Chairman of IIR
Members of the Board
Participants, Faculty Staff
Ladies and Gentleman

Introduction
• Overview
• The Evolution of Security Measures in the Inter-American System
• Challenges
• OAS Security Objectives
• Multidimensional Security Approach
• Hemispheric and Sub-regional Instruments
– Central American
– Caribbean
– Andean, MERCOSUR, UNASUR
• Conclusion

 These are interesting and yet complex times for many of us working in the international arena. We are witnessing a changing global order, which is already marked by many competing forces for global power. Across politics, economics, culture and military strength, a new world order is steadily emerging. Countries such as Brazil, Russia, India and China, referred to as the BRICS, are increasingly taking leadership roles in today’s political, military and economic world. The reality is that the impact of complex and cross-cutting concerns such as nuclear non-proliferation, energy, food, the proliferation powerful non-state actors, is rapidly changing our priorities in terms of both global and regional security in the fullest possible sense of the word.

 The greatest test of global leadership in the 21st century will be defined by the ability of leaders to work collectively to meet the challenges of this new security order brought on by unconstrained borders —from climate change, natural disasters and terrorism, to conflict, poverty, disease and economic instability. All of these threats and challenges are not only the concern of the larger and more powerful countries of the world but are also of central interest to the smaller states, as the world recognizes that insecurity today has no boundaries. Governments now recognize that alone they are unable to protect their interests and their citizens — national security has become interdependent with global security.

The Evolution of Security Measures in the Inter-American System
• The post World War II period marked by polarization and conflicting ideologies and superpower confrontation.
• The responses to security threats have likewise evolved and yield different regional perspectives on development and security in the Hemisphere.

 The global dynamics of the aftermath of World War II shaped the hemispheric concept of security that was characterized by the real or perceived threat of aggression among states, and especially, by extra-regional states. Responding to the logic of the Cold War, the OAS established, through the Rio Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (TIAR) in 1947 and the Pact of Bogotá in 1948, the foundation for military cooperation against external aggression and a commitment to the practice of nonviolent conflict resolution and conflict prevention to resolve regional interstate disputes, respectively.

 In the early 1990s, the end of the Cold War added new, non-traditional concerns to the traditional set of security threats to the Hemisphere (i.e. interstate conflicts and weapons of mass destruction). As mentioned yesterday by many other speakers, some of the non-traditional threats came from non-state actors and include: international organized crime; illegal traffic of drugs, arms and persons; money laundering; corruption; and terrorism, the latter being of increasingly significant importance after the 9/11 attacks on the US. Other non-traditional threats are structural in nature and include: extreme poverty and social exclusion; natural and man-made disasters; and environmental degradation, among others. These new dilemmas weaken the ability of states to manage internal conflicts and deal with transnational threats that have the potential to grow and ultimately compromise hemispheric peace and stability.

 On a regional basis, the Western Hemisphere’s security agenda has been historically shaped and defined by a constant and evolving social, economic and political landscape. The democratization process in the past 25 years has given way to new democracies with vast and accentuated diversity bringing to the fore the different political and economic interests among countries in the Hemisphere and between sub-regions.

 We have also witnessed rapid economic growth and greater global interdependence in our region, the proliferation of regional institutions and procedures to consolidate peace and security, and recognition that a multidimensional approach to security requires a strong shared identity among states and sub-regions.

 All of the realities have also yielded different regional perspectives on development and security in the Hemisphere. Throughout the past decade, we have grappled with changing definitions of security; new theoretical concepts such as “democratic security” (Central America and Colombia) and human security (Canada) have also emerged and informed our understanding of security.
OAS Security Objectives
• Provide for common action in the event of aggression against any member state (TIAR)
• Seek solutions to political, juridical, and economic problems that may arise between member states
• Increase collective action on multidimensional security as regards issues of illicit drug and firearms trafficking, human trafficking; terrorism; and transnational organized crime, etc.
Challenges
• Achieving greater peace and security remains one of the most critical security challenges for the Americas.
• The OAS recognizes the growing “complexity” of the Hemisphere’s security challenges and needs
• New types of inter- and intra- state conflicts continue to emerge.
• Given the growing complexity of the Hemisphere’s security challenges and needs, along with the vast number of organizations and instruments developed to meet these challenges, the OAS has placed new and greater emphasis on multilateralism, building and strengthening partnerships with regional and international institutions, as well as permanent observers. As we continue to strengthen the OAS, we have also sought to revitalize the inter-American System and strengthen collaboration among its principal institutions. However, to do this, genuine cooperation must form the basis of our hemispheric integration and development process.

 Latin America and the Caribbean are sub-regions with a worrying level of intra-national conflict, where violence plays a major role and affects perceptions of security that go beyond the borders of each state. Citizen security is being seriously threatened by the rise in both organized and non-organized crime. Ongoing challenges such as migration, rising crime and violence rates, poverty, environmental degradation, border relations and disputes all point to the need for a strategic and hemispheric security paradigm which places development at the center of its focus.
 The Western Hemisphere currently confronts disturbing levels of intra-state security threats of crime, violence and other public security issues.
 Citizen security is seriously threatened by the rise in both organized crime and criminal violence, and by rising social tensions resulting from increasing poverty in the region, and more recently the drastic rise in the cost of living.
 Criminal gangs have become major security threats particularly in Central America and the Caribbean. This new cross-border phenomenon and security challenge has traceable links between gangs in the United States with partner groups in El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Jamaica, etc. The gang network has also been implicated in illegal weapons and drug trafficking.

 Some of the most common security challenges affecting all sub-regions are:
o Illegal trafficking in drugs – it is estimated that the majority of illicit drugs shipped to North America and Europe from South America pass through the Caribbean Sea. But the Caribbean is not only a transit point for drugs -- it is increasingly becoming a market for illegal drugs, targeted particularly at youth.

o Weapons trafficking. This contributes significantly to the escalation and perpetuation of violence, and undermines stability.

o Transnational organized crime -- supported by increased access to sophisticated weaponry, greater mobility of persons and communication.

o Emergence of a widening range of non-state actors, including terror networks and criminal gangs; and emerging urban groups called “bandas emergentes”, in Mexico, Colombia, parts of Central America and also the Caribbean, which really do not have an organized structure and no leadership.

o Economic dislocations and natural disasters that devastate not only economic but security infrastructure and capacity.

o Aside from the transnational security concerns, several factors considered as the underlying structural sources continue to exacerbate many of the Region’s security problems—they have been identified as: income inequality, extreme poverty, highly urbanized populations, and growing youth populations caught in a cycle of stagnant job markets,

Multidimensional security approach
 In the Americas, the shift from focusing on combating traditional threats to introducing new transnational and internal security issues generated a renewed determination by OAS member states to consider a more holistic approach toward hemispheric security: one that recognizes the interdependence of threats and challenges, at the international, national and local levels, as well the cross-border impact of these challenges.
 After a long process of discussion, this new approach was recognized by OAS member states in the Declaration of Bridgetown in June 2002, which sought to incorporate non-traditional threats to hemispheric security, such as natural disasters, communicable diseases, destruction of the environment, as well as poverty, illicit drugs, human trafficking and acts of terrorism. Essentially, what our hemisphere faces is a combination of man-made and natural threats to our safety and well-being.
 Call on member states to work cooperatively towards redefining the institutional structure of existing mechanisms
 Recognizes the interdependence and cross-border nature of threats and challenges at the international, national and local level
 Recognize that security is the fundamental requisite that allows for democratic governance, stability and development

