2016, vol. 2, br. 3, str. 63-80
|
|
Doktrina organizacije dogovora za kolektivnu bezbednost
Doctrine of organization agreement on collective security
Visoka škola za menadžment i ekonomiju, Kragujevac
Sažetak
Organizacija dogovora o kolektivnoj bezbednosti (ODKB) je bezbednosna integracija u Evroazijskom regionu. U okviru ODKB posle dužeg vremena i mnogobrojnih promena i korekcija, stvorena je funkcionalna i organizaciono jasna struktura. Ovaj proces kretao se od prvobitnog DKB kao skoro političke organizacije, preko DKB vojne a posebno ODKB kao potpune vojno-političke integracije na postsojetskom prostoru. Danas ODKB ima potpuno jasnu i upravljivu strukturu počev od najvišeg organa odnosno Saveta za kolektivnu bezbednost, preko saveta MIP-ova, saveta ministarstva odbrane, komitet sekretara Saveta bezbednosti ODKB i ostalih organa. Sve odluke, osim proceduralnih, se donose konsenzusom. Kao najveći nedostatak u funkcionalnosti ODKB, može se istaći nepostojanje organa za rešavanje sporova između članica. Takođe, kao nedostatak se može tretirati i to da su do sada neka pitanja u vezi sa mehanizmom usvajanja i pravnog osnaživanja odluka donetih od strane organa ODKB, i dalje ostala nerešena.
Abstract
Organization of the Collective Security Treaty (CSTO) is a security integration in the Eurasian region. In the framework of the CSTO after a long time and many changes and corrections, made functional and clear organizational structure. This process was from the original DKB as almost a political organization, through DKB war and especially the CSTO as a complete military-political integration on post-Soviet space. Today, the CSTO has a completely clear and manageable structure, starting from the highest authority and the Collective Security Council, through the Council of Foreign Ministers, the Council of the Ministry of Defense, the Secretary of the Security Council Committee CSTO and other organs. All decisions, other than procedural, are taken by consensus. The biggest disadvantage of the functionality of the CSTO, it can be pointed out the lack of authority for the settlement of disputes between States. Also, as a deficiency can be treated and that so far some issues related to the mechanism of adoption and the legal empowerment of the decisions taken by the authorities of the CSTO, remained unresolved.
|