INTERNATIONACOURTOFJUSTICE
CASE
CONCERNING THEGABCIKOVO-NAGYMAROS
PROJECT
(HUNGARY/$LOVAKEA)
MEMONAL
OFTHEREPUBLICOFHUNGARY
ANNEXES
DIPLOMATICCORRESPONDENCE,
MINUTESOFINTERGOVERNMENTALMEETINGS,PUBLISTATEMENTS
ANDINTERNALDOCUMENTS
VOLUME4
2MAY 1994 III
TABLEOFCONTENTS
D~PLOMAT ÇORRES PONDENCE, MINUTE SFINTERGOVERNMENTAL
MEETINGS P,BLICSTATEMEN ATDSINTERNA DLOCUMENTS
PAGE
Annex 1. Letter £rom Mr Endre S, Hungarian Permanent
Representative to the Danube Commission, tu Mr G.
Morozov, President of the Danube Commission, 5
November 1951. 1
Annex2, Report ofthe SeventhCMEASession,Berlin,30 May 1956. 2
Annex3. Protocolon the joint negotiationsaimedat the investigation
of the utilisation sçherne of the Danube, from Wolfstahl-
Bratislavto the village of Fajsz,Budapest, 10-15 Januay
1958. 3
Annex4. Closing Prorocol of Negotiations of the Govemment
Cornmittees on UtilisitheHydro-Power of the Danube
between Bratislava and Nagymaros, Prague, 6-7 October
1958. 6
Annex 5. Memorandum on Negotiations of the Governments of
Hungaryand Czechoslovakia,13-14November1967. 9
Annex 6. Note Verbale from the Ministryof Foreign Affairs of the
Republic of Hungaryto the Embassyof the Czechoslovak
SocialistRepubli23 January1974. 13
Annex 7. Letter from Mr Istvin Huszh, Hungarian Deputy %me
Minister, and Mr Rohlicek, Czechoslovak DeputPrime
Minister,ro Mr Lesetsko,Soviet DeputyRime Minister, 25
Oçtokr 1974. 16
Annex 8. Letterfrom MrA Kossygin,Soviet Prime Minister,Mto
GyorgyLizhr,Hungarian Frime Minister,9 June 1975. 17
Annex 9. ProtocoloftheMeeting of the Hungaxiand Czechostovak
Govemrnent Plenipotentiaries, Budapest, 24-26 November
1980. 18
Annex 10. Letter from MT Lubomir Strougal, Czechoslovak hme
Minister, to Mr GyargyLAzAr, ungarian Prime Minister,
19October 1981. 23Annex 11. LetterfromMr GyargyLazib,HungarianPrimeMinister,to
Mr Lubornir Strougal, CzechoslovakMme Minister, 9
Novernber1981.
Annex12. AideMernoireon consultations of the CO-chairmenof the
Hungarian-Czechoslovak Commission on Econornic,
ScientificanTechnical ooperation,9July1983.
Annex13. Aide Memoire of the Hungarian and Czechoslovak
Boundary Water Commissioners, Topolcianki, 7-8
December1988.
Annex14. Letterfrom ML Péter SzBnyi, Hungarian Deputy Prime
MinistertoMi Péter Havas,Hungari a enipotentiary21
Mareh1989,enclosingMinutesof theProtoc ofltheXXEII
Sessionof the Hungarinn-CzechoslovakCommission on
Ikonomic, Scientificand Technical Cooperation, 3 Mach
1989.
Annex 15. Report of the CO-presidof the Hungatian-Czechoslovak
Commission of Economic, Scientific and Technical
Cooperation,April1989.
Annex 16. Lettehm MrPéterMedgyessy,HungarianDeputy Priiile
MinistertoMr Pave1Hsivnak,CzechoslovakDeputyPrime
Minister24lune 1989.
Annex17. Aide Memoire,Meeting of Mk Liszl6 Udvari,Hungarian
Govmment Plenipotentiary, and Mr VladimirLokvenc,
Czechoslovak Govemment Plenipotentiar,Budapest, 26
June1989,
Annex 18. AideMemaire of the scientific experts in çonnection with
the ternporarysuspensionof works on the Nagyrnaros
Bmage, signed by MrPa1Stefanovics, andPIlVlastirnil
Bms, Budapest, 17-19July 1989.
Annex 19. Proposalof the Councilof Ministers ofthe Hungarian
People'sRepublic, offered by HungarianPrime Minister
Mikl6s Némethto Czechoslovak Prime Minster Ladislav
AdarnecB, udapes20July 1989.
Annex20. Note Verbale from the Ministrof ForeignAffairsof the
Czechoslovak Socialist Republic the Embassy of the
HungarimPeople'sRepublic1, 8August1989.
Annex21. Minutesof the meetingbetweenthe HungarianMinistryfor
Indnstry, signed by ML Tibor L6czai Szab6, and the CzechoslovakMinistryof Fuel andEnergy,signedby l& .
MaturaJaroslav,21-22August1989.
Annex 22. Minutesof themeetingof the Cornmitteeof Experin the
Matter of the Gabcikovo-Nagymms Barrage System,
Budapest2, 1-23August1989.
Annex 23. Letter from Mr Ladislav Adamec,CzechoslavakRime
Minister,toMr Mklb NémethH , ungariaPrimeMinister,
31August1988.
Annex 24. Note Verbalefromthe Ministryof ForeignAffairsof the
Republicof Hungaryto theEmbassyof the Czechoslovak
SocialistRepublic,1Septernb1989.
Annex25. AideMemoireof themeetingbetween Mr PéterMedgyessy,
HungarianDeputyPrime Minister,andMr Pave1Hrivnak,
Czechoslovak Deputy Pnme Minister, Bratislava, 9
September1989.
Annex26. Aide Memoireof the meetingbetweenscientistseodiscuss
waterqualityandecology relatedro theHmsovo-Dunakiliti
reservoir,25-27 September1989.
Annex 27. LetterfromMrMiklSsNémethH , ungariaRime Minister,
toMr LadislavAdamec,CzechoslovakPrimeMinister, 4
October 1989.
Annex 28. Abte Verbalefromthe Ministryof ForeignAffairsof the
Czechoslovak Socialistepublicto the Embassy of the
HungarianPeople'sRepublic3,0 October1989.
Annex29. Note Verbale hm the Ministryof ForeignAffairsof the
Republicof Hungary to the Embassyof the Czechoslovak
SocialistRepublic,3November1989.
Annex30. hie Verbalefromthe Ministry of ForeignAffairs of the
Republicof Hungaryto the Embassyof the Czechoslovak
SocialistRepublic,30November1989.
Annex3 1. Note Verbalefrom the Ministryof ForeignAffairsof the
Republicof Hungaryto the Embasayof the Czechoslovak
SocialistRepublic,11Decernber1989.
1990
Annex 32. Letterfrom IvkMikl6sNémeth,Hungarian Prime Minister,
to Mr MarianCalfa, CzechoslovakPnme Minister, 10
January1990.Annex33. Lettefrom MrMarianCalfa,CzechoslovakPrime Minister,
to Mr Mikl6s Németh, Hungarian Prime Minister, 15
Febmary 1990.
Annex34. Omitted.
Annex 35. Letter fromM Wds Ntrneth, HungariaPnime Minister,
to Mr MarianCalfa,CzechoslovakPnmeMinister,6 March
1990,
Annex36. Letter from Mr Dominik Kocinger, Czechoslovak
Govemment Plenipotentiar,toMr Gyorgy K. SAmsondi,
HungarianGovernmentPlenipotentiary,19Jvly1990.
Annex 37. Minutes of the meetings between the Government
Plenipotentiariesheld in Bratislava, 6 September 1990, and
inBudapest,17-8 October 1990.
Annex38. Letter frorn Mr Gyorgy K. Samsondi, Hungarian
Govemment Plenipotentiq to Mr Dominik Kocinger,
Czechoslovak Govemment Plenipotentiary, 15 November
1990.
Annex39. Letter from Mr Domink Kocinger, Czechoslovak
Govemment PlenipotentiarytohlrGyorgy K. Sgmsondi,
Hungarian Government Plenipotenti2 1Navember 1990.
Annex40. Letter from MrJ6zsef Antall, HungarianPrime Minister, to
Mr Marian Caifa, Czechoslovak Prime Minister, 14
December1990.
Annex 41. Aide Memoire of the meeting of the Hungarian and
Czechoslovak Govemrnent Plenipotentiaries, Bratislava, 9
Sanuary1991.
Annex42. Letterhm Mr Maian Calfa,CzeçhoslovakPrime Minister,
to MrJSzsefAntall, HungarianPrime Minister, 15January
1991.
Annex43. Aide Memoire of the meeting of the experts of the
Hungari and SIovakAcademies ofSciences, Budapest,
13-14Febniary1991.
Annex 44. Letter from Mr Dominik Kocinger, Czechostavak
Govemment PlenipotentiarytoMrGyorgyK. Samsondi,
HungarianGovernment Plenipotentiary,15Febmary1991.Annex 45. Letter from Mr Gyorgy K. Simsondi, Hungarian
Government Plenipotentiary, to Mr Dominik Kocinger,
Czechoslovak Govemment Plenipotentiary , 15 Febniarjr
1991.
Annex46. Letter fromMr MM6s KirBly,Headof the Secreiariat of the
Hungarian Minister Without Portfolio, to Mr Ivan Lexa,.
Head of the Secretariat of the President of the Slovak
Republic,25March 1991.
Annex47. Letter from Mr Dorninik Kocinger, Czechoslovak
Govemment Plenipotentiary, to Mr Gyorgy K. Shmsondi,
HungarianGovernmentPlenipotentiary,26 March 1991.
Annex48. Proposalby the Governmentof theRepublic of Hungary for
the suspension of works on the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
BarrageSystemon the basis of ajoint agreement, Budapest,
22 April 1991.
Annex 49. hoposal by the Governrnent of the Republic of Hungary
regarding the termination otheTreaty concluded in 1977
between the Hungarian People'sRepublic and theÇzecho
and SlovakFederalRepublicregarding the Constructionand
Operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System,
Budapest,22 April1991.
Annex50 Ptoposalby the Governmentof theRepublic of Hungarf or
the joint resolution of energy questions arising from the
abandonment of the GabcikovoNagyrnarosBarrageSystem,
Budapest,22April 1991.
Annex 51. Noie Verbale from the Ministsy of Foreign Affairs of the
Czechand Slovak Federal Republic tothe Embassy of the
HungarianPeople'sRepublic,18June199 1.
Annex52. Position of the Czechoslovak Govemmental Delegation
regardingthe Position of the HungarianRepublic and the
Hungarian Academy of Sciences on the
Ecologica~nvironmental Effects of the Gabcikovo
Barrage, Bratislav11July 1991.
Annex 53. Joint Press Release of Mr Ferenc Midl, Head of the
Hungarian Govemmental Delegation, and Mr Jan
Carnogursky, Head of the Czechoslovak Govemmental
Delegation, 15July 1991.
Annex 54. Letter from MrFerenc Madi,Hungarian Minister Without
Portfolio, to MLJan Cmogursky, Slovak Prime Minister,
24July 1991.Annex 55. Letter from MrJanCmogursky, SlovakPrime Ministerto
MrFerençMidl, HungarianMinister Without Portfolio,30
July 1991.
Annex 56. ktter fromMLJan Carnogursky,SlovakPrime Minister, to
Mr J6zsefAntall,HungwianPrimeMinister,30July 1991.
Annex 57. Note Verbalefrom the Ministrof Foreign Affairs of the
Republic of Hungmy to the Ernbassy of the Czech and
SlovakFederalRepublic,30July f991.
Annex 58. Letterfrom Mr Ferenc Madl, Hungarian Minister Without
Portfolio,to MJanCmogursky, SlovakPrimeMinistes, 9
August 1991.
Annex 59. Letter fromMrJSzse Afntall, HungarianPrimeMinisteto
Mr MariariCalfa,CzechoslovakPrimeMinister, 12August
1991.
Annex69, LetterfromMr Jdzsef AntallHungari arimeMinister,to
Mi Jan Carnogursky, Slovak PrimeMinister, 14 August
1991,
Annex61. Note Verbalefrom the Minisixyof Foreign Affairsof the
Czech and Slovak Federal Republic to the Embasofthe
RepublicofHungary,27 August1991.
Annex62. LetterfromMr Jan Cmogursky, Slovak Prime Ministerto
MrFerenc Macil,Hungarian MinisterWithout Portfolio, 19
~e~ternbèr1991.
Annex 63. Letterfrom Mr Ferenc Madl, HungarianMinisterWithout
Portfolio,to Mr Jan Camogursky,SlovakFrime Minister, 8
October 1991.
hnex 64. Joint Deçlaration of the Parliarnentary Cornmittees of
EnvironmentalProtectionof Hungary and Czechoslovakia,
Budapest, 11October 1991.
Annex 65. Letter fromMr Jan Carnogursky,SlovakPrime Minister,to
MrFerenc Midl, HungarianMinister Without Portfolio, 21
October 1991.
Annex 66. Letter from Mr Gyorgy K. Shmsondi, Hungarian
Government Plenipotentiary, to Mr DorninikKocinger,
Czechoslovak Gavernrnent Plenipotentiary, 29 October
1991.
Annex67. Letter from MrFerenc Midl, Hungaria Mninister Without
PortfoliotoMrJanCmogursky, Slovak PrimeMinister, 7
November 199 1.Annex 68. Letter from Mr Shdor K. Keresztes, Hungarian Minister
for Environmental Protection& Territorial Development
andMrFerencMM, HungarianMinister Without Portfolio,
to Mr Joçef Vavrousek, Czechoslovak Minister of
EnvironmentalProtection6 December 199 1.
Annex 69. Letter from Mr Jan Carnogursky,Slovakhime Ministerto
Mt Ferenc Mhdl, Hungaria M inister Without Portfolio, 18
December 199 1.
Letter from Mr JozsefAntall,HungarianPrime Ministerto
Annex 70.
MT Marian Calfa, Czechoslovak Pnme Minister, 19
December 199 1.
Annex 71. Letter hm Ev2FerenceMAdl,HungarianMinister Without
Portfolio,to Mr Jan Carnogursky, Slovak Mme Minister,
23December 199 1.
Annex 72. Letter from Mr Jan Cmogursky, SlovakPrimeMinister, to
Mt Ferenc Mfidl,HuogarianMinister Without Portfolio, 8
Januq 1992.
Annex73, LetterfromMrMarianCalfa,CzechoslovakPrime Minister,
to Mr J6zsefAntall, Hungariafime Minister, 23 January
1992.
Annex74. Note Verbale hm theMinistry of Foreign Affairsof the
Republicof Hungary to the Ernbassy of the Czech and
Slovak FedemlRepublic, 14Eebruaq 1992.
Annex75. Setter from Mr Jozsef Anrall,Hungarian Prime Minister, ro
ML Marian Calfa, Czechoslovak Prime Minister, 25
Febniary 1992.
Annex 76. NodeVerbale fiom the Ministryof Foreign Affairs of the
Czechoslovak Federal Republicto theMinistry of Foreign
AffairsoftheRepublicof Hungary, 14March 1992.
Annex77. Letter fromMr Ferenc Mhdl, Hungarian Minister Without
PortfoIio, to Mr Jan Carnogursky, SlovakPrime Minister,
30March1992.
Annex78. Letter fromMr Frans Andriessen, Vice-Presidentof the EC
Commission to Mr Géza Jeszensky, Hungarîan Foreign
Minister,I3Aprii1992.
Annex79. Letter fromMrMarianCalfa,CzechoslavakPrime Minister,
to Mr JSzsefAntall, Hungarian Prime Minister, 23 April
1992. AAnnex 80. Letter fromMr Jan Carnogursky,SIovakPrime Minister, to
Mr Ferenc MiidI,Hungarian Minister Without Portfolio,11
May 1992.
Annex 81. Letter from Mr Ferenc Miidl,Hungarian MinisterWithout
PortfolioÉO Ah Jan CamogurskyS , lovakPrime Minister,
13May 1992.
Annex 82. Hungarian Declaration on the Termination of the 1977
Treaty, signed by Mr Jbzsef Antall, Hungarian Prime
Minister, Budapest,16 May 1992,with covering letterfrom
Mr Jdzsef Antall, HungarianPrime Minister, to Mr M4an
Calfa,CzechoslovakPrimeMinister, 19May 1992.
Annex83. Note Verbale from the Ministq of Foreign Affairsof the
Republic of Hungq to the Embassy of the Czech and
SlovakFederal Republic,39 May 1992.
Annex 84. Letter from Mr GézaJeszenszky, Hungarian Foreign
Minister,to MrFrans Andriessen,Vice President of the EC
Commission,19May 1992.
Annex85. Note-Verba foem the Embassy of the Czech and Slovak
Federal Republicto theMinistryof Foreign Affairs of the
Republicof Hungary,22 May 1992.
Annex 86. Note Verbaie from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
Republic of Hungary to the Embassy ofthe Czech and
SlovakFederafRepublic,10June 1992.
Annex 87. Note Verbale from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
Republic of Hungary to the Embassy of the Czech and
Slovak FederalRepublic,8 dulyf992.
Annex 88. Letter from Mr Rudolf Chmel, Czechoslovak Ambassador
to Hungay, to MrH. Strasser,Directorof the Secretariatof
the Danube Commission,5 August1992.
Annex 89. Lettesfrom Mr Jan Strisky,Czechoslovak PrimeMinister,
to MrJozsef Antall, Hungarian Prime Minister, 6 August
1992.
Annex90. Letter from MLJSzsefAntail,HungariztnPnme Minister, to
1 Mr Jan StrAsky,Czeçhoslovak Prime Minister, 6 August
1992.
Annex 91. Letterfrom MrIvanBAba,HungarîanRepresentativeto the
Danube Commission, to Mi Rudolf Chmel, Vice-President
of the DanubeCommission,17August 1992.Annex92. Letter hm ML J6zsef Antdl, Hungarian PrimeMinister, to
Mr Jan Strisky,CzechoslovakPrime Minister, 18 August
1992.
Annex93. Letterfrom Mr IvanBiba, HungarianRepresentativetu the
Danube Commission,to Mr TonDiaconu, President of the
DanubeCommission,28 August 1992.
Annex94. Letter from Mr Géza Jeszenszky, Hungarian Foreign
Minister,to Mr Josef Moravcik, Czechoslovak Foreign
Minister, 14September1992.
Annex 95. Letterfrom ML Jbzsef Antall, Hungarifime Minister,to
Mr Jan Suasky, Czechoslovak Prime Minister, 18
September1992.
Annex96. Letter from Mr Jan Strisky,Czechoslovak frimeMinister,
to Mr Jozsef Antall, Hungarian Prime Minister, 23
September 1992.
Annex97. Letter from Mr Josef Moravcik, Czechoslovak Prime
Minister, to Mr GézaJeszenszkyHungaria Mninister of
ForeignAffairs23 September1992.
Annex98. Letter from Mr 96zsefAntall, HungarianPrimeMinister,to
Mr Jan Strfisk ,y Czechoslovak Psime Minister, 28
September 1992.
Annex99. Letter from MrJan Strisky, CzechoslovakPrime Minister,
to Mr JSzsef Antall, HungarianPrime Minister, 2 October
1992.
Annex 100. Note Verbale from the Minisiq ofForeign Affairsof the
Republic of Hungaryto the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of
the Czechand SlovakFederalRepublic,12October1992.
Annex 101.Note Verbalefrom the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
Czech and SlovakFederal Republic to the Ernbassyof the
RepubIicof Hungary 2,October 1992.
Annex102. Applicationof the Republicof Hungaryto the International
Court of Justice for the Republic of Hungary v. the
Czechoslovak Republicon the Diversion of the Danube, 22
October1992.
Annex103. Note Verbale from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
Czech and Slovak FederalRepublic to the Embassy of the
Eiepublicof Hungar y7 October 1992, XII
Annex 104. Note Verbalefrom The Ministry of ForeignAffairsof the
Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, SIovakia to the
Ernbassyofthe RepublicofHungary,5 Novernber 1992.
Annex 105. Agreed Minutes of the meeting between the Czech and
Slovak Federal Republic, Hungaq and the European
Commission on the GabcikovoJNagymaros Project,
Bmssels,27November1992.
Annex106. Letter from Mi E Valencia-Ospina,Registrato Mr Ferenc
Mgdl,HungarianMinister WithriutPortfolio,4 December
1992.
Annex 107. Agreed Minutes of the meeting between Czechoslovakia,
Hungar and the EuropeanCommission onthe Gabcikovo-
NagymarosProject,Brussels, 10-11December 1992.
Annex 108. Note Verbale from the Minisuyof Foreign Affairs of the
Czech and Slovak Federal Republic to the Ministry of
Foreign Affairsof the Republic of Hungary,Prague, 18
December 1992.
Annex109. Nole Verbale from the Mnistry of Foreign Affairs othe
Slovak Republicto the Ministq of Foreign Affairofthe
Repulicof Hungary,Bratislava,18December 1992.
Annex 110. Note Verbale fromthe Embassyofthe Republic of Hungary
to the MinistrofForeignAffairsof the Czech and Slovak
FederalRepublic,23 December1992. '
Annex 111. Letrerfmm Mr J6zsefAntall, HungarianPrime Minister, to
Mr Jacques Delors, EC Commission President,4 January
1993.
Annex112. EC, Discussion Paper, Establishment of a Joint
HungarianJSlovak Water Management and Monitoring
Cornmittee,Brussels,Januq 1993.
Annex 113. AgreedMinutes ofthe meeting between Hungary Slovakia
and European Commission on the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Project,Bmssels, 19January1993.
Annex 114. Letter from Mr JSzsefAnrall,HungarianFrimeMinisterto
Mr Vladimir Meciar, Slovak Prime Minister,5 February
1993.
Annex 115.Comrnuniqu6of the Tripartite Meeting berweenHungq,
Slovak andathe EC on the Gabcikovo-NagymarosProject,
Brussels, 16February1993.Annex 116. EC Press Release of the Tripartite Meeting ktween
Hungary, Slovakia and the EC an the Gnkikovo-
NagymarosProjects of 16 Febniary 1993 , Brussels,17
February1993.
Annex 117. Note Verbale fromthe Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
CzeçhRepublic to the Delegationof the EC Commission,3
Mmh 1993.
Annex 118.Letterfrom the Slovak Foreign Minister,to Mt Boutros
Boritros-Ghali,UNSecretary-General,19May 1993.
Annex 119. Letter from Mr Jhos Martonyi, Hunganan State Secretary
for Foreign Affairs, to Mr Jan Lisuch, Slovak Under-
SecretaryofStatefor ForeignAffairs,2June 1993.
Annex 120. SlovakStatementrejectingtheEC andHungarianproposais,
signedby MrMiroslavLiska,18June 1993.
Annex121. Note Verbale from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
Slovak Republic to the Embassy of the Republic of
Hungary,Bratislava,13July 1993.
Annex 122. Letter from Mr Pablo Benavides,EC Director for External
EconomicRelations,toMrJhnosMnrtonyi,HungarianState
SecretaryforForeignAffairs,19July1993.
Annex123. Letter from Mr JAnonMosartonyi, HungarianState Secretary
for ForeignAffairs,to MrPablo Benavides,ECDirector for
ExternaEl conomicRelations,22July 1993.
Annex 124. Letter from Mr Alan Mayhew,PrincipalAdvisor to thEC
Directorate-Generalfor ExternalEconomicRelationtoMr
,Jinos Martonyi, HungariaS ntate Secretaq for Foreign
Affairs,5 August 1993, attaching EC, Draft Working
Document, Establishment of a Group of Independent
Monitoring and Water Management Experts for the
GabcikuvoBarrageSystem,Bmssels,4 August 1993.
Annex 125. EC PreliminaryWorking Document, Establishment of a
Group of Independent Monitoringand Water Management
Experts for the Gabcikovo System of Locks, Bmssels, 18
August 1993.
Annex 126. Group of Monitoring and WaterManagementExperts for
the Gabcikovo Barrage System, Minutes of the Eirst
MeetingofExperts,Bratislava8-9September 1993.
Annex 127. Group of Monitoring and Water Management Experts for
the GabcikovoBarrage System, Minutes EromSecond XIV
Meetingof theGroupof Experts,Budapest, 27 October-2
November1993.
Annex128. Note Verbalefromthe Minisiry of ForeignAffaissof the
Slovak Republic to the Embassy of the Reptrblic of
Hungay, 15 Novernbes1993.
Annex129. Note Verbale fromthe Ministry ofForeignAffairsof the
Republic of Hungary to the Embassy of the Slovak
Republic,25 Navember 1993.
Annex130. Groupof MonitoringandWaterManagementExpertsfor
theGabcikovoBarrageSystem,Minutes hm thirdMeeting
of the Group of Experts, Bratislava,28 November-1
Deceméer1993.
Annex131. Note Verbale£romthe Minisuyof ForeignAffairs of the
Slovak Republic to the Embassy of the Republic of
Hungary 12January 1994.
Annex132. Letter fromMrJinos MartonyiH , ungarianStateSecretary
forForeignAffairs,toMrPabloBenavides,ECDirectorfor
ExternalEconomic Relations,4Januq 1994.
Annex133. Note Verbalefromthe Minisy, ofForeignAffairs of the
Republic of Hungary to the Embassy of the Slovak
Republic,19January1994.
Annexf34. LetterfromMrJinos Martonyi,Hungwian StateSecretary
forForeignAffairstoMr Pablo BenavidesE, CDirectofor
ExternalEconomicRelations24 Januar1 994.
Annex 135. LetterfromMr Pablo Benavides,ECDirectosforExternaI
EconomicRelations,toMrJgnos Martonyi,HungarianState
SecretaryforForeignAffairs,27 January1994.
Annex136. Note Verbale from the Ministryof ForeignMairs of the
Slovak Republic to the Embassy of the Republic of
Hungary,1Eebmary1994.
Annex137. Letterhm Mr Jan Lisuch, Slovak State Seçretary for
ForeignAffairs,toMr Pablo Benavides,EC Directorfor
ExternalPoliticalAffairs,8 Februasy1994.
Annex138 ktter from Mr Dominik Kocinger,Slovak Government
Plenipotentiaryt,o DrLajos Zshmboki, ManagingDirector
of Oviber8 Febmary1994,Annex 139. Letterfrorn Prof.I. Schreiner,Headof the EC Experts
Group, toMr Pablo Benavides, EC Director for External
PoliticalRelations,10Febmary,994. 333
Annex140. LetterfromMrPabloBenavides,EC DirectorforExtemal
PoliticalRelations,Mr Jhos Martonyi,HungarianState
Secretarfor ForeignAffairs,18February1994. 336
Annex141. Letterfrom Mr Jhos Martonyi, HungarianStateSecretary
forForeignAffairsto MrPablciBenevides,ECDirectorfor
ExternalPoliticalRelations,23February 1994. 338
Annex142. Note Verbalefromthe Ministry of ForeignAffairs of the
Republic of Hungary to the Embassiesof Gerrnany, the
NetherlandsF, ranceandtheDanubeCommission,24 March
1994. 340
hnex 143. LetterfromMrJanosMartonyi,HungarianStateSecretaq
for Foreign Affairs,to Mr Pablo Benavides, European
Commission Director for External Political Relations,
Budapest,24 March1994. 341
Annex 144. Note Verbale from the Minisiryof ForeignAffairsof the
Republic of Hungary to the Embassy of the Slovak
Republic,28March1994. 342 XVI
PUBLICSTATEMENTS ANDINTERNALDOCUMENTS
HUNGARIAN PUBLICSTATEMENTS
Annex145. Parliarnentq Resolutio7,October1988.
Annex 146. Government ResolutiNo. 3004/1989,6 Jainuaq 1989,
Annex 147.Govemment ResolutionNo312511989,13May 1989.
Annex 148.ParliamentaryResolution911989,(VI.13),2June 1989.
Annex 149. Government ResolutiNo3205119892 , 0July 1989.
Annex150. Govemment ResolutionNo3305/1989,30Octobes1989.
Annex 151. ParliamentaryResolution 2411989 (XIO), 31 October
1989.
Annex 152.Hungq's National RenewalProgram(Budapest,September
1990)pp85-87.
Annex 153. GovernmentResolution3507/1990,20Decernber1990.
Annex 154. Parliamentary Resolutn611991(IY.23),16April 1991.
Annex 155. GovemmentResolution2009/1991,25October1991.
Annex156. ParliamentarRyesolution12/1992(IV.4),24 March1992.
Annex 157. Government Resolution3190/1992,7May 1992.
Annex 158. Statementby MrFerenc Madl,Minister WithoutPortfolio,
tothe HungarianParliamen11May 1992(Excerpts).
Annex159 PadiarnentaResolution911993(III5.),5 March1993.
HUNGARIAM INTERNALSTATEMENTS
Annex160. Report of Pkter Havas, Hungarian Government
Plenipotentiary, to the Hungarian Govemrnent on the
negetiationsconcerikingthe GabcikovoNagyrnBarrage
Systemheldon 27-29Octoberand2-3 November1982, 11
November 1982.
Annex161. Memorandum from Mr. Pkter Havas, Hungarian
' Government Plenipotentiary, toMr Jozsef Marjai,
HungdanDeputyPrime Minister6,Januq 1983.
Annex 162. Letter fromMr Jhos SzentBgothai, President of the
Hungarian Academy of Sciences,to Mr J6zseE Marjai,
HungarianDeputyPrime Minister,23December1981.Annex 163. Reportof a meetingofthe HungarianStateSecretary of the
Ministryof Environment and Water Management and the
Slovak Minister for Forestry, Water Management and
Timber Industry, çigned by Mr MiklOs Varga, the
Hungarian State Secretary,January1990.
Annex 164. Letterhm Mr G. K. Shsondi, Hungarian Government
Plenipotentiay, to MGyorgy Sza'loki, hiefCounselor of
the ParliamentaryCommitteeon Envitonmental Protection,
17Septernkr 1990.
Annex 165. Reportfrom Mr Eerenc Midl, HungarianMinisterWithout
Portfolio, tothe HungarianGovernment regarding the
Negotiations with the Czechoslovak Governmental
Delegation,15July 1991.
CZECH & SLOVAKSTATEMENTS
Annex166. Letter from the Slovak Union of Nature and Landscape
ProtectorstothHungarian Government,24May 1989.
Annex 167. Positionof Czechoslovakiaon materials prepared for the
Council of Ministersof the HungarianPeople'sRepublic on
the decision of temporarily stopping work on the
NagyrnaroBsarrage,26June 1989.
Annex 168. Note of the Slovak Environmental Committee, 25 June
1991.
Annex 169. FederalParliamentResolutionNo.200,3 October 1991.
Annex170. Slovak National Council ResolutionNo.246, 31 January
1942.
Annex 171. Declarationof the National Counoflthe SlovakRepublic
to the Parliarnentand to the Nationsof the World, 1
January 1993.
Annex 172. Information Release by the Slovak Environmental
Committee of theStatuteon Waters, Bratislava,March
1993.
hex 173. Public Relations Brochure of Slovakia, "The Temporary
SolutionontheTerritoryof the CSFR-Slovakia,"Bratislava,
1993.
OTHER STATEMENTS
Annex 174. Proclamation concerning Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage
System,signedby 232organisations,20October 1987.Annex 175. Resolution otheParliament of the European Comrnunities
on the Gabcikovo-NagyrnxosPower Station Construction
Project,29October1992. 426
Annex 176. Resoiutionof the Parliamentof the European~ornmunities
on theGabçikovo-NagymarosBarrage,10Mrirch1993. 427
Annex177. Resolution of the Parliamenof the European Communities
on theGabcikovo-NagymaroB sarrage,25June 1993. 429
Annex178. Council of Europe, Memorandumon Council of Europe
practicewith regard to State succession in the matter of
treaties, 12January 1994. 430
Annex179. Resolutionof the Parliamentof the European Comrnunities
on the Gabcikovo-Nagymaro Bsarrage, 12February1994. 436 Annex 1
LETTERFROM MR. ENDRE Sk, HUNGARW PERMANE RETPRESENTATI VOETHEDANUBE
COMMISSIO TN,MR. G. MORQZOV,PRESIDENT OFTHE DANUBE COMMISSIO 5NO, VEMBE 1951
Hungarian MinistryofForeignAffairs
O0225711951
toMr. G. Morozov
DdnubeCommission
Galac
Ta utilise paof the Danulvz'shydro-power, the Ministqof Mines and Energy envisages the
constructionof a hydro-electricpower plant on the river between Visegrid and Zebegény (river
kilometresf695 to1701).
The envisagedstructure consistofthree sections: the weir built into the riverbed, the hydro-
power plant andthe ship locks.
The hydro-electric power plant is planfora waterdischargeof 2,500m3/sec(37% duration of
the year), presumably divided i8tto10 machine units.
The weir is planned wit12 openingsof 27 m width. It is intendeto close thopeningsby a
sliding gütsystem.
The Iowest Danube water in the sectiof the structure will100.50m above the Adriatic, and
theheadwater will be 308.50rnabovethe Adriatic, i.e. the larwaterlevel difference will8.00 m.
To cornpensateforthe difference water levelsIWO twin locksof 24 mwidth,230 m useful lengtand
3.50 m si11depthare desègned n such a way thilt one lo-kinorder to shorten tsluicingperiod for
smaller ships and for saving water divided ba centrat gate in90 m and 140m long sections.The
gatesof the lock are of the cheek orraisinggateconfiguration.
Since theestablishinofthe envisaged hydro-electric power plant will infDanube along the
relevant section of the riveam requesting youMr. Secretarytoadvise me on the standpointof the
Danube Cornmittee concerning the;following:
1. CanceptuaI opinion on the establishofthe barrage
2. Nurnber, main dimensions and performanceofthe locks tbe constcuctedinassociation with the
barrage
3. Eventual particwlarof additional importance: damming heightype of dam, width of opening,
determinationqfsi11heiglit, etc.
Budapest,5 November 1951
(EndreSik3
The permanent representativof the
Hungarian People'sRepubliç to the
Danube Cornmittee Annex 2
REWRT OF THESEVENTC MEA SESSION BERLIN,
30MAY 1956
Onthe agendaof the CMEA'7 sthsessionheldinBerlinwerethefolIowingquestions:
1. The proposalof the commissionsdelegntedforthe harmonisationof the most importantbranches in
theeconomy ofstatesbelongingCothe CMEA;
M. the introductionofthe rnultilateralcleofaccountsbetween thestrttklonging to the CMEA;
RI. the work - programmeof the permanent commissionfor the exchangeof electric energy and
harnessingoftheDanubeVw sater-potential;
IV, theestablishmenotfpermanentswtorialcornmitteesonquestionsrelatedtoeconornyand technical-
scientificCO-operaiion:
V. thepreparationof reportsandproposainecessaryforthemeeting of govemment andParty.
The resultsofthe sessioncouldbesummarisedas followsinregardtotheitemsof theagenda:
I.....
II....
III. The work- programmeforthe exchangeof electricenergyandfor the cornprehensiveharnessingof
theDanube'swaterpotential.
The accepted work- programmefits with our attemptson the one hand to establishan adequate
connectionbetweentheeleçtricnetworksofHungaryandtheother'people's demwratic states',primarily
Czechoslovakia, Polanda,ndtheGDR; ontheotherhand,toharnessthe Danube'swater -potentialpartly
forthe establishmentof wate-powerplants andpartiyfortherecentmuch moreintensiveutilisation for
navigationandimmigration,and at the sametimeto achieveenhancedflood -protection.On thejoint-
Danube sections(thuson theHungarian-Czechoslovakborderalso)theharnessingof theDanube'swater
- potentiamustbejointiyplannedbythe statesalongtheDanube. Annex 3
ON THEJOiNT NEGOTIATIONA SiMEDAT THE INVESTIGATIONOFTHE UTILISATIONSCHEME OF THE
DANUBE SECTIONFaOM WQLFSTHAL-BRATIS LOTVHAVILLAGE OF FAJSZ.B WDAPEST ,0-15
JANVAR 1958
/ Thosepresent were:
Representingthe Cz&oslovak Party:
1. CestmirStol],Presideofthe Water Management Administratioof Czechoslovakia
2. EmilPolAk
1
3. PeterDanisovic
4. EduardRazga
Representingthe HungarianParty:
1. ImreDégen,Headof the National Water Administration
I 2. GyfirgyOsztrovszky
3. Dr. EmilMosoni
l 4. Kiroly Ziegler
5. YilrnosIllei
~e~resentin~the SovietPa*:
1. C.A. Russo,HeadoftheHydroprojecilnstitute
2. V.D. Galaktionov.
The meetingwas calledonthe initiativeand invitationof the Hungside. The participanof
the discussiowere inforrned on thsituationregardiplanning andsimultaneouslythey have visited
the sites of structtobe erectedon the upper Danube. In addition,for consultation, theHungarian
Party putorwardthegeneralissuesof conceptassociatedwith theschemeofutilisingtheDanube.