Other instruments and tools of the Inter-American System
o CICAD – the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission deals with drug trafficking, interdiction, and prevention of drug consumption. The adoption of the Multilateral Evaluation Mechanism (MEM) to assess the efforts of member states in combating illegal drug trafficking is one of the many success stories in this regard.
o CIFTA – The Inter-American Convention against the Illicit Manufacture of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials is the first binding regional agreement that explicitly addresses small arms, light weapons and explosives.
o CICTE -- The Inter-American Committee Against Terrorism (CICTE) has programs of technical assistance and specialized training that target six areas: border controls, financial controls, critical infrastructure protection, counter-terrorism legislative assistance, terrorism crisis management exercises, and policy development and coordination. Over a period of two years (2005-2007), CICTE spent over $2 million in security training for Caribbean countries, funded to a large extent by US contributions to the OAS.
o Department of Public Security -- covers Trafficking in Persons, Transnational Organized Crime, Gangs, Small Arms and Light Weapons, Humanitarian De-mining, and the Concerns of Small Island States (especially natural disasters).

 Complementing the hemispheric tools for dealing with regional security threats, many countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have developed sub-regional instruments in response to the specific necessities peculiar to the respective sub-region.
Committee on Hemispheric Security
 In August of 1995, OAS member states agreed to establish a Committee on Hemispheric Security through AG Resolution 1353 (XXV-O/95). At the Second Summit of the Americas held in Santiago, Chile, in 1998, the Heads of State and Government of the Hemisphere decided to promote "regional dialogue with a view to revitalizing and strengthening the institutions of the Inter-American system, taking into account the new political, economic, social, and strategic-military factors in the Hemisphere and in its sub-regions." The Organization of American States, through the Committee on Hemispheric Security (CHS), was instructed to:
 Follow up on and expand topics relating to confidence and security-building measures;

 Analyze the meaning, scope, and implications of international security concepts in the Hemisphere, with a view to developing the most appropriate common approaches by which to manage their various aspects, including disarmament and arms control; and
 Pinpoint ways to revitalize and strengthen the institutions of the Inter-American System related to the various aspects of Hemispheric Security.
The establishment of the Committee also widened the scope of OAS activity on democratic defense by facilitating the possibility of early, rapid and preventative response to crisis situations.
Hemispheric Instruments
• 2003: OAS adopted the Declaration on Security in the Americas. It reiterated that the security of the Americas is affected by traditional and new threats, concerns and other challenges of a diverse nature, inter alia
– terrorism, transnational organized crime, the global drug problem, corruption, illicit trafficking in weapons and the connections among them;
– extreme poverty and social exclusion;
– natural and man-made disasters; environmental degradation,
– HIV/AIDS and other diseases
– trafficking in persons.

• 2004: The Declaration of Nuevo Leon adopted in the Special Summit of the Americas held in Mexico introduced policies that strengthened social security systems; addressed proliferation of communicable diseases and the threats they posed to the security of our people; committed to improve food security and social development.
• This Declaration deepens the human dimension of security. At its core, lies the principle that the basis and purpose of security is the protection of human beings.
• In 2006, the Inter-American Defense College and Inter-American Defense Board is integrated into the OAS
• The decision has served to elevate the awareness of future leadership in security matters and cooperation.
• New partnership has helped to strengthen OAS responsiveness to hemispheric security situations and its understanding of the practical application of relevant knowledge and techniques
Sub-Regional Mechanisms within the Hemisphere
• Given the range of security threats experienced by Member States, various sub-regions have also established a number of instruments to respond to the myriad challenges.
– Central American
– Caribbean
– Andean, MERCOSUR, UNASUR
 The OAS understands the differences in the security needs and challenges of member states and the varying perceptions of threats, priorities, and subregional particularities. Security often means different things to different people at different times, and asymmetries among states are relevant when addressing security in the hemisphere and the special concerns of each Member State. Therefore, the OAS recognizes the need for member states to pursue their own agendas and identify different types of strategies and mechanisms for addressing security concerns.

Central American Security Mechanisms
 In the context of Central America, several developments of the last twenty years highlight the recognition of the importance of a regional approach. The peace processes in the 1990s, and the signature of the 1992 Tegucigalpa Protocol embodied a new vision of Central America as a region of peace, democracy, and development.

 The 1995 Framework Treaty on Democratic Security in Central America delivered a ground-breaking agreement that overhauled the region’s national security doctrine and emphasized cross-border cooperation in a new national security approach. Despite the limited success of the treaty since then, the concept remains relevant and could serve as a starting point for a stronger regional security architecture, which could further be extended to Caribbean countries.

Caribbean Regional Security Mechanisms
 In 1996, CARICOM implemented the Regional Security System of the Caribbean, demonstrating the priorities of preventing the illicit trafficking of drugs, rescue assistance in cases of national emergency, immigration control, protection of fishing resources, customs and tariff controls, maritime police, natural disasters, pollution, and contraband.

 In response to a multidimensional approach to security, the Caribbean has developed a regional agenda which consists of mechanisms that enhance border security and provide intelligence support, such as the Joint Regional Communications Centre (JRCC) the Regional Intelligence Committee (RIC), CARICOM Intelligence Sharing Network (CISNET), Regional Intelligence Fusion Centre (RIFC), as well as the CARICOM-IMPACS mechanism responsible for the implementation and execution of regional projects relating to crime and security.

Andean, Mercosur, UNASUR Security Mechanisms:
 On 24th August, 1997, Member States of the Rio Group signed the “Declaration of Asunción,” in which they promised to defend democracy, including the coordination of efforts in the fight against drug trafficking, corruption and terrorism, and the promotion of measures to build confidence and security within the Hemisphere

 In June of 1999, the MERCOSUR trade bloc welcomed the incorporation of observer nations, Bolivia and Chile, into a Zone of Peace, free of weapons of mass destruction and anti-personnel landmines. Similarly, these countries agreed to strengthen cooperative mechanisms around the themes of security and the exclusively safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy including spatial technology and science. Likewise, by June 17th, 2002, the Andean nations signed onto the “Andean Charter for Peace and Security,” which establishes, inter alia, the principles of a communal policy toward security based on cooperation, reduction of military spending, peaceful resolution of conflicts, and the declaration of a peace zone.

 In recent years, the Andean Community has stepped forward in the implementation of activities related to the commitments and cooperative actions emanating from the Declaration on Security in the Americas, adopted in Mexico in 2003. Countries of this region have agreed to strengthen their efforts in relation to the reduction of military expenditures, meetings with high-level authorities on penal justice, the fight against organized crime, trafficking of drugs, persons and arms as well as the mechanisms to confront extreme poverty, natural disasters, and environmental challenges.

 The most recent subregional mechanism with a strong security agenda to be established is UNASUR. This is an intergovernmental entity with international juridical character; whose goal is to gradually integrate two existing sub-regional-bloc organizations, MERCOSUR and the Andean Community of Nations, as part of the South American integration process. It is modeled on the European Union. It has created a South American. The South American Defense Council (SADC) was proposed by Venezuela and Brazil to serve as a NATO-like mechanism for regional security, promoting military co-operation and regional defense.

 On March 10, 2009, Defense ministers from the 12 South American countries that make up UNASUR met in Santiago, Chile for the first meeting of the recently-formed South American Defense Council (SADC).

 When the South American leaders established the Defense Council on December 2008, they perceived that it would become an instrument to aid in the resolution of discords of a military nature on the continent. Even before the Santiago meeting was held, at least three antagonistic situations already existed.

These included the continued strained relations between Ecuador and Colombia, a simmering arms race between Chile and Peru, and what some sections of the regional media described as "bellicose posturing" between Colombia and Venezuela. But now that all these countries, as allied members of the SADC, have agreed that the Council will be a diplomatic forum to diffuse regional conflicts, there is hope that the joint action plan will help to resolve these existing situations.

 Finally, OAS member states have benefited from the newly reinvigorated relationship between the OAS and the Inter-American Defense College/ Inter-American Defense Board, which seeks to provide the OAS and its member states with technical and educational advice on related military and defense issues in the Hemisphere. Since 2006, the Inter-American Defense College has been adapting its structure to the new realities of the Hemisphere in order to play an integral role to play in supporting the major pillars and mandates of the Organization of American States.

