made. In 2000, an official policy “for equal representation” was launched to correct the under-representation of national minorities in the armed forces.210 Special personnel policies Affirmative-action policies tend to be controversial and may even be unconstitutional or unlawful especially if they involve reverse discrimination. They could also potentially breach the international agreements described above. Specific and time-limited derogations from the EU Directive for the purpose of redressing previous discrimination are an option. However, targets or quotas of under-represented groups to specify the desired levels of minority participation in certain army ranks and structures, and policies designed to meet those quotas, can be effective. In Canada in the 1960s, one of the issues dividing the Anglophone majority and Francophone minority — roughly three-quarters to one-quarter of the population, respectively — was the under-representation of the latter group in the armed forces and particularly in the officer corps. Affirmative-action quotas, special training programmes, and changes in language requirements for officers were introduced with the expectation that this would increase Francophone representation. It seems that the creation of French-speaking units in all three services and in every military discipline has had a more important impact on increasing the number of French-speaking officers.211 A further method for facilitating the recruitment of under-represented groups short of quotas is by easing the requirements for the acceptance of minorities into military schools (a policy of this kind was introduced in Bulgaria in 2003, with the help of the NATO Information Centre and with financing by the EU delegation in Bulgaria). Training measures Policies of this kind may include special training courses to raise awareness of ethnicity issues. For example, in the mid-1990s, the members of the newly formed South African National Defence Force, which had to incorporate seven different armed forces belonging to different racial and ethnic backgrounds, went through a number of training programmes designed to nurture greater tolerance and respect for diversity. To go further, completion of equal-opportunities training may be a pre-condition for promotion; conversely, evidence of non-compliance with these policies may be treated as a bar to career advancement. Nationality questions Restrictions preventing non-nationals from entering a country’s armed forces are common among OSCE participating States, but they are not universal. On their face, such restrictions are a form of discrimination (sometimes indirect racial discrimination), but this may be easily justifiable. For example, the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination does not apply to “distinctions, exclusions, restrictions or preferences made by a State Party to this Convention between citizens and non-citizens”.212 Although citizens of EU states are generally free to take up employment in another EU state under the right of free 210  Ministry of Defence, “The Chief of General Staff’s Equality and Diversity Directive for the Army”, <http:// www.army.mod.uk/linkedfiles/servingsoldier/usefulinfo/equality/ss_hrpers_eq_w/cgs_equality_and_diversity_directive.pdf>. 211  “Multiethnic Armed Forces”, Geneva Centre for Democratic Control of Armed Forces, 2005, <http://www. dcaf.ch/publications/bg_multiethnic_armed_forces.cfm?nav1=4&nav2=1>. 212  Art. 2. 108 Handbook on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Armed Forces Personnel