Seeing is Believing

Seeing is believing. Twenty diplomats traveling to the site of the Bastroe canal in the Danube delta had this adage in mind, considering that the site had caused such international ado of late. Two weeks previously, navigation had resumed there through a canal linking Ukraine’s section of the Danube river delta. The scandal was caused mainly by fears that its construction would damage the environment. Romania is still convinced that the whole project is inexpedient. The United States and the European Commission have stressed the need to treat nature with more consideration. All the steps the Ukrainian government had taken previously — meeting with colleagues from Bucharest, representatives of international organizations — had yielded no tangible results, except that the first stage of the deepwater canal had been built and it was the second stage’s turn. Therefore, the diplomats’ trip to the site was meant to demonstrate the Ukrainian views on the project.

NO DAMAGE TO THE “UKRAINIAN VENICE”

The diplomats were met by a rather cool weather in Odesa oblast. But the piercing wind did not prevent them from appreciating the charms of the “Ukrainian Venice” — as the vicinity of the town of Vylkove, crossed by numerous canals, is often referred to. While on board the Krymska Strila, diplomats would often appear on deck to take in the fascinating landscape, even if briefly, and snap shots.

None of the diplomats noticed huge mounds of earth excavated from the Bastroe canal to make it deeper, or dead fish and birds as alleged victims of man’s rude interference. Powerful hydraulic dredges were deployed outside the territory of the nature preserve — and the latter was the main argument in the canal dispute... Earth lifted from the bottom was carried away by barges and dumped far away from the unique Danube ecosystem. Statements to that effect were also made by environmental activists... Viktor Bezdolny, manager of Del Lotsman (customer of the deepwater canal project), says clearing of the Bastroe delta of silt, among other things, has quite a few ecological advantages; at the same time, Romania’s construction of its own canals resulted in altering the current in the Ukrainian section of the Danube delta. Evening out the banks increased the speed of current in the Romanian canals, just as the Ukrainian ones grew shallow. Such changes in the current could cause a disaster, Mr. Bezdolny, stressed, explaining that the Ukrainian canals could get silted. This would upset the ecological balance, destroying wild and plant life. The dredging procedures were kept in strict conformity with set standards, he said, and Ukraine had held a tender for precisely that purpose, with several private companies among the bidders. German Mobius, with a professional experience dating back a hundred years, had been named successful bidder. The company motto is never harm Mother Nature. The Germans had agreed to take part in the project only after thoroughly examining all project documentation. “The very fact that the German company agreed to help resume navigation there is proof that the project is an ecological optimal one,” stated Viktor Bezdolny.

FIRST RESULT: ENCOURAGING

What will be the result of the diplomats’ trip? Will certain countries revise their stand in the canal issue? Apparently, these questions were uppermost on the mind of the trip organizers — the Ukrainian ministries of transport and communications, and foreign affairs. Both ministers appeared quite satisfied by conversations with diplomats after the trip. “The very tone of their questions was different. The most important result of the trip is that they could study the situation on the spot,” said Minister of Transport and Communications Heorhy Kyrpa. “It was especially important for all of them to see with their own eyes that there were no large-scale hydraulic engineering works underway; that works actually being done were aimed at restoring a normal current, which had been there previously and which must secure the ecological balance in the region,” stressed Foreign Minister Kostiantyn Hryshchenko. Heorhiy Kyrpa said that Ukraine would have to clear the bottom even if resuming navigation were not on the agenda. “The diplomats appear to have realized that no transgressions have been perpetrated; that all we have [at issue] is the Romanian policy aimed at retaining its monopoly status in allowing river-sea vessels through its canals,” the minister pointed out.

Resumed navigation has yielded the first results; 38 ocean yachts and 24 merchant ships from Russia, Turkey, Bulgaria, and of course Ukraine, have used the canal over the past two weeks. T&C Minister Heorhiy Kyrpa noted that this statistic is nothing much, but one shouldn’t expect a rapid influx of customers in the Ukrainian canal. After all, many sea and river carriers were bound by contract with Romanian canal owners, some such contracts expiring in a year. Naturally, no one would want to sever them, because quite often such contracts are made with prepayment. “The fact that even in the presence of such contracts some of the parties resort to deviations for the benefit of Ukraine is proof that the Ukrainian canal is attracting interest as a more economically effective and least expensive one,” Mr. Kyrpa stressed. The Ukrainian government wants to keep the canal available round the clock, navigable in both directions, unlike its Romanian counterpart, charging the vessels three times less. He further informed that a big international carriers conference would be held in Odesa, in early October, and detailed information on canal passage contracts would be provided.