Havingexploredanddisçussedthe materialin detail,partiemadethefollowingresolutionson
thefundamentalissuesconcerningthe utilisationschernoofthe Danube:
A. UpperDanube Section
1. As thestartingpointsof this section,the Wolfsthalupper dam and the Nagyrnaroslower
dam were accepted.
2. For the utilisationofDanube sectionktween the lowerreachof the Wolfsthalhydro-
elecuicpower plant andthe upperreach of Nagymarosit isadvisatoaccepta singlepower plantby-
passcanalapproach. Inthis respect,it is necessaryto elonthetfollowing:
a} the sitesofthweir andthe placeof waterextractias weIlas thetrace-lofethe canalmustbe
acçuratelyidentified,in line with the waterextractionassumedat 1856and1853river kilometres,
respectively;
b) the levelof headwateratthe waterintakemustbe acçuratelyidentifiedbetweenlimitsof 131and
132rnabove theAdnatic:
c) the standardwater yield theby-passcanal andthe minimumwater yield to lxensured inthe
abandonedDanube iedmuscbe accuratelydetemined. 3. In order to resolve the issues listinpoint 2, ajoint technical sub-cornmittee is to set
up, in which Hungarian and Czechoslovak representativeç and a representative of the Soviet
Hydroproject Institute would participate.
4. The upper water level and the final water yield of the envisagNagymaros hydro-electric
plant mustbe determined. It would be desirable to raise the nomal each to 108.50 nior higher above
the Adriaticandthe final water yield tmore han 3000 m3Jsec.
5. The effect ofbmaging in the territoriof the two countries mustbe accurately identified
from the aspects of flooding and the raising of the groundwater levby,indicating the damages çaused
andthe efficient engineering protection measuresbeotaken.
6. A technical sub-cornmittee isto be formed with the participation of the authorised
representatives of Czechoslovakia and Hungary and the representative of the Soviet Hydroproject, in
order ta elaborate the issues outlined in po4 and5of the protacol.
For the assessrnentof the damages caused by flooding and for the protection measures,the sub-
cornmittee will follow rhe resolutions of the Hungarian=Czechoslovaktechnical committee passed at its
IV Session on 14 December 1953.
7. The Hungarian VIZITERVmust acceleratethe planning ofthe Nagymaros barrage ,and
must aim at cost-efficient approaches in the layout of the plant, in the configurations of the smcture and
in the organisatioof work (the construction ofasingle navigatian lock, structura1simplifications,use of
consmiction materials available from the site).
8. Deadlines:
a) The sub-cornmittees will start their activities in Februa1958 and will draw up their
repons before theend ofMarch1958.
b) At the meeting of the joint technical committee to be held in early Apr1958 in Prague,
thereportswill be discussed andaproposa1made tathe governrn&t cornmittee.
c) Until 1 May 1958 the utilisation plans relating to tshared section of the Danube must be
prepared and submitted for discussion and approval to the Czechoslovak and Hungarian
government committee. The investigated and approved scherne must be submitted to
COMECONbefore theend ofMay1958.
d) The Parties shall make a proposal to their relevant govemment organisations that the
government committee meeting should take place in early May 1958 instead of the
originally envisaged timing, sinthematerials have tobe prepared.
9. The issue of whether the Nagymaros power plant would be built alone by the Hungarian
Peoples Republic or jointly with the Republic of Czechoslovakia wiIl be submitted to the govemment
committee meeting tobe held in earlyMay.
B. The Danube section downstream from Nagymaros
According to the VlZITERV plans, the utilisation of the Danube section downstream fram
Nagymaros will be ensured by two barrages , to be constructed inthe vicinityof Adony and Fajsz.
According to the calculations carried out, these barraare less cost-efficient than the Nagymaros plant
and the by-pass canal. In the courseof the future planning activities, the sitesreach(highest water
level)of these barrages must be accurately identifiedand the navigation requirements are to be taken
into consideration.
C. On CO-operation and aid
The Partiesconsider it advisable tdevelap relations and to ensure an exchangeof experience in
the fieldsofplanning, geologica1exploration and hydro-construction. At the requestof theParties, the Soviet Hydroproject Instituispreparing methodological
1)
instructions before the endof February 1958 to detemine the cost-efficiency indicatorsof the dams and
on the sharing of the.total investment cost between the national economic sectors. This willbepassed
through COMECON toeach design officedealing with the comprehensive utilisation of thDanube, for
further examination and for cornmens by specialists.After taking into consideration the opinions, the
'
Hydroproject Institute of the Soviet Union will draw up the final text of instructions, which wiEl be
submitted for approvalto the Standing Cornmittee ofCOMECON .
2) The Hungarian and the CzechosEovak Parties consider it necessary to delegate ten
Hungarian and ten Czechoslovak experts to the Soviet Union's Hydroproject Institute, where for one
month they would study planning, geological exploration and scientific research as weH as the
construction problems of hydro-structures sirnilar to those envisagedfor the Danube. The Soviet
Hydroproject Institute will delegatefiveexperts tothe Hungarian and five experts tothe Czeçhoslovak
design offices for aperiod of one month. tostudy the Danube designs and to also ensure the necessary
technical aid.3) The Standing Cornmittee of COMECON must be requested to handle the exchange of
scientific technical literature, and the exploration and research st,dprovided that they have practical
significance frorn the aspect of planning and constructing hydroelectric plantthe Danube.
Budapest 15January, 1958
l
(signatures)
Cestmir Stol1Imre Dégen G.A. Russo
The copy is authentic
(seal andsignature) Annex 4
~
937/GKT/58 TOPSECRET!
Of specialimportance!
Drawnup: in45 copies
copy65
CLOSIN PROTOCOL
ON THENEGOTIATIONHSELDINPRAGU EN 6 AND7OFOWBER, 1958 BETWEENTHE GOVERNMENT
COMMITTE ~FTHEHUNGARIA PEoPLES&PUBLIC ANDTHE REPUBL ICCZECHOSLOVAKI AN
UTILIZMGTHEHYDRO-WWER OFTHE DANUBE BETWEENBRATISLA VND NAGYMAROS.
The Govemment Cornminees of the Hungarian PeopIes Republic and the Republic of
Czechoslovakiadiscussedothe6and 7 of October 19in Praguthe issueof jointly harnessingthe
hydro-powerof rheDanubeThemembersofthedelegationswerasfollows:
HungarianGovemmentCommittee:
AnralApr6,
FirstDeputyof thePrimeMinister,Head oftheCornmittee
Arp8dKiss,
engineer,Presidentof the National PlanOffice
Imre Dégen,
engineer,SeniorDirectorof NationalWaterAdministration
DeputyMinister forHeavyIndustry
GyorgyOsztxovszky
engineer,PermanentDeputyothHungarian representatoCOMECON
CzechoslovakiaGovemmentCommittee:
Deputy PrimeMinister, HoftheCommittee
OtakaSimUnek,
Minister,PresidentheStatePlanninOffice
CestmiStoll,
engineer,FizstDeputyof the MinisterofEnergyandWaterManagement
JosefKelar,
FirstDeputyofthe Ministerof EnergyandWaterManagement.
Inthecourseofthe negotiationsthe government commcIear1ymadeeffortto cornetan
understandingon themeasuresbeiakenconcemingthejoint establishmentof the hydro-electricpower
plantson theanube,to meetincreasingdemandsforelectric pothefuture in botheHungarian
PeoplesRepublic andtheRepublicCzechoslovakia.
Onthe basisof theprelirninarydiscuheldsofar,thegovernmentcommittees havecorne to
thefollowingunderstanding:
1.a) Inprincipiethe governmentcommitteesag&Oestablish,on the basis of joint planning
andjoint investment,hydro-electricpower plantson the Hungarian-Czsectionof theDanube and the two Statesconsider it desirabto harness the hydro-power of the Danube jointly in the section
between Bratislava and Nagymaros.
b) The two govemment committees agsee to envisage the construction of the Danube
hydroelectric-power plantsinthe long range national econornic plan of the Hungarian Peoples Republic
and the Republic of Czechoslovakia, ranging unt1975.
2. The two government committees agree that firstof al1the joint Danube hydro-electric
power plant of Nagymaros should be built on the Danube inthe years ktween 1961and 1965. To this
end, the Hungarian-Czechoslovak special committee will ensure that the plofthe hydroelectric power
1 plant areprepared before the 1st of Septeinb1959.
The two government committees are in agreement that theNational Planning Officeof the
3.
Hungarian Peoples Republic and the State Planning Office of the Republic of Czechoslovakia, should
discuss the optimal schedule othe Nagymaros hydro-electric power plant- with the contribution of the
members of the Hungarian-Czechoslovak expert committee - submitting to lheir governments for
approval More 15 October 1959 the coordinated plan for constnicting thjoint Nagyrnaros hydro-
elecuic power plant in the years 1961-65. In discussing the schedule of construction and the plan
proposal, the optioof commencing the activities in 1960should also be taken into consideration.
1
4. The two government committees acknowledge that concerning the utilization scheme of
thejoint Danube section, ihc resuofsthe workcarriedout sofarby the Hungarian-Czechoslovak expert
1 cornmittee are not sufficiently accurate and complete toenable reliable decision monithe utilization
scheme ofthe Danube section between Bratislava and Nagymaros.
Therefore, the Hungarian-Czechoslovak expert committee will ensureon a comprehensive
basisthe elalioratioofmore accurate and comparative initial data (on a unifom basis) for the whole
section behveen Bratislava and Nagyrnaros, in four scenarios:
~ a) the by-pass canatobe Iocated along the left-hand sbank of theDanube,
l
b) the by-pass canal to he located dong the right-hand sideofthe Danube,
by-pass canal Icicatedpartly on the left-hand side and partly on the right-hand sidofbanks
c)
the Danube,
d) river-based hydro-electric power stations.
The joint expert cornmittee will evaluate these scenarios, and rnake a prtoothe govemment
committee on the most advantageous solution and on the scheduling oeach hydroelectric-power station.
The relatedocument wiIl besubmitted beforethe end of 1960for approvalto the HydroprojectInstitute
of the SovietUnion.
5. The two government cornmittees agree that thcurrentresultsof the activities carried out
sa far on theutilizafioscheme of the joint Danube section must be submitted tothe secretariaof the
COMECON Technical and Scientific Cooperation Standing Cornmittee of Energy Matters, with the
understanding fhat the complete scheme shall be detemiined in accordance with point4, betweed the
fixed points i.e. Wolfsthal-Bratislava and the Nagymaros hydroelectric-poplants.
6. The two govemment cornmittees agree that the documents for the proposal concerning the
division of generated energy between the parties and forthe proposal relating to the sharingof the
irnplementation costs oeach hydroelectric-power plant andthe investment, wib¢ prepared by the joint
Hungarian-CzechosIovak expert cornmiitee, and willbe submitted tothe government cornmitrees before
15 March 1959. These measures will not lead taa delay inthe development of preparations for the
Nagymnras hydroelecaic-power plant . 7. Thetwogovernmentcornmineesagreethatfortheconstruction of eachjointhydroelectric-
powerplant ,thepreliminaryagreementofboth govemmentsis nectssary.DrawnupinPrague, on the7
October 1958,intwooriginalcopiescontainingCzechandHungarian texts,bothbeingequallyvalid. -
Representingthe Representing the
Hungarian Cornmittee: CzeçhoslovakCornmittee:
AntalApt6 Polacek
(signature) (signature) Annex 5
MEMURANDU ONMNEGOTWTION OFTHE GOVERNMEN OFTSUNGAR AYND CZECHOSLOVAKIA,
BUDAPES 13,-14NQVEMBE 1R964
The negotiatiowu initiated at the proposofthe Government of the Czechoslovak Swialist
Republic. The discussions were carried out in a friendlonsthe basis of mutual understanding.
The participantofthe negotiationwere:
From the Hungarian side
Imre Dégen, engineer -head of the National Water Administration, headof the Hungarian
delegation
. Dr IstvhnHetényi -Vice Presidenofthe National Planning Office
Gyorgy Vajda,engineer-Head of Main Department al the Ministry of Heavy Industry
MikMs Breinich, enginee-Deputy Head of the NationaWaterAdministration
Experts
Dr IstvlinGabor, enginee-OVF (National Water AdministratioDUNABER director
Vilmos Illei, engine-chef project engineer OVF VIZITERV
LbzlO Kocsvay, engineer-headof department oftheMiniscryof HeavyIndusiry
On theCzechoslovak side
Josef Smrkovsky - Minister of Forestryand Water Management, head of the Czechoslovak
delegation
, Frantisek Kordengineer-Presidentof thStatePlanningCornmittee,Deputy Minister
Julius Pavlis, engin-Deputy Minister of the Slovak Technical Committee
Ladislav Rehacek-Deputy Minister entrusted with heading the Central Energy Administration
JuliuHanus, engineer-Deputy Minister of Forestry and Water Management
Experts
Jiri Bornaengineer- Head ofthe Danube Department ofthe Ministryof Foresm and Water
Management
Karel Hofmann, engineer - senior expert of hydroenergy matters at the Central Energy
Administratioh..
The Partieagreed upon the following series of discussions:
1 Lontrolling energy the executofntasksdetemined in association with the hydroelectric-
power plant system on the Danube, at session IV of the Hungarian-Czechaslovak Economic and
Technical-Scientific Co-operationJoint Committee.
11 The Czechoslovak Party'proposal on elaboratingan alternative version of the joint
Hungarian-Czechoslovak hydro-electric power plant sysofmthe Danube.
Each point in the series of discuwasodiscussedasfollows:
Re.1: Controlling the execution of tasks detemiined in association with the hydroelectric-power plant
system on theDanube, at sessionIV of the Hungarian-Czechoslovak Economic and Technical-Scientific
Co-operation Joint Comminee. The pairies investigated the execution of tasks sternming hm the
resolutions on hamessing the Hungarian-Czechoslovak Danube section, made in SessionIV of the "Joint
Committee".
The joint investment programme conceming the by-pass canal version of the Danube hydro-
electric power plant system wasçompleted by the specified deadline, thatby 30 April1967.
The Hungarian Party submitted the joint investment programme, together with the supplements in
line with the Hungarian regulations, to the relevant senior authorities for comments, andhas already
started the reconciliation of comments.
The Czechoslovak Part yas not yet submitted for comments the joint investment programme
together with the supplementscomsponding to the Czwhoslovak reguIations, because of the reasons
described in pointIIof the Minutes.
Due to the same reason, the Partiesdid not submit the joint investment programme to the "Joint
Committee" on 30 June 1967.
The Czechoslovak Pmy's proposa1 on elaborating the alternative version othejoint Hungarian-
Czechoslovak hydro-electric power plant system on theDanube
The head ofthe Czechoslovak delegation informed the Hungarian Party of thereasons according
to which the CzechosIovak authorities proposed working out an alternative version for the Hungarian-
Czechoslovak hydro-eleccricpower plant system on the Danube.
So as to complete this explanation, they have given technical information concerning the
recommendation to implement the alternative version ,the main points of which can be surnrnarised as
follows.
The question of selecting the finalapproach to the hydroelectric-power pEant sysliem on the
Danube was subject to discussions between the organisations involved and the governrnent of the
Çzechoslovak Socialist Republic. In evaluatingthe by-pass canal version and the total implementatioof
the system, not only were the issueofthe technical set-up examined, but alsothe intensity of investment,
the gradual and scheduled irnplementation, the issue of concenttating and using the construction
capacities etc.
On thebasisof a considerationof these problerns, the Government of the Czechoslovak Socialisr
Republic came to the conclusion thatin ordetto select the optimum solution which would be the most
advantageous to hoth Parties,it is considered necessary to elaboratso-called alternative version for the
Danube section of Bratislava-KliskaNema, which would meet the following conditions:
a) PrimariIy it would enable a putting into operaton a gradual basis, resultin-contrary to
the scenarios investigated sofar-in amuch lower capacity and assersinput,a shorrer period to put into
operation the first plant and thus during the construction period,aireduction oflosses resultingFrom
the unproductive tyingup of theinvestment cosis.
b) Division ofthe construction activities betweethe two Parties wiihan equal work load,in
rems of both extentand labour intensity.
C) Keeping the Danube river in the current nverbed as much as possible. It is to be
considered, however, whether a short by-pass canal solution of the two barragescould be used, with
insulated head-race canais,alower darnming level above theterrainand perhaps the utilisatioof a split
tail-race canal which could eventually be Iinkedto the hydroelectric-power plants. The applicationof suchtechnicalapproachesthat wouldensurethe irnpemeabiIityof the
d)
1 resewoirs,and aioo,favourableconditionsforthegroundwaterlevelinthesurmundingareas.
Efforts shouldbe madeso that in the involvedterritoies naturalbiologicalconditionsare
e)
disturbedaslittlas possibleand furthemore, thatthemost advantageousconditions are developedfor
the economicutilisationof areas along the Danubeand that the least possibleburden is pIacedon the
agn'culturalandforestareas.
The alternative version willjoin the envisaged Czechoslovak-AusuianWolfsthal-Bratislava
hydroelectric-powerplant and the Hungarian-CzechoslovakNagymaros hydroelectric-power plant
similarlytothe by-passcanal versionplannedfor Gabcikovo-Nagymaros.Accordingto the concepts
developed so far, the alternative versionwould consist of two barragesof approximately identical
1 gradientwitha by-pass canal, and each barraeouldhaveitsindependentriverreservoirand ashortby-
pass canal.
The alternative versionis to be developedto the samestandardas theby-passcanal approachand
the finalversioistobe selectedaftertheassessrnentof themostimportant considerations.
The fundamentaldata arecalculatedon the basis of common basicprinciplesdeterminedby the
centralinvestors. Becausetheprojectof the alternative version eplitequallybetweenthe two parties
in ageographicalsense, each party will planthe structureson ilsown area, including the necessary
explorationandexploitationactivities.
Developing the alternative version10 a standard comparableto the by-pass canal approach
requires a period oone or one and a half years accordingto current belief and this means that the
materialwiElbepreparedinthefirsthalfof 1969,whichisthe finaldeadlinefortheresultsof the work to
beusedduring negotiationsbetween the planningofficesof the twocouncriesconcerningCO-operation
after1970.
Aftercompletingthis briefing,theCzechoslovakPartyhandedovertotheHungarianParty amore
detailed planf the alternative draft version,
The Hungari aarty announcedthat it would examinethe suitabilityof developingthis new
concept andbefore 15January1968it willinfonnthe Czechoslovak Partywithregard to the standpoint
of the relevant governent agenciesof the HungarianPeoplesRepublic. The Hungarian Party still
considerstheGabcikovo-Nagymarb os-passcanalversionas theoptimal solutionforutilisingthe shared
Hungaian-CzechoslovakDanubesection. At the sametime it believesthat if ajoint work would be
carriedoutin association withthe alternative scenarioi,t is sufficientto elaboratethis alternative version
tothesamedegreeasthe by-pass canal version.
The Partiesagree thathe Central Investorswillmakea moredetaileddeterminationin December
1967about theconcept,degreeof elabotation,scheduleandelaborationcostsof thealternative scenario
tobe worked outjointly.
These Minuteswere drawn up in two copies in the Hungarianand Czechlanguages each,bath
copiesbeing authentic.
Budapest 14November1967
Imre Dégen(signature) JosefSmrkovsky(signature)
Headof theHungaian HeadoftheCzecho-
Delegation slovakIlelegationl Annex 6
NOTE VERBAL FROM THEHUNGARIA MINISTRY OFFOREIGN AFFAIR TO THE EMBASSY OFTHE
CZECHOSLOV SO CIALIS TEPUBLIC 2,3 JANUAR Y974
1 NOmVERBALE
Only for official use!
462/1974
Prague
Bratislava
Pollution ofoundary waters on
Hungarian-Czechoslovak section
1CQPY
For your information in the appendiam1 sendingyou the copy ofa Nole Verbale,which was
deliveredby Comrade Roska, Deputy Prime Minister, to Dvorsky,the ambassadoin Budapest,on 23
January 1974on theabove subjeci.
Budapest,28January 1974
Br. Ustor Endre
Ambassador
Head of Department
The Ministryof Foreign Affairof theHungarian People'sRepublic presents its compliments to
the Embassyof the Czechoslovak SociaIist Republichasdthe honour to present the following:
It isof great importancefor both countries tosolve the technical andeconomic problems
concerning boundarywatersby ajointeffort. Tthis end in determining and executing the rtasks,
the mosteffectivCO-operationisneeded. Inrecognisingtheimportance of this quesrion anorder to
strengthen the friendsof ourtwo neighbouring socialist countries, through the CO-opofawater-
management bodies, Hungary and Czechoslovakia had already on 16 April 1454 concluded an
Agreement on the regulation of technical and economiç questions concthefrontier waters. On the
basis of this Agreemenand onthebasis ofdecisions reachebythe Joint Technical Cornmittee forrned
according to this Agreemena,profitable CO-operationhad evolvin thesolutionofseveralproblems
concerning boundary waters.As apart of this, twatermanagement bodiesof thetwo countries also
made effortstoregulate and providforthe necessary CO-operationto eliminate or dimitheserious
pollution which has emergover reçent years. The effective measures for preventing the pollutioof boundary waters are of great importance.
since if thesemeasures are not taken pollutiomaycarise severe darnage to indusa-ythe agriculture and
the popuIation ofthe lower riparian countrieIn connection with this, theHungarian water management
bodies optirnistically açknowledge the planned measures to be taken by the Czechodovak Socialist
Republic for improving the water-purification parameters ftheDanube.
The necessityof fiirthermeasureson the pollution prevention oboundar wyatersisprovenby the
fact that recentlymore and more frequent catastrophical waves of pollution were observable on the
Hungarian-Czechoslovak joint river section. This pollution came from the territoof the Czechoslovak
Socialist Republic.
In order to minimise darnage stemming from such waves of pollution, at the Hungarian-
Czechoslovak Joint Technical Cornmittee'sXXIXth session the two parties have agreed on the methofor
indicating sudden pollution in boundary waters. According to this agreement the Parties obliged
themselves ta inform the other party by telephone or telegraph ofevery pollution of boundary waters
without any delay, in order to provide the conditions for irnmediate action. This provision is
encompassed in subsection 4 ofsection 16of the said meeting'sprotocol, approvebyboth the Hungarian
and Czechoslovak competent govemmental bodies. The approval isstated also in theProtocol of the
Joint TechnicalCornmittee from itsXXXth session held in Jun1969.
The Hungarian partyregrets to siate that inspite of the above mentioned agreemthe competent
Czechoslovak water management bodies had several tirnes faiIedtofulfithis obligation,
This happened in thecase ofenormous pollution pasaing down the Hernad ktween 2-10 February
1973. It took8 dnys of seriouseffortto clear it away. Mention must be madeof the oil pollution othe
river Bodrog on 8 November, which by 9thof November had already completely covered the river fora
Iength of 8 kilometres reaching the line of BodrogkeresztUrA couple of days afierthisthe Hungntian
authorities registered extraordinary water pollution onSajO river, theonce again on the Bodrog river
on 14th of November.
The usually unexpected and unpredicted industrial water pollution of a concentrated and
enormous extent does not allow Hungarian water management bodies to prepare themselves for
prevention, thus lessening the effectiveness ofprevention itself, and rathecosts ofprevention. As a
-consequence of this lackof readiness considerable damage resultson Hungarian territories,a pair of
which could beavoided in theevent ofa timely forecast.
To illustrate the degree of darnage caused, let us refer to the time whenwater pollution passed
down the Herndd river between 2-10 February. On that occasion 40.000 kilosof fishdied; at theB6cs
brewery thestoppage of production occurredt,hen the production of 32 thousanKWh energy failed,theoperation of the "Fels6dobsza"waterworkshad to be limited for some days and this affected 4000
citizens,andso on; thetotaldamagewas intheregionof 8millionForints.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the HungarianPeople'sRepublic asks the Embassyto
intercede withtheGovernment oftheCzechoslovakSmialistRepublic in arderto stopand preventin the
futurethe above depicted situations,to influenceCzechoslovak watermanagementbodies to makeevery
efforttoprevent pollutiononboundarywaters. In the eventof -hopefullyexceptional - caseswherethey
cannotpreventsuchsuddenpollutionsas theabovementioned,the competentbodies shall complywith
the provisionsof the agreementon forecastingreached by the Hungariân-Czechoslovak Joint Technical
Cornmittee.
The Ministryof Foreign Affairs of the HungarianPeople'sRepublic wirhdue respect asks the
Embassyin cornmunicatingthe aboveto stressthat it wouldbe extremely importantfor the campetent
Czechodovak bodies tothoroughlyand in good faith examinethe above describedfactual and legal
situation, and to take the necessarysteps. Such an attitudewould prevent serious damage to the
Hungarianeconomy, and at the same tirne itwould be absolutelyin accordance with the brotherly
friendshipandco-operationwhichineveryrespect existsanddevelops betweenourcountries. Annex 7
AttentionofPresidentsof Hungarian
andCzechoslovak sectionsofthe
JointHungarianlCzechos Clomvmaission
forEconornic Tech~cal andScientific
Co-operation
Prague,25October, 1974
DearComradeLesetsko:
The Gabcikwo/Wagymarosbarragesystern constitutesan integralpart of the comprehensive programme
for thedevelopmentof sacialisteconomicintegrationof theCOMECONcountries and at the same time,
it promotestherealisationof objectivesarriatforthe comprehensive useof the Danubeand supports
the interests of countries participatingin navigation dothe Danube. Both the Hungarian and
CzechoslovakGovemrnenîsagreetotheexpedienceof an implementationof thebarrage
The governments ofbothcountriesconcemedcarried outthepreparatoryworkforthiisnvestment project
ina mannerenabling a startoconstructionin 1978.
Thelimitationof nationaIresourcesasweIas otherimportantinvestmentsbeinginitiatedsimultaneously
with the implementationof thisarrage system considerablincreasethe burden ofthe two countries
concerned. This circumstancenecessitaiesthe attractionof resourcesfromotherDanubecouncrietoa
partial if not a full extent.
Withregard to the foregoing,we wouldlike to makarequestEoComradeLesetsko. We beg to askyou
to allowus toorganisea trilaterU.S.3.R.-Czechoslovak- Honsugtrtonfor thepromotionof
therealisationothe saidbarrage systern with your participatit atesuitabletoyou.
Pleasefindattachedheretoconsiderationsrelatingtothe projectfinancingwhich we wouldliketodiscuss
with you.
YoursfraternaIly,
Rudolf Rohlicek IstvanHuszh
Deputy PrimeMinisterof DeputyPresidentof
theCzechoslovak Socialist the Cabineof theHungarian
Republic People'sRepublic Annex8
LETTEREIXOM MR. A KOSSYGIN, SOVIE PRIME MINISTER T,OMR. GY-GY LAZAR ,UNISARIAN~LME
MINISTER 9,JUNE1975
Moscow, 9 June 1975
DearComradeLhzaL,
TheSovietGovernmenthas carefullyexaminedthe Hungariangovemment'srequest of27February1975
thatitgrant credit to the Republicof Hunfortheplanned constructionof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Danubebarrage system.
In ouropinion, it woullx expedient if you would discuat anexpert level the concrete voluof
possibleaid tbe granteby the SovietUnionin the areof planningoperationsand deIiveryof certain
typesof equipment. Afterwards wewoulbe abIeto determinetheconditionsforgrantingassistance.
The Councilof MinisterStateCornmitteeforForeignEconomicRelations hasreceived the authorita
hold zhese discussions with the participaofothe interested organisations. If agree ta this,
representativof the partiesmaykgin thesediscussionsinthenear future.
Respectfully,
A. Kossygin
Presidentof the Councilof
MinistersoftheSovietUnion
To CornradeGybrgyLAzar
Presidentofthe Councilof Ministers
of thePeople'sRepublicof Hungary
Budapest Annex 9
PROTOCOL
OFTHE MEETIN GFGOYERNMEP NLTEN~TENTIAR OIESHEHUNGARM N EOPLE R'EPUBLI CND THE
SOCIALIR SEPUBLI OF CECHOSLOVAK HIADBETWEEN 24-26NOVEMEE 1980 W BUDAPEST,
CONCERNINGTHECONSTRUCTIONOFTHE GABCMOVO-NAGYMD ARMOSYSTEM
Present:
OnbehalfoftheHungarianParty:
. Dr. MikldsBreinich Engineer GovernmenP tlenipotentiofMNK (Hungarian
People'sRepubZic)
Dr. LAszlNagy Engineer OVH(NationalInstituteof WaterManagement)
Mikl6sSzant6 Engineer OVIBER
Dr. GyorgyKerekes Engineer OVH
SAndornéRéti lnterpreter OVIBER
On behalfof theCzechoslovakParty:
Vladimir Lokvenc Engineer GovernmentPlenipotentiaoftheCSR (Socialist
Republicof Cz~choslovakia)
MiroslavShndor Engineer UradvlaclySSSR
JozefOblozinsky Engineer Vodohospodarskavystavba
MagdalenaSrncova Enginter Uradvlddy SSR
MarietaValentavCi lnterpreter Vodohospodarskavystavba
ThesaidGovemmentPlenipotentiarisiscussedthefollowing:
1. Theformationofjoint bodieswilhthe participationof the GovernmentPlenipotentiaries;
2. The appointmentof the Secretariesof the JointCornmitteeand of rnembers of the Joint Operational
Group
3. Theprocedurefor thetransferofauthorityof the JointTechnicalCammittee(KKMB);
4. The Joint OperationalGros orkingprogrammeforthe firsihalfof asregardsnegotiations;
5. Thenextnegotiationsprogrammefor tGovemment Plenipotentiaries;
6. Othermatters.
ad 1. The GovernmentPlenipotentiatiesestablishedthefollowingjoint bthepurposeof
carqing out tasksensuingfrom the TreatyktwetheHungarian People's Republand the SociaIist
Republic of Czechoçlovakon the constructionand operationof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage
System:
1. JointCornmittee
2. Joint OperationalGroup
Provisionsgovemingthe organisationalstructureand scopeof activitiesof the saidjoint bodies
arecontainedinAppendixI. of the presentProtocol.
ad 2. TheGovernmentPlenipotentjarieshtreby apasSecretariesof the Joint Cornmittee:
- onbehalfof theCzechoslovakparty SAndorMiroslav
Engineer
- onbehalfoftheHungarianparty Dr. Las216Nagy
Engineer.
The Government Plenipotentiary forthe SocialistRepubiicof Czechos(CSR)iappointed
the followingpersonsbemerribersof the CzechoslovaksectitheJointOperationalGrou:
-JozefOblozinsky Engineer -representativeoftheinvestorforthe water
management partofthe proje-r Head oftheCzechoslovaksectionof the JointOperational
Group-MilanChrapciak Engineer -representativeofthecontractorfor the
energyaspect ? oftheproject
-representativeofthe generalpIannerof theproject
-201th Gemeran Engineer
-SLndorMiroslav Engineer -representativeofthe CSR'sGovernment
Plenipotentiary
The Govemment PIenipotentiary for the Hungarian People's Republic (HPR) appointed the
following personsto bemernbersof theI-iungariansectionoftheJointOperationalGroup:
- Mikl6sSzintd Engineer -representativeofthe investor,Head ofthe
Hungarinnsectionof the JointExecutive Cornmittee
-a representativefor the energyaspect oftheproject. He shallbe appointedlater.
-Istvan Dobb Engineer -representativeofthegeneralplanner ofthe project
- arepresentativeofthe Governrnent Plenipotentiaryofthe HPR. He shallbe appointedat a laterdate.
The Joint OperationalGroupshallcommenceits acrivitieson 1January 1981. At the same tirne
the Joint Co-ordinationGroupof investorsandplannersshall çease its activity.
of the Agreementon Joint Operational Regulationsthe range of
ad 3. Accordingto Article9.
authoritiesofthéJoint TechnicalGroupshall be transferred totheGovemmentPlenipotentiaries.
The Govemment Plenipotentiaries shall commission the Secretaries of the Joint Technical
Committee (JTC)to prepare a report on the activitiesof the JTC and to submit this report to the next
meetingof GevemmentPlenipotentiaries. TheGovernment Plenipotentiaries shall alsd oecide on further
measuresconcerning ongoingaciivitiesafterhavingdiscussedthereport.
ad 4. A workingprogrammeof negotiationsfor the Joint OperationalGroup shall be adopted by
GovemmentPlenipotentiaies for the 1sthalf of 1981. The programmeis containedin Appendix 2. of
this Protocol.
ad 5. The GovemmentPlenipotentiaries reachedan agreement to discussthe followingtopics at
their next meeting:
1. Reporton theJoint TechnicalCornmittee'sactivities.
2. Reporton theJoint OperationalGroup'sactivities.
3. Refinement of the content of tasks and deliveries specifiedin Article 2, Paragraph (3) of the
Agreement on Mutual Aid RelatedEothe Constructionof theGabcikovo-NagymarosDam System.
4. Refinernentof Chapters7 and 8 of the Executive GuidelinesconcerningHungarian-Czechoslovakco-
operation forthe preparationand constructionof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosDam Systern.
5. Proposaisfor rhemodificationof thetechnical aspectofthe JointContractualPlan.
5.1. Breakfs or bridges? on accessroad totheDunakilitiweir?;
5.2. Shiftingthe axisof the tail-race can.l
6. Revisionofthe ourputendof the Nagymaroshydroelectricpower plant.
7. Questions related to the organisationalstructure underlying, and modeof operation, of the
hydroelectricpowerplant.
8. Othermatters.
The Government Plenipotentiaries commissioned the Joint OperationaG lroup to prepare the
materials ofthe nextmeeting.6.1. The Govemment Plenipotentiaries cornmissionedthe .Joint OperationaGroup to investigate
opportunitiesfor themutualutilisationof specialisedconstructionmachine*
6.2. The Government Plenipotentiary for the CSR invited the Hungarian party to investigate
opportunitiesfor the tsansportationof a 16tonne floating Cranefromthe HPR within theframeworkof
plan co-ordinatibetween theHPRandtheCSR.
The Government Plenipotentiaryfor the HPR shall investigatthe above and inform the
Czechoslovak partyof wansportatiprospects.
This Protocolhas beenprepared intwo originalcopies in Hungarian andSlovak. Both copies
shalEbeequallyand fullyauthentic.
Budapest,26November1980
GovernmentPlenipotentiary GovernmentPlenipotentiary
forHPR: forCSR:
(:Dr M.iklosBreinich:) (:Vladimir Lokvenc:)
Engineer Engineer
APPENDI 1X.
TOTHE PROTOCO LFTHE MEETIN OFGOVERNMEP NLTENIPOTENTIA OFR2I-S6
November1980
Provisions Governing the OrganisationalSmcture and Activities of Joint Bodies of Government
Plenipotentiaries
1. Provi~ionsGoverrtingtheOrganisarionaIlructurad Activitieofthe,JointCommittee
1.1. TheJointCommitteeshalldiscussandassessrnatterssubmittedby the GovernmentPlenipotentiaries
-concerningthe preparatioand executioof thejoint investme-as wellas recommenddecisions tobe
taktnby theGovemmentPlenipotentiaries.
1.2. TheJointCommittee consistof thefollowing:
Czechoslovak Sectionof the Joint Committee:
-CSRDeputyMinisterforForestryandWaterManagement
-Representativeofthe CSRFederalMinistryforHeatingFueh andEnergy
-Representativeof theStateCommitteeforPlanning
-Representativeof theFederalFinance Ministry
-Representativeof theMinistryofMetallurgmd HeavyIndustry
-RepresentativeoftheCSRMjnistryof Construction
-Head of theCzechoslovak Sectioofthe JointOperational roup
-Secretaryof theCzechoslovakSectionoftheJointCornmittee
Hungarian SectionoftheJoint Committee:
-RepresentativeoftheMinistryof Machinery
-Representativeof theNational PlanningOffice
-Representativeofthe FinanceMinistry
-Representativeof theMinisq of MetalIurgyand Machinery
-Representativeofthe MinistryofConstruction andUrbanDevelopment
-Headof theHungarimSection of the JointOperationalGroup
-Secretaryof IheHungarian Sectioof thJointCommittee .--
21
l
1.3. The agenda, locationand timeof JointCornmitteemeetings shall ix detemined by the Government
Plenipotentiaries.To Joint Committee meetings may be invited, upon the rniitualageement of the
GovernmentPlenipotentiaries,furtherrepresentativesof govemmentagencies,heads of other bodiesof
GovernmentPlenipotentiaries andother experts. Joint Committee meetings shallp besidedoverby the
Government Plenipotentiaryofthecountry hostingthemeetinginquestion.
