the threat created by large-scale actions of armed groups of international terrorists in the south of Kyrgyzstan and other areas of Central Asia was neutralized.

The CST also played an important military-political role in the process of achieving national reconciliation in Tajikistan. Moreover, in the middle of the first decade of the 21st century, within the framework of the CSTO, this country is receiving significant political, military and military-technical assistance.

In general, we can say with confidence that the Collective Security Treaty Organization is a significant international regional organization in the vastness of Eurasia. Moreover, the CSTO is a Eurasian organization not only in the spatial-geographical, but also in the political-legal sense due to the universality of its principles and practical goals, as well as through the direct participation of its member states in the relevant European and Asian security structures, in

first of all, the OSCE and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

In conclusion, it should be noted that after the collapse of the USSR, the balance of power in the world was disrupted, and a new security architecture has not yet been created. Moreover, the situation in the post-Soviet space, which was tightly controlled by Moscow twenty years ago, cannot now be called stable either. In this regard, Russia simply needs a powerful integration group consisting of allied countries, capable of adequately responding to the challenges of our time. In this regard, the CSTO really contributes to solving the problems of national security of the Russian Federation on its front lines, creating, in fact, under the auspices of Russia, an extensive political and defense space and a common military-technical potential.

In a broader sense, the Treaty, especially with the creation of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, can help strengthen Russia’s positions and the general allied collective positions of the CSTO member states in the world, and the formation of a significant Eurasian pole of security and stability.

The long-term goal of Russia's policy towards the CSTO, and, if possible, the entire CIS, is to create a community of states capable of becoming in the 21st century one of the world's leading centers of sustainable political, socio-economic, scientific and technical development, a zone of peace, national and social harmony . Here, military-political factors are closely intertwined with the necessary internal reforms.

Maintaining stability along the perimeter of its own borders, creating and strengthening a belt of good neighborliness, peace and security is one of the key priorities of the foreign policy of the Russian Federation. Moreover, this factor is of particular importance with the emergence of new challenges and threats and the increased use of Russian territory by international terrorists and drug traffickers to achieve their cross-border goals. In these conditions, it seems that the CSTO can become the structure that will best suit Russia’s national interests in a rapidly changing international situation.