The diplomats left the Bastroe canal with rather positive impressions, with the only exception of Romanian Ambassador Alexandru Kornea, who emphasized that Bucharest would never change its stand in the matter.

Ian Boge, head of the European Commission’s Representation, was not as categorical (an approach marking statements by Brussels officials, by the way). He said the visit was very interesting and that statements about the European Commission’s critical approach to the project were not exactly correct; that they simply asked questions and hoped to receive detailed information from Kyiv. The diplomat also stated that Ukraine had already supplied the European Commission with considerable data, whereas Brussels was still expecting some information. Ian Boge went on to say that a team of commission experts would arrive in Kyiv shortly, to study on the spot what had been accomplished to date. Monique Frank, Ambassador of the Netherlands (her country currently presides over the European Union) reminded journalists that the EU had never criticized the Ukrainian canal, and that she found the trip very useful, as she could gather a lot of new information. She added that the Dutch were very fond of nature, that the Netherlands was a land of rivers and the sea, so the people had a very sensitive approach to all environmental matters. Monique Frank stressed that she was aware of the regional problems, including a high unemployment level; that balancing economic progress, earning money, and preserving the environment was never an easy task.

There are few countries experiencing no problems with their neighbors. Ukraine is not the only one to have problems with Romania; diplomatic relationships between Bucharest and Sofia, Bratislava, and Budapest have been often marked by disputes... That is probably why Bulgarian, Slovak, and Hungarian diplomats support Ukraine off the record.

Romania’s being offended by Ukraine’s restoration of the Bastroe canal is explained officially by fears that the project can damage the environment. Unofficially, it is chagrined by considerable economic losses resulting from the Ukrainian canal’s less expensive passage. Criticism from the US State Department and European Commission can also be explained officially and otherwise. A competent Ukrainian foreign ministry source has it that criticism from Brussels was provoked by the absence of a unanimous approach to the canal issue in Ukraine. Likewise, the State Department sided with Romania because Romanian canals have US investments. Besides, Romania and the United States have stronger political ties.

Ukraine and Romania are experiencing a remarkably strained period. Bucharest recently declared they intended to take the Romanian-Ukrainian sea shelf delimitation case to the International Court of Justice in the Hague. Experts believe the Romanian diplomatic demarche is a response to the helpless situation with the Ukrainian canal. “The International Court is not our choice. The only problem is that we offer legal consultants and lawyers an excellent opportunity to earn extra money.

Under the circumstances, we’ll have to enlist leading law forms on both sides. If we want to let them make good money, so be it. That’s probably something somebody wants somewhere,” stressed Foreign Minister Kostiantyn Hryshchenko, when asked by journalists. He reminded that Kyiv had preferred bilateral talks, but that Bucharest had decided differently. He also felt sure that Ukraine was acting in accordance with the international law of the sea. “We could have solved the problem differently, but if we have to do it the Romanian way, we will meet them in the [International] Court,” added Kostiantyn Hryshchenko.

Statements made in official Kyiv recently indicate that Ukraine will not leave Bucharest’s accusations unanswered. Both sides have begun to openly discuss matters previously avoided for reasons of neighborly relationships. “We have studied the situation and will raise the matter of serious transgressions being perpetrated by Romania,” stressed Heorhiy Kyrpa, Minister of Transport and Communications, referring to environmental infringements.

Will the relationships with Romania improve? A Ukrainian diplomat commented on this question briefly and to the point: No. Just as Russia cannot settle the Kurile Islands issue with Japan, so Ukraine will find it hard to reach an understanding with Romania.” Meanwhile, the markedly strained Ukrainian-Romanian relations are likely to relax somewhat before long. A number of Ukrainian experts are convinced that the current Romanian declarations are part of the presidential and parliamentary campaigns (the elections in Romania are scheduled for November 28, 2004).