 Recently, in the aftermath of the catastrophic earthquake in Haiti on January 12, the Inter-American Defense College actively worked side-by-side with the OAS (through my office) to set up a situation room, lead efforts in compiling minute by minute and daily updates on the rescue and relief efforts taking place in Haiti. This was a clear example of where the IADC played a central and supporting role to the OAS in its efforts to help the government and people of Haiti.

 Contribution of sub regional mechanisms to an integrated hemispheric agenda. The challenge to the hemisphere-wide system is to encourage effective agenda prioritization and results-focused action through sub-regional and national organizations and agencies. In this regard, sub-regional organizations and security mechanisms are an essential element to a hemispheric-wide security approach.

 Consequently, the Organization recognizes that sub-regional mechanisms play a critical role in addressing the various sources of instability and insecurity. On our commitment to the fight against illegal drugs, human and arms trafficking, organized crime, terrorism and violence, the OAS recognizes sub-regional mechanisms, organizations and agencies related to the different aspects of pursuing security and defense in the hemisphere.

Conclusion
• Recognize the complexity of the region
• Recognize the multiple perspectives to each security issue
• Strengthen cooperation among existing subregional institutions, international and governments working towards improved security
• Seek new mechanisms to assist and influence security cooperation

 For the Organization of American States building peaceful societies and prosperous economies is of critical importance. Security challenges are counterproductive to these objectives.

 Current challenges to peace and security the Americas, such as transnational organized crime, border disputes, and migration flows, are trans-boundary in nature and call for regional solutions. Existing security structures in the various sub-region’s need to work in tandem with regional, international organizations and governments in order to meet these challenges.

 I have called for a new Partnership for Security Reform in the Americas which must aim to strengthen regional structures, create more effective legal mechanisms, and develop new tools and instruments that formalize current, ad hoc approaches to conflict prevention, insecurity and instability. Regional approaches to common security threats are not incompatible with state ownership of national security, understandably a major concern for most governments. A regional approach can, in fact, help strengthen key aspects necessary for national and regional security and at the same time help build trust between states.

 Sub regional mechanisms can contribute to the establishment of a solid hemispheric security architecture that in coordination with the regional organizations such as the OAS, and other key sub regional organizations like SICA and CARICOM will help country governments mitigate and manage the array of national, regional and transnational security needs affecting our countries.

 The OAS believes that while a short term impact and immediate response is necessary to address some of the immediate security problems, a more structural solution will only be achieved through a strategic approach addressing the underlying causes of insecurity and instability.

 In my view, multidimensional security threats require multidimensional, multidisciplinary and innovative responses. I firmly believe that a holistic, integrated approach to security and crime prevention must address development, good governance and the rule of law, as well as crime prevention.

 The OAS has welcomed the decision of the Hemispheric leaders to meet annually at the level of Ministers of Security to address many of the threats, challenges and other security concerns facing the Americas

 I believe that the OAS is on the right track. By leveraging the strengths of states to work together in developing their capacity, we are building a mechanism for sustainable security. Current scenarios predict escalating crime and threats of terrorism across the hemisphere. Problems of poverty, inequality, and poor education also threaten our children.

 A development agenda that fails to deliver at expected levels and which leaves large segments of the population marginalized has the potential to adversely affect governance and security in the region.

 The key to our success in combating security challenges will be the ability of all states, larger and small, to reconcile the relationship between security and development, and to move forward with an integrated, multidimensional approach that emphasizes greater cooperation and partnership to confront common challenges.
 While we all have a collective responsibility to create change, to build peace, and restore confidence in the democratic system; ultimately this can only be done through the civic and political leadership of each and every country.
 Our role as third party institutions must focus on helping to build and maintain environments that support domestic and regional objectives of peace and security, justice, social equity, development, and democratic governability as well as provide hope and opportunity for all the citizens of the Americas.

I thank you for your attention. I look forward to your questions.