1.4. The JointCommittese hallconduct its discussionson the basis ofwrjttenmaterialspreparedjointly.
In extraordinarycasesa oral report,deliveredeitheby a GovemmentPlenipotentiaryor anothermember
of the Joint Committee upon the commissio of the GovemmentPlenipotentiary,may also serve as a
basisfordiscussion.
1.5. Measures of the Joint Committee shall be adopted on the basis of an agreementbetween the
Government Plenipotentiaries. Disputm esustbe settledinaccordancewithPoint27. of theAgreement.
1.6. A Protocolshallbe drnwnup for al1Joint Committee meetings to be signedby the Government
Plenipotentiaries.
2. ProvisionsGoverningthe Organisational Strucrureand ActivitiesoftheJoint OperationalGroup
2.1, The Joint OperationalGroup shallengage in executive tasksas cornmissionedby the Government
Plenipotentiaries. Italso preparesrnaterialsand drafts positionfor meetings of the Government
Plenipotentiaries and Joint Committee meetings.
2.2. TheJoint OperationalGroupshall be commissioned by the GovemmentPlenipotentiarieste carry
outthe following tasksinparticular:
2.2.1. management and co-ordinationof activities related tothe working out of joint planning
documentation;
2.2.2. management and co-ordination of the working out of executive plansin relation toprojects
executedby oneContracringPartyontheterritoryofthe otherContracringParty;
2.2.3. monitoring thut!hc constructionofthe BarrageSystemis carried outin a co-mdinatedfashionon
the territoryofbothContractingPartiesin accordance withtheapproved Joined ContractuaP llan andthe
ConstructionSchedule.
2.2.4. ensurethe inspectionof works and transportation;ensureco-ordinationktween variousbodiesof
the Contractingparties; submissionof reports of its findings to GovernmentPlenipotentiaries with
proposalsformeasurestok takenattached;
2.2.5. subrnission to the Government Plenipotentiaries of proposals and statements in respect of
modificationsconcemingtechnicalsolutionsincorporated in theapprovedJoint ContractualPlan;
2.2.6. assessrnentof the necessityand extent of extra costs resulting from circumstancesspecifiedin
Article7. of the Treaty; submission of such assessmentsto the GovernmentPlenipotentiarieswith an
expert opinion attached;
2.2.7. keeping of records ofdeviationsfroman equalproportionof worksand deliveriesundertakenby
theHungarian and Czechoslovak partiesincases listai underArticle7. of the Treatyand submission of
suchrecordstothe GovernmentPlenipotentiariesforapproval;
2.2.8. ensuringthat individual installatiosubject tothejoint ciwnershipof the ContractingPartiesare
receivedfromthecompanies executingthernand thattheyaregivenforexploitation tothe organisations
tobe in chargeof theiroperation;2.2.9. ensuringthat individual installations cornpledy one ContractingParty on theterritory of the
otherContractingParty arereceivedfsom the cornpaniesexecuting thernandgivefor exploitationto the
organisationsinchargeoftheiroperation;
2.2,19. assessrnentof the extent of damagesand costs in accordancewith Articles 25 and 26 of the
Treaty; assessmentof causes of damageand liabilitiesin respect of compensation, andsubrnissionof
expertopinionstothe GovernmentPlenipotentiaries.
2.2.11. ensuting the activitieofthe investment organisationsof the Contracting Partiesin respect of
tasksrelatedto theexecutionofthejointinvestment,in accordancewithArticle6. oftheTreaty;
2.3. In appointingrnemkrs of the Joint OperationalGroup the Government PlenipotentiarisesaIlact in
accordancewiththeirownorganisationalregulations.
2.4. Joint Operational Group meetingsshallbe presidedoverby the Head of theSectionof the country
ofthe WorkingGrouponwhoseterritory the meeting idquestion isking held.
2.5. Proposais andrecommendationsconcerningmeasuresto betakenshallbe approvedon the basisof
an agreementto thateffectmadeby the Headsof the Joint OperationalGroup . Should the Headsof the
EC faito ~ach anagreementonanysuchproposalsandrecommendationsthentheseshall be submitred
individuallytothe GovernrnentPlenipotentiaries.
2.6. Heads of the Joint OperationalCroup shall select rnembersfrom investment and planning
organisationsto exerciseconPr0o1verworkand deliveriescarriedout by the other ContractingParty,as
well as to participate in mutual technical supervision over the contractor's activities and planning
activitiesarriedoutbythegeneralplanning organisation.
Heads of the Joint OperationalGroup shaIl indicate the nameand the scope ofactivity of such
persansin the Protocol.
Personsselectedin the abovernannershall submittheirfindings,cornrnentsand proposalsto the
Joint Operational Group.
The Govemrnent Plenipotentiariersnayappointfufier expertsto exercisecontra1over work and
deliveries.
2.7. HeadsoftheJoint OperationalGroupmayinvitefurtherexperts toparticipateinthejr meetings.
2.8. Joint OperationalGroup meetingsshall be held in accordancewith the schedulespecifiedby the
Govemment Plenipotentiaries. JoinO t perationalGroupmeetingsmay be heldupontherequestof either
head ofthe JointOperationalGmup, preferablyatthe timerequestedforthe extraordinarymeeting. The
Contracting Partiesshall alternate in hostingJoint ContractualPlan meetings. Conditions for meetings
mnst be providedbythehostcoeinq ofeaçhmeeting.
2.9. A protocolmustbe drawn up for eachJointOperationa1Group meeting. Protocolsareto be signed
by the Headsof both Sectionsof theCornmittee. Annex 10
LE'ITERFROM MR. LUBOM %II'ROUGAL,CZECHOSLOV PAIME MINISTE R, MR. GYORGL AzAR,
HUNGAR~A PRNIMEMINESTE2 R9~~YQBER 1981
Prague, 19October1981
PresidentOfTheGovernmentOtThe
CzechoslovakSouafist Republic
Dear ComradeLAzGr!
In harmonywiththe decisionsarriveatduringour negotiationsof June this andthe negotiatioof
the Chairman of both gmups of the Czechoslovak-Hungarianeconomic and technical/scientific co-
operative cornmittee, heldin Pragueon 21 Septemberof this year,the further procedures for the joint
constructionof theGabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarragSystemafier1981have been examined.
We were informedby ComradeMarjaithat theGovernmentof the PRH, withregard to the present state
of the fulfilmentof the intertreatproposes totheGovernmentof the CSSRthat we suspendwork
on the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystern until 1990 on the basis of a joint agreement, due to
changeswhich have occurredsincethe signingof the treaty.
The Governmentof theCzechoslovak Socialist Repubhas discussed this Hungarianproposal and has
çonduded that thCzechoslovakParty cannot interruptwork on the barrage systemeither for technical
and economicreasonsor forreasonsofprotectionofthe region. This wouldcause imparabledamaro
work alreadycompleted and the protection of the region and would require an immense passive
investment. The Czechos!ovakParty could perhapsagrtoa siowdownin the timetableof the wofor
a periodofthreeyears. Fothisreasonitproposed,in the spiritof the decisionmadeduringthe meeting
heldktween Comrade Marjai, Comrade Rohlicek, anmd yself,thacthe expertsbothnationsexamine
bothproposais andfinda solution acceptable to bothparties.
The Czechoslovakpartyhastaken the necessarystepshasprepared the guidelinesfor the negotiations,
and isready to begin negotiationsduringthismonth.
Comrade Lazir,please allowme to expressrnyconvictionthat the negotiatingguidelinesprbyothe
Hungarian Partywitlconsiderthe economic andpoliticalsignifiofconstructfi orboth Partieand
the previously expressed position of Czechoslovaonathe continuation of the constructio~ of the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrag Seystemata reducedPaceaccording tothe interstreaty.
Respectfully,
C. Strougal
The Honourable
CamradeGyorgyLazfir
Chairmanofthe Councilof Ministersof the
Peoples'Republicof Hungary
BudapestThe President ofthe Councilof Ministers ofthe
People'sRepubIicof Hungary
ComradeLubornirStrougal
PresidentoftheGovernmentofthe
Czechoslovak SocialistRepublic
Prague
Dear ComradeStrougal!
1have receivedyourletterdated19Octoberregardingthe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystern .
The proposal of the Governmentof the Peoples'Republic of Hungary which Comrade J6zsef Marjai
pteseotedat the meetingof theHungarian-CzechoslovakEconomicandTechnicallScientificCooperative
Cornmittee'Cso-Chairmenin September of thiyear wasprecededby a thoroughexamination. Since the
signing of the interstateTreaty, thhave been great changes in the conditions and the circumstances
and for this reason, taking into considerationthe present state of developrnentand the delahavehat
occurredcomparedto theagreement, we have reached theconclusion that themost worthwhilesolution
would beto suspendwork until1990,onthebais ofajoint agreement.
Naturally,we are carefully studyingthe position of the Government of the Czechoslovak SwiaIist
Republicon ourGovernment'sproposal,as presentedin youtletter.
1 agree thatexperts from both sides should begin negotiations. For Our part,we have created the
necessarypreconditians.for this.
Please allowme,dearComradeStrougal,to alsotake thisopportunity toexpressrnybestregards,
Budapest,9 November1981.
Respectfully,
GyorgyLizCir1 Annex 12
AIDEMEMOIR ON CONSULTATION SFTHECO-CHAIRMEN OFTHE HUNGARIAN-CZECHOSLQVAK
COMMISSI OONECONOMIS ÇC,IENTI FNDTECHNICA CLOOPERATI ONJ,LY 1983
Aide Mernoire
on the meeting of the CO-chairmenof the Scientific and
Hungarian -Czechoslovak commissionon Economic,
Scientifand Technical Cooperation.
On 9 July 1983 the meeting of the CO-chairmenof the Hungari-nCzechoslovak Commission on
Economic, Scientific andTechnical Cooperation (hereinafter Commission)took place in Komarom; with
JozsefMarjai, the DepuPresidenof the Hungarian People'sRepublic'sCounçil of Monionerside
and with Rudolf Rohlicek, the DeputyPresident of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republicon the other. On
the agenda of this meeting were acute questions as to the further jointofothe Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros BarrageSystem.
Btla Kovacs, the ambassador of the Hungarian People'sRepublic in CzechoandAndrej Barcak,
the ambassador of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republicin Hungary,attended the meeting.
The list of further participants is appended.
1
II The Parties have concluded rhat the inquiries, in line with high level decisions, conçerning the
acceptance, by the Czechoslovak party of some of the works assigned initially to the Hungarian side
concluded unsuccessfully. From rhis fxt and also regarding the degree of ofaworks onthe
Czechoslovak side, the Parties agreed that the construction of the barrage system should continue
according to the workdivision defined in the 1977 Treaty on the constandtoperation of the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System and in the agreement on mutual assistance during the
construction, athe schedule on commencement of operation acceptedtheXVIlIth session of the
Commission should continue.
1 21The CO-chimen of the Commissioninsmin theplenipotentiaries:
-Tocommence immediatelythe working out of ajoint work and supply schedule according to the
deadlines accepted during the commission'sXVsession;amtly, Iheoperation of the first m-chine
unit atGabcikovo Barrage shouldbe started in 1990,whofetheNagymaros Barragein 1993;
-Thejoint schedule shoube worked out isuch away tharthe detailed evaluation of torks
be done in 1984and 1985barthe disposal of central plbodiesalready working out plans for year
1484;
-To ensure that the leganecessardraft amencimentsas to the deadlines defined in the 1977
I Interstate Treonythe constructiandoperation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Sysandin
the agreement anmutual assistanceduring constructiworkedout insucha way astobe passedon
for approval by the CO-chaimenbefore September 1983.31
The co-chairmenof the Commissiondeclarehat in the 119771Treatyand the Joint OperationalPlan
measuresfor theprotectionof nature and environmentwere -according tothethen-avajlableknowledge
-takeninto account. Both Partiesh,owever,cansiderit necessary,to seek rationa1solutions thraugh the
necessary and possible modification of the technical plans for the avoidance of unfavourable
consequenceswhich may beidentifiedin the course of the realisation [of the Project] and fothe
irnprovement of the environment. Theyalso considerit necessaryto establishthewidest possible co-
operationfor thispurpose.
ThisAide Memoireis made in two copies,in HungarianandCzech languages,borhcopiesbeingequally
valid.
Komarom,9July 1983
Jozsef Marjai RudolfRohlicek ON NEGOTIATIONSOFHUNGARI AND CZECHOSLOV A KUNDAR Y ATERCOMMISSIONS,
TOWLCIANKI,7-8DECEMBE 1R88.
Participants:
Onbehalfof Hungary:
Dr. LAsz1Nagy KVM
Mrs. SandorRéti OVIBER
Onbehalfof Czechoslovakia:
VladimirMikus MLVDSSR
FrantisekDohnalik MLVDSSR
EleonoraHellerova PD
In the courseof the negotiations,thefollowingquestionshavebeendiscussedbytheparties:
1 Report on the resolutionsof the HungarianParliamentwith rtoathe Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaros
Barrage.
2 Jointtaskrelatedto theprotectionof the quality of water affectcGabcikovo-Nagymaros
BarrageSystem.
3 Otherquestions.
Ad 1 The HungarianCommissionerinfomed the participantsin detailon the resolutionsof Parliament
with regartothe Gakikovo-Nagymaros Barrag Systern,passedin the courseof the autumn session.
Framamong the8 pointstask list elabotatedby the Hbingarianparresolution,it is point 3 that
affectto the work of the Commissionerisn the BoundaryCammision,the other points relatingto the
activityof the Co-operationCornmitteeandthe acttheplenipatentiariesresponsibGNBS.
Ad 2 The task formulainpoint3telatetoanincreasingcontrolof the area affecGNBSaswell .
asto thprotectionofthequalityofwater.
For the sake of efficient CO-opt,eCommissionerassignedthe task to the subrnissionon water
quality todeterminethewater-qualityrelatedimpaof thGabcikovoNagymarosBarrgageSystem,
at anexbaordinarymeeting tbe held in January 1989and in the frarneworkof this activity hrther
specifya constructionplan forthe sewagelreamentplants on givenareasof the two cuuTheies.
submission shallalso deteminethescheduleof worksand controlsat locationsnetheextended
protectionof the waterquality.Ad 3In theComrnissioner'sviewitisnecessarythatthework ofthe Subcornmissions oiheCommission
andtheteamsoftheGNBSplenipotentiarieb sebetterCO-ordinateAdtthenext meeting,the
Representativesshallmutuallyinfm eachotheroftherneasuret sakentoirnproveCO-operatian.
Consideringthatasa resultof theconstructiofGNBS thetasksandresponsibilitieshadincreasedfie
Commissionersagreed to meetquarterlyinthefuture.Thenextmeetingof theCommissionerswill take
placeinHungary,inthefirsrquarterof the year1989.
Dated8Decernber1988,
Topolcianky
illegiblesignatuillegiblesignature
(En .VladimirMargetin)(Dr.Mikl6sVarga) Annex 14
LB~TH RROMh& PBTW Sam, HuPJGAIIIADEPUT YRIMMINETER,Tû hfl~TEF!HAVAS,
HUNGAEU ANENTL4RY 21MARCH 1989 ,NCLOSINMNUTE SFTHE~OMCOL OFTHE XXIII
SESSIONOFTHEHUNGARIAN-C~CHOSLO CVAMKMISS INNCONOM IC,ENTIFANI)TECHNICAL
CO-OPERAT3 IMN,RC1H989
BudapestMarch21,2989
DearComradeHavas,
Hease findenclosedthMinutestakenatthe23rdSessionofthe Hungariaannd Czechoslovak
CommitieeforEconomicTechnicaand ScientiCo-operat FoagueMarch2 and3,1989),as
wellastheActioPlancompileforthfulfilmentthemsksundertakeandapptovebyMr. Pbter
Medgyessy.DeputyErne MinistChairmaonfthHungariaSectiooftheCornmittee.
Pleasexpeditetheachievemoftheobjectives.
Approveby
Mr. PétMedgyessy
DeputPrimeMUiister
ChairmaoftheHungariaSection
ACTIONPLAN
toachievtheobjectivarisifromthe23rdSessioof theHungariandCzechoslovaCornmittee
forEconomiçTechnicaandSciendfCo-operation
tothe operationof theGabcikovWaterManagement
SystemGovernment MTNUTES
takenat the23rd Sessionof theHungarian and Czechoslovak Committee for Econornic,Technicaland
ScientificCo-operatian
The Hungarian and Czechoslovak Committe for Economic, Technical and Scientific Co-operation
(hereinafter:Committee) heldits23rdSessioninPragueon2 and3, March1989.
The HungarianDelegatian was led by Mr. PtiterMedgyessy, Deputy Prime Ministe orf the Hungarian
People'sRepublic(HPR),Chairrnanofthe Hungarian Section oftheCommittee.
TheCzechoslovak Delegation was ledéyPave!HrivnakF , irstDeputyPrimeMinisterof theGovernrnent
of the Czechoslovak Socialist epublic(CSFR),ChairrnanoftheCommitteeforTechnical,Scientific and
ProjectDeveloprnent,Chairman of the Czechoslovak Sectionof the Committee, who, atthe samecime,
performeétheduties of theChaiman oftheSession.
-..
Basedonthe informationpresqntedandoncoElationst,he Comrnitteemakes thefollowingdecisions:
[Agenda]1. lmplementationof decisions,concerningeconomic CO-operation,made at the previous
meetingof the Committee,as well as in the negotiationsheld since the previousSession between the
GeneraISecretariesof the Party,thePrimeMinisters and theDeputyPrime Ministers areto be çarried
intoeffect.
1.1. It statesthat
1.1.1. ThePlenipotentiariesoftheGabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystern:
-workedout a joint schedulefor theconstructionof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System,
which takes intoaccount themodifieddeadlinesof the constructionof the Gabcikovoand Nagyrnaros
HydroelectricPowerPlants;
-workedout a joint report on theconstructionactivitiesof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage
System in 1987 and 1988. The work and supplieswere carried out in accordance with the Joint
Contractual Planand thenew,rnutuallyapprovedconstruction schedule.
1.1.2. On behalfof the two Gavemments, the Co-Chairmenof the Committeesigned the amending
Protocol of the Agreementon mutual assistanceduringthe constructionof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Barrage System concludedon 16 Septernber 1977,which includes new deadlinesfor the putting into
operationof the Gabcikovo andNagymarosBarrage System.
1.2. Ttsets asobjectivesfothePlenipotentiariesoftheGabcikovo NagyrnaroB s arrage System:
1.2.1. tosubmitajoint reportforthe Go-Chaimenof theCommiueebeforetheend of 1989 at thelatest
on thepreparation forthe joint operationof the facilitiesof the GabcikovoBarrageby the Contracting
Parties,on the deadlinesforputting intooperation,theacquiringof itsjoint ownershipon the clearing
ofaccountsof the joint operationaicostsanan the studyof establishiajoint venture.
1.2.2. tosubmita joint reportfor the24th Sessionof the Comrnitteon the stateof constructionof the
Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage System,incIudingthe issuesof operation and economicaspectsof the
GabcikovoBarrage.
1.5. The Partieshave agreedihatthe stateof environmentin theregion by theGalxikovoNagymaros
Barrage System must not deterioratebecauseof itsoperation.The non-deterioratiionof the Danube's
waterqualityas a consequençeoftheoperationof the plantis a fundamentalrequirement. In ûrder to guarantee these conditions, the Committeecommissions the Minister for
EnvironmentalProtectionandWaterManagementof the HungarianPeople'sRepublicas well as the
MinisterforForests,WaterManagementandTimberTndustry of the SlovakSocialistRepublicto work
out a concreteproposalthroughCO-operation iththe Plenipotentiarof the BarrageSystem, andto
submitit ttheCo-Chaimen by15 April1989.
TheCo-Chaimenof the Committeewill discuasthe proposa1andwill make a decisianonthe
stepstobetaken beforetheendof AprÎl1989. Annex 15
REPORTOF THE CO-PRESIDENTSOFTHE HUNGARIAN-CZECHOSL COOMAK ISSIOF EcolrruIL
SC~ENTIFICAND TECHNICA LO-OPERATI 8ANPRIL1989
Ministeof Environmental Protectand
Water Management of the Hungarian People's
Republic
Minister of Wrestry, Water Management and
Wood hocessidg ofthe Slovak Socialist
Republic
According to Artic1.3of the Protocol takattheXXIII .ession of the Hungarian-Czechoslovak
Cornmittee of Economic and Scientific-Technical Co-operation,Prague,on the 2thand3rd of
March 1989,
"thePartieagreed thinthe region exposed, the environment must noi be affected unbyvtheably
operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage.
A fundamental requiremenr is chatthe quality of water of the river Danube temain unchanged.
To provide the conditions required to meet this objective, the Cornmittee hereby entrusts the Minister of
Environmental Protection and Water Managemenofthe Hungarian PeopleRepublic as wellas the
MinisterofForestry, Water Management and Wood Processing of the Slovak Socialistwiththeic
development of specific suggestions in CO-operationwith the plenipotentiaries responsible for the
barragetobe submitted ro the CO-presidentsunriIthe 15th1989.ril
The suggestions shall be discubythe CO-presidentsbefore the end of A1989and at thesame
tirne, the representatives shall decide upon what hainaddition."
PROPOSAL TO BE DISCUSSED AT A MEETING OF THE CO-PRESIDENTS OF THE
HUNCARIAN-CZECHOSLOVAK COMMITTEE OF ECONOMIC AND SCIENTIFIC-TECHNICAL
CO-OPERATION INAPRTL 1989
The ministers accepted the ofnegotiations between the government representatives responsible for
the wateroursealong the staie border, held on theofApril 1489,according to which
the representatives had agreed upon an additional water quality control pbecarriedout in
1989
- rocompletethewater quality monitoring and evaluatian systemonbagreements under the State
Border River Convention, with additional indexs;
-to determine the quaoftwater of tDdnube before the reservoits are fiEIed;- to continuously monitor the water quality, jointlor in cornpliance wsth a CO-ordinatedprogramme.
according to the fundamental principles accepted within the framework of the State Border River
Convention. The results of the analysis shalbe recarded, and evaluated on a regular basis.In case of
any unfavourable change inthe quality of waterthenecessary stepsshall be takenby mutuai agreement.
Considering the outstanding importance of environmental protection from the point ofview of society,
and with special regardto the protection of the quality water of theDanube, the ministers suggesthat
a special inter-governmental agreement be c~ncluded on the supposition that the construction of the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage will take place in cornpliance witthe Treaty concluded as well as with
the relevant inter-governmental agreements.
The suggested Treaty shall be fomulated on thebasis ofthe following principles:
- The Parties agree to carry out the monitoring and evaluatioof the qualityof water of the Danube in
the region affectedby the constructian of Gabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage in the way and to rhe extent
approved by the governrnent represeniatives responsiblefor thestate border river othe 7th-8thof April
1989as well asin accordance with the programme for the years 1990-1993.
- The competent organisations of the Contracting Parties'counuies shall detemine the desired valuesof
the different water quality index numbers on the basis of the results of joint observations for years
and detailed observations before the filling of the Wrusav-Dunakiliti reservoir 1989. These values
shall serveas a basisfor the evaluation of changes in the quality of water athey shalI be used as the
standard values inthe controI of operationofGabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage.
- The Contracting Panies agree that risk-frpeak energy production may only commence after the
constructionof installationnecessary for the protection of waterqualityThisprecondition has to be
taken into accountwhen deterrniningtheoperational mode of theGabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage
Systern.
- Inarder ta achieve this goal, the Parties agree uaoprogramfor the realisation of the necessary
waste water purification plants before the starapeak energy production.
Cornpliance with the programme agreed upon shall be checked eeeery yeat by the government
representatives responsible for the state barder riv.r-The Parties agree toinform the population on
changes in the ecoIogicalconditions,wirhparticular regar tdthe qualityof water.- A joint workingcornmitteeconsisting oexpertsof bothPartiesshallbe setup toprepare the draft
agreementby the endof June 1989.
This Reporthas been prepared intwo copies,in HungarianandSlovaklanguage,both copiesbeing
equallyauthentic.
Daied 8April1989
Budapest
illegiblesignatureiIlegiblesignature
MinisterofEnvir~nmentaM l inisterof Forestry,
ProtectionandWater WaterManagement and
Managementofthe WoodProcessing of the
Hungarian People's CzechoslovakSocialist
Republic Reputilic
(LAszM Mar6thy) (Eng. Vladimir Margetin) Annex 16
LETTERFROM MR PETER MEDGYESSY, HWGARIA DNEPUTYPRIME MI'NISTE RO,MR PAVEL HRIVNAK,
ÇZECHOSL~VAK DEPUTYPRIME MLNISTE 24,UNE1989
The Deputy PrimeMinisterof the Councilof
Ministersofthe HungarianPeople'sRepublic
Comrade PAVELl4UVNAK
DeputyPrimeMinisterof the
CzechoslovakSocialistRepublic
Prague
Budapest,24 June,1989
DearComradeHrîvnak,
TheHungarianAcademyof SciencesCHAS) hasstudiedtheenvironmerital,ecologicaland water quality
aswell as the seismological impactsof abandoningor irnplementingthe NagymarosBarrage of the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystern(GNBS).
The Ad Hoc Committee setup for this purposewas ledby a membeofthepresidencyof EMS. 1 am
enclosingthereportof theAd HocCommitteetotheHungarianandCzechoslovakscientific-professional
negotiationsas Hungariandocumentation.
Having studied the expected impacts of the constructionin accordancewith the original plan, the
Committeeof the Academy came to the conclusionthawe do not have adequate knowledgeof the
consequencesof environmentalrisks.
Initsopinion,thriskof constnictingtBarrageSysteminaccordancewiththe originalplancannotbe
consideredacceptable. Of course, it cannot be stated either that the adverse impactswill ensue for
certain, therefore,ordhg to their recommendation,furtherthoroandtime consurningstudiesare
necessary.
ReferringiciCornradesNémeth'sand Adamec's agreementand the workschedule we approved, 1
proposethe establishmentof and the beginningof workby the HungaandnCzechoslovakscientific-
professionalcornmittees.
1recornrnendthat thdiscussiononthe documentationof the Hungarian AcademyofSciencesshould
take place in twa workinggroups,which would discussthe hydrologandlecologicaasweil asthe
geologicaland seismologicalissues. The results of their workand their recommendationswould be
synthesizedby asummarizingcornmittee. 1 am inwoducingthe Hungarianmembers of the working
groupsintheannex..
1 think,it Is desirable that the Czechoslovakscientific-professionalworking groups also present
documentationto the Hungarianworking groups. 1 recornmendthat the working groupsbegin the
negotiationsçsoonas possible. Iwoulbeglad,ifthefirstthethi sok placeinBudapest.
1propose,furthemore, to review thefeasibility condofiArticle 15 of Treaty of 1977in inter-
govemmentalprofessionalworkin groups,taevaluatethe workperfomed so far,and to supplementor
torenegotiatethemeasuresto btakenifneedbe.Theseprofessimal negotiations shoucoverprimarilythfollowing:
The specificationof tasks to be perfomed concerningthe preventionof a decline in the water
qualityofthe Danubeandguarantees
- Detenniningthewaterqualitysimation
-
Specifiingthenecessatynetworkofa monitoringsystem
- Performinga suitabilitystudyon the planneddevetopmentof watertreatmentçystemsin
termçoftheirnetwork,capacityandleveloftreatrnent.
Determiningthe possible operatiol odes of theGabcikovo-NagymarasBarrageSystem,which
arefreefromenvironmentalrisksandmeetthe ecologicalrequjrements.
Completingthe waterreplenishment systemin Szigetk6zand reguIatingthe dischargein the Old
(Szigetktiz)Danube.
I recomrnendthat the professionalcornmitteesto be organizto discuss the aforementioned issues
shouldsrar teirworkafterJuly IO ,asedon themutuallyexchangeddocumentation. 1recomrnend that
thedeadlineforexchangingthis documentation should be Jy2attheIateçt.
1proposethat we shouldreviewthe resultof the scientific-professl egotiationsithefirst haIf of
July, whiIedoingthe samepersonallywittheresuItsof the worofthe inter-govemental professional
cornmitteesasit goeon.
Inmy view, ourrecommendedpersonalconsultationswillprovidetheopportunityto outlinethe direction
and scheduleofthefurtherHungarianandCzechoslovakstudiesandnegotiations.
1 am confidentthat baçedotherecommendedexchangeofthe documentation and the work programme,
we willestablishtheconditionsfarsuccessfulnegotiations.
WithComradelygreetings,
Dr. Medgyessy Péter
Annex:(1) The documentof the Ad Hoc Cornmitteeof the Hungarian Academyof Scienceson the
environmental, ecological and water qualiiy as well as seismoIogica1impacts of abandoning or
implementingtheNagymarosBarrageoftheGabcikovo-NagymaroB s maga System
(2) Background material: The professional summaryof the risk factorand ecological hazards
consideredby theCouncilofMinistersof the Hungarian Peoples epublic,whenmaking thedecisioto
suspendthe work relatedto theNagymarosBarrageoftheGabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrag eystem
Annex
Theproposedscientific-prof es siongrlupsandtheirHungarianmernbers.
The workinggroupsare supplementedby the representativofthe scienrificinstitutiothefMinistry
ofthe Environmentand WaterManagementandinvitedHungarianprofessionals. Annex 17
A IDEMEMOIR ME, ~G OFMR LASZLU ~DV AR[HUNG ARIANGOVERNME NT ENIPQTENT I ADRY,
MR. VLADIML IOKVENC C,ZECHOSLOV GAOVERNME PNLENTPOTENTIA RUY,APEST 2, JUNE1989
AIDEMEMOIRE
of the delivery at the Embassy of the Czechoslovak Socialisr Republic in Bu26pJuneo1989of
the letter written by the ~ke-Preofdthe Council of Ministers of the Peaple'sRepublic of Hungary to
the Vice-Fresident of the Governmentof the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic and the documents
comprisingthe appendices thereto and of the discussiinsrelation theabove.
The appendin hereto contains theofthe narnes of the participants.
Comrade Lhszl6 Udvari, referring to the "Aide Memoire" of the meeting held between the Czechoslovak
Plenipotentiary and the Hungarian Commissioner in Budape6tJune1989 and to the responsibilitits
acceptedby theHungarian Party during the same, delivered the letter written by the Vofethesident
Council of Ministers of fhe People'sRepubHungary addressed to Comrade Pave1Hrivnak, the Vice-
President of the Govemment othe CSFR,the documentationprepared bythe Hungarian Academy of
Sciences regarding the environmental/ecologic1~1/w andes-isnologtyal effectsof the
abandoning, as well as the completionofthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System's Nagymaros
Barrage, which,according to the contenof the letter, hproposes bedebated by the Hungarian-
Czechoslovak scientific/professional work-group and that pbepworked outon the basis of these
discussions.
The Hungarian Government Commissioner further deliverthedocument prepared bythework group
compiling and summarising ecotogical problems of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System which
contained the:risk factors and ecological dangers taken into consideration by the Council of Ministers of
the People'sRepubliofHungary when deciding io suspend woon the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage
System, and the bibliography of scientific and professional studies utilized during ofethempilation
said document, al1be usedasbackground mareria!for the proposed discussions.
The Hungarian Commissioner gave a briefinasto the proposals contüined in Deputy Prime Minister
Medgyessy'slener.
The Commissioner propusrd thattheproposalsbe debatedas soonas possibleineither thCSFR or
Hungary. Inthe name ofhis Government, he expressed confidence that on the ofsthe proposed
document transfer and work-programmwe can create the conditions fot successful negotiations.
The Plenipotentiary of the CSFR accepted the aforementioned lettwo documents andstatedthat
on 13 May 1984 the Hungarian Party had infomed the Czechoslovak Pofthe ternporary suspension
of works at Nagymaros. On 26 June 19119t,hat i44 days subsequent to the above, he gave us [sic]
those background materials used by the Hungarian Council of Ministhesbasis for its decision to
suspend the construction of rhe NagymBarragefor two month.
The CSFR'sPlenipotentiaryexpressedhis view that the Czechoslovak Govemment and the Federal
Parliament continues to stand by the completion of the provisions of the Interstate Treaty of P6
Septernber 1977.
Subsequent to the translation of thematerials debythe Commissionerof the People'sRepublic of
Hungary, the Czechoslovak Party wpreparits own proposals regarding further negotiations.
This present "Aide Mernoire" reminder was prepareboth the Hungarian andtheSlovak languages
and bothversionsareequally valid.
Budapest,26 June1989
[signature] [signature]
Dr. Liszl6Udvari Vladimir Lokvenc
Commissionerof the Plenipotentiary
Councilof MinisteroftheHPR of theÇSFRAppendix
ParticipansftheDiscussions
OntheHungarian Part:
Dr. Lhd6 Udvari Commissionerof thPRH, StateSecretaryotheMinistryof
Transportatiw,elecommunications
andConstruction
PalBeny6 DeputyChiefDepartmenH t eadat ForeignMinistryoftheHPR
the
On theCsechoslovakPart:
VladimirLokvenc. PlenipotentiyftheCSFR
Vlastimil ExtraordinaryndDulyAuthorid Ambassador ofthe
Ehrenberger CSFR
Ka01ujhAzy CounsellofortheEmbnssy
of thCSFR
MichalSlovak SecretaryoftheEmbassyof
theCSFR .
HelenaMuckova Employeeof the Comrnissionerf the
CSFR Annex 18
AIDEMEMOIR OENCONCULTATION OSFTHE SCIENTlFlEXPERTSINCONNECTION WITHTHE TEMPORARY
SUSPSENSIONOFWORKS ONTHE NAGYMARO BASRRAGE SGNEDBY MR.PL STEFhNOVICS,
HUNGARIA AND,MR. VLASTMIB LARUSB , UDAPEST 1,7-19JULV1989
AIDEMEMOIRE
on theHungarian-Csrechoslovaconsultations
of the scientificexpertsin connectionwiththe temporary
suspensionofworksonthe Nagymms Barrage
The consultationswereheldinBudapeston 17-19July 1989
List ofparticipantsappearsin appe1.ix
The workwascarriedout in threeexpertpups onthebasisof the standpointof the HungarianScientific
Academy deliveredon 26 June 1989. Acçordingto our previous mutual agreement the background
infornational materialhanded ouer on 26 June 1989 was not on the agenda of his meeting. The
Czechoslovakparty preparedits standpointfor discuandothis was deliverCOthe Hungarian party
on 14July 1489. The Resultsof group discussionsare attachedin appendixes2-4. Scientificexperts of
hth delegationscontinueddiscussionson the basisof theaforementionedmaterials.
WorkinggroupsdiscussedissuesconcerningpossiblriskfactorsAccordingtuthe Hungarianside these
shouldbe verifiedand supplementedrequiringwork lastingseveralyears. In contrCzechoslovak
party is of the opinion: thatal1riskrelatedproblemswere sothat theycoulbe correctedduring
the further continuousconstructionof the NagymarosBarrage. The Czechoslovakparty expressed its
wiIlingnessto cooperate,and thiswas well recebythe HungarianParty, which alsoprepared for
futurescientific andexpertconsultation.
This Aide Memoireis made in tw~copies,inthe Hungarianand Slovak language, bothcopies being
equallyauthentic.
StefanovitsPh1 VlastirnilBarns
the leaderof the theleaderof the Czechodovak
Hungarianscientifjc scientificworkinggmup
working group Annex 19
PROPoSAL OFTHECOUNCU .FMINISTE RFSTHEHUNGAR~A PEOPLE SEPUBLIC OF,FEREDBY
HUNGARIP ARNIMMEINISTE MRIKL~NSEMET HRIME MINISTE LADTSLA AVDAMEC B,UDAPEST,
20 JULY19S9
Before offering the proposal, I should like toernindthefollowing:
1)Our decision to suspend construction selattheoconstruction of the Nagymaros Barraandof the
technological facilities required for damming in the case of peak-flow. It atolthe Hungarian
reachesofthe Danube as a whole.
2)1should like to refer to the fact that it has ken proved without any invest-implementation
of the Gabcikovo Nagyrnaros Barrageproject of the scale and laiddown by the plan is exclusively
justified by an outwom energy generation concept- at the same time, al1 the ecological and other
(technical,agricultural, social) hazards are connected to the practices required for energy generation,
especially in the case of peak fl-the requirements stipulatedfor peak-floin the original treaty
have not been met on schedule andthe conditions of compliance with these requirinthe long run
are not assured eiîher.
When presenting our proposa1,wish tomake itclear that in our pofview, the decisive point is the
full complianceith the ecological requirements evenif Ourpresent interestscame into conflict with this
because we are aware of our responsibility for the people living now and in the theurightand
leftbankof the Danube, induding Hungarians, Slovaand, 1would Say,also Austrians, and also for the
stateofour capital.
Our starting point is that as long as the eçological problems have not been surmounted and, once
surmounted , a balance between nature, man and barrage has not been found, we cannot commit
ourselves to take any irreversible technical step however late our recognition is and however advanced
the construction worksare.
