From: Tom Gray <tgray@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Date: 11 Nov 92 10:26 PST
Subject: IPS Danube Dam Dispute
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1466601899:000:6729
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!tgray    Nov 11 10:26:00 1992


/* Written 12:07 am  Oct 29, 1992 by newsdesk@igc.apc.org in igc:ips.englibrary */
Copyright Inter Press Service 1992, all rights reserved.  Permission to re-
print within 7 days of original date only with permission from 'newsdesk'.

Title: CZECHOSLOVAKIA/HUNGARY: Danube dam dispute worsens


an inter press service feature

by chris stephen and vivianne schnitzer

budapest, oct 26 (ips) -- the rift has widened between hungary and
czechoslovakia over the fate of a hydro-electric dam on the danube
river, with the decision by the slovak authorities to go ahead
with the project in the face of protests from budapest and
environmentalists.

relations between the two countries have been growing
increasingly tense since 1989, when hungary pulled out of what was
originally a joint project set up in 1977.

czechoslovakia brought relations between the states to a new low
at the weekend, announcing that it intended to complete the multi-
billion dollar gabcikovo project and subsequently blocking the
danube just north of the hungarian border.

hungary, which considers any diversion a violation of
internationally recognised national borders, has since launched
fresh diplomatic efforts to try and halt the work. but the
atmosphere has been tense since talks sponsored by the european
community to find a compromise solution collapsed last week.

hours after the talks ended without agreement last friday,
czechoslovakia declared the project open. several massive steel
barges were swung across the river close to the hungarian border
and a fleet of trucks began dumping boulders into the river to
form a permanent blockade.

the czechoslovak plan is to divert much of the river from its
present course along the hungary-czechoslovak border into a new
concrete channel to the north.

klaus binder, the director of the plant, says that this
deflection of the danube ''is reversible'', and that water
diverted to the canal can be returned to the river through a
system of floodgates and sluices. but hungary considers the action
a violation of the trianon treaty, which established the
countries' borders in 1919.

environmentalists on both sides say valuable marshland will dry
up, that subterranean water reserves -- europe's largest -- will
be upset by changes to the natural balance of the area, and that
hungarian minorities in the south of slovakia will be exposed to
flooding.

but czechoslovak engineers contend that water will continue to
flow down the existing river and that the plant will actually help
the environment. it will be cleaner than using coal or nuclear
power, they say.(more/ips)

czechoslovakia/hungary: danube dam dispute worsens(2)

czechoslovakia/hungary: danube (2)

currently, more than two-thirds of the country's electric power
is produced in thermal power plants fired by low-quality brown
coal -- a key cause of acid rain which is devastating the
country's forests.

soviet-designed nuclear power plants provide another 16 percent
of czechoslovakia's energy, and hydro power accounts for the
balance, although most available sources of hydro-power have
already been tapped.

while conclusive proof has yet to be produced that the gabcikovo
project will cause the damage the hungarians and environmentalists
claim, the dispute is worsening.

hungary's parliament has voted against allowing the government to
negotiate a compromise. hungarian appeals have been made to the
united nations, the ec and the international court in the hague,
but they all have said that they can only arbitrate if the two
agree to accept the judgment, something the czechoslovaks refuse.

not surprisingly, political rhetoric is warming up. whilst ruling
out military action, hungary's foreign ministry spokesman has said
new measures would be considered. ''these are not going to be
revealed at this time,'' he said, though trade and financial
sanctions are suspected.

nationalist leader and slovakian prime minister, vladimir meciar,
has also ruled out military conflict, but admitted ominously that
it could come to a ''show of force.''

the situation is complicated by a variety of factors. the first
of these is that the entire project is on slovak soil and has been
under czechoslovak control from the outset.

the second is that although officially the dispute is between the
hungarian and czechoslovak governments, czechoslovakia is set to
separate into separate republics in 1993 and czech political
leader vaclav klaus has already said the issue is ''purely
slovakian.''

prague holds ''no responsibility'' for the continuation of the
project, he said. ''the end responsibility for the project will be
with vladimir meciar's government, who will have to answer to the
international forces after january.''

german minister of foreign affairs klaus kinkel, has added his
voice to the issue by condemning czechoslovakia's unilateral
decision to start work on gabcikovo. he reminded the government in
prague that it was ''responsible for the security of central
europe.''

the quarrel is likely to cast a shadow over the meeting of the
two nations at a meeting with the ec presidency in london on
wednesday. (more/ips)

czechoslovakia/hungary: danube dam dispute worsens(3-e)

czechoslovakia/hungary: danube (3)

despite the statement by plant director binder that five of its
eight turbines are operative and that electricity production could
start within a week, it is uncertain how much power can be
produced.

hungary's pull-out in 1989 severely handicapped the scheme, with
one of the two dams being abandoned. some estimates say generating
capacity will be less than seven percent of the needs of slovakia,
when it splits from czechoslovakia next year.

many millions of dollars are still needed to scoop out the rest
of a 40 square-kilometre lake behind the dam and one of the main
hopes of environmentalists is that western financiers will refuse
to back the project on the grounds that its electricity output
will be too small.

christian richter, an austrian official from the conservation
group global 2000, said: ''the point is, it is a huge dam and a
huge place, but this dam will bring very little hydro-electricity.
i think the reason they want to finish it is political: they have
begun it and they don't want to lose face by stopping it.''
(end/ips/rp-en/vs/ego/trd/mv/cs/dal/92)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The above news story is copied from the IGC Networks, home of   *
* the nonprofit networks EcoNet, PeaceNet, ConflictNet, LaborNet, *
* and HomeoNet.  For more information on IGC Networks news        *
* services, write to support@igc.apc.org  .                       *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *