The Bystroye conflict INEE analysis Bujor Ana Maria

Profile The conflict regarding the situation of the Bystroye Canal in Ukraine has generated a diplomatic conflict between Romania and Ukraine, starting with 2004, when this initiative was proposed, being a conflict related to environmental and economic issues. The canal was to be built in a very sensitive biological area, part of the UNESCO World Heritage, called the Danube Delta. This is the most relevant point regarding the start of the conflict, even though economic and social issues were also mentioned and are to be discussed later. The Danube Delta is formed by the separation of the River Danube into 3 arms before spilling into the Black Sea. The natural landscape formed here is unique, representing the home for countless species of endangered birds, mammals and fish. For this reason, but also because it represents a nesting ground for these species, as well as a place of preservation of the local traditions, the area is protected by the laws, both national and international. According to several international treaties, including the Espoo Convention, signed by both Romania and Ukraine, the area is to remain untouched and human activities are to be seriously restricted. Regarding the economic issues, before the proposal of the new canal, Ukraine had to use the Romanian transport routes for transportation, which meant higher costs and smaller competitiveness for the Ukrainians. As a result this project was announced to reduce the costs of transport and to make Ukraine a good choice for transporting merchandise. Regarding the social context, both the population on the Ukrainian side, as well as on the Romanian side is mostly poor, depending on the Delta for everything. The Ukrainians also aimed at creating new jobs for the population by involving them in construction works and trade. On the other hand, many other people fear about the destruction of the environment, which would cause the loss of jobs in the tourism industry. All in all, the sudden announcement of the program led to a wave of disapproval, especially as the Romanian authorities had not been announced of it to offer solutions. Moreover, the former conflict involving the Snakes Island, a disputed territory by both countries, did not help either, animosities expanding even more and the new issue being perceived as a new provocation from the Ukrainian government. Causes

In the case of this conflict, one cannot really talk about deep structural causes, as the motivations were mostly economic and dictated by government policies. Indeed, Romania has a history of conflicting relations with Ukraine, caused mostly by territorial claims and historical inaccuracies, but one could not say that Romania has an open conflict with its neighbor. The causes were mainly economic as Ukraine was not satisfied with the prices it had to pay for the classic transport routes used by Romanians. Also, the population in the area is very poor, with very few possibilities to get a job. So, as far as the Ukrainian government was concerned, a new, shorter way to transport goods cheaply was more than recommended for their economic interests in the area. There is also a matter of prestige, Ukraine aiming to increase its importance in the area be it economic, strategic or political. Another issue also economic- is related to the discovery of oil near the Snakes Island, which should be transported easily towards Europe. Thus, a simple pathway towards the continent, cheaper and shorter, would supplement this need and would bring profit to the Ukrainians. The trigger of the conflict was the announcement itself that Ukraine was to start the construction of the canal, without consultations with the Romanian government. This was seen as a provocation, as Ukraine had signed treaties preventing this, so conflict ensued. The fact that the Ukrainian side did not want an alternative solution aggravated the situation, which remained nevertheless at the diplomatic level. As the Romanians refused to accept the construction, the two sides found themselves in a tense situation. The conflict could aggravate if none of the parties offers to find a solution and if they were to make changes that could destabilize the other party, like building a new canal to make Bystroye useless, which has been mentioned. It is unlikely that the conflict will go beyond the diplomatic level, being more likely for it to stall. On the other hand, the conflict could come to an end if the parties found a common way or if the construction of the canal would prove to become way too expensive for the government. Intense action from a third party may also help, but again, it is unlikely for this to happen, as Ukraine is not part of the EU and it did not seem to respond to international statements. Actors The actors of the conflict are mainly 2- the governments of Ukraine and Romania, the conflict being one carried between the two countries. The Ukrainian government, represented by its institutions, claims to act overall in the interest of its citizens and thus make the best economic decisions for the general prosperity. Its goals are to transport oil and merchandise cheaply and also to attract more foreign transport on the new canal. The government aimed to build the Bystroye Canal no matter what and used the resources it could access in its capacity to do so.

The Romanian government has similar capacities and resources, but its aim is to maintain the Danube Delta intact, for all its potential- which would mean not allowing the new canal to function. In this purpose, it resorted to international institutions and also agreed to make some economic compromises, without too much success however. Anyhow, the economic aspect should not be overlooked, as the government might lose up to 1,5 million $ per year because of the canal, the economy of the city of Sulina also being severely affected. Being a member of the EU, it can demand help from this entity, even though its authority in Ukraine is debatable. Other actors that got involved are the EU, through statements and threats to cut funds, UNESCO, which aims to maintain the Delta intact- as part of the heritage and the United States, which accused Ukraine of destroying the environment willingly despite being aware of the consequences. All these actors did not influence the situation too much, but managed to stall it so that construction works lasted very much. Also, some NGOs like World Wildlife Fund opposed the constructions and popularized the issue so as to attract more support. Also, the inhabitants of the area were asked to offer their opinion on the building. Most of them opposed the construction for fear of not losing their income made from fishing and tourism; on the other hand, others, which wanted a construction job, preferred for the works to begin. Dynamics All in all, in spite of the international outrage, construction works continued, even though they were stalled many times. Most likely, Ukraine will continue to use it without being too influenced by international statements. Nevertheless, the Romanian government continues to oppose the activities in the area, making threats regarding its use, going as far as building a parallel canal to make Bystroye useless. Romania had a lot to suffer because of the lack of a common policy and strong institutional attitudes; by having dispersed opinions and by not being consistent, the government lost from time to time in this conflict. One cannot say the conflict has increased lately, as it has rather stalled. The two parties maintained their hostility (the Romanian ambassador did not go to the inauguration), but not much happened with the exception of several statements regarding the issue. However, if they were to be well used, there are some windows of opportunity regarding this issue, one of them being the influence of the EU in Ukraine and the funds it offers to this country; also, the Romanian side has shown itself interested in opening discussions, but nothing constructive has happened yet. The economic difficulties encountered by this country may very well open it more towards collaboration, just like they could make it close itself even more. Regarding this issue, one could see some possibilities for the conflict to continue. The best possible solution would be for the two countries to have a comprehensive meeting in order to analyze all factors involved and the effects of the works. There are some suggestions, like

making another canal around the protected area, but which would be more expensive. Also, the Romanian side has offered to make some discounts for transportation. It is doubtful that Ukraine could accept in totality such an offer, but a solution could be found if discussions were to be handled by an international organism such as UNESCO. A middle way would represent a cessation of the activities in the area until all factors of impact are analyzed. Agreeing to some common rules of handling the area and continuing transportation (for both sides ) could represent a solution for some time, but again, this could not be solved without an agreement on communication between the parties. The worst case scenario would be represented by sabotaging the canal, which would lead to an acceleration of the conflict and to the closing of the communication. This would stop any attempt to reach a good solution and the Ukrainian party would simply continue the works and activities with no regard for the Romanian demands. Sources WWF report - assets.panda.org/downloads/bystroyecanalqa.pdf Romania pierde suprematia la gurile Dunarii http://www.evz.ro/detalii/stiri/romania-pierdesuprematia-la-gurile-dunarii-659954.html Articole Ziare.com http://www.ziare.com/articole/canal+bastroe Canalul Bastroe incalca in continuare regulamentele internationale http://www.romanialibera.ro/actualitate/europa/canalul-bastroe-incalca-in-continuareregulamentele-internationale-229312.html Ukraine goes all the way for Bastroe Canal http://www.9am.ro/stiri-revista-presei/2006-0303/ukraine-goes-all-the-way-for-bastroe-canal.html