Accordingto OUTfir ntention to insontwhat has been saidabove, we have two alternative proposals
tooffer and, , to discuss with ysothat with knowledge of the conclusion of the discusswencan
offer anestablishepropasaltoOurParliament.
Our proposals arepresented below:
Alternativ1
The diversion of theDanube river-bed should not take place in October and, accordingly, thepreparacory
works should not be started in August this year either. We have to insist on this proposaanynder
circumstances prior to September when Parliament sits , leavingthe final decision to Parliament.
Whatwe suggest now is that the diversion of the Danube should not tnke place and construction of the
damming facilities in Czechoslovakia and Hungary as weas construction of the Nagymaros barrage
should not be continued for a penod of 3-5 years unless the complex ecologicaleffecthefentire
barrage systepi is knowas a result of a joint investigation and an ecologically optimum mode1of the
operation, including al1thenecessary assurancefor the protof waterquality from both a technical
and an operational poiofview, is found.
In our view, it would lxexpedietoinvite the aforementioned international institutionsandauthorities
for this investigat,owho couldCO-operatewith theCzechodovak and Hungarian scientists and while
we would reserve for ourselves the ritotdecide,we could arriveat a solution acceptabto both
parties.
1believe that we can makaresponsible decision upon thedestiny of the barrageonlyin the knowledge
of the results of this investigation. Inle, three different decisions are possible:1) Construction and operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage with al1 the necessary assurance
incorporated in the project.
2) Abandonment of the construction of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage.
3) With the construction of the Nagymaros Barrage omitted, development of an ecologically harmless
way of operation of the Gabcikovo Bat-rage.We are aware of the significant uncertainty inherentout
proposal as far athe future is concerned. However, as soon as the ecological effect isknown, there will
be certainty instead of uncertainty. Therefore, if science could offal1 the assurance requiredfor an
established decision withia year, it wouldbe expediencto jointly investigate our possibilitand limits
andthe thingstobe done, among them the possibilitof the diversionofthe river.
Alternative2
Inaccordance with the Czechoslovak standpoint, the Hungarian government is ready to compromise and
present a proposal to Parliament according ta which the barrage shall be constructed but with the
ecological reguirements fullymet by both parties in thecourse ofconstruction and in scheduling, and
with al1thenecessary assurance setout in an inter-governmental agreement andthen inthe amendment of
the T~eaty(which will mosl likely become necessary) tobe subrnittedto Parliament.
This proposa1 is also based on our belief that no irreversible technical steps cbe taken unless the
ecological problem has ken fully answered.
We recornrnend thai-the Danube diversion does not take place in Octoberthis year buta year later and
during the year sogained, thetechnical conditions of compliance with the water quality requiremenand
the programme of impIementation be jointiy workedout;-we undertake to set limits to peak-flow that is,
to keep the retained water level low for some pars (a stricter version of thibaseload operation).Al1
this considered,the entire project could be put into service yew later. Hence, the condition of the
continuation ofconstruction is-an amended Treaty based on acomprehensive programme of realisation
of the project, deterrnining the ecologicai requirements and providing athe necessary assurance, with
the construction suspendedfor a year.
(Fundamental condition for both alternatives)
Diversion of the Danube should not takeplacein October 1489
Alternative 1
Suspension of works on the diversion of the Danube as well as of the construction ofal1 the facilities
required for damming in both Czechoslovakia andHungary andof the Nagyrnaros barrage for3-5 years.
- Joint invitation bthe Parties of international scientific institutions, foreign scientific institutions and
experts to CO-operate with Hungarian and Czechoslovak scientific institutions and experts a) in
investigations to find the ecologically optimum mode1of operation of Gabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage as
a whole b) in the elaboration and implementationof the necessary assurance of protection othe quality
of water fr0m.a technical and operational point of view after 3-5 years, the following, theoretically
possible,alternative decisions cbe made:
1) Continuation of the construction of Gabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage with al1the necessary ecological
assurance
2) Surrender of the construction of Gabcikovo NagymarosBarrage: 3) With the Nagymaros barrage
omitted, development of ecologicaiiy harmless ways of operation ofthe Gabcikovo barrage.Alrernative
2Suspension of works on the diversion of the Danube for 1 year. Postponement of the putting into
service ofGabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage by 1 year. (Works in Hungary and Czechoslovakia delayed
.Construction of the Nagymaros barrage started 1 year later.- Joint invitation by the Parties ofinternational and foreign scientificinstitutions andexperts to co-operate with Hungarian and
Czechoslovakscientificinstitutioand experts
a) inelaboratioof al1thenecessaryassuran ofprotectionof thequalityof waterfroma technicaland
operationalpointof view and elaboratioof aprogramme forirnplementationb)Base loadoperationof
Gakikovo NagyrnarosBarrageor limitedpeak-flow forsome(3-5)years. Monitoringandanalysisona
scientifiçbasis.Amendrnenotf theTreatyinaccordancewiehparasa)-b). Annex 20
NOTE VERBALEFROM THEMINISTR OFFOREIG AFFAIRSOFTHE CZECHOSLOV SOACIALI S TPUBLIC
TOTHE PRAGUE EMBASS OFTHE HUNGARI PEOPLE5 REPUBLIC 1, AUGUST 1989
NOTEVERBALE
Il 1.261/89-1.
The Ministryof Foreign Affairthe Czechoslovak Socialt epublicpresentsits compliments
to the Prague Embassyof theHungari aeople'sRepublic andon behalf of the Govemmenof the
Czechoslovak Socialist Republic the honour to presentitspositionin conneçtionwiththe measures
takenby theGovemrnentof theHungarianPeople's Repubc~llowingthe2Mh ofJuly 1989.
The HungarianPart yot awaitingfor the positionof the Czechoslovak Partyçoncerningthe 20
July 1989 propositionhastaken steps for zheircompletion. This appliesespecially to the decision
concerning the non-closef theoldDanubesection whichshoulbecompletedinOctober1989 onthe
Gakikovo sectionby theHungaria Pnrty accorditothemutualscheduleof work.
%
The Federal Ministryof Foreign Affairs of the Czechoslovak SocialistRepubliç considers it
importanttoemphasise thatheCzechoslovakPartyhasalwaysunderstoodthe 13May 1989decisionof
the Governmentof the HungarianPeople'sRepublic concerthe two-monthstemporarysuspensioof
the HungarianParty'sworkas pertainingonlyto the NagymarosDam. This viewhas been confirmedby
theHungarian Partyduringal1negotiationscarriedon sofar.
TheGovemmentof the Czechoslovak Socialist Repubiidnotchange its 1May 1989position
and willonfom totheTreatyinthefutureas well.
The 29 July 1989 decisionof the Governmentof the HungarianPeople'sRepublicrepresants
significantchangein the intentionsofthe HungarianGovemmentannouncedsofa.
Thisnewdecisionofthe Hungarian Party:
1. Similarlytothe 13May 1989decision, thisdecisionis notsupportedby the documentsconcluded
by agreementconcemingthe constnictionof the NagymarosBarrage and therefore the consequences
thereofbnng aboutthe unilateral violationoftheinternationallegalobligationsby the HungarianPeople's
Republic.
2. The consequenceisthat significantfurther damageis catoethe Czechoslovak Party which
mustbe compensatedby theHungari aeople's Republinaccordance with generailnternationallaw,
3. Thisdecisionisunilateral, made wittegatiationswiththeCzechoslovaPartandit doesnot
correspond toArt 27 of theTreaty conceming the constructioand operation of the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrageSystem.
4. Thisdecision interfewiththe consmction of theGabcikovoBarrageto a largeextentand thus
fundamentallyendangersthewholeideaandconstnictionoftheGakikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem.
5. This decisionraisesdoubtsconcemingthe reliabilitheHungarianParty in connectionwizh
thenegotiations concernthebarrage.
Takinginta considerationthe abovernentionedcauses andfactsandrefemng to the international
documents concludedby agreementconcerningthe constnictionof the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage
System and to the generally acceptenoms of international lawconceming the international
responsibiliofstatesinconnectionwiththeviolationofthe internationalobligationsthe Governmentof
the Czechoslovak Smialist Republic is aggregating the extent of dmage already cautodthe
Czechoslovak Socialist Repubcy the course of actiontakenby the HungarianParty and enforcesits
compensation.
At thesametimetheGovemment of the Czechoslovak Socialist Repueservestherighto becompensated forthat damagethat willbecaused inthe futureas a consequenceofthe unilateraldecisions
of theHungarian People's Republic.
The Govemmentof the Czechoslovak Socialist Republicemphasisesthat the responsibilityfor the
consequences of the unilateral decisionsof the Governmentof the Hungarian People'sRepublic is
exclusively takenby the HungarianPeople'sRepublic. It meansunder no circumstancesthe repudiation
ofthejoint nskresultingfromthe constructionnor thejoint responsibilitiesofthe two States.
The Govemment of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic asks the authoritiesofthe Hungarian
party to takt measures whiçhwould allow for the completionof aIl obligations set forth inthe Treaty
concerning the consmçtion and operationof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem to thedeadlines
esiablished.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republicavails itself OF this
apportunity ta renew tothe Prague Ernbassy of the Hungarian People'sRepublic the assurances of its
highestconsideration.
18August 1989, Prague Annex 21 .
MlNUTESOFTHE MEETINGBETWEENTHE HUNGARIA MNINISTR FYR TNDUSTRY AND THE
C~CHOSZOVAK MINISTR OFFUEL AND ENERGY SIGNED BY MR. TLBOR LACZA SZAB~ AND MR.
MATUR AARQSLA V122 AUGUST 1989
AIDEMEMOIRE
on the meetin gf the WR's Industrial Ministry antheCSER's Fuel and Energy Ministry hetdin
Budapest on 21-22 August 1989,with Gyula Czipper Industrial Deputy Minister onside, andwith
Ladislav Blazek Deputy Minister Fueland Energy on the other sasCO-chairmen;and
on the discussions held o23 August 1989 at the Ministtyof Transport, Telecommunication, and
Construction under the leadershiof Dr. L5szl6 Udvasi, Gavernment Commissioner and Vladimir
Lorenc,Plenipotentiary othequestionof energy.
Aim of discussionThe exchanged views on energy questio-related tthechange in the Govemment
the construction and operatoftheGabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage System.
The lisof participants appears in appendix No.1
During discussions the parties laid down the following:
1,The values ofelectric-energy production and of the built-in performance over a year with average
water flow(1838),agreedupon inthe Joint Contractual Planthefollowing:
al Inthe case ofthe implementatioof Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System according totheJoint
Contractual Plan
Gabcikovo Nagymaros Total
Built-in performance 720 158, 878
x) the joint performaofwater turbines to be supplied by the Austrians is higher
Electric-energy Gabcikovo Nagymaros Total
production(GWh)
basiclevel plant
operation Peak 2980
Capacity 2650 1025 3615
b/ In the caofthe abandonment of the Nagymaros barrage:
Gabcikovo Nagy maros Total
Built iperformance
(MW) 720
Electric Energy
production (GWh) 2980xx
xx) The valueof electnc-energyproduction might be modifiedbecause ofthe change in hydraulic
conditions foilowing the abandonmof Nagymaros.The Czechoslovakpartyannounced:
1) Ttwill persist in the implementationof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systernaccordingto the
JointContractualPlan,inboh a physicalaspectandalsoaccording to thetirne-schedule.
2) Itdemanch,forthwith the continuationof workson the closinof the DanuWsriverbedand that the
fulfilmentofthe head-racecanalbe ensured;thisking a preconditionto the successfulcommencement
of theoperationofGabcikovo'sfirstmachineuniton 1 July1990.
3) Otherwise,the CzechoslovakParty will undertakerneasuresthat will ensure the operation of the
GabcikovoHydroelecü-ic FowerPlant.
4) In thecase of a unilateral suspensiof works (evenfor one year), the Czechoslovakparty would
suffer damageto the valueof 1.953,l millionUSD because ofthe blockingof assets. Aninçrease in
damagewouldfollowif the completionofconstniciionand commencemeno t f operatiwere postponed.
The Czechoslovak partyrequests,in thedeterminationof damages,that electricenergbe fully supplied
on the basisof the newdivsionof the hydro-energypotentialabovethe agreedframework(accordingto
the investmentshare).
5) Requestsanelectric-energysupplyonthebasisoftheJointContractua1Plan,evenif constructionwere
posrponed,or dteredand if changeswilhregard to operation were ttoakeplace.
6) In the case of the abandonmentof the Nagymaros Barrage, the divisioo nf the utilisation of the
Danube'shydro-energy potential woulbde changedas wel1astheinveshnentshare.
Hence, theshareofbenefitsshouldalso be modifiedbetweentheHungarîamandtheCzechoslovakParty.
TheMungarîanparta ynnounce that:
It has notreceivedthosematerialsthat wouldbe necessaryin ordertview the Czechoslovakopinionas
well founded. For instance: legal negotiationshave to clarify whose fault hasled to the eventual
&mages; withoutsuchnegotiationsno statementon the showing of damages may be accepted; the
amount of damage announced in connectionwith theone delay in commencementof operation is
unfounded. (According tothe Hungarianparty'sprelirninarycalculationsthe amountquoted in the
Czechoslovak opinion is excessive);Ir is not known,what technicalrneasuresthe Czechoslovakparty
intendsto takeinorder to stathe operationof the Gabcikovobarrageinthecase ofa delayin workson
closure of the Danuberiverbed,whichare necessaryfor commencementof operations,and it is also
questionable.Itisnotknown howthat measurecouldcomplywithrequirementsofinternationallaw..
To handletheCzechoslovak announcemen 'itnmerito',the Hungarianpartyneedsadequateanswerson the
abovementioned questions.
This Aide Memoirewaspreparedwiththe samecontentintheHungarianandSlovakIanguagesby:
OnHungarianside: OnCzechoslovakside:
LaczaiSzabSTibor MaturaJaroslav .
seniorcounsellor DeputyHeadofDeparnent
in theIndusuialMinistry intheMinisüyfor Fuel and
Energy Annex 22
MlNUTESOF THEMEETING OFTHECOMMIT~E OF EXPERTSINTHEMATER OF THEGABCIKOVO-
NAGYMARB OSRRAG SYSTEM B, DAPES2T,-23AUGUS T989
MINUTES
l
of the meetingtheCornmitteeof Expertsthesubjectof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem
in Budapestbetween21-23 August 1989,chairedby the HungarianPlenipotentaryand the Czechoslovak
Plenipotentiary.
1 Thelisof the namesofthe participantsisappendedhercuntoas Appendii 1.
The leadersoIhecarnittee of expertsagred uponthe discussionofthe followingquestions:
1
1 1. Generalquestions.
1 2. The preparationofoperativemeasuresmadenecessarybnewesituation.
1 3. Consultationofnavigationexperts.
4. Consultationof theenergyexpetts'workgcoup.
5. Otherquestions.
Section1. GeneralQuestions
Tcday'smeetingbythe expertsrelatesto thepreviousdiscussions,whichwere 3August 1989.
The discussions wereagrdupon prior to the forwarciitheMemorandum of the CSFR on 18
August 1989,therefothediscussionsdo not dealwiththe subjectofthe said Memorandum.
The Hungarip arty detemines that theCzechoslovakdidnot appraiseproposalssubmittedduring
thecourse of themeeting of the CzechoslandHungarianPnme Ministers at a Prime Ministerial
level. Neithwere the four outlines presented thecourse of the persona1consuItationheld by
engineer VladimirLokvenc,PlenipotentiandDr. Laszl6Udvari,Plenipotentary,in Bratislavaon 3
August, 1989appraisebytheCzcchoslavakparty.
The Czechoslovakpartydeclaredthat it wouldappraisethe Hungarianproposalsand that thesewould be
thesubject ofjoint discussions,consequentonigiventhefundamentaldatakforehand.
The Hungarianparty has receivedinformationthat the Czechoslovakpartyhas studiedtechnical counter
measures to the suspension of the relocofthe river-bedat Dunakiliti and the posnon-e
constructionofthe NagymarBarrage.
The Czechoslovakparty has given information to the effectplannersare studying technical
possibilities for redthenlosses resulting from the non-utiofsthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Barrage System.
The partieshallreturn to the aforementionedquestiontheconsultatitobe helby the Aime
MinistersofthCSFR andtheHvngarianPeople'sRepublatthelatest. AIDEMEMOIRE
of the discussionsheIby thedelegatioriof the Ministryof Industryof the HungarPeople'sRepublic
and the MinistryofFuel andEnergy of theCSFR in Budapeston August21-22, 1989,chaired by Gyula
Czipper,Deputy MinisterforIndustryand LadislavBlazek,Deputy Ministerfor Fuel and Energy of the
CSFR;
within the framewark of the discussionsheldon August 23, 1989in the Ministry of Transportation,
Communications, and Construction,chaired by Dr. Laszl~ Udvari, Commissioner and Vladimir
Lokvenc,Plenipotentiary,regardingthe questionof energy.
The purpose af the discussions: the parties exchanged opinions othe energy questions related to
changes tothe constructionandoperatioofthe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem.
The list othenamesof the participantsis to be foundappendedhereuntoas Appendix 1.
Duringthecourseofthe discussions, the partiesdetenninthefollowing:
f. The valuesreIatedtothe productionofelectricalenergand thebuilt inperformancein theyearof
average flow(1938)astakeninto considerationinthe JointCon~actualPlanare asfollows:
a.) In the eventof the constructionof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systernaccording to the
JointContractualPlan:
Gakikovo Nagyrnaros Total
BuiltrInPerformance
(MW) 720
Energy Production(GWh)
- DuringBasic Operation 2980 1040 4020
- DuringPeakOperation 2650 1025 3675
b.) In the eventofthe abandonmentofthe NagymarosBarrage
Built-inPerformance (MW
720
Electncal Energy
Production 2980**
* Thetotalperformanceof theturbinestobe suppliedbytheAustriansishigher.
**
The value attributedfor electricalenergy production rnaychanas aresult of changes in the
hydraulicconditionsiftheNagyrnarosBarrage isabandoned.The Czechoslovak Party declared that:
1. It would continue to insist on the construction of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage in
accordance with the Joint ContractuaIPlan,in both subject and tirne.
2. It demands that work on the closure of the Danuk's river-bed continue and that the filling the
upper water canal be guaranteed, this king a prerequisite condition for the commencement of operation
of thefirstunitof machinery at Gabcikovoon 1July , 1990.
3. Otherwise, the Czechoslovak party willundertake measures that wil1ensure the operation of the
Gabcikovo Hydro-electril:Power Plant.
4. In the event of a unilateral cessation of work (even if only for one year) the dedication of
resources will cause damages of US$1,953.1 million, which would further increase if the datefor the
completion andthe commencement of operations of the hydro-electric power plant are further delayed.
In the determination of the said damages, the Czechoslovak party requests that the total amount of
electrical energy delivered be divided upon the basisof the new hydra-electric energy potential and
above the previous limits (according to resources invested.)
5. It requests that the arnount of electrical energy determined in the Joint Contractual Plan be
provided even inthe event ofa delay or modification in that constructionaochange in operations .
6. In the event of the abandonment ofthe Nagymaros Barrage, the division of the utilisation of the
hydro-electric energy potential of the Danube changes, as does the division of invested equipment
resources.
Ttfollows from the above that the division oprofitbetween the Hungarian and Czechoslovak parties is
to be amended aswell.
The Hungarian party declared that it had not received ihose materials which areabsolutely necessary if
the opinion of the Czechoslovak party isto have any foundation. Thus, for exarnple,the question of to
whom responsibility for any damages are to attributed muscbedecided via legal procedures.Without the
aforementioned, the declaration regarding division of damages cannot be accepted. The amount of
damages declared by the Czechoslovak party in the event of aone year delay in theplant'soperation has
not been determined (according to the prelirninary calcularions ofthe Hungarian party, the amount
quoted in the Czechoslovak opinion is incorrect byorders of magnitude.) It is not known whattype of
technical measures the Czechoslovak party wishes to utilise to initiare operationof the Gabçikovo
Barrage if there ia delay in the relocationofthe river-bed, (necessary to commence operations of the
Gabcikovo Barrage) and how these measures may be broughtinto harmony with international law. The
Hungarian party can anly deal with the declarations madeby the Czechoslovak party if the Czechoslovak
party givesproper answers toquestians such asthe above.
This present "Aide Mernaire" has been çompiled inthe Hungarian and Slovak languages, the textof both
king identical.
From the Hungarian part: From the Czechoslovak part:
Tibor Laczai Szab6 MatiiraJaroslav
Chief Counsel to the Deputy Department Chief
HPR's Ministry of Industry attheCSFR's Ministry of
Eue1and Energy Annex 23
LET~ER EROM MR. LADISLAV ADAMEC C,ZECHOSLA VRIK EMINISTER ,O MR. MIKL~S NEMETH,
HUNGARIA PNRIMEMINISTER 31 AUGUST 1989
Prague,31August 1989
CornradePrime Minister!
During our last joint discussions in Budapest on 20 JuIy 1989, yau made same recornrnendations
regarding the further stepsbeotaken in the matter of the construction of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
BarrageSystern. The common threadin al1the variants included in your recommendationisthat the
construction according to the vatreatydocuments of ejthethe whole of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
BarrageSystem or one parof it (theNagymaroshydroelectric planisto be aborted.
FolIawing an examination of an sides of al! the variants included in your recommendatiby the
responsible Czechoslovak authorities, bydscjentific, technical, econornicand other insti1uamons,
forced to repealhat the Government of the Czechoslovak SociaIist Republic continues to insist that
consWuctionof theGabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systemproceeds as per the Treaty Regarding the
Construction andOperation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systemconcluded between the Czech
and Slovak Federal Repiblic and the Hungarian People'sRepublic on 16 September 1977 and other
related treaty documents.
After çomplex consideration of the entire problewe have come to the conclusion that all alleged
fundamental risks whichyouhave raised were taken into consideration priorto the commencement of the
constructionof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System, as weIl as during the course thereof.
Discussions held by Czechoslovak and Hungarian scientists, and technical, economic and other experts
subsequent to the Hungarian Government'ssuspension of work on the NagymarosBarrage did not resulr
in the finding of any arguments which might justifythe suspension of construction on the Barrage
System asIaiddown in the original treaty documeorthe amendment of the conception thereof.
In the event that the Hungarian People'sRepublic, conaary to its international legal obligations , decides,
unilaterally, withothe agreement of the Czech and Slovak Federal RepubIicto realizeone of the
variantswhich you have suggested,theCzech and Slovak Federal Republic will suffdamages in the
range of thousand millions concerning equipment aIready invested, energy, shipping agriculture and
forestry. This would distu~bthe actions taken undethe Czech and Slovak Federal Republic water
management plan on a significant part of its territothus,the plans for development of towns and
villages located in the reg.oThe Czechoslovak Socialist Republic will claim compensation for the
resultingdnmages. In connection with thitheCzechoslovak Socialist Republic wibe forced to take
suchactions on the sovereign territory of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic which will ensure the
amount ofwater guaranteed fotheGabcikovo Barrage according totheTreaty of 16 September 1977.
The steps taken by the Czechoslovak Partywould be only temporary as the Czech andSlovak Federal
Repibtic continuesto remain ready to complete construction of the Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaros Barrage
System on basis of the aforementioned Treaty, on the condition that the Hungarian People'sRepublic
expresses her readineto do the same and reirnburses the Czechoslovak Socialist Republicfor damages
incurredasa resultof the uniawfulactsofthe Hungarian People's Republic.
With Comradely greetings,
Ladislav Adamecsk.
TheHonorable
Comrade Mikl6sNkmeth
President ofthe Councilof Ministersof the
Hungarian People's Republic
BUDAPEST. Annex 24
NOTEVERBAL FEOM THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGA NFFAIR OSFTHE HUNGARIA LES REPUBLI TO THE
EMBASSY OFTHE CZECHOSLOV SOAKIALIR STEPUBLI C ,EPTEMBH R989
NOTEVERBALE
663-31/89.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Hungarian People's Republic presents its compliments to
the Ernbassyof the Czechoslovak Smialist RepuMic and has the honour to hereby inform ir thathas
receivedNoreVerbale No. 111,261189 1-.dated 18August 1989 of the Ministry of Foreign Affaiof
the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic adûressed to the Embassy of the Hungarian People's Republin
Prague.
The contents of theNole Verbale have beençarefully studiedby the relevant authoritiof the
Hungarian People's Republic and they have deemeditnecessary once again to sumrnarise the facts and
results of the meeting between thHeads ofGovernment of the two countries held on20 July 1989 in
Budapest concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Dam System and to state their opinion concerning the
question of thdam as follows
1. The Hungarian Party reported on the prolongatioof the suspension of work in Hungary
relatedtothe Nagymaros dam andbarrage technology until fro31July to31 Oetober 1989.
2. The Hungarian Party announced that, during the suspension period, further investigaofons
the ecologicalrisksentailedby the project shall take place and that during this pnoioirreversible
technical measures shalbetaken. This ithe reasonwhy preparatorywork conducted on the territoof
Hungary and related ta therelocation of the Danube'bed at the Dunakiliti weir plant waalsoto be
induded in the rangeofactivitietobe suspended.
3. The Hungarian Party presented two versions of its proposa1concerning the joint investigation
of the feasibility of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Dam System and invited the Czechoslovak Governrnent
tomake an assessrnent of the propoand to hold joint discussions on the matter.
The subrnitted version of the proposal suggestthatjoint investigations be conducted ovea
period of either3-5 years or in the alternative versio1 year, and the working out of ecological
guarantees and an optimal system of operations. The Hungarian Party also proposed thazinternational
scientific organisatibesinvoked in thesaidjoint scientific work.
4. The Government of theHungarian People'sRepublic, having assessed what wassaid at the
negotiations of 20 July1989, arrivedat the conclusion shat the CzechoslovaPartydoesnot think it
necessary to modify the contents of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Agreementorthe construction schedule.
Itdid however acknowledge the extension of the suspension and made no objection specifically to the
suspension of the preparatory operations forosure of the Danube at Dunakiliti, asking Hungarian
proposals conceming further construction wortobe carried out on the dam system to be handed over to
the Czechostovak Party in writing. The Czechoslovak Party assured the Hungarian Party that the
Czechoslovak Govemrnent would assess these proposals.
On the basis of the above thMinistry of Foreign Affairs othe Hungarian People's Republic
wishes tostressthe following: TheHungarianPartydid not causetheCzechoslovak Party to corne to the
conclusion that the Governrnent of the Hungarian People's Repubtic had taken unilateral measui-es
concemingthe suspension of the construction of the Gabcikovo-NagymaroDam System.
The CzechasIavakParty received the Hungarian proposalreferreta in Pain3. above in writing
as earlyas 20 July 1989, that iat the timeof the meeting between the Heads of the Hungarian and
Czechoslovak Governments, which proposals were later repeated by the Hungarian Govemmenr
Cornmissioner in charge of the consîruction of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Dam System, who, on 3August 1989 in Bratislava, handedover an edited version of the said proposals with a clear scherne
attached,and açcompaniedby anexhaustive oral explanation, to the CzechoslovakParty.
The Hungarian Party must declare with regret that, up to the present day- 40 days later -the
Hungarian proposalshave stillnat beenassessedby the:CzechoslovakParty.
The Governmentof the Hungarian People's Republic hereby wishesto direct the attention of the
Government of the Czech Republic to the fact that according io its assessrnent, Hungary, and
Czechoslovakiaalso, are in a state of necessity. Actsof the two Govemrnents have to be assessed
accordingly. The HungarianParty findsno explanationfot the rigid denial of negotiationson ecologica1
guaranteesand optimalmodeof operation.
The Czechoslovak Partyis not evenwillingto negotiateaboutquestionswhich wouldbring about
any amendment in the [1977] Treaty on the construction and operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaros
Barrage System, not even then, when science mises fundamental doubtsconcerning the ecologicaE
harmlessness of the Barrage System. The Hungarian Party neverthelesshopes that the Czec,hoslovak
Partywill finally adopta responsible attitude andtake an active part in finding a solution acceptatoe
both sides.
The HungarianParty accordingto the basis to the basicprinciplesof the [1977] Treaty proceeds
from the fat that the profit and the possiblemalerial loss, the risksof intervening in nature and the
prevention thereofor the burdensof avertingit arecommon. Thereforethe Hungarian Party does not see
any basis to the determinationof Czechoslovak demandsfor compensation without negotiations in the
present periodof suspension.
The suspensionof preparatoryoperationsfor the closure of the Danubebed atDunakiliti by the
Hungarian Party in itself neither interferes withe realisation of the conception of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Bamage System nor with the consti.uctionof the Gabcikovo Barrage. The suspension
unquestionablydelays the commencementof operation of the Firsthydro-electricgeneratorsbut it must
be taken into consideration that this periodof suspensionis the last possibiIityfor the two Parties to
confront thoroughlyand for al1times the joint work with the requirernentsof environmentalprotection
andto this end toweighup al1the circums~ances verycarefully.
The Government ofthe HungarianPeople'sRepublicfirmlyrejectsthe statementcontainedin the
Nore Verbale of the Czechoslovak SocialistRepubIicdated 18 August 1989 according to whichsteps
hken by the Hungarian Party put into questionits reliabilityin respoftnegotiatiansconducted on the
subject of the damsystem.
Such a groundless assertionmust cause the Hungarian Government to question whetheirt can
expect appropriateCO-operation hm the CzechoslovakPartyinthe settlementof such future problems as
may occasionallyariseinthecourseoftheexecufion ofthejoint project.
During the expert negotiationsled by thePlenipotentiariesofthe to Governmenis Erom 21 to 23
August 1989in Budapestthe Hungarian Partyasked to be infonned about the content of that cechnical
counter-measure, which according to Our information the Czechoslovak Party is contemplating in
connectionwith the suspensionof the preparatorywork related to therelocationof the Danube' sed at
Dunakiliti.
In the light of the information received from îhe Czechoslovak Party on the subject, the
Government ofthe HungarianPeople'sRepublic wishes to directtheattentionof the Governmentof the
CzechoslovakSaciaiistRepublictothe factthat,holdsucha CzechosIovakmeasureindeedbe taken,that
wodd be regardedby the HungarianPartyas a materialbreachof the 26 September 199,77 Tseaty. Such
a breach of the Treaty would lead to serious international legalconflictfor which the Czechoslovak
So~ialistRepublicwouldbe solelyresponsible. The CzechoslovakSocialistRepublic wouldaIsohave to
assume sole responsibiljtyfor any ecologicalthreat to Hungary'stersitorieswhich may aise from their
actions,as wellas theexpecteddeteriorationin navigation conditionsontheDanube. The Govemment of theHungarian People's Republic hereby once more invites theCzechoslovak
Govemment togive serious consideration to Hungarian proposals made inwriting on 20 July 1989 in
Budapest, and repeated on 3August thesame year,and urges the Czechoslovak Govemment to respond
without delay to the said proposals on the rneritThe Hungarian Party proposes thatthe planned next
meeting between the Headsof the two Govemments be preceded by expert meetings and then a
consultation between the Deputy Prime Ministers of thetwo countrje~, The obligation of the two
Governments to clarify this cornplex problem to theirnations, and their responsibility to future
generations, now demands of the two Governments a full and appropriate reconciliatiof their mutual
and individual interests,
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Hungarian People's Republic avails itself of this
opportunity to renew totheEmbassy of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic the assurances of its highest
consideration and requests that the above be irnrnediately communicated to the Czechoslovak
Government.
Budapest, 1 September 1989
To the Embassy of the Czechoslovak
Smialist Republic
Budapest Annex 25
AIDE MEMOE RETKE MEETlNGBETWEEN MR. P~?TERMEDGYESS HY,NGARIA VNICE-PRESID OFTTE
CQWCLLOF MINISTER AS, MR.PAVEL HRIVNAK CZECHOSLOV DAKPUTYPRIME MINISTER,
BRATISLAV 9A,EFTEMBE 1989
Vice-President of the Councilof Ministers NPR, Pdter Medgyessy, and Vice-fiesident of the
Govemmentof CSFR,PavelH~vnakconducted negotiations in Bratislava,on 9 Septernber1989on the
furthercourseof theconstructionof Gabcikovo-NagymWaterBarrageSystern.
Thenarnesofotherparticipantsinthe negotiationsappearsinAnNo. 1.
Mainpurposesofthenegotiations:
-statementof thviewsof the parties,
-preparationof themeetingofthehime Ministers.
The parties mutuallyinfarmed one anolherof their views. The view of the Czechoslovakpartyis
includedinAnnexNo. 2, whiletheviewof the HungariaPartisinAnnexNo. 3.
Theyagreedasfollows:
1. Theplenipotentiariesshallens:re
a)thatexpertsofinternationallaw ofttwo partimeet before20 September1989, for thepurposeof
the interpetaion of the 1977Interstate Treaty,and the relevantdocuments,from the point of viewof
implementation.
b) rhat a scientistsof the two parties wilI take plactheend of September 1989 in order to
investigateany ecologicalproblemsraisedby theHungaripnrtyresultingfrom the filling uthef
Hmsovo-Dunakilitireservoir.
2. ThepartiesconsidethemeetingofthePrime Ministersofthtwocountriesnecessarypriorta passing
my decisiononthefurtherprogressof the constructionof Gabcikovo-NagyWaterBarrage System
bythe Parliamentsof thetwocountnes.
Made in Bratislava, o9 Septernber 1989, in 2 original copies in the HungariathenSlovak
Ianguages.BothtextsareequaIlyauthentic.
Annexes: 3
PéterMedgyessy Pave1Hrivnak
Vice-Presiedentofthe VicePresidentaf
CouncilofMinisters of theHPR theGovemment of CSFR
Annex3
View ofthe HungarianParty:
TheHungarianpaiy regretfullystatedbat the "inmerito"negotiattheHurtgariaproposaisairning
at the performanofthethreetofiveyear,andlorone yearjoint investigat,s weIlas theecological
guaranteesand tlleelaborationtheoptimalsystemof operationonly took placein an indirect way,
withinthe frarnewarkof the reasoningof the CzechosIovakproposal.The Hungarianpa~tyinttoded
establistheprovisionalconditionsfortheelaboraaadnimplementationofthemeasureswhichwouId
rninimizeecologicalriskas well ato provide opportunityfor necessarytechnical interventions,
anaor correctionby the suspensionofthe preparationof the Dunakilitiwaterbedrelocationwork. Icisnot able to make any modification in the suspension of the preparation of the Dunakiliti waterbed
relocation More 31 October. Afterthat date, the decision of the government and the Parliament shall be
the goveniing one.
It was emphasized that the Hungarian party isstill guided by the intention to give effect to ecological
requirements. It asks that the Czechoslovak governrnent shall repeatedly think over the proposals of the
Hungarian government.
The Hungatian party did notviolatethe Treaty and [other] agreements between the two countries by the
suspension of the work, thus it reputes the statement of the CzechosEovaparty that it will be forced to
adopt a supplementary technical solution. This solution violates international law, and, in al1probability,
will resulin an ecological ernergency, primarily in Szigetkoz. It dratheattentionof the Czechoslovak
party tothe factthat nounilateral measures shalbe taken in respect of international frontier rivers which
would change the water status quo. The planned Czechoslovak step would violate theprovisions of the
Paris Peace Treaty of 1447,as well as the Agreementon theFrontier River signed inPrague, in 1976.
The Hungarian party does not acknowledge the announcement conceming theCzechoslovak requirement
for damages, as its present decision of suspension pertains to the minimisationof the ecologicalrisks
affecting both countries of the joint project, as well as the attempt to avaid a shared danger. It
ernphasises that al1profits. aany material losses of thejoinproject, aswell as the risks of intervention
in nature,the prevention, mdlor burdens are shared, and the enforcement of the ecological requirements,
as well asthe CO-ordinationof the reductioof material lossesareaIsojoint tasks.
The Hungarian Party requests the continuous transfer of the technical, ecological, shippiand water
energy utilisation documents conceming the diversion of the water of the Danube on the territory of
Czechoslovakia, which has ken planned asa supplementary measure.
Annex No, 2
View of the Czechoslovak party:
The principal view of the governrnent of CSFR iscontained in the letters of the Federal Ministry of
Foreign dffairs of CSFR on 18 August 1989,and that of the President of the gavernment of tCSFRon
31 August. ln connection with that, we repeatedly propose that the Hungarian party continue the
construction of the Gabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage System, particularly the reloçationof the waterbed of
the Danube at Dunakiliti, in hmony with the Treaty and the relevant documents.
Tfthe Hungarian party is prevented from that for any reasons of capacity, technical or other
organisational reasons, the Czechoslovak partyisready toimplement the reloeation of the Danubeby its
own means, at the cost of the Hungarian party,so that rhe agreement on mutua1help inconnection with
the construction of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System would be supplemented accordingly.
If the Hungarian party refuses to acceptthe above proposals, and continues ta violate the valid Treaty
unilaterally,we willbe forced to adopt a supplementary transitions and temporary technical solution on
the territory of thCSFR which would aIlow theputting into partial operatioof the Gabcikovo Warer
Barrage System. We intend to implement the above variant in order to minimise the losses of the
Czechoslovak party caused by the action of Hungasian People'sRepublic. This solution serves the
interestsof both countries. It would partiallymake it possiblfor Czechoslovakia to utilise the assets
invested into the project, anwould reduce the amount ofdarnages to be paid by theHungarian party to
the Czechoslovak party.
The &ove solutionprovides the supplyof theMosan branch of the Danube andthe old Danube waterbed
with an appropriate quantity of water in accordancwiththe documents perraining tothe consiruction of
the Gabcikûvo-Nagymatos BarrageSystem, and, simultaneously,providesfor navigation. Ii is only a
provisionalsolutjon, and the CSFR isstill readytocomplete the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systern
in accordance with the Treaty of1977, underthe condition that the Republicof Hungary shows the samewillingness,and will cornpensatethedamage caused toCzechoslovakia by the unilateralviolationof the
Treaty.
The Czechoslovak experts of international lawdid not find any cause justifiedby law which
would prevent Czechoslovakiafrom implementing the above-rnentionedsupplementarytechnical
solution.
We arereadyto receivethe Hungarian expertsof internationa aw in orderto discussthe legal
aspectsofthestepstakenby theCzechoslovak parry. Annex 26
AIDEMEMOIR OFTHE MEETINGBETWEENSCIENTISTS TO DISCUSSWATER QUALITYANDECOLOGY
RELATED TO THE HRUSOVO-DUNAK RELITRVOIR ,5-27 SEITEMBE 198'3
AIDEMEMOIRE
on the negotiations of the Hungarian and Czechoslovak expert scientists othewater quality and
ecological issuesof the Dunakiliti-Hmsov Reservoir
The negotiation was heldon 2- 27 September 1989in Bratislava. The Hungarian delegatiwas
led by Arp&dBerçzik,Academician, and the Czechoslovak delegation was led by Ludovit Weismann,
Academician. The list of the members thedelegation areIistin Annex 1.
The meeting took place followingan agreement betwetn Mr. Péter Medgyessy,Vice-President of
the Council of Ministers of the Hungarian People's Republic (HPR), and Mr. Pave1 Hrivnak, Vice-
President of the Council of Ministers of the Government of the Czechoslovak Sacialist Republic (CSFR)
on 9 September 1989. In the negotiation,the following four ropics were discussed:
(1) Trends in water quality inthe Dunakiliti-Hrusov Reservoir
(2) Theimpacts of the expectedchanges in water quality in the Resewoir on the downstream
reaches of the Danube
(3) The water quality and ecological issuesin the Old Danube and itsbranch systems
(4) The endangered state of tsubsurface water resources in the Kisalfold
During the discussion oeach question in detail, the experts reached commonpositions in somthef
problems asfollows:
(1 TheParties evaluated theresearçh results obtsonfar, whichfom the sçientific basis for
resolving the controversial problems anda methodological starting point,
(2) Theresidence time ofthe water in the Reservoir kilone to two days andcould be as manas
threedays in certain locations. Asa resuli, the amount of fitoplanktons algae in open waters will
increase.
The qudity of underground watersmust by al1conditibespreserved for the provision of
(3)
drinkingwaterto thpublic.
Al1necessarystepsmust betaken in order to preventprejudtothe self-purifying capacity of the
(4)
Danube water.
(5) Inordertostudy the impacts on the surface and subsurface waters by the Dunakiliti-Hrusov
Reservoir, a monitoring systernof a permanent nature sLsset up, which should be
developed based onniform methods on both the Hungariaand the Czechoslovak sides.
In those issues in which nocornmonposition could bereached, the opinions twotParties are
included in Annexes 2 and 3. The negotiations were carriedon in a friendly atmosphere, the Parties tried ta understand and
çonsider each other's position. They started from the fact that the engineering solution should be in
harmony with the ecological requirements in cirderto preserve the conditions of nalure anlife in the
given area to the maximum extent.
Bratislava,27 September, 1989
(signature) (signature}
A. Berczik L. Weismann
Leader of the Leader of the
Hungarian delegation Czechoslovak delegation
Annex 2
The position of theHungarian delegation
(1) A fundamental difference Getweenthe Hungarian and Czechoslovak position is that whileon the
part of Hungary, the priority of the ecological aspect should be ensured in a consideration of the issues
related tothe Gabcokovo Nagymaros Barrage System based on the stand ofParliament in October 1988,
while according to the Çsechoslovak position, although the ecological interests are important, they do not
have absolute priority.
(2) We do not agree with the opinion of the Czechoslovak delegation that the rnajority of the
problems raised can be studied and resolved after the constructioof the Barrage System and especially
afterthe fillingup of the Dunakiliti-Hnisov Reservoir. In numerous cases, not even the scope of the
alternative solution cabe defined and, thereforewe consider the 1:Iscale "experîrnent" tolxrun on the
naturalenvironment extremely risky.
(3) We consider ita proven fact that in the case of cornpleting the Dunakiliti-Hmsov Reservoir,
trophity conditions will change adversely, characterizby a several-fold multiplication of algal biomass.
This wjIl represent an increasein the organic load ofinterna1 originthat will exceed the extemal load
comingfrom the watershed along the reachbetween Bratislava andBudapest and will impact adversely
on the several hundred kilornetre long downstream reach ofthe Danube.
(4) It isto be clarified whether the Reservoir has such a mode through which the reproduction of
algae canbe at least piodicallycontrolled.
(5) We consider those interactions especially problematic that are the consequences of the
simultaneous presence of differentpollutants. The rnajority of these are triggeredby the increase in
trophity. Thus thepossible appearance of anaerobic conditions inthe Reservoir (depending also on the
removalof the top Iayer), the impact bar& filtering, the impaon the transport of toxic heavy rnetals
due zo a change in the composition of suspended sediment, and furthemore, a demand for modifying
water treatment technologies as a result of a change thecomposition of rdwwater canbe rnentioned.
(6) It ito be clarifiehow the amount of carcinogenic by-products ofchlorination produced from the
algae and their rnetabolic products during water frealment can be controlled and what technological
changes should be irnplemented for this purposeand 10 removt the increased amount of algae at the
surface water treatrnent plants in Ldbatlan and Budapest.
(7) The managing of the river for operation nt peak-flowould infiuence water quality imany ways
(both positively and negatively). The position taken up by the Hwngarian delegation is that a
predorninance of adverse impacts can be expected,but atthe present level oour knowledge no scientific
statements can be made with the necessary açcuracy. The uncertainties are, therefore, to be consideasd
risk factors also in this case.
(8) To the knowledge of the Czechoslovak delegation, no studies have been cmied out (not even in
Czechoslovakia) on the chernical composition and the impacts on human biologyof the asphalt cover andits coating whichwas laiddown at the upstream reachof the powercanal, as well as at certüin parof the
Czechoslovak side of the Dunakiliti-Hrusov Reservdr. The application of the technology took place
based on only several decades of experience in Czechoslovakia. We consider it essential ta clarify
through studies whether substancesharmfril IOhuman health could get dissolved from the asphalt and its
coating (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) or substances hindering the water treatment process (e.g.
resulting inbad odour with chlotine).
With respect to the planned water replenishment systems supplying waterta the branch, we found
(9)
that, having shelved its ewlier plan corresponding to the arrangements on the Hungarian side, the
Czechoslovak Party prepared a new plan withspecial consideration for the unfavourable study resultson
colmatation. This confirms our concerns about the water replenishment systemand makes a comparative
evaluation of thetwo plans necessary.
(10) Due to the known reduction of water resources in the country, he value of the water resources
located under Kisalfôld and supplied from theDanube increased significantly. The barrage, the alteration
of riverbed conditions, the development of the water replenishment system and the dredging
fundamentally change the infiltration conditions and the ensuing damages in quantity and quality may
affect notoniy bank filtering, but, over time, also the whole water resources storedIt is to be clarified
through studies what measures should be takento protect our water resources representing potential
drinking water forover two million people (and also importantforfuture generations).
The more stringent formulation of the Hungarian (conservation of drinking water
(1 1)
resources, self-cleansingetc.has its root in the geographical (lowland) situation of the country.
In conclusion, the clarification and the resolution of the deficiencies and problems raised is
(12)
possible only within theframework of a cornprehensive study programmecarried outfoi.several years.
Bratislava, September 27, 1984
(signature)
Dr. ~rp~d Berczik
Appendix 3,
Theposition ofthe Czechoslovakdelegation
1.
Basedon theCzechoslovakresearchresults andthe collected documentation,the subsurfacewater
resources will increase onboth the Czechoslovak and the Hungarian side due to an increase in the water
IeveIin theDunakiliti-Hrusovo Reservoir. At the same time, the watertable gets stabilized at ahigher
level than thepresent one.
2. The seepagecanals constructeclon bothsides ofthe Resewoir and along the upstream reach of the
head-race canal prevent the excessive seepageof water to the sides and the possible soaking of the area
near the dyke of the Reservoir.
3. Only some of the suspended particles will get deposited in the Dunakiliti-Hrusovo Reservoir,
some of it will be carried downstreamby the water. Prirnarilyinorganic substances will get deposited in
theReservoir. To overcome the ensuing filtering resistance, technological measures should be taken that
ensure the enhancernent of the infiltration system on the bottom of the Reservoir. Such rneasures are
included in thetechniçal plan.
4. To resolve the problems of the flood plain, an appropriateamount of water will be guaranteed in
Czechoslovakia. This way the water supply into the branches andthe flooding of these areastomaintain
the forest ecosystems andthe wholevegetation are resolved. Similar measuresarerecornmended alsofor
the Hungarian side.5. Tnordet to irnptementthe measuresrecommendedunderItems2 and 3, it iadvisableto operate
the GabcikovoBarrage atpeak-flow.
6. The mount of autochthonousorganiç mntterpresent in the Reservoir does not considerably
influence theself-deansingcapacityof thewater.
7. From an engineering aspect, the problemosf thewaterresourcesservingaa water supplyfor the
populationof Budapestdo not havea directrelationshipwith the operatioof the BarrageSystem. This
problemdates baçk toeartiertimesand, accordingtotheHungarianParty,this issuewillbe resolved.
8. Theexperiences obtainedby the CzechoslovakPart y aybe used for theimplementationof water
producingworksandfor takingmeasuresforwater conservationinSzigetkBz.
9. The majorityof potentialproblemsraised by the HungarianParty and based on assumptionscan
be studiedonlyby developinga monitoringsystemduring theoperationof theBarrage System.
10. Inthe Czechaslovak Party's viewthe present levelof knowleclgeontheaffectedareaalong with
the possibilitiesof the engineering solutionare suffictoncarry out the fillingup of the Dunakiliti-
HmsovoReservoir and the upstreamreachof the power canalin accordancewith the originalschedule
approved by theGovernmentsofthe CSFR andtheHungarian People's Republic.
(signature)
LudovitWeismann
Academician Annex 27
LE'ITERFROM MU. MKL~SN ~ ~ , HUNGARM PRNIMEM~ISTER TOMR. LADISLA AVDAM=,
CZECHOSLOV PRAIMEMINISTE4 RO, ÇTOBER1989
President
CounciiofMinistem oftheHungarianPeople'sRepublic
ToComradeLadislav Adamec
Prime MinisteroftheCSFR
Prague
Dear ComradePrimeMinister!
In your letter dated 31 August, you informed me that you had examined the Hungarian proposais
subrnitteat the eimeof Ourjoint negotiationsin Budapeston 20 July and thatyou had arrivethe
conclusion thatyou would still insison the continuation of the construction of the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrage Systerninaccordance with the Treyf 1977.
1 am worried about the situation thatyou have examinedour recommendationsand developed your
positionin sucha manner thatintheperiodktween 20 July andthe 31 Augustdate of your letter,there
wereno substantive discussions hebehveenexpertsof the two sideas to said recommendationsand
lhatitwas only durjng the meetinof Deputy%me Ministerson 9 Septemk that an agreement was
reachedonhaving meetingsandconsultations between legal and ecologiclperts
My concernis increasedby thefactthat scientificopinions didnotcorneanycloserto oneanotherduring
the courseof thesemeetings.
DearComradePrimeMinister!
Severalhighly regardedrepresentativesof the scientificcomrnunityhave indicated seriousecological
dangers.These,bytheirverynature, couldbe provenbeyonddoubtif the Projecwas builand operated,
as originally conceived, but the present level of scientific probaissuficient to cal1 for an
amendmentofthe original plans.
Takinginto considerationthe progress of construction, both nationspresented now with a final
oppominityto balance thejoint plat iththedemandsof environmentalprotection1am convincedthat
our Governments arebeingguidedby thedesiretomakethiscomplicatedmatterclear toourpeoples and
by a responsibilitofuturegenerationsandthatitis our common duty to make sure that our two new
nationsharmoniseour respectiveandjoint interestsfullyanaworthymanner.
The Hungarian Governmenti,nspiredby this historicresponsibility,suspenddork connected to the
Nagymaros Barrage withinHungary,on 13 May . Duringthe coumeof rnymeetingwith you on20 June
,1 gavean explanationastoour decisionto do sand 1informedyou as to theperiodof timefor which
thesaidsuspensionwouIdbe ineffectand theworkwhichwouldbe involved.
Atthe same time,a legaldisputehasdevelopebetween thetwo nationsas totheextentof the legalityOr
illegalityconcerningthe Hungarianparty'smeasuresand concerningthe refusal of the Czechoslovak
partyto examinethe Hungarian suggestiosn theirme&.
1would Iike to emphasisethat the HungarianGovernmentused internationalenvironmentallaw as its
startingpoint, which requires thaitn the eventthatenvironmentaldangersareperceived,states havethe
right and obligation to suspework in the interestof avoiding undesirable ecologicaleffects and to
commencenegotiations. The Hungariap nartyconsidersthese measures, to the beofits belief,to be
entirely lawful. ThusEdo not findyour çlaims for compensationfor damages,as signalledin your
letters,have anygrounds.I found myself unable to comprehend those statements made in the name of the Czechoslovak
Government which refertotechnical measures to be undertaken on the sovereign tetritory of the CSSRin
the event thathe closure of the riverbed at Dunakiliti isdelayed. Certaiyou havebeen infomed as to
the danger of ecological catastrophe such a move would pose both to Szigetkoz in Hungary and, in the
event of flood, to Bratislava. The Czechoslovak Government'sresponsibility in this case is obvious.
Such rneasures wouIdnot only make thejr effects feIton the relationship between the two countries, but
could becorne a much wider, international issue. The spioftthe persona1discussion that you and1have
had inthe past givemehop that this unworthysituation may be avoided by our poples,
1 trust that prior to our forthcoming personal discussions, the situation and political atmosphere will
develop so as to allow issues conceming the protection of the human environment to have prirnary
importance during the course of these discussions and that the Czechoslovak party will take into
consideration the warnings of grave ecological danger issued by the Hungarian party'sscientific bodies.
We cannot agree with the genera! Czechoslovak opinionthat the majorityof the problems raised can be
examined and resolved after the construction of the Barrage Syatern and specifically the filling the
Dunakiliti-Hrusovo Reservoir. We consider the execution of experiments on nature having uncertain
effects tbe extraordinarily risky.
1 emphasise, once again, that the Hungarian Government, acting upon warnings from the scientific
community, finds it necessary to claritfhyecological state of necessity which would be caused by the
commencement of operations of the BarrageSystem according tothe original plans.
We propose that, for the purpases of rninirnising the environmental nsks posed by the Dunakiliti-
Hmsovo reservoir, an agreement as to the development and realization of a program for the complex
system of water quality protection, technical, operational, and ecological guaranbeeconcluded. This
must be achieved by further specifyingthe requirements provided forin Articles 15and 19of the (1977)
Treaty, naturally taking into consideration, as well, that the requirernents set earlier have not been
adhered to according to the tirneschedule. We recornmend that saidagreement be concluded by July 30,
1990,at the latest.
The Hungarian Government proposes that the Hungarian and Czechoslovak Parties.invite international
scientific organs tocontrol the implementation of the system of guarantees pertaining to water quality
protection and technical operation conceming the Dunakiliti HrusovResenoir, the Dunakiliti dam, the
power canal, the Gabcikovo Hydroelectric Power PIant,andthe Nagymaros sectionof the Danube.
Giving up the peak operation of the Barrage System would not only result in the non -appearance of
harmfulenvironmental effects in the region surrounding the Nagymaros Reservoir, but irwould also
reduce them along the upper sections of the system. For this reason, the Hungarian Government
proposes joint discussionsregarding technical/economiccorrections pertaining the abandonment of the
construction of the Nagymaros Barrage and the corresponding amendment to the Hungarian-
Czechoslovak Treaty signe&16September , 1977.
Dear Comrade Prime Minister!
During this period when the Eastern Europian region is rife with a great deal of tension and is in the
process of socio-economicrejuvenation, we can, ifwe reach agreement, set anexample for thepeoples of
Europe that wearejointly capable of bringing man and the naturalenvironment into hmony and can act
together in such a matter of great importance.
Budapest, 4 October , 1984.
Cornradely Greetings 63
Annex 28
NOTEVERBAL FEOM THE MINISTR OF FOREIG AFFALR OFTHE CZECHOSLOV SOACIALIRSTEPUBL~C
TO THEEMBASS YFTHE HUNGARIA PNOPLE REPUBLIC 3, OCTOBE 1989
NOTEVERBALE
The FederalMinistryof Foreign Affairsof the Czechoslovak Soctepublic presentsitscompliments
to the Embassy of the Republicof HungainPrague andupon instructionof the Governementof the
Czechoslovak Socialist Republcas the honour transmit thestandpoint of the Governmentof the
CzechoslovakSmialist Republic concerning theconsmction of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage
System as presecuted byL. Adamec, President of the Governmentof the CzechoslovakSocidist
Republic, to M. Nkmelh,Presidentof the Council of Ministeof theRepublic of Hungry at their
meetingof26 October1989in Bratislava.
The Governmentof the CzechoslovakSmialist Republicwas readyto consider the Hungarian
Party'sproposalto signan agreementbetweenthe Governmentof the CzechoslovakSocialistRepublic
andtheCouncilof MinistersoftheHungarian People's Republiocn a systemof technical,operandonai
ecologicalguaranteesrelatedtheGabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem. The Czechoslovak Part s
willingto signan agreementto thiseffectshortlybasedon theassumptiontheHungarian Part yilt
immediatelycommencepreparatoryworkon therefillingof the Danube's'bedintheregionofDunakiliti.
The Czwhoslovakproposalis based on the presumptiothatthe competentwater management
organsof the twostateprtpare the technical princof the said agreementwithin two weeks which
canbe initialed at the level of Deputy Ministersfor Foreign Affairs,thetinitailling of those
principles the HungarianParty should start the actual closureof the Danube bed. The tetheof
agreementhasto be elaboratso thaitcouldbe signed beforetheendoMarch 1993.
The Governmentof the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic suggetde conclusionof a separate
agreement in which both partieswould oblige thernselvesto limitations or exclusion of peak hour
operation mode of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System. By way of this suggestionthe
Czechoslovak Party concerninriedto clearaway the misgivingsof the HunagrianPartyconcemingthe
potentialecological effectsofthe peakloadoperationmode.
Furthemore, the Governmentof the Czechoslovak Socialist Republicroposed to invalidate
staternentsçontainedin the Protocolof Febniary 1989refetringto the Nagyrnarosdam andthetoby
return todeadlinesindicatintheProtocolof October1983. The CzechosEovaParty putsforwardthis
compromise in order to enabIethe Hungarian Party to utilise the time thus gained to investigate
ecologicalquestions andto put forwarditsproposalsindue time.
Al1proposals put forwabytheGovernmentof the Czechoslovak Socialit epublicmiginatein,
and areincompleteconcordancewith, thTreaty signedby theCzechoslovakSwialist Republand the
HungarianPeople'sRepublicon 16September1977on the construction anoperationof theGabcikovo
Nagymaros Barrage. The Hungarian Party made the acceptance of the Czechoslovak proposals
conditional upon acçeptance by Czechoslovakiathe modification of the Treaty of 1977 on the
constructionof theGahikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystemwiththeview's toabandontheconstructionof
the Nagyrnaros Barrage.The Governmentof the Czechoslovak Socialt epublicseesno justification
for a modificationoftheaforernentionedTreaty.
Should theHungarianPeople'Republicdecideunilateral-inconflictwithits internationallegal
liabiliti-toabandonthe Nagymarosproject then the CzechoslovakParty shall demandcompensation
andthereirnbursementof itslossesresultingfromsucha decision. However, the Governmentof the CzechoslovakSocialist Republic in view of the facc that
differencesof opinion continueto exist evenaflerthe meetingof Prime Ministersof 26 October 1989
heldin Bratislavamaintainsitspositiontowardsthe GovernmentoftheRepublic of Hungary tu the effect
that it fulitsliabilitiesin connectianwiththe constructiof the GabcikovoBarrage in such a manner
as toallow thecompletionof the projectin accordancewith the relevantbinding agreements,with the
provisiontha~a separateagreementshall be signedon thesystem of technical,operationaland ecological
guarantees,as indicatedabove.
8. Should theRepublicof Hungary fail 10meet its liabilitiesand continueunilaterallybreach the
Treaty and related legal document tsen the CzechoslovakParty will be forced to commence a
provisional,substituteprojecton the tersitoryof theCzechoslovakSwialist Republicin orderto preveni
furtherlosses. Sucha provisional projectwouldentaildirectingasmuchwaterinto theGabcikovo dam
as agreedin the JointConstructionPlan. The FederalMinistry ofForeignAffairsof the Czechoslovak
SocialistRepublic availsitselfof thisopportunityto reneto theEmbassy of the Republicof Hungary
theassurancesof itshighestconsideration.
-
Prague,30 October19891 Annex 29
NOTE VERBALE FROM THE M~ISTRY OF FOREIG NFFAIRSOF THEREPUBL ICHWNGAR TYOTHE
I EMBASS YFTHE C~ECHOSCOV SOAKIALI STPUBLIC,3NOVEMBE 1989
1 NOTEVERBALE
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof the RepoflHungarypresentsits compliments tothe Embassy of
the Czechoslovakmialist Republic and requeststhe Embassyto infom iEsgovernment without delay
aboutthefollowing:
The Council of Ministerofthe Republicof Nungary on the bais of the resoIution passecl by the
Parliamenton30 October 1989,is initiating theamendmentof the Treaty, signedon 16September 1977
by theHungarianPeople'sRepubliandthe CzechoslovakSocialistRepubIconcerningtheconstruction
andoperationoftheGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem.
By puttirig the Barrage System inrooperation according to the original plans both Huandry
Czechoslovakiawouldfindthemselvesin an ecologicalstofnecessity,therefotheHungarianParty
deerns necessary the eliminaofothe peak Ioad operation of the Barrage System and accordinglyit
deemsnecessarytherelinquishmentoftheconstructiontheNagymaros Barrage.
1
The Hungarianpartyconsidersit necessary to canceltharpart of the protocolsignedin Febonary1989
the accelerationof theconstructionofthe Nagymaroç Barrage .ystem
The Hungarian Partcyonsiders it necesstoyconcludean inter-govemrnentalagreement In order to
minimise the environmentalnsks present in the nmaoperational modeof the Dunakiliti-Hrusovo
Reservoirand the Gabcikovohydroeleçtricpower planttoprovidefor a systemof guarantees,which
includethe preservationof waterquality,technicaloperationalmaintenanceand ecology,rtotheng
Dunakiliti-HrusovoReservoir, the Dunakiliti Barrage, the Gabcikovo hydroelectric pewethelant,
powercanal,andtheriver sectionof the DanubeasfarasNagymaros.
The prectlndition of filling up the Dunakiliti-Hnisovo Reservoir is the conclusion of the inter-
govermental agreement. Incaseofa Czechoslovak statementof intentionabout, the conclusionof the
inter-govemmental agreement,the preparatory wofkthe riverbed diversat theReservoir can lx
continued.
The Hungariangovemmentwishesto inform thegovemmentof theCzechoslovak SocialistRepubIicthat
the detailed textual proposalanamendment of theinterstate treaty will be presented within the
framework ofadequatelegalproceduresin November2989.
) The Councilof Ministersofthe RepublofHungaryonceagainexpressesits intentionto continue , at a
level also acceptabltheCzechoslovakParty, negotiationsas soon as possibleonthe initiationof the
amendmentof theTreaty.
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungaryavailsitself of this optorenewits
highest considerationto the Embassyof Czechoslovak Socialist R.public.
Budapest,3 November1989
To the Embassyof the
Czechoslovak SocialistRepublic
Budapest1 Annex 30
NOTEVERBAL EROMTHE MINISTRY OFFOREIGA NFFAIROSFTHE REPUBLI OF HUNGAR YOTHE
CZECHOSLOV SOAKIALI S TPUBLIC3,0NOVEMBE 1989
NOTEVERBALE
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof the RepubIicof Hungarypresentsits compliments tothe Embassyof
the CzechoslovakSocialistRepubIic,and withreferetoNote VerbaleNo. 663-5o 0f the Ministryof
ForeignAfairs aated Novernber3, 1989anda11thoseantecedentstespectively,coonectedto this Note,
has the honourto present the draftof theTreatyof the Hungarianpartyin reference tothe modification
of rheTreaty concludedin Budapest,September 16, 1977ktween the Republic of Hungary and the
Czechoslovak SociaIistRepublicconcerningthe executionand operationof the Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaros
BarrageSystem.
The Hungarianpartypriorto negotiations,and subto anagreement tocommence the negotiationsis
ready to hand over aTreaEypertainingto theexecution,conclusionand operationof the Joint Danube
Barrage Systern,as welas a proposed system of tequirementsfor an inter-governrnentalagreement
whichprovidesforthe qualityofwateandecologica1guarantees.
Duringthe compilationoftheTreatydrafoneofthemainaimsof theHungarian partywas rhat,withthe
commencementof operationsof the Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaros Barrage Systeaccordingto the original
plans the cenitoriesof both Republicof Hungary andthe CzechoslovakSwialist Republic would
enteran ecologicalstatofemergency andsuffer from seriousenvironmentadamage. Moreover an
ecological catastrocould QGCUr.
Thesereasonsmakethefulfillmentofthe 1977Treaty withoutanymodifications impossible.
TheMinistq of Foreign Affairsrequeststhe Honoured Embassyforwardthedrafof the Treatyto the
relevant Czechoslovaauthorities. The Hungarinnpartywould highlyappreciateit if the Czechoslovak
authoritiesarefulIystudiedthe Hungarianpropoand lookthe abovementioneddangersinto account
in the elaborationof their ownopinion, togeththe mosteconomicallysensibleoptionsunder the
çircumstances and the interdependence between them whic has resulted from their mutua1
responsibility.
In the interestof all this the HungarianParty is provide thCzechoslovak Party,if requested,
with furtherinformationor to consulatthesarnelimeinitiatenegotiationson an amendmentthe
Treatyand anagreementonecological guaranterespectively.
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungaryavailsiof thiopportunityto renew to
the EmbassyoftheCzechoslovakSocialistRepublicthe assurancesof itshighestconsideration.
Budapest,30 November,1989
The Embassy ofthe CzechosIovak
SociaIistRepublic TREATY BETWEENTHE REPUBLI OF HUNGAR YND THECZECHOSLOV SAKCIALIRSTEPUBL~C
CONCERNING THE AMENDMENT ANDTHEMAJORPRINCIPLE SF AMENDLNGTHETREATYSIGNED
AT BUDAPES OTN 16SEPTEMB1 E977REGARDMG THECONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE
Introduction:Far the avoidanceof ecologicalstate of emergencyresulting fromthe construction of che
Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrageSystemaccording to the 16Septernber1977Treaty the Hungarian party
proposes the omissionof the peak operation of the Barrage Sysiem and the abandoning of the
constructionof the NagymarosBarrage.
If ecologicallytolerateconditions areestablishedtheHunparty isprepared tocompleteand operate
the remaining installations.Thereforeif the Czechoslovakparty is prepared to amend the Treaty of 16
Septemixr 1977,and to abandon the constructof the NagymarosBarrageand manifestsits intention
zoconclude an ecological-guaranteeagreement(see Article of.the draft treaty as welPas the draft
agreements appended to be theTheses")then the Mung~ianparty will immediatelyproceed with the
preparrttoryoperationsfor theDunakilitibed-decanting.
It is only afier the conclusion of a guarantee-systernagreement tbedtcan be filled up. These
objectivesare setforth withinan internationallegal frameworkwhich consists of the draft treaty below
and the draft entitled"Thesesktween the Republicof Hungary andthe Czechoslovak Socialist Republic
on thetreaty concemingthe constructionof the Joint DanDam", as well as iAnnex to lxhanded
overbeforethestarof thenegotiations.
The Republic of Hungary and the Czechoslovak SocialistRepublic attaching continuously great
importancetothe utilisationof thecommonsectionoftheDanube,
becoming aware as a result of projects in scientific knowledgethefsignificant risks which the
completionofthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem according to theoriginalplasf the Treatyof
September 1977mayimply;
takingdutyintoconsiderationthe presestatofadvancementofthe GabcikovoDam,
attachingparamount importance to the interests of the preandtfuture generations to maintain a
healthynaturalenvironment,
being conscious of the fathaithe fnendship and good neighbourlyrelations of the two nations and
statesharingthe commonsectionof theDanube can onlybe strengtheneby takingthe interestsof borh
countriesinto consideration and proapplyingthe generalprinciplesand milesof internationallaw,
have deçidedto amendtheTreatyof 16 September1977,signed atBudapestconcerning the construction
of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem and for this purpose the have appointed their
plenipotentiaries:
the PresidentotheRepublicof Hungary.............................
the Presidentofthe CzechoslovakSocialistRepub........................
who afterexcusingandexchanging theircredentialsdueformhave agreeduponthe following:
Article 1:
1 111 The Contracting Partiesresolveto amentheTreaty of 16 September 1977betweenthe People's
Republic ofHungary and the Czechoslovak SocialistFederal Republicconcerning the constructionand
operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymarosarrage System(hereinafterreferredto as the Treaty) in such a
rnanner asto harmonise the interests in developing of water management, energy, transpartation,
agiculture and uther nationaleconamic branchesin the regiomnecfim with the utilisation of thejoint sectionoftheDanubewith the interestsin presentingthenaturalenvironmentand in minimisingto
the extentpossibletheecologicalrisks.
121 In order to realisethese objectivesthehave decidedto eliminatethe applicationof peak mode
operationandto abandon theconstructionoftheNagymms Barrage.
Article2:
In order to açhievethe objectivesset forth in Article 1the ContractingParties will conçlude a
freaty(agreement)
a) on the establishmentof a cornplextechnical, operatiolnd ecologiçd guaranteesystem, aiming
at protecting water qualitas well as at reducingor rather eliminatingthe environmentalrisksof the
Dunakiliti-Hrusovreservoir,
b) on the completionof the construction and operation a tte GabcikovoBarrage which willbe
referredto astheJoint DanubeBarrage,ina shortenedformthe Barrage, and
c) on mutual acçountof costs, expenditures,expensesand damagesresultedos resultingfrom the
amendmentoftheTreaty.
Article3:
111 Bifferenceswhich may arisein conneciionwiththe construction andoperation of the Barrage
includingdisputes resultingfromsteps tobetakenin order topmtectthe naturalenvironment shouldbe
settledbythe govemmentplenipotentiariesinthe firstinstance.
/2/ If an agreementby the goverment plenipotentiariescouldnot be reached within a reasonable
period of time,then thedifferenceshallbe submitted tothe govemmentsof the ContractingParties for
decision.
131 If an agreement cannot be reached by the two govemments either in the case of unsettled
questions within,......then eiiher of them is entitled to submitthe dispute to internationalarbitrate
tribunal1or to the InternationalCourt of Justice. On the basis af an agreementor due ta threatening
environmentalemergencythisdeadline can beshortened appropriately.
Withoutprejudiceto provisionsof paragraphs /Il-13and subjectto parallelinformingthe other
/4/
ContrnctingParty, in the case of significantdanger directly threateningthe natural environment,The
ConwactingPartiesshall,have theright
- totakenay urgentmeasuresnecessary to avertdangereven withouthaving recourse to procedures set
fort hparagraphs111 and121 . The justifiedexpensesresultingfrom thesemeasuresshaIlbe borne by
the two Statesinan equalproportion.
1"The rulesconceming the establishmentandthe proceedingsofthe tribunalshouldbe formulated in the
courseofthe negotiations. 151 The ContractingParties declarethatthey accept the decision of the Arbitrate Tribunal or the
InternationalCourtof Justicasbindinguponthem.
1 Article4:
/I/ ThisTrentyentersprovisionallyintoforce upon its signatuthe ContractingPartieswillasfrom
that date,disregardthe applicationof the provisionsof the Treaty at 16 September 1977 as wellas
suppIementaryProtocols of 15 October1983and6February 1989king in contradictionwiththepresent
Treaty.
/2/ This Treaty maybe amendaibymutualagreementof the ConbactingParties. Negotiationsshall
start irnrnediateto supervise and and the provisionsof the Treaty if any of the ContractingParties
wishes so provided that iinitiativeisjustifiedby an connectionwiththe completionof objectivesset
forthin the Treaty. If a differenceoviewsemergesbetweenthe ConbractingParties on whetherthere
arebases relatingtothe protectionof thenaturalenvironmentjustifyitheamendmentof theTreaty,the
appropriateprovisionsof Article 3shallbeappliedto thesettlementof theirdispute.
In witnesswhereoftheplenipotentiarieshavesignedand sealedthisTreaty. Annex 31
Note Verbale from the Ministryof Foreign Affairsof The Republic of Hungary of the Republic of
HungarytotheEmbassyof theCzechoslovak Socialist Republi1,I Decemkr 1989
NOTE VEREALE
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof TheRepublicof Hungary presentsitcomplimentsto the Embassy of
the Czechoslovak ScrcialistRepublic, and has the honour to present with reference to initiatives
conceming thernodificatianoftheTreatysignedbetween theRepublic of Hungaryand the Czechoslovak
SocialistRepubliçon 16September1977 in Budapestfor theExecuiionand Operationof the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros BarrageSystem, includedin NoteNo. 663-59of 3 November1989and Note No. .. of 30
Novemkr, as well as the draft of the Iegd documentcontainedin the Appendix andthe antecedents
presentedon 20 July 1989andin thecourseof the meetings between the headosf our two countries,the
followingproposalforthecarnmissianoftheCabinetofMinistersof theRepubIicof Hungary.
Naving observedthe process of transformationcurrently being undergoneby the system of political
institutionsinCzechoslovakiathe CabinetofMinistersof the RepublicoHungar yullyunderstandswhy
the Governrnentof the CzechodovakSmialist Republichas so far faiIedto respond tothe Hungarian
Party'sinitiativesforthemodificationof theGabcikovo-Nagyrnaros greement.
Based on the understanding that,at the presenttime,the Governrnentof the CzechoslovakSwialist
Republiccannotbe expectedtodealwith mattersrelatedto theBarrageSystem on themeritsof the issue
and with fullresponsibilitythe Cabinetof Minisrersof thè RepuofHungary herebyproposesthat the
hithertouncommencednegotiaiionsbe postponedto a timemore suitablefor both parties -at the same
timemaintaining the validity of the Hungarian initiativefor the modification of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Agreement. The Hungarian Governrnenthereby proposes that construction work be
suspendeduntil the commencement, and in the courseof, the negotiationsand that for the time being
only maintenance wark becarriedout on theBarrageSystem.
The nature and scopeof the maintenanceworkshall be hamnonisedby the GovemmentCornmissioners
inJanuaty 1990.
On the basis of the above the Cabinetof Ministers of theRepublic of Hungary proposes that an
agreement be signed concerning the postponemeno tf negotiationsconcerning the initiative for the
modificationof theAgreement concerning the BarrageSystern andthecancellingof constructionwork
onboth sidethereto.
The Ministry of Foreign Affaits of The Republic of Hungary herebyrequests the Embassy of the
CzechosIovakSociaIistRepubIicto forward theproposa1of the Cabinetof Ministersof the Republicof
Hungary totherelevantCzechosIovakauthorities.
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof The Republicof Hungary availsitselfof thisopportunityto renew to
theEmbassyof theCzechoslovakSwiaIistRepublictheassurancesof itshighest consideration.
Budapest,11Decernixr 1989 Annex 32
LETFE FROM MR. MKLO S EMETH H,UNGARIA PRIME MINISTE ROMR. MARIAN CALFA,
CZUIHOSLOVAK PRIME MINISTE R,JANUAR 1990
Rime Minsterof theCSFR
Prague
HonorabIeFrime Minister!
As you wellknow,the Governmentof the Republicof Hungaryhasrepeatedlyattemptedto initiatethe
amendment of the Treaty Regardingthe Construction and operatiof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Barrage Systern, conclud16September,1977and the preparationofthe saidamendmentat a scientific
expertIevel. The Hungaripartyhasmadeseveralproposals to this end.Lastyear, overa periodof six
months,therewerethreemeetingsbetweenourrespective HeadsofGovemment. AIthoughourpositions
did corne closetoa certain extent, our discussions lno results.The fact that Ourrespective
positionhave becornefixed, whichwill presumablylead to legal çonflictsand has led to a su-called
technical provisionalsolution,will,aboveal],beaosourceof tensiobetween the Governmentsof
our respective nations.
1wouldremindyou chaion 31 Octaber,1989. theParliamentof the Hungarianrepublicauthorizedthe
Councilof Ministertoinitiate,a legalprocessfor anamendmentof the saidinternationaltreaty. Thisis
what wascommunicatedinourNote Verbaleoralme~noranda dated3 November and30 November .
We completelyunderstandthe fact that during the last few weeks, during this period of a change for
modemCzechoslovakia the new Govemmentyou lead was not able toconsiderthe amendmentof the
saidtreattobe ofprime importance.
1am inreceipofanincreasiriglygreateramountof informationregardingthe factthat now,in the midst
of your significanteffort to build a new society, you are finallyable to sacrifice some time to the
questions concemingour common sectionof the Danube. The Hungariangovernmentwelcomesthe
commencementof newscientificstudiesinCzechoslovakiaon the questionsof thejoint reservoirandthe
GabcikovohydroeIectricpower plant.Iklieve that the politicaland socialrefm processin ournations
hasfinallybroken downthewallwhichobstructedthe revelationof thetrueenvironmentaleffects of the
Barrage Systemand for thepreparationand executionof a decisionwhichis in the longterm interes&of
thepeoplesofbathournations.
Honorable PrimeMinister!
Historyatthepresenttimeoffersustheopportunityto reassessthe Barrage Systemindepthgovernedby
natural science, technicaleconomicconsiderations, freed fmm the fetters of the earlier political
decisionsmadebyourGovernments.
Asyou well know,the Hungarian Governmenhtastakenrneasuresto dissoltoterminateanycontracts
in privatelawwhich serve to furtherthe constructionof the Nagymaros Barrage. The Hungarian
Govemment'spositionremainsunchanged with respecttutheNagymarosBmdge Systern.
I recomrnendthat wenot hold detailednegotiatjonstowards theamendmentof the interstate treaty, as
initiatedin ourNodeVerbujedated30 November,1489,but ratherthat ajoint Czechoslovak-Hungarian
scientificstudy, with the involvementof international scientificorganizations,examine the complex
ecologicaleffectsof the Dunakiliti-HrusovoReservoir,theGabcikovohydro-electricpowerplantandthe
powercanal,dong withthe assessrnentof thepresentenvironmentalsituationandthe recordingthereof,
and that we make thecommencementof operationof the reservoirand the Gabcikovohydro-elecrricplantdependenton theresultsthereof.On thebasisof the resuItof theaforementioned,then,we would
decideupontheamendmentof the inter-statetreaty orthe conclusionof a new treaty.
It isy opinionthat this studyand the full assessrnent therfan be çornpletedih the firyithalf of the
year. EolIowingthis, in the secondhalfof the year,negotiationsasto the modificationof the (1977)
treaty can commence. Thistirnetableallowsfor the final decisions to bemaby the new Govemments
and ParliamentswhichwiElbe formedaftertheHungarian and Czechoslovak elections.
1 wouIdlike to inforniyou thatthe Hungarianparty shallsuspendconsiructionworkduringthis period
and shallonly preservethe existing'statuquo'I would recommendthe attention of the Czechoslovak
Govemmentto the same.
Our recommendationis foundedupon the initiativeswe madebetween20 July and 30 November 1989
Thus, 1 would, for example, remind you that on 20 July, the Hungarian Government in one of its
proposais suggestedthe suspensionof constructionwork for a perioof 3-5 years andthatjoint studies
serveasthebasis of ourdecisions.
Honorable Prime Minister!
I am convincedthatourGovernments areking guidedby thedesireto makethis matterfor before our
peoplesand forour respbnsibilito futuregenerationsand thatitis Ourcommonduryto make sure that
our two nationsreconcileourrespectiveandjoint interestsintheirfull scopeandina creditablemanner.
Withouragreement, we canprove to thepeoplesof Europethatweare ableto bringmanand the natural
environmentintecommonharmony.
Budapest,January10,1990.
WithSincereRespect,
Mikl6sNémeth Annex 33
The mime Miister of theCaechoslovakSocialistRepublic
Prague,15February1990
In yourletterof 12 January 1990 you calIedattentiontothe unsuccessfulnegotiations becween the
representativesf the CSFRand theHungarian Republicwhichwereheld on 12January 1990and dealt
wih the newapproaçhof theGovernment ofthe HungarianRepublicin connectionwith the operation of
theGabcikovoNagyrnaros BarrageSystemafter13May 1989.
In harmonywiththe suggestionssubmittedinyour letter,anin the 30 November 1989Note Verbaleof
the Ministry for Foreign Affaiof the Hungarian RepublicI support the irnmediate renewal of the
bilateralnegotiations whichwouldleadto joint conductconcerning the putting into operation of the
GabcikovoBarrageduringthe yearof1991. Inthemeantirnein thecourseof the negotiationsyouwould
elaboratethebasicprinciplesof thelnterstateTreonytheconstructioand operationof the Gabcikovo-
Nagyrnaros Barrage Systernsigned on 16 September 1977 and the basic prinçiples of the suggested
changesin furthercontractualdocuments concemingthe utilizationof the joint Danube sectionso that
the basic documents prepared mightbe discussed bytheGovernment of the CSFR and the General
Assemblyof the CSFR inJune 1990.
Withsincererespect
MaBanCalfa
To his excellence
Mikl6sNémeth
Presidentofthe Councilof Ministers
of the RepubEiof HungaryAnnex 34
OMI~D Annex 35
ThePresident ofthe Councilof Ministers of theRepublic of Bungary
MarianCalfa
PrimeMinisteroftheCSFR
Prague
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
1have receivedyourletter in responseto myletterdated 10January 1990. In light of this 1gatherthat
with thebuilding ofthe new Czechoslovak societyyou arenowableto accordsufficientattentionto the
joint clarification the questionsregardingthebuilding of the Gabcikovo-NagyrnaroB sarrage on a
govemmentallevelas well.
While 1 welcomethe supportfortheresumptionof thebilateralnegotiations,1determinewith regret your
refusalto take part in the decisionof the fateof the GabcikovoBarrage via wfoundcd and objective
scientificandspecialistexaminationswhichIhadinitiatedinrnyletter.
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
1 disclosedthe positionand proposalof theCouncilof Ministersof the Republicof Hungaryin my letter
dated 10January 1990.
1 hereby inform you thatthe politicapartiesand environmentalrnovements in Hungary support this
concept. Our proposaiswere not only çonsidered by you on international negotiations and diplornatic
channels butwerealsomutually viewed as a meansof expression withwhich to break links withthepast,
establishnewpoliticaltiesand settlethebarrageissueinareassuringmanner.
Please considerthe contentsof my letter dated 10January as the positionof my Government and the
notificatioof ourarrangements according ttohe following.
l/ The negotiationregardingthe Hungarianproposa1to modifythe contractcantaining the pressured
compromise shouldnotbeheld.
Hungarian and Czechoslovak joint scientific exper txaminations with the assistance of
international scientific institutionsshould begin withregard to the complex ecological effects of the
Gabcikovo Barrage the resultsof which should determine the possible putting intooperation ofthe
reservoirand the Gabcikovopower station.
21 Subsequent to the exarninations,n thebasisof their results,negotiationsshouldbegin regardingthe
modificationof the InterstateTreaty. After the electionsthe establishedgovemmentsand parliaments
should rendertheir decisions.
31 The Hungarianpartywill suspend work during the exarninations and negotiationsnd will only
cornplete conservation and floopdrotectionwork. We suggest tothe CzechoslovakParty that italso
suspendworkson the Gabcikovopower plant anditsinstallationsin a similu way andrestrictitseIfto the
ofpreventionof damages.
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
1concludedmy Januaryletterwiththe thoughtthat it is our jointobjectiveto completelyharmonizethe
collectiveandindividualinterestsofthetwocountriesinupright manner.
I willcompletethisrhoughtby disclosingthat in lighofyourpreviousstate functionand participationinlasty&s primeministerialmeetingsyou are wellawareof the environmental effectof the barrageso
pleaseexamine rnypropasal onceagain. We shouldnotletthehistoricopportunityofferedbythe social
changes inoutcountriesgo by.
Thehandlingof thisissueincludesnotonlytheseniementof thefateof a giganticinvestmentfiascobut
alsoaquestionaffectingthesocialtiesof HungaryandCzechoslovakia andthenationalhappinessfor the
peopleof thetwo countries.
Budapest6 March 1990
Withsincereesteem,
MikldsNémeth Annex 36
LE'ITERFROM MR. DOMINI KOCMGER,CZECHOSLOVAK GOVERNMEN PTENPOTENTIARY ,O MR.
GYORG Y.SAMSOND HI, NGARIG ANVZRNME PLTENIPOTENTIA 19 J,LY1990
The Plenipotentiaryof the Governmendof the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and of the
Governrnent of the Slovak Federal Republic regarding the construction and operation of
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem
DominikKocinger
Bratislava9July 1990
Dear Mr. Plenipotentiary!
Please accept my best wishes on the occasion of your appointmentas the Plenipotentiary of the
Governmentofthe RepublicofHungar in thematterof the construandooperationof the Gabcikovo
-NagymarosBarrage System. Please almetoexpressmy hope,onthiswcasion, thatOurcooperation
willbesignificanandinthe interestsof our nations.
We welcomethe declarationmade during the press conferenceheld in Budapest on 16 July 1990
according towhich the HungariaPartyis attemptingto fiadjust solution tothe problems of the
Gahikovo -Nagymaros BarrageSystem and1would likeCoassuryouthat it alsoout interetotum
al1of our resourcestowardsfindinga solution to thefurtherfjoint investmen1.would like to
assureyou thatwe arereadytobeginprelirninarynegotiationsregardingthescopeofthedisputed
questionand IproposethaOurfirst meetingathesissuesbeheldduringthefirst threedaysAugust
of this yearin Bratislavathenerent that my proposalis unaccepttoyou for any reason, 1 am
preparedto acceptthe dand timeof your choosingfor our meeting.
1onceagainaskthatyouacceptmy expressionsofdeepregard.
Signature
TheHonorable
Dr. GyfirgySarnsondiKiss
Plenipotentiaryof the Governmentof the RepublicofHungary
Budapest,VI1 Annex 37
MINUTES OFTHE MEEXiNGBETWEENTHEGOVERNMENT PLEN~NTIARES HELD IN BRATISLAV A,
SEITEMBE 1990,AND INBUDAPES 17,-18OCMBER1990
MINUTES
Regarding thenegotiationson 6 Septeniberin Bratislava ond17-18 Octoberin Budapestbetweenthe
plenipotentiariesof the Republic of Hungary and theCzech and Slovak Eedera1Republic and the
Government of the Republic of Hungary with regard to the questions concerningthe Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrageSystern.
Thelist ofnamesoftheparticipantsrnaybe foundinAppendices 1and2 to theseminutes.
ThePlenipotentiariessagreedtothe discussionof the following questions:
1. The situationreguding theGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem.
2. The detemination of theexaminationsnecessaryforthepreparationoffurtherdecisions.
3. The renewal of the activity of the Joint OpmationalCroup in accordancewith the developed
situationandthedeterminationofthenext assignments.
The situation regardithe Gabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage
l/
The Hungarian Plenipotentiariesisclosedto the Cztchoslovakparty thntthe positionof the Hungarian
Governrnent with regard to the Gabcikovo Nagymaros Barragernay be found in the govemment
document entitled "'the National RevivalProgramme" which was forwarded by the Hungarian
Plenipotentiaryon an unofficialtron 27 September1990to the Ambassadorof the Czechand Slovak
Federal RepublicinBudapest.
Withthe airnof clarifyingthe situation betweenthecontfactingparties,thepleriipotentiaryof the Federal
Government requeststhat the Hungarianparty disclose its position withregard to the operatiand
cornpletionof thebuildingof the Gabcikovo NagyrnarosBarrage.
The Czechoslovakparty notifiedtheHungarianPlenipotentiariesoitsposition. The Czechoslovakparty
willsetdown its positionin the minutes subsequenttthepresentationof the Hungarianparty'sofficial:
position.
21 The detemination oftheexarninationsnecessarjfforthepreparationoffurther decisions.
The Plenipotentiariesofthe Czech andSlovakRepublicnotifieditspattneron6 September1990thatthe
Government of the Slovak Republic approved the estabIishmentof an Expert Committee at the
KornenskyUniversity inBratislava whichis subordinato thePlenipotentiariesof the Czeçhand Slovak
Republic. Thetearn'sassignmentistoperfom researchandto coordinateresearchwhichis perfomed by
Federal and foreign scientific institutions withthe assistance of the European Comrnunity. The
Plenipotentiaryofthe Czechand Slovak Federal Republipcroposes to the Hungarianpartythat itake
part directlyin twork of theExpertCommitteewiththe participationof Hungarianspecialists. In this
casethedirectionof thespecialistteamwouldix govemedby thePlenipotentiariessofbothcouniries.
At the request of the Czechoslovak party,the Hungarian partyprornised to present io the
Czechoslovak party before 15 November 1990 the assessrnent of the speciaIist opinion which
substantiatedtheungarian party'decisiontocompletelyabandontheNagymarosand suspendal1works
on the GabcikovoNqgyrnatosBarrage.
The Plenipotentiariagreed to debate the presentematenal on their planned meeting in mid
December and reach an agreement with regard to the specialist examinations necessary for the
preparationoffurtherdecisions. The renewal of theJoint OperativeCroup'sactivity, in accordance with the developed situation,
3/
and the determinationof thenextassignments.
'Fhe Plenipotentiaries agreed thatthey will renew the activofthe Joint OperativeGroup. The
Hungarianparty disclosesthaton 15 Octokr 1990 itnamedDr. LajosZshmboki as the directorof the
Hungarian sectionof the Joint OperativeGroup. They agreedthe next meeting ofthe Joint Operative
GroupTeamwillbe held between5-9Novemkr 1990inBudapest withthe followingprogramme:
3.1 The procedureforthe temporaryoperation of the weirat Dunakiliti.
3.2 The supervision regardingthe validityof the flood prevention planfor theDunakilitiregion.
The discontinuationof faults anddeficienciesdetectedbythe Hungarianparty with regard tothe
3.3
constructionprojectsalready builtonCzechoslovaktemtory.
3.4 The fimd preventionarrangements atthe tail-race canal,thepremisesofthe GabcikovoBarrage
andthe head-race canal.
3.5 The buildingoftheinterna]watersuccionplantat Szalka.
3.6 The utilisationof raisedlandvsedon Czechoslovakterritoryby thecontractorsof the Hungarian
Party.
3.7 The removalof theearthimpedimentat theGabcikovo~~droe1ectriC PowerPlant.
3.8 Notification withregardto thebuildingofthe observational constructionprojectsandthe results
ofthe observationsupto now.
3.9 Notificationfromthetwoparties of workcompletedby 1990or in thepmess of being
completedin 1990.
TheJointOperativeGroupTeamwillholdits nextnegotiationbetween3-7December 1990.
4/ Furtherinitiativesothe HungarianParty.
The Hungarian Plenipotentiarieshas already initiatedat a meeting on 6 September 1990, the joint
organization of an international scientific conferencefor the ecologiand scientific problems of the
barrage.
The Hungarian GovernmentPlenipotentiary infomed and invited the Czechoslovakplenipotentiaryto
the Austrim, Czechoslovak and Hungarian trilateral conference regardingthe development of land
ktween Budapest andVitnna tobeheld in Budapest on 25-26 January 1991with regard to the questions
concemingland developmentandseiîiementarrangementin BudapestandVienna.
The Hungarian Partynotified itsCzechoslovakpartner of an initiative toestablish a l~ilateral
international nature protectipark.
The Hungarian Plenipotentiariesnotified the Czechoslovak partyof the request sent to the World
Bank fora reductionof the loan in the interest of the environment-friendlydevelopmentof the region
affectedby thebarragesystem.
The Hungarianparty stressedtheimportanceoftheconsistentlyobjective notificationof publicopinion.The Plenipotentiaryof the Czech and Slovak Govemmentacknowledges the notification. He will
disclosehispossibleparticipationnhetriIateclonferencatthenextplenipotentiary eeting.
TheMinutes weremade intwocopiesinHungarian andSlovakandis validinbothoftheselanguages.
Budapest 18October1990.
ThePIenipatentiarieostheRepublicofHungary,
Dr. GyolrgyShsondi Kiss
ThePlenipotentiarieoftheCzechandSlovakFederalRepublie,
DorninikKocinger Annex 38
TheOfficeof thePrime Minister
TheGovernmentCornmissionerof the Danube Barrage
DV-KBT-529190
To MrDominikKocinger
The GovernmentPlenipotentiaryofthe
Czech and Slovak FederalRepublic
Bratislava
Honoured MisterCommissioner!
We welcomedthevisitof youandprofessotMuchata uson TNovember.Afterexaminingyourresearch
proposa1on the ecologicalmodellingof the condition of subsurface watersin the Danubian AIfold
submitted tous at thismeetinogu,r standpoinisthe following.
Thisresearchproposalisbasicallytwo-sided; it proposesthe consultantstatusfor the Hungarianside in
a programmewhich is of a CzechoslovakPHAREnature. This featureis in contradictionwith our
previous agreements according to which i, the preparationof a decisian on the solutionof the barrage
problem, we were toset upjoint professionalgroupsand jointly choosenonpartisanexpertsin order to
assistdecisionmakingintheresolutionoftheprobIemsrelatingtotheBarrageSystern,
Nevertheless,we do not refuseto pamke in the programme,if it can bechanged to become a tmly
trilaterallybalancecione. The programmecould be acceptable to us after adoptionby the Hungarian
ScientificAcademyor bytheTechnical University of Budapest. MisterBrinkhorstwillalsobe informed
onthis,ourstandpoint.
Naturally,t'his projectmay be onlypart of the necessaryexploratoryresearch for thejoint preparationof
a decision. We wantto returnto thesetasksin linewith the spiritof the negotiations held with Minister
VavrousekandGovernment Commissioner Kocinger.
We regrettedto seeatourmeetingon 12-18October, thatfollowingthe Slovakside'swithdrawal wewere
unableto fom the JointExpertCommissions andto invite impartial experts to settlethe openscientific
questions,al1the issues which werein accordancewithOurmeetingof 5 September. We followedthis
and m.,e no unilateralsteps,wdid notinviteexperts unilaterally.
To keep alive the procedure for the joint preparationof a decision, foll~wing Mister Kocinger
govemmentcommissioner'r sequest, we did consent,asan initiastep,tohand over toour partneronce
againthe summaryof expert opinions thasterved asa basisforthe Hungarianside'sdecisionsuptill now.
Thereasonforthis requestwasthatallegedlyat that timetheHungariansidehadwithdrawntheseexpert
opinions.
At our meeting heldon 7 Novernbet it was clarified that this withdrawalhad not taken place.
Nevertheless,for thesakeof good cooperation1appendto my letterthe list of expertmaterialsmade in
two languages from 1989 together with the enurnerationof Hungarianofficial expert materials that
served asa basisforHungariangovemrnentdecisionsandjoint expertdiscussions.
For next meeting, scheduledforthe middleofDecember,accordingto theptotocolat ourmeetingof 17-
18 October, we shall prepareand deliveradditionalmaterial usefut for foming a basis for the joint
preparation ofthedecision. Thisshallbethesummaryofjoint expertmaterials andofficialmaterialsthat
servedas a basis forthesematerials.Finally1 wantto informyou Mistergovemment commissioner, thatin iine with our discussion in
September,thatexpertgroupswerefarmedin thHungari anademy af Sciencesandthatwe areready
toagreeontheircompositionwithyou.
Budapest,15November1390
Respectively
Dr. SdmsondK i issGyorgy Annex 39
On 19 November 1 got your letter from the CzechoslovnkErnbassy. In conneccion withthe
PHAREaidrequestlet me expresswy conviction that ourproposalforjoint actiondoes notçonflict with
our previous proposais. Already on 6 September, 1990 on the occasion of Ourfirst negotiatians ir;
Bratislava 1 infmed you that the Czechoslovakparty is planning touse the help of the Council of
Europe in solving the open questionsrelating to the ecological environment in the operation of the
Gabcikovo Hydroelectric PowerPlant.
Inorder to obtain thesummarieswhich are acceptedby both contractingparties 1suggested that
the Hungarian party take steps on the professionaiand financial arrangementfor utilizing PHAREaid,
which is up to this time only bilateral, namelyit exisis between Czechoslovakiaand the Council of
Europe. In orderto speedup thisproçessand to ensure thefinancialguaranteeof the aid,we worked out
a proposa1withthefollowing title: "Proposal for the agreemeotnmutualcooperationin cannection with
the PHAREprogramme". I sentyou thisproposalon 26 October 1990with a reguest for thenegotiation
of iton 7 November 1940and also to explorethe possibilityof concludingan agreement. HenceI mit
see any contradiction involving former agreements, and neithern1 seeany evidenceof unilareralsteps.
Our proposa1concerningthe modelling systemof surface and subsurfacewaters is valideven if
we didn'lgetaccessto the PHAREaid. Wemightspecifyand solveotherproblemsfollowingthis kind of
method.
1am happy to recognizethat the Hungarian partyis ready to take part in thprojectand1 expect
your suggestions concerningthe fulfilment of the trilateral treatyItis my opinion concerning your
regret that,ecause of the retraction of the Slovakparty you were notable to organize the meeting of
civic groups of experts on the agreed date of 6 September 1990. Since that time concerning the
clarificationfthe openand scientificquestionsandthe invitationofoutsideexpertsIhave the following
viewpoint:1aisoregret thatit is nottheCzechoslovakParty'sfault irhatthe signingof the protocoloftlie
negotiationson 6 Septemberwasn'table to be completed. You answeredour proposa1 inthe protocol
sent by us after 30 days, when the preparationsof the further negotiating materials had happened. I
suppose yciuused the expression"Slovakparty" by mistakesince on the basis of the intergovernmental
agreementand of the agreementon the statutes of commissioners 1act inthe name of the Czechoslovak
FederalRepublicand notonbehalf ofthe Slovakparty.
The factof our submittinga proposalon the modellingsystem of thewaterquality, and that this
proposal referredto a joint solution ato theterritoryof both StatesshowsOurwillingness tosolve the
probiems of the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystemjointly. Namelythis is such a question already
covering morethanthe territoryof the Gabcikovo system.
On this questionthe first specialçommitteeGanstart work even withoutthe negotiations of an
jntergovernmentalcommission. During the negotiations heldon 7 November 1 gave the name of Prof.
Muha who is the head of the Czechoslovakgroup and I also introducedhim to you. This is how the
Czechodovak party envisionsthe formationof open questions, and thisis how it likes to contribute to
their settlernentwith facts and not with needlalienation.
Fromthis aspect the annexof the materialattachedto your letterdidn'tmeet with my expectations
those which we commonly discussed (rnarked with "X")and especially those which were suil not
receivedby theCzechosEovak party(markedwith two "X").
Onthe basisof the materialsfamiliarto us it inotpossible toestablishthe cornplexof problems
which wouIdbethe object ofresearch,and inthe sameway it is not possible tocreare special groups
responsibly. Itispossiblethat the scientificspecial opinionscontain thesemateriawhich occur in yourannex,or inothermaterialsbeingpreparedbyyourselfforthepreparation of thejointdecisionand which
were not knownbeforebytheCzechoslovak Partyuntilthistirne.
In order to organisethe responsiblepreparationconçerningprirnarilyour furtherprofessional
discrissionsand agreements,we wouldlike toask you, Mr.Commissione o sendus al1 thedocuments
whichcan beof helpwithit.
Bratislava,21 Novemkr 1990
Ing. DominikKocinger Annex 40
LE'ITE FROM MR. J~ZJEFANTALL, HUNGARIA PRNIMEMINISTE MRMR,MARIAN CALFA,
CZECHOSLOV PRAKMME INISTE R4,DECEMBE1R 990
ThePrime MiriisteroftheRepublicof Hungary
To MT.MarianCalfa,
%me MinisteroftheCzechandSlovakRepublic
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
The unresolvedissueof theGabciko-NagymarosBarrageis a seriouseconomicand politicalproblem
forrnygovemmentand thecountry.1beiieve,iisintheinterestof ourcountriesand both of uwethat
determinethe faoftheplantby thejoint re-examination and modifoftheinterstatecontract.
It appears that the bilateral negotiationsconcerning this, betweenthe plenipotethetwoesof
countries,Mr. Kocingand Mr. SdmsondiKiss,havereachedastandstill.
Hawever, the negotiations between MinisteJrozef Vavrousek,from yourgovemment,and Sandor K,
Keresztes, MinisterofEnvironmentalProtectionand LandDevelopmentonOurpart, seemprornising.
Duringthesenegotiations, aprincipleagreement wasconcludedbytwoministers,wirhregard to the
submissionofa proposa1concerninga joint intergovernmentalcommiCopreparean amendment of
theTreatybetween thetwo Governments.Thework ofthe committeecouldbe assistedbyexpertsof
the EuropeanCommunitiesaccordingto our agreementwi(EC. C)ommissionerRipade Meana. The
CzechandSlovakandHungarian sectionofthcomrnitteewillseperatelysubmittheirproposaisfortheir
governments.
Mygovernmenthasalreadydiscussed andapprovedthisproposalin Septemberwiththerequirement that
itsimplementationwilldependupontheCzecand Slovakpartyd'ecision.
Inthislighthequestion othesettlernentof the issuenot onlyhasinterna1politicalrelevancefor both
sides, but is alan impedimentfor bilateral relations and influencesthe international viewof our
countries; whichiswhy 1 ask the PrimeMinister tdo everything possible in order for Minister
Vavrousek toreceive the necessary authmizationthe establishmentof a committee and for the
Commencemeno tfnegotiations.
Budapest14 December 1990
Thankyou, Annex 41
AIDE MEMOIR REGARDING THEMEEiTINGOFTHE HUNGARW AND CECHOSLOVA K OVERNMENT
PLENIPOTENTEAB RRIAT,ISLAV AJ,ANUAR1 Y941
ATDE MEMOIRE
Ntgotiatians with regard to questions about the Gabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage between the
Plenipotentiariesofthe Czechand Slovak Federal Repucndthe Republicof Hungarywhich was held
inBratislavaon9January1991.
The appendixofthe"AideMemoire "containstheIisofnames oftheparticipantsof the negotiation.
Theplenipotentiaries discussed the following questions:
1./ Regarding the notification othe resolutions of the Czech and Slovak and Hungarian
govemrnents.
On 20 December 1990 the Governmentof the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic discussed the
announcementregardingtheproblemsof theGabcikovo Nagymaros BarragSeysternanddeterminedthat
theproblemsof the Gabcikovo NagyrnarosarrageSystemmusibe resolvedwithinthe frameworkof the
InterstateTreaty via negotiationsbetweengovernmentdelegations. Mr. V Meciar,the Presidentof the
SlovakGovernrnent,was namedas headof the govemmentdelegationby the Czechand SlovakFederal
Republic. Thecommencementofthe negotiationswillbe determinebydiplornaticitinerary.
On 20 December1990the Governmentof theRepublicof Heingarydeterminedthat the InterstateTreaty
was theresultofadeficientdecisionbecausedid nottakeenvironmentalprotectionpointsof view into
consideration. The Governmentof the Republicof Hungary agreed wand confirmedthe contentof
previous govemment resolutions regarding the discontinuationof construction work. Itgave
authwizationfor certainministersand commissionersto kgin negotiationsthe Governmentof the
Çzech and SlovakFederal Republic withregaro thedissolutionof the 1977InterstateTreand the
kafting ofa newcontract.
2.1 Thehandingwer of thematerialcontainedintheminutesof the negotiation heldin Oçtober 1990
inBudapest.betweenthe plenipotentiaries.
-(Assessment)
-(W material).
The Plenipotentiaryof the Govemmentof the Czcand SlovakFederaIRepublicpromisedto revealby
15 February 1991the positionof the CzechandSlovakpartywithregardtthepresentedmaterial. The
PIenipotentiarywiIl makea recornrnendatiothePlenipotentiaq of the HungarianRepublicregarding
further steps.
The Hungarianplenipotentiaryannoaincedthat by 15 Wbruary 1991the assessrnentof the principles
whichserve as thebasisfortheworkinoutofa newcontractwillbe revealed.
3,1 The plenipotentiariesgithedirectorsof the Joint OperationaiGr(JOG) the assignrnentto
rnake an announcementwith regard to the activity of the Joint Operationai Gandpta make a
recornrnendationfotheresolutionofthdebatedquestions.4.1 The Hungarian partygave notificationoftheassessrnentof international aw withregard io the
situatioof thebuildingof theGabcikovoNagymarosBarrageSystemand theprocedureforthe payrnent
of lossesoccasionedon bothsidesbythediscontinuation ofbuilding.
The "AideMernoire" wasmadeintwocopiesintheSlovaklanguage.
Bratislava9January1941. Annex 42
LETTE RROM MR.MARIAN CALFAC , ZECHOSLOV ARIME MINISTER T,MR. J~ZSEF ANTALL,
HUNGARI ARNIMM~ISTER1,5 JANUARY 1991
Prime Minister
Czech andSlovakFederalRepublic
Prague,15 January1991
DearMT.PrimeMinister!
In referenceto yourletterof 14 December, pleasmeaioinfom you as to the stepsadoptedbythe
Government ofthe Czech andSlovak Federal Republic regardingeabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage
System.
The Govemrnent of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republicexpressies agreement toholding
negotiationçbetween governmentaldelegatiowiththe HungarianPartyfor the resolution the
complex problem of the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage System and hnamed Vladimir Meciw,
Presidentof the Govemrnentof the Slovak Republic, tobe the leaderof the GovernrnentalDelegation
whichwillconduccnegotiatiowiththeHungarianParty.
The Governmentof the Czech andSlovakFederal RepublicsimultaneouslyauthorisesJosef Vavrousek,
Minisierof the Governmentof the Czechand SlovakFederalReputoworkin closecontactwiththe
Fresidentof the Slovak EnvironmentalCornmitteein organisinginternational assistancein judging the
ecologicalproblems. .
DearMt. Pnrne Minister,1believethabthe steps adoptedbyt1e Governmentof the Czechand Slovak
FederalRepublicwillassistinresolvingthe complicated
matterof theGabcikovo-NagymaroBarrageSystem.
With deep respect,
MarianCalfa
The Honourable
Mr. J6zsefAntall,
President of
the GovernmentofîheRepublic of Hungary
Budapest 89
Annex 43
AIDE MEMOIR OFETHEMEETING OFTHE EXPERTS OFTHE HUNGARIA AND SLOVAA KCADEMI EFS
SCIENCE ÇUDAPEST, 13-14FEBRUARY 1991
AIDEMEMOIRE
From the discussionsof the Hunganan Academyof Science(HAS)and the Slovak Academyof Science
(SAS).
The subjeçtof the discussions:Joint scientificresearchprirnarilyon the eissuesconcerningthe
Hungarian -CzechoslovaksharedDanube sectionandthe areasrelatedto it.
The date and pIaceofdiscussion:13-14 February 1991,The HungarianScientificAcademyP3udapestJ
andthe I-IAS' EcologicalandBotanicallnstitlV~cr~t6tl.
Pteliminaries:The Head- Secretary of the HAS in November 1990called upon the Slovak Scientific
Academyto propose expertgroupsto review the above mentionedtopic. The Slovak expert grouhas
onlyrecentiybeen preparedto entertainthe saidinvitation.
TheRepresentativesofthe HAS.
xxx. listnot trandated
The representativesof the SAxxx
The delegationsagreedthat thesubjectof discussionsisthe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrartfollows:
1. The evaluationoftheprevious cooperation
2. Theconditionsandpossibilitiesof futurecooperation
3. Measures necessaryto take forthesakeof future cooperation
4. Closingevaluation
1.Theevaluationofthepreviouscooperation
Both delegationsbriefiy describthepreviousresults of the joint programmedefined by the HAS and
SSA under the auspices of the agreement on cooperation betweenthese Academies, named as "The
geological, hydrological and biologic-ecologicalresearch of Kisalfoldand the utilization of scientific
achievementsin solvingecologicalproblems".
The delegdions sharedthedeclaratiothat:
The resultsof previous cooperationin partiçular scientific fieldpartial.The cooperation was
envisagedinrathergeneraltems andtogetherwiththe shortagein matenalandtechnical aspectsresulted
in the fact that more research wasperformednot jointly but collaterally. The recent experiences could
servean a goodbasis forfurther,moreintensivecooperation.
2. Theconditionsandpossibilities forfuture cooperation
Surveyingthe presentstateof the explorationof problemsrelated to the construction of the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrageSystem,bothdelegationsdeclared:
1) The research on the consequenccs and ecological risof Iheconstruction of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage Systemwill be dealt witb strictly on n scientific basis, withour political
considerations. The achievementreached thatway should serveas astnrtingpoint in the makinof
objectivedecisio bysthe authoritiesofboth sides.2) The topicsofcooperation:
a- To contribute to theknowledge about the impacts of the supposed ecological risksand
consequenceson theaffected area.
b- To constiiutastandardizedmonitoring netfor theobservationof the ecological changesof the
area,togetherwith ajoint systemof informationand joint database.
F-To pursuejoint researchin orderto getacquaintedwiththe affectedarea,afterharmonizingthe'
workingmethods.
3)Further,theresponsibilityandcenterof interestshould be directly concentratdn the institutes.
4) The cooperationisplannedtobe implernentedaccording to thefollowing stages:
a- First stage: (un31June 1941)In orderto elaborate thefrarneworkagreementon coopration
between theHAS and the SAS asa preconditionto firm cooperationa common/sharedprogrammeis
necessary.
Exchangeof informationofçoncerntothe ma andconnectedproblerns.
Theelaborationof thescheduleof coopetationi
b-Secondstage: (until31December1991)Theformationofjoint expertteams.
Theconfirmation of thoseshort-termorlong-tem plans forwhich the institutesofboth Partieshavebeen
providedwiththe conditionsnecessaryforfirmcooperation.
c- Thethirdstagewillpossibly lastuntil31Decemkr 1992:Theconclusionof short-term plans.
Continuousinformationonthelong-term plans.
d-Thefourthperiod possibly will lastuntil 1995:Gradua1condusionof long-terrnplans.
After eaçh stagean evaluationof the cooperationand its resultswill take place. Afie same tirne,the
partieswillconfirmfuturecooperation.
3. Measuresnecessaryfor the sakeof future cooperation:
The delegationsagreedthat:
1. They will work out the catalogue of problems andecological risks stemming from the
construction of the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System. The mutual exchange of the catalogue
shouldtakeplaceMore the nextmeeting.
2. Theywillwork outthe programmeproposa1 astothe plans connectedrothe affectedarea.
3. Atthenext meetingthedelegationswiIl bepreparedtoset upjoint expertternis.
4. Theproposal of thedelegationsisthat themembersof thesetearnswilIbe expertsapprovedby
bothsides. Foreignexpertswill be invitedtojoin theseteamsonlyin the roIeof adviseror consultant ia
joint solutionbythepartieshasnot been reached.
5. The basis of cooperation willbe the inventoryof existingknowledge on the affected area
compiledby the relative institutes.
6. The intentionof delegationsis to ensurefurthercooperationin the international activityover
problemsrelatedto theDanube flood plan andthe ecological problemsofstatesalang theDanube.
7. Boh delegationsconsider the Planon the Establishmentof the TrilateralDanubePark located
nearby of great importance, the implernentaiion and maintenance strategyof which should be
underpinned by scientificresearch. S. Therequestof delegationsta thHAS and totheSAS toindicatethe personorcornmitteein
chargeof liason.
The discussionswere characterizedby mutual understandingand efforts to solve professionallythe
ecologicalrisksandproblernsstemmingfrornthosethreatstatheterritoryof theGabcikovo-Nagymaros
BarrageSystem. Frogresshasbeenmadein clarification ofthe methodsandtasksof future bilateral
cooperazion.
Attheend ofthemeetin tgedelegationof theSASinfomed thedelegationof theHAS of thetechnical
detailsandecologicalaspectsof C variant,approvedby theSlovak governmenatndon theecologically
valuedD variant,
The signed agreementscouldserve as solid basis for the elaborationof firm programmesof future
cooperation.
(signature) (signature)
Dr.MilanRuziçha Dr. Arp8d Berczik
Director,Headof Director,Headof
Delegation Delegation Annex 44
LEITER FROM MR. DOMMM KOCINGER,CZECHOSLDV AKOVERNME NLTENLPOLENTIAR TOY,MR.
GYORGK Y. SAMSOND HI, NGARIG AQNVERNME PLTNIPOTENTIAR Y5BBRuARY 1991
Telex!
FIenipotentiaryofthe
Governmentof the Czechand Slovak
FederalRepuhlicand of the
GovernmentoftheSlovakRepublic
regardingthe Gabcikovo-NagymaroB sarrageSystem
Dominik Kocinger Bratislava,5febmary 1991
No.:SV-45/91
DearPlenipotentiary!
Duringour meeting of 9 January 1991made a promise thatI wouldsendyourhe Czech and Slovak
position on thematerials1receifromyou atthemeetingby 15February1491.
Afterstudyingthe materials andaskingtheopinionof theCzechoslovakscientificandplinstitutes
and bodies and conservation organisations1, determinethat these maternotscontain any new
probIemswhjch have,asyetnot, been discussed.
In rny lettof25 November 1990,No. SV-163190,Irequestedalthematerialsonthe listcompileby
you by15 Novernber1990. Unfortunately,1haveyet besentthosernaterials.
Inthe interesofdebatingtheopenquestionsrelatiotheconstnictionand operationof the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros BarrageSystem,1propose thata meetingof Plenipotentiariesbe conveneddunng Febmary
1991,during whichwe would forma joint workinggroup. Thisworkinggroupwoulddefinthoseopen
questions which obstnict the constructionand operatiothefHungarian sideof the Gabcikovo
Hydroelectricplant anddo by theendofMarch 1991. We would thenresolvethesedefinequestions
throughexperts,perhapswiththe assistanceof international stelp.lish
At thesametime,I determinethat the Hungarian Party hatoysubmitanytechnical proposal for the
modificationof thejoint project whichwouldbasisfothenegotiationsof theJoint operativeGroup.
DearPlenipotentiary!It is rnyconvictiowetcan developa properatmospherefor the completionof
the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosHydroelectric Plant System throtheresolutionof the professional and
technicalproblems.
WithGreetings,
Dominik Kocinger
The Honourable
Dr. GyorgyKissShsondi
Plenipotentiaryofthe Gavernment
of the RepublicofHungary
authorisedintheareaof theconstruction
and operationoFheGabcikovo-Nagymaros
Hydroelechc PIantSystem.
Budapest 93
l
Annex 45
Office ofthePrimeMister
Danube Barrage Plenipotentiary
DV-KBT-270,1990
DominikKocinger
Ministerswovodného a
lesnéhohospodkstva SR
84218Bratislava
Lovomeskeha2
1 DearPlenipotentiary! C
Pleaseallewme, in keepingwiththatwhich we discussedat ourmeetingin Bratislava9Ianuary 1991,to
send youa summq of thoseprincipleswhichmay serveasa basisforthe internationaltreaty which we
proposed.
l r
1 was gratefuiohavereceivedyour lettertoday,1willreplytoyour initiativeswithina matterof days.
Budapest15Febniary 1991
Dr. GyorgySgrnsondiKiss
1 Appended:2pages.
The Hungarian Republic and the Czech and Slovak Republic, reaching that the construction and
operation of the Gakikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System wouldinitiate imversible ecological process
which wouldresult in grave environmentalrisks on the territories of both nations, wouldendangerthe
region's&inking water supply, the quantity of river water, fishing conducted on the Danube and the
livingworld,foresltrand agricultureofthe affectardas,
Taking into considerationthe fact thatthecontinuingof suspensionof consmiction wowould require
seriousfinancialsacrificeson bothparts,
1
have decidedtonot constructthatGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System and that they will conclude a
maty tothiseffectandregardingthe settlementoftheresultsof investmentworkdoneto date.
1. The ContractingPartiesshall,othebasisof common agreement, terminatetheTreaty
concludedin Budapeston 16September1977betweenthe WungarianPeople'sRepublic and
theCzechoslovakSocialistRepublicregardingthe Construction andOperationof the
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem and arnendedby the Memorandum dated6 Febniary
1977,as well asal1otheragreementswhichthe ContractingParties agreethat al1such
agreementsas mayhave beenconcludedbythevariousbodiesofthe ContractingPartiesfor
thesamepurposeswillalsolosetheirvaliditycontemporaneously.
'
2. TheContraciingPartiesdeclarethat theyc~nOuieioconsidervalidtheboundarylines
establisheby the PeaceTreatysignedby themon 10Febniary 1947.
3. The ContractingPartieswill begin,withoutdelay, toassessany investmentwork thatrnahave
beencompletedas perthe Treatyof 1977. For thispurpose,theywillestablishjoint working
groupswhichwouldmaketheirreports astotheresultsof saidassessmentby .................91
tothe Governmentsofthe Contracting Parties.4. TheÇontractingPartiesshall, onthebasisof saidreports,detemineanylosseswhicharethe
resultsof theworkwhichhasbecorneredundant.During the courseofthe determinatioonf
losses,onlythoseexpensesrnaybecountedwhich,
-
areattributablexclusivelytotheconstructionofthe BarrageSysrernr,egardlessof
thenationalityofthe cornpaniesundertakintgherelatedwork,
-
cannotbeusedforotherpurposes,
-
werecompletedpriortothepointintirnewhenoneContracting Partyfirstbrought
intoquestiontheadvisabilityoftheconstructionoftheentireBarrage System.
Lostprofitsdonot constitutedarnages.
5. Lossesshall be bornebytheContractinP gartiein qua1 proportions.TheContracting Party
whose lasses exceedonehalfof thetotalamountmaydemand reirnbursemen otf the
difference.
6. The ContractingPartiesshalEi,n a separateagreement,sertlethe questionof whatis to be done
withthoseprojectsalreadycompleted,of how toresolvetheproblemsofnavigationand floodprotection
and of how to executethe physical/environmenta rleconstructiof the region, attemptingto attract
pmcess internationarlesources. Annex 46
L ~ R FROM MR MIKL~ KSIRALYH EADOFTHESECRETAR IFTHEHUNGARIAN MINISTEWRTTHOUT
PORTFOLIO M, MR.IVANLHXAH, EADOFTHE SECRETAR IFTHE PRESIDENOFTHE SLOVAK
REPUBLIC,5MARCH 1991
Dr. FerencMid1
MinisterWithoutPortfolio
ToMY. IvanLexa
Headof theSecretartfthePresident
of theGovernmentftheSlovakRepublic
Fax:42 7315484
DearHeadof theSecretariat!
1wassurprîsedtohearof theofficialdeclmadeibyMr. AbaffyDusanduringthemeetingothe
Hungarian-CzechndSlovakBoundarWatersCommissionsanubesub-Cornmittee eetinginGy&in
March 1991, acçorditowhichthe Slovak Governmenthas orderedthatthe so-"ç"lVariant
(teçhnicalprovisionalsolution)implemworkkgin on2April1991.
1am surethatyoutoo,knowhow sensitivelythis decisionmayaffectour bilateralnegtheationsin
nearfuture,lhereforethatyouinformusofthepositiotheSlovakGovernment.
1thankyouinadvanceforyourreply.
Dr. Mikl6sKirAly
HeadoftheSecretariat
Budapest,25Mach 1991 Annex 47
Bratislava 26 Mach 1991
NO. 63-SV191
Mr. Dominik Kocinger
GovernmentPlenipotentiaryofthe Government
of theCzechand Slovak Federd Republicand
of theGovernmentofthe Slovak Republicfor
the constructionandoperationoftheGabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrageSystem
DearMr. GovemmenrPlenipotentiary!
1 acknowledge the existence ofsome open questions sernainingwhich we have to solve ata
govemrnental Plenipotentiary level andwhich require a more in depth study of the problem. This
concemsthe answer which you gave ro my proposal of 15February 1991:establishing a joint working
group which would define at an expert level the problems of the completionand operation of the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem.
Inmy standpoint on thebasis of your suggestion 1mivedatthe draft of the basic principles of the
newconvention which1wrote on 15February 1991.
In spiteof this fac1 thinkit is necessarytosolve in parallel those operative problems of the
constructionwhich are the cansequences of the suspensionof construction on the Hungatianside and
those which have still not been settled by governmental delegations in the course of negotiations. It
concems the areasunder ongoing construction in thetemtary af CSFR and about the hand-over and
receipt of consmiction works alreadycornrnencedwhichneed tobecornpletedby the Hungarian Party on
the basis of the Interstate Trea1consider it necessary to negotiate the damrning of the Danube river-
bedin Dunakiliti in the temitorof the CSFRand the substitution of naturaearthby temporary grave1
and concrete blocks which has already been completed, and in addition 1feeitnecessaryto discuss a
couple ofquestions which have beenaskedby the headsof the Joint Operative Group.
RespectecM i r, GovernmentPlenipotentiary, 1 would suggest the negotiation of the above mentioncd
question in thfirst halfof April Ientmst ytofix theexact tirneof the negotiations.
With regards:
J. Kocinger
Dr. GyorgyKiss Shsondi
Budapest
the GovernmentPlenipotentiary ofthe Republic of Hungaty Annex 48
PROPOSAL BY THE GOVERNME N TTHE REPUBLIC OF HUNGAR FORTHESUSPENSION OFWQRK ON THE
GABCIKOVO-NAGYMAR BOARRAG SESTEM ONBASISOFAJOTNTAGREEMENT, BUDAPEST,
22 APRL 1991
The Republic of Hungary andthe Csechand Slovak Republic,in considerationof the questions raised
regardingthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systema,waitingclarificatiand requiringfurther study,
agreedon the following.
1. The State Parties will suspendwork still in progress commenceon the buis of the Treaty
Concluded in Budapest on 16 September 1977 between the People'sRepublic of Hungary and the
CzechoslovakSocialistRepublicconcemingthe construction and operationofthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
BarrageSysternamendedby the Minutesdated 6 February 1989. The suspension willbeineffect tintil
30 September 1993. At the sametirnetheStatePartieswill , duringthe aforementionedperiod, refrain
from undertakingany unilateralrneasurestheDanuberegionwhichwoutdaffect the physicalor legal
statusoftheriver in anyway.
2. AHadditionalexpensesandlosseswillbe incurredseparatelyby both parties
3. During the period of suspension theState Parties will independentinaaccordance with the
researchprogramsoftheir scientificacademiesperformexpertexaminationforthe purpose of preparing
treatiesregardingthe terminatofntheTreatyof 1973.
Theexaminationswill beperfmed especially inthe followingareas..
- protectionof the quantity andqualityof the drinkingwatersupply,
l
- hygienicvirologyandbacteriology,the microbial processethewater'smaterialtrafic,
- geology(hydrogeology,tectonics,seismology),
-
the composition of life forms along the cornmonsection of the Danube, as well as the
biological andecologicalstatusandself-cleaning capabilitiessame,
-
the composition of life forms along the Szigetkoz and Zitny Ostrov tnbutary branch
systemsand hydroIogica1statusandmaterialtrafficofthem
- groundwaterconditionsand utilisationof soi1
-
otherexaminations whicharedeterminedtobe necessaryby eitherof the State Parties.
TheStatePartiesmayinvolveforeignexpertsin theexaminationsin so faasitprovestobe necessary.
4. The Czech and Slovak FederalRepubFic rakesnotices lhat the Council of Ministers of the
Hungarian PeoplelsRepublicsuspendedwork at Nagymaros on 13 May 1989 which theGovemment of
theRepubIicof Hungary does notwish tocontinue and simultaneouslybeganthe reinstatement of the
region. The Republicof Hungary is prepareto begin negotiationswith tCzech and Slovak Federal
Republic todiscussthe legal consequenceof the Governmentdecision referred to in this paragraph,
subsequent tothe conclusionofstudiesundertaken regardingthe whole Barrage System.
Budapest,22April 1991, 98
Annex 49
PROPOSAL BYTHE GOVERNME OFTTHEREPUBLICOF HUNGAR REGARDINGTHE TERMMATLO NFTHE
%TY CONCLUDE ID1977 BETWEEN THEHUNGARM BNPLES =PUBLIC AND THECECHOSLOVAK
SOÇIALIS RTEPUBLICREGARDING THECONSTRUCT ANODOPERAT~O0 N1THE GABCMOVO-NAGYMAROS
BARRAG SEYSTEM B,UDAPES2 T2, APRI1991
(ThisisadraftregardingHungarytheMainPointsof anAgreement.)
The Republic ofHungwy and theCzech andSlovak Federal Republic,with the knowledge that the
construction and operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage SysnauEd causeirreversibIe
ecologicalrepercussionsresultingin grave environmentalriskstemitonesof both councriesand
endangeringtheregion'sdrinking watersupply, the quaoftriverwater, fishing conductedthe
Danube and theLivingworId,forestryandagricultureof thenffectedareas
have decided not to consmct the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systand will conclude a treaty
regardingthe setdementoftheresultsof investmentwarkdonetothepresent. This willbe donekeeping
in mind thaacontinuationof the suspensionof the constructionwill requireseriousfinancialsacrifices
forbothsides.
1. The StateParti shall, on the baiof ajoint agreement,terminate the Treaty concluded in
Budapest on 16 Septernber 1977 between the Hungarian People'sRepublic andthe Czechoslovak
Socialist Republic Regardingthe Construction andOperationof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage
Sysremamendedby the Memorandurndateé6 February 1977. In additionto thaswellas al1other
agreementswhichthe State Parties concludedthepurposeof executingthe said Treaty. The State
Parties establish that al1 agreements concludedfor the same purpose will dso be simulbneously
terminated.
2. The StatePartiesdeclashatthey will continueto considervdid boundarylines establishedby
thePeaceTreatysignedon 10Febniary1947,
3. The SatePartieswiltbegin,withoucdelay,the assessrnentof anyinveworknthatmay have
beencompletedaccordingto theTreat of 1977, For shispurposethey will establish workinggroups
which will preparetheirrepoasto the results of saidassessrn,...,..991to the Governments
of theStateParties.
4. The StatePartieshall,on basis of saidreports,detemine anylosseswhitheresult of any
unneceçsarywork, In thedeteminatiof losses,onlythoseexpensmay becountedwhich,
- are attributableexclusitothe constructiof theBarrage System,regardlesofthe
nationdityotheçompaniesundettakingtherelatedwork;
- cannotbe usedfoother purposes;
- were completedpriortothe datewhenone StatePart yirst brought iato questthe
advisabilioftheconshction oftheentirBarrageSystern.
Lostprofitsdo nat canstitutedamages.
5. Lossesshallbebornebythe StateParties equally.TheStatePartywhoselossesexceedone half
of thetotaamountis entitiedtoreimbursementofthedifference.
6. The StatePartiesshall, in a sepagreement ,ettlthequestionsof what is to be done with
those instnllationsalreadycompletehowfto resolvetheproblemofnavigation and floodprotection
alongthecomrnanboundar oytheriver anhow to executethe region'sphysicalnaturdreconsbuction
attemptingtotakeadvantageofinternatioresources.
Budapest, 22April,1991 - .-
99
Annex 50
PROWSAL BY THEGOVERNMEN OTTHE REPUBLI OF HUNGAR YORTHE IOIN RESOLUTION OFENERGY
QUESTIONSARISINGFROMTHEABANDONMENT OFTHE GABCMOVO-NAGYMAR BASRRAG SYSTEM,
BUDAPES 2T2,APRL L991
Both the Slovak andthe HungarianParties wouIdIose a certain amount of electricas aresultof
abandoningthe operationof thbarrage system.Allowingfor thedifferentconstructionalternativesthis
would be1000kilowattsofelectricity ayearforeacside.Thisamountis equivalentto3 percentofthe
utilisationofelectricityinSlevakia.
Wenote thatin addition tothe abovementionedtheHungarianParty is responsiblefor delivering1200
kilowattsof eleciricity Austriaas payment for the Ausûian loan made in çonnec+tionwith the
construction.
For the reasonsdescribedabove,Hungarian energyexpens have lieenexaminingfor severalyearsthe
alternative possibilities to compeer this lossof energy.f the variantsexamined, tmost cost
efficienteemsto bethesupplementingof thevariousgas heating plaused forthepurposesof heating
with a so-calledfront-endgas turbine, which wgive us the opportunityto produceelectricalenergy
on the sarnescaleas thelossesdescribedabove,whilethegas utilisationof thenation wouldincreaseby
onlyan insignificantarnount. In the interestsof realisingthe aboveprogr~ungrian Party shall
shortlyinitiateoperation ofthefirstgashturbineunitnextotheSzazhalombattaiOilRefinery.
Asfar as Hungaryis aware,similaropportunitiesexist onthe Slovak siaswell. For example, the
supplementationof the SlovnaftCompany'sthermalenergy needs could be undertakeby using a gas
turbineconnectedin a similarfashion. Likewise, the central gystemsof Bratislavaor Bratislava-
Ligetfalu,supplementeby suchequipment,could replacethe Iostelectncalenergyproductionin svcha
manner asto make the amountof extragas needed seemtnvially small taking into considerathen
double amountof gas whichwouldbe needed for heatingpurposes..
The HungarianParty recommends thatthe Partiesjointly examine, in co-operationwith the Slovak
energy planninginstituti,and on thebasisof experiencepreviouslyattainedby the HungarianParty,
the technicaloppotrunicieswhicwould enablethe replacementof lost productionin the eventthat the
Barrage Systemis abandonedThe productionof energy evengreater than that previouslyplanneby
suppIementationwith the aforernentioneddual-use gas turbine systern, wouldgreatly improveSlovak's
energy andenvironmentalsituation.
Budapest,22 Apnl, 1991. Annex 51
NOTE VERBAL FEOM THEMLNISTR OF FOREIG ANFFA~S OFTHE CZECH AND SLOVAK FEDERAL
REPUBCI COTHE EMBASS OFTHE REPUBLI OF HUNGARY 1, JUNE1991
NOTE VERBALE
lkt. no.: 100.119/91.
The Ministy of Foreign AffairstheCzech and SlovakFederal Republicpresentitcomplimentsto
the Ernbassyofthe Republicof Hungaryand, at therequestof the Governmentof the Czech and Slovak
FederalRepublic,referringto the resultsof the negotiations heldon 22 April 1991 in Butheest,has
honour to invite the Delegationof the Governmentof the Republicof Hungthe second round of
negotiationsregacting the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem.
The Delegationofthe Govemmentof the Czechand Slovak Federal Republicsuggeststhat the followjng
factsbethestartingpoinofthesenegotiations:
- The construction othe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systemoccurred on thebais of the
Treaty and relateddocuments concludedbetweentheCzechoslovakSwialist Repuandcthe Hungarian
People's Republicon16 September1877 regarding the constructionandoperation of the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrage System,
- the validity of the aforementioned Treaty and the related treaty dwuments has not been
questionedby &fier the Czech and StovakFederal RepublitheRepublicof Hungary and both State
Parties considerthe sametoremainvalid,
- the Czechoslovakparty considersthe actionsofHungarianpartysince13 May 1989to be in
contraventionoftheTreaty signedin 1977and the relatai treaty documentsand to the internationallaw
of treaties,
- as a resultofthe actionsofthe Hungarian party,asdescrikdabovCzech and SlovakFederal
Republichas suffered nationaleconomic,ecological,moral anddamagel ,
- theGovemmentof the Czech and SlovakFederal Republic,itheinterestsof a resolution of the
problemsof the Hungarianpartyandthdamage sufferedby the Czwhand SlovakRepublic,is prepared
todebateanydefinitesuggestionssubmittby the Hungarianpartywhichmayleadto a resolutionof the
situation.
The Govemment of the Czech and Slovak Republic wouId welcome the commencement ofthese
negotiations atanytimebetween26June and4 July 1991.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairsof the Czech and SIovakFederal Republic wouId like to availitself of
this opporiunityto renewits highestregardsto the Embassyof the RepHungarfthe assurancesof
its highestconsideration.
Prague,18 June1991,
To the Embassyofthe RepubIicof Hungary
Prague Annex 52
POSlTIONOF THECZECHSLOVA GOVERNMENT DAELEGATIO RENGARDING THEPOS~ONOF THE
HUNGAR~ RAEPUBLI ACNDTHE HUNGARIA ANCADEM OYFSCIENCE OS THE
EC~~GICA~JENVIRONMEE NFFAECTOSFTHE GABCIKOV BORRAGE B,RATISLAVA 1,JULY 1991
Using theresults to date of studies conducted ifieldof environmental protection and taking into
consideration the more broadly defined ecologiçal correlations, the Gzecho-Slpartirees two
problem areas pertaining to the commencement of operations at the Gabcikovo Power Plant tofbe
primgryimportance:
- the question of the development of the effecteZitny Ostrov under ground water supply,
especially froawnterquality viewpoint,
- the field of environmental protection, the disturbance of the ~[perative ecosystem'soperational
dynarnicsand the endangerment of the geo-foundatithefforests of the flood plains, and the condition
of thedry land and water flora and faunawhiçh istied to lhis area.
Itcan be determined that certain negativeeffects cm be found in the under ground water supply on the
given territory as a result of certain hydrological conditions presenton the Danube, iofthendent
Gabcikovo hydroelectric plant or the Hrusosvo resewoir. We are speakintheconsequences ofthe
area'shydrological conditions.
With consideration for the fact thatabcikovo power pant iforal1practical purposes, standing just
before completion, the option to liquidate the power plant cannot be considered andrthe sole
ecological solution. the Czecho-Slovak party is of the opiniansolution which would reduce the
ecological risk to future water sources and utilisationthereof andnegative effects on the environments to
acceptable leveispossible.
Thematerial presented btheHungarian party regarding the construction ofthe Gabcikovo hydroelectric
pant would undeniably lead to itsposition of rejection, whichit supported by listing ecoIogical risksand
consequences. The position, howeverdoesnot makeclear theextentof scientific grouand support
forthe listed effects.
Point 4 of the introtx'i?tethe material listed the ecological risks. 1 is not quiexact,The
dynarnic balance of the Danube has been influencedby man since ancient tirnes(flood defence measures,
excavation,grave1 mining, dredging,etc.)Such artificial interference in theDanube's bed created
changes, which were reflectedion changes to the hydrological system, as well.(The first mat
interferenctookplace during the reiofQueen Maria, wife of King Bela IV,between 1235-1279.)
Points 2, 3, and 4do not contain ecological risks. They only signal problewhich relate to the
signalling of expected ecological effects on the environment and create a sense of disinthe
prognoses. Wemust mention, in relation to Point4, theCzecho-Slovak partyplaces Fat emphasis
on the time factor, is,thus,alwnysand continuously at workon the tirne table for work related to the
tasksto be undertaken as a result oftechnical interferencein the DanuWs floodplains.
The accumulation of waterand the sedirnentation procein thereservoir, as is expressedinthe
introduction to Chaptercan bedescribed witthe assistance of a hydrodynamicbalancewell. With
this solution, th¢shape of the bed can lxchaaswell, so thatthe spand sedirnentation of floatage
andsluicing wouldix optimised.
The branch system of the river is presently isolated fram tflowby dams and thresholds. In the
pat,the forests oftflood plains would havebeen awash in teventof only 1300m31sec flow,whiIe
today this would onlyoccur at flow of 2500m3lse.c.Theextent of euttophyzation isdependenton aregularassessrnentoftheresultsobtainedbymonitoring,acceptanceofeffective measureswilltakeplace
on thepartofCzecho-Sioo vrgans,totheextentthatthe deveIopedsituation dernands.
Anextraordinarilk ytailed geologicalsurvewas conduczedpriorto the commencemen tfconstruction,
as well as duringthecourse thereof,of the areneffectedby the çonstnictionof the power plant. The
resultsthereofwereexchanged,consulted and inspectedby Czecho-Slovak andHungarianexperts.
The Czecho-Slovakparty conducted adetailed examinationof seismicity whichhas beenassessed. The
results of such research is well-knawnto the Hungarianparty. The President of the Czechoslovak
Academyof Sciencesdetemined in hisletterof December 1940,that there wasno differenceof opinion
atthe joint discussioheIdby the CzechoslovakandHungarian Academies of Sciencesin Budapeston
the questionsof seismicity. For this reason, therewerno further,supplementaryexchangesa€Iater
meetings between scientificexpert wshich would have required expertstudy. therefore, there is no
reason forthe Czecho-Slovakpartytoamendits positionto date asto thequestionof seismicity.
Bratislava,July 11, 1991.
JUDr.Jan Camogursky
Leaderofthe Czecho-Slovak
GovemmentaD l elegation
od ofresolurion Annex 53
JOINTPRES RSELEAS OFMR FEREN L ADEH, EADOFTHE HUNGARLG AONVERNMENT AELEGATION,
AND MR JAN CARNOGURSH KEY, OFTHE C~HOSLOYAG KOVERNMEND TELLEGATIO1N5,JULY
1991
On 14and 15July 1991a negotiationwasheld in Bratislava bthegovemment delegationsof the
CSFRand the Hungarian Republregardingthequestionsof the Gakikovo NàgymarosBarrageSyslem
(GNBS). The government delegationothe CSFR was led by Jan Carnogursky, Presidofthe
Governmentof the SlovakRepublicd the govemmentdelegationof the Govemmentof the Hunganan
Republicwasledby Minister FereMadh
The Czechoslovakdelegationexpresseditsreadinessto resolvethesituatbasisofamultilateral
judgement of thedifferent alternativesproposedbyboth parties.
The Czechoslovak delegationecornrnendedthata joint committee be established consisting of
plenipotentiariestheCSFR,Republic of Hungary and tEC which would examine the variations
submittedby 31July1991.The committeewould judge thevariationsin depthplacing theemonasis
the resoIutionof the ecological problems. Thecommitteewouldsubmittheresults of thetoxaminations
the heads of the government delegations.The govemmentdelegationsof the CSFRand the Republicof
Hungary woulddtcide an the furtherprocedure. The Czechoslovakparty emphasisedthaonly could
accept avariatiwhichenablestheputtinginrooperationof the Gakikovo Barrage.
The Czechoslovak partyphasisedthathe cornmitteesworkdoes affectthe Czechoslovakdaimy's
for compensatiowhicharase as a resultof the unilateralaction of the HungarianPaoftheIn light
increasing darnage the Czechoslovak party cannot accept the other party'sproposalthegarding
suspensionof workonthebarrage.
The Hungarianparty ,in accordancewith its mandattheabandonmentof the barrage systern, the
termination of the Interstate Treaty of 1977 on the basis of mutual agreement and made a
recommendation forCO-operationwith regard to the resolution of the ecological, navigational, flood
preventionaland energyproblems.
The Hungatianpartymadea propositionfortheestablishmentof ajoint professional-scientificcommittee
for the joint explorationof ecological nsks binding the work of the committee to the simultaneous
suspensioo fworkon the Czechoslovakside.
Thedelegationsagreeto notify theirGovernmentsandParliamentsand by 15Septembervia diplomacy
inforni each other of their positregard ttheestablishmentof a cornmittee. New negotiations
betweenthe govemmentdeIegationsmaybe heIdsubsequent tothis.
Bratislava, 15July 1991
Ferenc Madl, the head ofthe Hungariandelegation.
JanCamogursky, thehead ofthe Czeand Slovakdelegation Annen 54
LE'ITEFROM MR. FERENC MADL, HUNGARI MAINISTEWR~OUT PORTFOLIO T OMR. JAN
CARNOGURSK YLOVAP KRIMEMINISTE2R 4,JULY1991
Dr.FerencMidl
MinisterwithoutPortfolio
Jan Carnogursky
PrimeMinisterof the Slovak Republic
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
As the head of the Hungariangovernmentaldelegationnegotiatingthe mtheGabcikovo
Nagymaros BarrageSystemI would like toinformyouofthe following.
Hungarianpublic opinion andthe HungarianGovernrnentanxjoandyattentively follows the
pressreports of the unilateral stepsof the Govemment of the Slovak Republic in connection with the
barragesytem.
The preparatory worfor diverting the waofthe Danube near the Dunakildam through
unilaterallyaalso alarming. These steps arecontraryto the 1977Tretothe good relationship
ktween ournations, Furthemore, thesesteps arealsocoEoOuragreementin Bratislavaon 22 July
1991the basisof which is that youinformus about yoursubsequentdeliberationsbefore31July 1991to
which wewouldreplybefore 15Septemkr 1491.
You would inform us about your position on the suggestionssbymus in Bratislalso
prior to t15 September. As isknown we fomulated yours and Oursuggestionsin a common press
release. In this document weexpresseciour agreement that wewill continue our bilateral negotiations
afterthe 15thSeptember,whenthe.answerswillhavealreadybeen exchanged.
Weinvariably hopethat bothpartiesrespect Ouragreement. On theofaal1this we would
have deep scrupleon al1 unilateral steps which wouldaffect the legal status of the Danube as an
internationalundarywater.We wouldthank you verymuch if you wouldease aur anxiety withyour
answer.
Budapest,24July 1491
Withdeeprespectand
sincere regards Annex 55
LETER FROM MR. JANCARNOGURSKY, SLOVAP KRIME MINISTE R,MR. FERENC MADL,HUNGARIAN
MINISTE WITHQUT'PORTFOLIO ,0JULY 1991
PrimeMinistes oftheSlavak Republic
Bratislava30 July191
Dear Minister!
As statedonce before in the joint statementof the negotiationshe15 July 1991 in Bratislava
between the goverment delegationsof the Republicof Hungary and the Czech and Slovak FederaI
Republicregardingthe buildinof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage,theCzecho-Slovak delegation
expresseditsconsent ftheesiablishedmixed cornmitteecomposed of representatitheCzechand
Slovak Federal Republic, the Republic of Hungaand the European Communityto muItilaterally
examine al1the possiblevariatsubmittedby thpartiesby31July1991.
I wouldliketoannounce,on the basisoanauthmisariofrumthe Govemmentof theCzechandSlovak
FederaIRepublic, ththeCzecho-Slovakpartyrequeststhatthe mixedcornmitteeexaminethequestion
of theGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystemin adetailedmannerfowhich atechnological solutionhas
ken found on thebasisof thejoint agreement plan. In the courseof the comprehensivestudyspecial
attentionwillbe accordtothe resolutionof ecologicalproblems.
Dear Minister,1 hop we will be successful in jointly resolving the question of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros BarrageSystem.
Sincerely
JanCamogursky
Dr. FerencM6dl
MinisteroftheGovemrneno tf the RepublicHungary
Budapest Annex 56
LE'ITERFROM MR. JANCARNOGURSK SL, VAKPRIME MINISTER TOMR. JOZSEF ANTALL,
HUNGARIA PNRIMEMINISTER 3, JULY 1991
ThePrimeMinister
of the SlovakRepublic
Bratislava,July 31991
EsteemedMr.PrimeMinister,
Our nationsare in aeriod of transition froma totalitariansystemto a democraticsystem. Hungary and
Czechoslov&iaarerenewingtheir intemationalrelationsona freshbasi.Our efforts are focusedon the
preservationanddevelopmentof goodrelations,especiallywithour neighbournations. For thisrea1on,
am al1the morehurt by the fact that we cannotagreeon certainquestions. Onesuch point of dissension
in the common relationship between Czechoslovakiaand Hungary is theproblem of the Gabcikovo
hydroelectricplant.
Permit me to inform you,at this time,of theisionof the SlovakGovemment and of the Czech and
Slovak FederalGovernmentto continuework on the Gabcikovopower plant, as a provisional solution,
which is aimed at the commencementof operations on the temtory of the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republic.
Both Governments arrived at this decision on the basis of serious consideration,'cothatiheed
permanent suspension of construction of the hydroelectric plant is theleast acceptable solution, even
fromanecologicalpointof view.
From thebeginningof construction,ournation has givengreat attentionto the examinationand study of
the ecological risks,as has the Hungarian party. We wishto continuethis a,and willinform the
Hungarianpartyof theresults.
Dear Mr. PrimeMinister,
1 admit that thedecisionof our Govemmentscausesa certain amount of dejection in Hunga1think,
however,that theissue of the Gabcikovopower plantmustbe examinedas a particular partial problem,
our nations having differing opinions as to its resolution,but which,however, must not be allowed to
seriouslydisturb Slovak-Hungarianrelations.
Escalationof tensionswouldnotbe in thenterestof eithernatio1strust thattensionson one issuewill
not disturb ourriendly relationshi1assure you that the interestsof the Slovak Republic are towards
the best possibleCO-operatwiththe Hungarian Republic.
Esteemed Mr. Prime Minister,1look back fondly upon our meetings in the past,1asincerely hope
that the difference of opinions surrounding Gabcikovowill not disturb our presently good, personal
relationship.
Respectfully,
JanCarnogursky.
HisExcellency
J6zsefAntall
Prime Minister
of the HungarianRepublic
Budapest. Annex 57
NOTEVERBAL FROMTHE MINISTRY OFFOREIGN AFFAIR OSFTHE REPUBLI C FHUNGAR YOTHE
EMBASSY OFTHE CZECH AND SLOVAK FEDERAR LEPUBLIC 3,0JULY1991
NOTE VERBALE
42011991
The Ministry of Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungarypresents its compliments to the Embassyof
the Czech and Slovak Federal Republicand has the honour to request that the Embassy inform the
Govemment of the Czech andSlovak Federal Republicof the following position of thement of
the Republicof Hungary.
It continues to be the intentionof the Govemment of the Republic of Hungary to continue negotiations
between the States regarding thee of the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System and continues to
prepare for the next phase of negotiations, scheduled for September. The questionof whether the
negotiationswill achieveany resultsor not is fundarnentallydependenton whether or not the atmosphere
surrounding preparations and the negotiations themselves will be constructive, which demands, as a
prerequisite, thatunilateralactionsnotnduringthe courseof the dialogues.
It is with great sorrowthat the Govemmentof the Republicof Hungarydetermines that on27 July, 1991,
the fillingof thecikovo-NagymarosBarrage'shead-racecanalbegan on the Czech andSlovak partby
the pumping of wateromthe Danube,a commonboundaryriver.
The Plenipotentiary of the Govemment of the Republic of Hungary did not accede to the Czech and
Slovak actionsinounced at the meeting of GovernrnentalPlenipotentiaries held on 10 July 1991 to
discuss the questions regardingthe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem.
The Plenipotentiaryof the Govemmentof the Republicof Hungaryexpressed hisconcems regarding the
preparations for unilateral steps to beowards relocating the waters of the Danube in his letter to
Mr. Jan Camogursky, Plenipotentiaryof thevemment of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic,
dated 24 July 1991.
Mr. Jozef Antall, %me Ministerof the Republicof Hungary,in his negotiations held in Dubrovnik with
Mr. Marian Calfa, Presidentof the Czech and SlovakFederalRepublicon 27 July 1991 also emphasised
that the necessityof avoidingunilateralactions,andthey agreed thatthe two Governmentswould request
their Parliaments that representatives thereof continue discussions regarding this question in either a
committee or otherform.
The Government of the Republic of Hungary, reinforcing its counter-opinion, as expressed above,
expresses its protest at the unilateral actions undertaken by the Government of the Czech and Slovak
Federal Republic, which not in harmony with the joint contractual planon the execution of the 1977
inter-state Treaty concludedon 15July 1991by our GovemmentalPlenipotentiariesin Bratislava.
The Govemment of the Republicof Hungary shongiy requests theGovemment of the Czech and Slovak
Federal Republic that the work underway on the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System be halted and
thatfurtherunilateral steps,whichare inconflict withthe interestsof both States, be avoided.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republicof Hungary itself of this opportunity to renew to
the Embassyof the Czechand SlovakFederalRepublic the assurancesof its highestconsideration
Budapest, 30July 1991
Embassy of the
Czech andSlovak Federal Republic
Budapest Annex 58
C ~ R FROM MR. FERENMc ADL H,UNGARIA MNINISTE R~OUT PORTFOLI MO,MR. JAN
l CARNOGURS KLY,YA KRIMEMINISTE 9RAUGUST 1991
Dr.FerencMidl
MinisteWithaul Portfolio
Mr. Jan Carnogursky
Chairmanof thehlegation of
The Government ofheCzech andSlovakFederal Republic
hesident ofthe GovernmenttheSlovakRepublic
EsteemedMr. President!
1would herebylike to acknowledgethereceiptofyourIetterdated30 July3inwhichyou infom
Mr. J6zsefAntall,PrimeMinisteroftheHungarian Republicof "thedecisionof the SlovakRepublic and
of the Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic tocontinue work on the Gabcikovo
BarrageSystemon theterritoryofCSER withworkbeingaimed at thecommencementof operations
asatemporarysolution."
Hungary considers the decisionveryregrettableand unacceptablesince our firm aim is to continue the
'negotiations;this cbelundermined by any unilateral step. 1am convincedthatwe cannot find a
jointly acceptable solbyiusing coercive means. In the interests of achieving results at our next
meeting, scheduled for Septembwe,have defined a specific concept , which is included in the
memorandunt of the Foreign Ministry of the Hungarian Republic,dated 30 1.lIn the said
memorandum, we refer to the agreementreached by Mr. J6zsef Antall and Mr. MarianCalfa in
Dubrovnik thatthe Govemmentsof the two nationsshallrequesttheirParthatheir mernbersof
Parliamentcontinuediscussionson thequestionin comrnitteeorin anotherrnanner.
1would like totake this opportunityto reinforcethe cornmitmentof the Governmentof the Hungarian
Republicto continue negotiationsdialogue with the Governmentof the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republicegardingthe futureof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSys1trust thatthroughpatient
negotiatiowe willbeable toarrive atjoint solution which will beacceptable to both Partiesand
which willein harrnonywiththe noms of internationallaw. However1do protest anyunilaterd step
that woulbcin contradiction wtheinfcrestsof our natandinternationalla1consider ii very
importantthat 1receiveinformationasearlyas possible onthedetailsoftheprovisi~nalsolution,
1sincerelyhope that thisunresolved,inheritedquestionhavela negative effect thefuture
relationshipbetwetheHungsrianGovemment,theFederal Governmentand the SlovalrGovernment or
1 upon the developrnentofs betweenourRepublics.I can assureyou that we are prepared to engage in
thedevelopmentotheserelationshipson manylevels.
1 Budapest9 August1991.
1 (Signature ofFerencMâdl) Annex 59
The Prime Mi~ster afthe HungarianRepublic
Budapest12August1991
Ur. Marian Calfa,
The Rime Ministerothe Czechand Slova PederalRepublic
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
Mr. Jan Carnogursky,the Chairmanof the Czech and SlovakFederal Rgiublic'sdelegation an the
InterstateNegotiationsaboutthe Gabcikovo-NagyrnarBarrageSystemandtheksident of the Slovak
FederalRepublic,ina letterdatedJOJuly 1991,informedmeof thedecisionof tSlovak Republicand
the Governmentof the Czech and Slovak Federd Republicto continue provisionalwork on the
GabcikovoBarrageon theterritoryofCSFRwiththeaimofputtingirintooperation.
The agreement amivedet during the course of our discussionsin Dubrovnikon 27 July 1991, the
notificatioof the Federal Govemment'sessionon 25 Julyand the agreementconcludedduring Our
negotiationservthepurposeofpromotingnegotiationsbetweentheParliamentCornmittees.
On thisoccasion,1would,again,liketoemphasisethatthe InterstaTreatyof 1977 on the Gabcikovo
NagymarosBarragewassignedby theGovemrnents of the Hungarianand the CzechandSlovak Federal
Republic. ln light of this, the HungGovemmentwillregardthe FederalGovernmentas its future
negotiatingparmerandwill handlethe questioofthe Barrageasa regretta ihented interstateissue
awaitingresolutioby the HungarianRepublicandthe CzechandSlovakFedera l epublic.
Bearingthis inmind,1 wouldliketo eedeavourto pmrnotethesuccessof the interstatenegotiatanns
the basiof our discussionsinDubrovnikwiththe convictiontasttheresultofpatientdialogue,ajoint
agreemenw t ilbereachedon the Barrageissue.
Withrespect, Annex 60
LETTER FROM MR.JOZEF ANTALL H,UNGARIA PRIME MINISTER TOMR.JANCARNOGURSKSY L,OVAK
..PRIMME INISTER,14AUGUST 1991
MDF HungarianDemocraticForum
Budapest, 14August 1991
Mr. Jan Carnogursky,
President
ChristianDemocraticMovementof Slovakia
Bratislava
Dear Mr. President!
The democraticchanges whichhave taken place in our region have created favourable conditionsfor the
Statesand people of the region to puttheirrelationson a new foundations,in harmony with the standards
of the developedworld.
This is especially important in the case of nations which are direct neighbours, where greater
be taken over as to the nursing and developmentof good-neighbourrelations. We are compelled to this
by oneof the centralelementsof our sharedideals,Christian thought.
1am aware that a return to the path of democratic developmentdoes not, in and of itself, mean an end to
al1problems or the automatic validation of a new system of principles over questions of disagreement.
For my own part, for this reason,y specialattentionnot only to existing tensions,but to the methods
used to ease and resolvethem.
It is in this spirit that 1am endeavouringto resolve the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage issue, which is
making our bilateral relations so much more difficult. It is my opinion that my agreement with Prime
MinisterMarianCalfa,concluded in Dubrovnik,accordingto whichthe Govemments of the two nations
their respective Parliaments to have their Representativesconduct negotiations in a Committee or in
anotherformat. 1requestthat, to assist in this, you accept the reply madeby Mr. Ferencader of
the HungarianGovemmentaldelegationto your letterdated July20.
1 am sure that you are govemed by similar principlesand good intentions in your national political and
state activities.
Please allow me, Mr. President,to expressour sincere sorrowat the statementsmade by Mr. Jan Petrik
during a Christian Democratic Movement pressconferenceregarding Slovakia'scoat of arms, as well as
for comments made during this same press conference, in which he said, "when Hungary has a wiser
Govemment, she will beg for the completion of the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System." We feel
that these, and al1similar,remarksdo ourrelationsno good.
1 sincerelytrust that we willbesuccessful,through our jointefforts, in finding acceptablesolutions to al1
of our problems,which formsuch a pressing burdenon our peoples andourrelations.
1hope that yourfamily weekendwaspleasant.
Budapest, 14August 1991
Respectfully
J6zsef Antall
Mr. Jan Carnogursky,
President
ChristianDemocraticMovementof Slovakia Annex 61
NOTE VERBAL EROMTHE MINISTR YFFOREIGN AFFALR SFTHE CZECH AND SLOVAK FEDERAL
REPUBLI TCOTHE EMBASSY OFTHE REPUBLI CF HUNGARY 2,7 AUGUST 1991
NOTE VERBALE
U. i. No. 106.427191-MPO
The Ministry of Foreign Affairsof the Czech andSlovak FederalRepublic presentsompliments to
the Embassy of the Republicof Hungary andwith referenceto the Verbale dated 30 July 1991 and
numbered 42011991,the Ministryof Foreign Affairs has the honourto convey the following position to
the Ministry of Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungary:
The Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republicappreciates the Hungarian Governrnent's
efforts to organise further negotiationsas to the fate of the Gabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage System, but
the Governmental Delegations werenable to amve at a constructive solution at two meetings, on 22
Apnl 1991 and 15July 1991,where the Hungarian Delegationhad only limited authority. As a result,
the Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic approvedpreparations for investment and
transport in the temtory of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic fortheposes of beginning
temporary operationsof the Gabcikovohydroelectricpowerplant to minimise thes caused by the
unilateral actionsenby the Hungarian party.
In the opinion of the Govemment of the Czech andSlovak FederalRepublic, such a decision is not an
obstacle to the continuation of further negotiations. In the event of the Hungarian party presenting
specific technical solutions on the basis of the valid Treaty of 1977 and its related treaty documents
regarding the construction and operation of the Gabcikovo Hydroelectric Power Plant and Barrage
System, the Czechoslovakpartys preparedto executethe agreed upon methodof resolution.
The filling of the power canal is not considered by the Czechoslovakparty to be in contravention of
internationallaws it simplyfulfils technical measures forthe7presewationof the power canal'sintended
purpose, the exact fulfilment of which provided for in the Treaty plan had been prevented by the
Hungarian party'sunilateral suspensionof work. The filling of the power industnal water canal should
have begun, accordingto the work timetable,inmber 1989. As aresult of the delay of this step, the
construction of the power canal is being damaged. Therefore, its prevents further damage. The
Hungarian party was informed of the implementationof these measures at the 10July 1991meeting of
Plenipotentianes.
Itis with regret that the Ministryof Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic communicates that the
Govemment of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic cannotagree with the Republic ofngary's
demands regarding the suspensionof construction work on the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System.
Continuedwork towards the commencementof operationsof the Gabcikovohydroelectricpower plant
not in any event in contravention of international law,in the opinion of the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republic.
The Govemment of the Czechand Slovak Federal Republic trusts that the questionof the construction of
the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System will not disturb our common relationship and that both
nations will proceedas per Europeannoms to seekaresolutionof the issue.
The Federal Ministryof Foreign Affairsavails itself of this opportunityto renew to the Embassy of the
Republicof Hungarytheassurancesof itsighestconsideration.
Prague,27 August 1991 Annex 62
SlovakRepublic
Bratislava, 19September 1991
DearMr. Minister:
1would liketoinforrnyou that,on the basiof the agreement acceptedby the Governmental Delegations
of the Czech and SlovakFederal Republic and the SlovakRepublicduring heir discussions of 14-15July
1991in Bratislava regarding the questions of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System, the Czech and
Slovak Party, in keeping with proposalsetforth during the said diScussions,proposthat a cornmittee
consistingof experts from the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, the Republic of Hungary and the
Eur~peanComrnunity resolve the problems pertaining to the construction and operation of the
Gabcikovo-NagymaroB sarrage.The said committee would examine al1variations of passible solutions
in a comprehensive manner. The results of the said examinatiowould Li ef an advisorynature andthe
Governmental Delegations of the CSFRand the Republic of Hungary would have the power todecide
over furtherprocedures.
I would once again emphasise, however, that Czechoslovakiawill only findacceptablea variant which
would makethe operation ofthe Gabcikovo Barragepossible.
I await your response regarding the estabIishment ofa cornmitteeas well as your furtherproposals
regarding the resolution of problems pertaining tothejoint construcandnoperation of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage.
Sincerely:
(signature of Janarnogursky)
The Honourable Mr. Ferenc Madl
Minister of the Government of the Republic of Hungary
Budapest . Annex 53
LE~TE RROM MR.FERENM Ç ADL, UNGARL MAINISERWITHOU TORTFOLIO TO,MR,JAN
CARNOGURSK SL,OVAKPRIMME~TSTE8 RO,CTOBE R991
Dr.Ferenc Mhdl
MinisterWithoutPortfolio
To Mr. Jan Camogutsky,
Plenipotentiaq ofthe
FéderalGovernmentoftheCSFR,
Prime MinisteroftheSIovakRepublic
On thebasis of the agreement concludedat the meeetween the GovemmentalDelegationsof the
Republic of Hungaryandthe Czechand Slovak FederalRepublion 15July 1991,and the proposal
includedin youletterdated 19Seprember,1proposelhatourmeetingin Budapesthetween28 Octokr
and 5 Novemberbe convenedforthe purposesof cwatinga professional-scicommissionas anew
factor in govemrnentalnegotiationsregarding the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systern. This, of
course,oes netexcludethepossibilityofdiseussingotheraspectsofthe issue.
Whereas we would like to discuss the scope of the probtobe placedMore the professional-
scientifir:commission,the compositionof the commisandnquestionsrelating to the commission's
conditionsof operation,it mightbe suggestedthat a relativelysmallnumberof delegatesparticipatein
this meeting. I w~uldgreatlyappreciilif you would informme of your opinias te the above
mentioned.
1 would liketoemphasiseonce again,that, on the basis ofParliament'ertinent resolution, the
Govmrnent of theRepublic ofHungaiy would liketoenter intnew Treaty negotiatiowith the
Federal Govemmentof theCzeçhand SlovakFederal Republicregardingthe consequencesresulting
from thejoint teminatioftheInterstateTreofy1977.
Ithankyou inadvanceforyourreply.
Budapest,8 October1991
Respectful,
FerencMadl Annex 64
JOINDTECLARAT IFTHE COMMI'ITE OFESNVIRONMENT ~ATECTION OF HUNGARY AND
CZECHOSCOVAK BUA,APEST I, OCTOBEI R99 1
Joint Declaraticinonthe discussions
of the Environmental Cornmitteofthe HungarianRepublic'sParliament and theNations Chamberof
the Czechoslovak Federal Republic heldon 9-11October 1991
The Environmental Cornmitteesof the Hungarian Republic'sParliament and of the Nations Chamberof
the Cze~hoslovakFederal Republicinthe spirit of the discussions of the VisegrAd-inrKrakow,
1. Mutuallyexchanged their experiences gained in drafting legat noms on environmental protection and
itssub-branches.
1./It isestablished thatproblems and starting points aremutual,
2.1Jtis aped that even in the preparatory stage they willmutually exchange draft enactments of
legislature, and cooperate during the legislativeptocess in orhaveta system of laws in both
countries whicishamionised on the basis of Europlegal standards.
Il.Negotiations were held on the Gabcikovo-NagymarBarrageSystem,
1./Mutual agreement was reacheand hence the partiesdeclare that:
alThequestions related to the barragesystemare primarily of a technical-scientific namre, and so,
their evaluation and solution mustalso be detemined on a technical-scientific basis.
blThegovernments of theHungari aepublicand oftheCzechoslovak Federal Republic are now
able to continue negotiations toafmutually acceptable solution forthe present situation in the spirit
of recent cornmitteediscussions.
2.1Wehereby propose that ourgovernments shouldstart negotiations without delay, in accordance with
the following viewpoinrs:
a/ These should be an expert cornmittee should be set up in order to evaluate on ofeabasis
cornmon methodology al1realistic scenarios, as determined by the cornmittee. cornmittee will
evalbiate-givingpriorityto ecologicalas--the econornic, energy, social,flood-protection, navigation
and international lawconsequences.
b/ Agreement should be reached on the rnethodology of research aon thoseprinciples and
values that will serve ascriteria injoint evaluations.
cl The resultsof heretofore perfomed scientific research should lx systematised, rnutually
exchanged and missingones, substituted.
d/ The quality, safety characterisandstechnical suitability of already completed structures
should bejointly evaluated.
e/ The scientific institutions on both sides should be invdved in the scie-texpertco-
operation(only those institutions which are notdirectly economically deponthe constnictian of
thebarrage).
f/ Duringfuture expert discussions participationof experts fiom international organisations would
bepossible upon request ofbothparties.
gJ The implementation of tasks encompasseciin sectial-fshould be speeded-up, in orderto
minimise environmental damage and the economic damage on the already completed structures. Also,
thefinal outiooofthe hydro-electricpower plant shouldnot be predestined by further construction.
3.1TheHeads ofEnvironmental Cornmitteesare hereby instructed: a/TQ form parliamentarysupewisorysystems toconeol governrnental bodies.connected to the
case.
b/ To inform each other every month, about the above rnentioned proposais and of their
implementation;aIsoonthoseproblems that might hindetrhe continuationofCO-operation.
III. ThePartiesinfomed eachotheron the basicprinciplesof bothcounrriesenergy -politicalconcepts;
the partiediscussedthe possibleenvironmentalimpactsof these. Theyagreed on thecontinuationof the
mutunlexchangeof information andofdiscussion.
IV. The Czechoslovak delegationvisited the EnvironmentProtwtion area and LandDevelopment
Ministry,wheretheystudied the work andpursueda discussion withthepoliticalstatesecretary. During
thisdiscussiontheyinfomed eachother about:
1./Thestateof theircauntriesnature;
2.1The pteparationsof the EnvironmentalWodd Conference that shouid take place in 1992in
Brasilia;
3.1The problems on environmentaldamagecausedandleftbytheSovietuoops.
V. The committees had discussions with the representativea of Hungarinn non-governmenîal
environmental organisationson the environmentalproblems of the regions near the border. The
proposition togovemmentsis toback up by every means the CO-operation of fronticr regions in that
respect.
VI. The Czechoslovakpartyproposes thatthe Hungariansideget acquaintedwith theresolutionsof the
conferenceheld in Serock near Warsaw named "Central and EastEurope'snew energy policy". The
Czeçhoslovakside is of the opinion lhatif the HungarianParty is interestedir shouldjoin the çlosing
documentsof the conference,iftheGermanandPolishpartyagreed.
VII. The committeesproposalto their respectivegovemments asto the preparations for the upcoming
EnvironmentalWorldconferenceto be held in Brasiliato co-ordinatetheit activitiesand togetherwith
otherCentra!EuropeanStates make preparationfor a joinappearance.
VI11 The Czechoslovakdelegationgetacquainted on sitewith:
1./The environmentalquestionsof the Danube-bend andmeettheMayorof VisegrBd;
2.1 The Central andEast European Regional Environmental ProtectionCenk's purpose and
activity;
3.1 The Czechoslovak delegation which attended the Hungarian Republic Parfiament's
Environmental Protection Cornmittee'session heldon9October.
IX. The Czechoslovakdelegationappreciatesthe support expressedby Mr. SzabadGyorgyand Mr.
Dornbach. thePresident and Vice-PresidentoftheHungariR anpublic'Parliament, forthejoint position
of the environmentalcommittees ofboth parliaments,which took place at the reception organisedfor
delegates oftheNationsChamberoftheCzechoslovakEederalRepublicsParliament.
The Czechoslovak delegation expresse itss gratitudeto the EnvironmentalProtectionCornmitteeof the
Hungarim Parliamentfor the substantialand valuableprogramme,for the very correct and friendly
altitudeindiscussingcomplexissues, and forthecareshownduringtheperfectlyorganised visit.
The Czechoslovakdelegationis of thefirm opinionthat themurual visitof parliamentaryenvironmental
protection committeesformeda solidbasis forthe non-formal,tighrand long-lastingCO-operation ,hat
would finallylead to the bettement of the environment for boihcountries. Therefore, it invites theHungarianparliamentary environmentprotectioncornmittee'd selegationto continuethe discussion in
Prague,the dateof whichwiIlby agreeduponbythecornmitteesecretaries.
X. The Hungarian partydeclares,thatthe successof discussionis also connectedtothe Czechoslovak
partiesconstructiveapproach and toits efforts CO-operationT . he Czechoslovakpartiesinvitationto
Pragueforthecontinuation ofdiscussionsis herebyacceptedwithgratitude.
Budapest,1 1October1991
JozefStank IvanRyndo RottNandor Annex 65
LETTERFROM MR. JANCAWOGURSK SY~VAK PRME MWISTER, TO MR. FERENC MADL,HUNGARIAN
MINI- WITHOUP TORTFOL2I1 OO, CTOBE R99l
The PresidentoftheGovernmentofthe Slovak Republic
Bratislava21October 1991
DearMr. Minister!
Thank youfor yourletterdate8 October1991in whichyoupropose that wehoidthe meeting regarding
the problem of the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystemin Budapest atthe end of Octobeor at the
beginningof Novemkr.
1appreciateyout initiative,Mr. Minister,and appreciatethe intentionHungari anovemment to '
continue negotiaaingthe problem whiçh is a burdento both Parties. The aforementionedreadiness to
holdmeetingsregardingthe problernisabasiccondition forfindiagsolution.
Duringthecourseof negotiations heldbtheGovermental Delegationsof the Republicof Hungaryand
rheÇzech and SlovakFederdRepublicin Jiily 1991in Pozsony,it becme apparentthat the Hungarian
delegationwas givenonlya limitedmandateand thatit was lirnitedby the resolutionof the Parliament.
Itwas authorisedonly toteminate thevalidity of the interstatetreaty regardingthe constniction and
operationofthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Syste mnd toput a completehalt to constructionwork
ontheGabcikovo-Nagymatos Barrage System.
According to the positionof the Czecho-SlovakParty, apteçonditionof successfulnegotiationsis the
wideningof the mandate of the Hungarimdelegationin suca way that the Hungariadelegatiomay
negotiateregardingal1the alternativesconcemingthe cornpietionof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage
System .
For us, it is not known, nor is it apparent hyour letter, whether the original resolutionof the
NungwianParliamenthaschangedand whethertheHungarianGovernenial delegation would beable to
concludenegotiations regardithe entireçomplexof questionpemining tothe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
BarrageSystem .
Itisdso anopenquestion,raisedduringthe Bratislava negotiatio,stowhetherthe expertcornmittee
should consistof ourexperand Wungarianexpertsor alsoof EumpeanCornmunityexperts.
The HungarianParty has not technically,documented,, any of the variants aimed at resolving the
problemsof theGabcikovo-NagyrnaroBs arrageSysternevenafterthePozsony negotiations.,
Dar Mr. Minister, 1 would be grateful if you could inform me as to whether the Hungarian
GovemmentalDelegationwillhave a mandate to discusstheentire complexofquestionspertaininte
theGabcikovo-Nagyrnaros Barrage Systemat thenext meeting.Further,I wouldliketo become farniliar
wirhyout position as to the rnake-upof the expertcornmitteedebatingthe problemsof the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrageSystem .
BorEipiecesof informationare importantfor the CzechoslovakDelegationin preparingfor negotiations
wirhthe HungarianParty.DearMr.Minister,the meetingproposeciforthe end of Octoberor thebeginningof Novembershould
on1ytakeplaceupon theclarificationoftabove problems.
Pleaseallow m,e,Mr. ,Ministeto assureyouof myregards,
Withgretings,
TheHonourabIe
Dr. FerencMAdl
MinisteroftheRepublicof Hungary
BudapestPrime ilbister's Ofice
DanubeBarrageGovernment
PlenipotentiarySecretariat
1055Budapest,Kossuthter 4
To Mr. DominikKocinger
thePlenipotentiarof the
Government of theCzechand Slovak
FederalRepublicandofthe
Governmentof theSlovakRepublic
regardingthe Gabcikovo-NagyrnaroBs arrageSystem
84218Bratislava
Lovomeskeha 2
DearPlenipotentiary!
I have determinedfromthe minutes of the meetingofthe JointOperativeGroupheld 23-27 September
1991 that the Czechoslovak Partyis undertakingsuch workaswas declareciearlier and re-commenced,
worksregardiw nhiçhthedeçisionwasplacedbeforetheinter-govemrnentalnegotiationsat our meeting
of 10July 1991.
We detemined, in the PlenipotentiariesMeeting'sMinutes, GeneralPart, Points 1 and B.2, that the
decision regardingthe handing over of constructionpmjects undertakenby the HungarianParty on
Czechoslovakterritory would be mad by the GovernmentalDelegations,asthis would be a departure
from the JointContractualPlan. Despite this agreement,the CzechoslovakPart yas begvn work on
completing the connectingdikes and has declaredthat the Gabcikovohydroelectncplant'searth filling
work'sstoppagewas onlytemporary and,further,thatheParty would like to continue workon dredging
the power canalfollowingtheinspections.
The filling of thpower canalwirh waterhas broughtHungarian and internationalprotests. Filling,as
pravidedfor in theJointContractualPlan,is aimedat the commencementof operations. Theconditions
for commencingoperationsarelacking today, Accordingto theJoint Contractual Plan, the power canal
and the reservoirmust be filled simultaneously,thusthe watwould be allowed toflow in from the
reservoirarea.
In contrast,the siphoningplannedforOctobertakeswaterfrom thesmall kd during theperiodof lowest
waterfiow duringthe year(October-November).I thereforeholdthe continuationof this filling to be a
depmure fromthe Joint ContractualPlan.
1ask you, Plenipotentiary,to take immediatesteps for the haItingof woaslisted above and which
departsfiomtheJointContractualPlan.During the meeting of the JointOperativeCroup, the Czecho-Slovak Party gave information ofthe
cornpIetionof such energy andwater constructionwork, amongother questions,as would serve to
commencetheoperationsof theGakikovo hydroelectric plant. The HungarianParIiamenthas setforfh
in a resolutiothatinvestmentin thebarragesystemmustceaseforthwith.ThetwoGovernrnents have
commencednegotiationsasto thenecessary new, orarnendedp , roject. We once againproposthat the
constructionwork be suspendedpriorta the conclusionof an inter-governmentaa lgreement. The
HungarianPartycannotbear any financialor technicalresponsibilityfor any work being undertake
despitetheabove.
Budapest,29 October 1991
Respectfully,
Dr. GyorgySamsondfKiss Annex 67
Dr.FerencMgdl
MmisterWithoutPodalio
Mr. Jan Cmogursky
FederalGovemmentalPlenipotentiwy,
Prime MinisteroftheSlovakRepublic
Dear Mr. PrimeMinister!
1am gratefulto havereceivedyour letterof 21 Oçtober. 1wouldlike to determine,lookingbackupon
the directions takenby OUT negotiationsto date, that the mandate of the Hungarian Governmental
'Delegation was detemined by the Resolutionof Parliament,in the sameway as the Czecho-Slovak
Party's room formanoeuvre was clearly defined by the Czeche-Slovak legislative bodies and
governmentaldecisions. I considerthe facthatwe have corne toanagreementas a result of oui two
rounds of negotiations,that the questionsrelated to the barrage system are pirnarily questions of a
professional/scientir:tureandthatthisshallserve asthebasisforajointjudgementand resolution.
1am sure thatourGovemmentswilltakejoint advantagesof thehistoricalpoliticsof the pastopportunity
offeredus a€thistime.Freedfromthepoliticsof thepast,wecanre-evaluate thedisputedproblernfrom
a professiond/scientificviewpoint,namely,the eçologicaleffects,flood protection, navigation,energy,
economic,technicalJsecurityand other questionsof the BarrageSystemrelated to the 1977 Interstate
Treatyor any other solution. Thisis whthe EnvironmentalProtectionCornmitteesof our Padiameats
insisted on in iheir joint declaracionaccepted in October 1991 in BudapesIn hamony with this
dwument,1considerthetask ofournextmeetingto be the formation,composition, mandate, operational
order and conditions of the joint expert cornmittee for the consideration and resolutioof the
professional/scientiquestions.
The HungarianGovernmentexpressesits readiness to place any proposal and professionallscientific
problem raisedby the Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republicbefore the expert
cornmittee,
Among the subjectsof ournext meeting,thejoint invitationof internationalprofessionallscientificbodies
is also concluded, if we mutually detemine that it is necessary for the tesolution of any
professional/scientiquestion.
Aspertains tothenatureofthe questionstobe discussed,1propose thatournextmeetingtakeplacewith
delegationsofa morelimited composition.
Dear Mr. hime Minister!
1would greatlappreciateit if youwouldinfom me of youropinionas to theabove, 1once againinvite
youand yourdelegation tothethirdlntergovemmentalNegotiationa.
I awaityourreplyasto whenwemayexpectyouto visitBudapestfromthe thirdof Novemberonwards.
7 Novemixr 1991,Budapest
Dr. FerencMgdl Annex68
1
LE~R FROMMR SANDO RKERES~, HUNGARIM AINISFEFOR ENVIRONMEN PTOTLE~~IO&
~URITORIAL DEVELOPME ANTDMR FEREN C ADL ,UWGARI AWNISTE RITHOU POR~OLIO n3
MR. JOSEFVAVROUSEK , ~HOSMVAKMINISTE OFENVIRONMENT PROTECTIO6N ,ECEMBER
1991
K. ShndorKeresztes
MinisterofEnvironmentalProtectionandTerritorialDevelopment
Budapest. December1991
Ferenc Mgdl
MinisterWithoutportfolio
JOSEF VAVROUSEK
the MinisterofEnvironmental Proteof the
Czech andSlovak Federal Republic
DearMr. Minister!
Youropen letter,dateci4 Decembr 1991givesan opportunityto summariseonce again our proposais
and plansfor the joint resalutionof the seriousprobletothe Gabcikovo-Nagymarosarrage
Systemthawe inheritefromthe past. Withaur reply, along with that wlrtterexpresswe,
wouldliketoseedevelopment,assoanaspossible.
Hungariapublicopinion,the HungarianParliaand thHungarianGovemmentstartedout fromthe
defencof the followingfundamentalvaland interestsin judging the problemsof the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrageSystem:
the protectiofthe naturliving conditionsof peopleand their commoniboth banks of
the Danube,in the interestof thepresentand futuregenerations,inSlovakiaandHungary;
thepreservatiandstrengtheningthenatural relation,nendshipand CO-operatbetween
the two peoplesand the resolutionof theircornmonproblemsin a manner whichis in line withEurope
andiscentredohuman values.
The HungarianGovernment,as a consequenceof the effeci informatioathnndand additional
expertnalysisand observatiohasrecognisedthat the avoidaofthe dangers and potential risks
inherentintoperatiooftheGabcikovo-NagymaroBarrage Systemis essen.iThereforeinSpring
of 1989, influencedby the historical responsibility, theGovemment suspended construction on the
barrage system.
Among the risks, thethcotheregion'sdsinkingwater is the greatest. The stheper capita
replenishabledrinking water supplyof both Hunandthe Çzech and Slovak Pederal Republic is
extremelyunfavourable.We areamonthelowesinEurope..Thuswe cannotallowthe presentlyused
bank fiIttationsystem, whichguaranteescheapdrinkingwaterfor manymillionsof people, or the only
.reservefor subsequentgenerations represented by thesubsurface water atSzigetkoz and
Csallbktkzbeplaced atrisk.
Since thetirof thesuspensi ooncons.tnictionwork, the certaintythat the Gabcikovo Nagymaros
Barragwould resuItin irreversibleecologicallydamaging processeshas becomequite great. These
processewouldresult isetiouecologicarisksfotheterritorisfboth nationsIn additiothe
inspectionothe plans aconstruct haisevealednew dangersand questionsof technicalsecurity
relatetothe operationsof the barrage. Finallywe wouldalsolike torefer tothe fact thatthe HungarPartydu,rinthe courseofthe Budapest
negotiations,haslwaysagreedto theparticipationof internatioexpertsinjoint studiesthere were
differences,whichwerenotimconcilable, betweenthenegotiatingdelegationsastothemannerin which
thisshould be undertaken. As a matter of fact, an agreementwas reached as tothernanner of
participationofenpets recommendedby the EuropeanCommunity.
Dear MT. Minister!We hope that our commonintent to improvethe situationwill soon give us an
opportunityto allow the commencementof professionallscientificCO-operatwhich will nllaw usto
corneto anagreementas tothefateoftheGabcikovo-NagymaroB s arrage System
1 (signaturesofSQndorK. KeresztesandFerencMidl) Annex 69
L~R FROM MR.JAN CARNOGURSKY, SLOVAK PRIME MMISTER TD MR. FEREN C ADL , UNGARIAN
M~ISTEW R FHOUP TORTFOLIO 1, DECEMBE 1R91
DearMr. Minister!
The development and strengtheningof gaod-neighbourlyrelationsastraditionaleffort made by our
nations. Theproblemsregardingtheconstructionof theGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystemand the
problems related to the interstatetreaty regarding the constandtoperation of the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrageSystem concludedbetweenSlovakiaand Wungaryin 1977 are ,o a certain extent,
outsideof the frameworkofthesepositiveandconstructiverelations.
I assur you that the CzechoslovakPartyis sincerelyattemptingto fansolution acceptableto both
Parties.
Yourneeds, whichwerepresentedby theHungasian delgations during the negotiationsof 2 December
1991, areregarded byus to beof interesforfamiliarisingourseIveswith the positionof the Czech-
SlovakParty'position.
Duringthe courseof negotiations,OurGovemental Delegationstartedconsistenllyfrhevalidnorms
of internationallaw. We, therefore,holdthe fulfiof treatobligationstbe themost importantof
these noms and OUT stance on the Danube barrage systern is defined by just such a fundamental
principle.
Dear Mr. Minister,please allow me to repeat and emphasiseour positionwhichwapresentedat the
aforementionedBudapest negotiations.
The CzechoslovakPartc onsidersuseful theformationof ajoint cornmittexpertsto includeforeign
expertsnominatedby the EuropeanCornmiinitybased onthe needsof both Parties,. The Czechoslovak
delegationhadalreadymade sucha proposalduringthe negotiationsof 15July 1991in Bratislava. The
task of the cornmitteewould bethe assessrnentof the alternative solutionsand professional/scientific
questions related to the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System, the above being placed before the
çommitteeby31December 199 1.
I am repeatedlystressingthat,becauseof the high state of readinessof the Gabcikovo plant,the only
solution that is acceptable for us iswhich takes intoaccountthe putting into operation of the
Gabcikovo plant. As far as the fate othe Nagyrnarosplant is concernedit should be solved in
connectionwith compensatingtheCSFRfor damagecausedbyHungary'snon-cornpliancewiththe inter-
stateTreatyanditsrelateddocuments. TheCzechoslovakPartyis,obviouslywillintoparticipatinthe
consideredsolution of ecologicatprob1emwhich may appearon the tesritoryof eiththe CSFR or
Hungary.
The CzechoslovakParty declares thatit will continue work othe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage
Systemwith the intentionofcommencingoperationof theGabcikovoBarrage, whilecommittingitselfto
not undertakwe orkintheDanube'sbeduntilJuly 1992.DearMr. Minister,1note thatal1Czeçhoslovakstepstaken pertaining tothe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
BarrageSystem asecompatiblewithOurobligationsunderinternationallaw. Measurestelatedto work
done beyondthe scope of theJointContractuaPl lanwere causedby the Hungarianhîy's unilateral
suspensionof thefulfilmentof itsTreatyobligations.Intheinterestsof adhaencetothe substanceand
goals of the 1977 InterstateTreaty,andthe interestof curbingthegrowingecologicalandeconomic
damage,theCzechoslovakParty,committed tofulfillingitsrespansibiliw,asforcedto resorttosuch
measures.
1hust thatthe HungarianPartywill takenoticeof theaforementioned argument andwill develop a
position whicwilladhere iothefmalities of internationallaw.
DearMr. Minister,allowmetoexpressmyregards.
Bratislava18 December 1991
JanCarnogursky
Dr. FerencMhdl
Ministerof theGovemmentof theRepublicof Hungary 128
Annex 70
LE'ITE mROM MR. J~ZSEP ANTALL H,UNGARIA PRIME MINISTE RO,MR. MARIAC NALFA,
Cz~c~osmva~ PRIME MINISTE1 9,DECEMB E991
ThePrirneMinisterof theRepublicof Hungary
Budapest19December1991
Marian Calfa,
the PrimeMinisteroftheCzechand SlovakRepublic
DearMx. Rime Minister!
In 1977 the fmer Governmentof the Peoples Republicof Hungary and the Government of the
CzechoslovakSocialistRepublic concluded treatywithregard to the completionand operationof the
Gabçikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage. Whatbecame widely knownin both our countries isthat, during the
lengthypreparations,the authorsof thejoint plansdisregthe ecological andenvironmenta1point of
view which ibecoming moreprevalentindevelopedcountsies.
This ithereasonfor theincreaseinthenurnberofprofessionalcounterargumentshm thekginnfng.
The GovernmentoftheRepublic ofHungarsy uspend4constructionat Nagymafoson 13May 1989and
the cross-fillingof the river'sbed at Dunakilition 20 July 1989becauseit is convitheputting
into operationof theGabcikovoNagymwosBarragewillprecipitatean ecologicaIstateofernergency.
Subsequent tothe decisionscancemingthe suspension,the Hungarianparty searchedfor a soluvian
negotiations. The PrimeMinisteriaImeetingin 1989atteststo that. At the sametime,in the summerof
1989joint efforts were made toclarifytheproblems.
The transitionsakingplace in our countriesofferedan opportunityfor a joint resolutioserious
problems inheritedfromthe dictatorial systemof the past and for the conclusionof a responsibleand
humanedecisionkeepinginmind theinteresisofpresentandfuture generationOur govments began
negotiationsinprilof 1941.
The plenipotentiariesmet first in Budapest,then in Bratislavain July andonce again in Budapest in
December.
The delegations ernphasised on every occasionthatthey consideredthe issue of the Gabcikovo
NagyrnarosBarrageto b primarilya professional-scientproblem. The ParliarnentaryCornmitteof
the two countnes withresponsibilityfor environmental-ccologicailssuesagreedwith this in their joint
statementsandurged theearliestjointdisclosureof theseproblems.
In accordance with this, during the negotiationsin Decemberof 1991, both parties considthed
detemination of themandateof thcommitteewhichexamine theprofessionalquestionsto be their most
important assignment. Thedelegationspreviouslyput theiproposaisseparatingthisin writing and
jointly producedan agreement. From this potfview,themeetinginDecembercoulé haveconcluded
withresults.
At the same timcthe Hungarian delegationrequestedthat, duringthe examinationby the professional
cornmittee,theCzechand Slovakparty refrairifromworkwhichis inconsistentwiththe InterstateTreaty
of 1977 and which(in contraventioof International Law) aimsat unilateraldecision. This rational
minimumrequirernent(whichaidsthe equanimityof thejoint researcwas not takenintoconsideration
by the CzechandSlovakdelegation. However,it promisedtonotifytheCzeçhand SlovakGovernment
of the request. In liofthis, the Hungarian party offanotherten days for the deliberaof this
situation.
Jan Carnogursky,the Prime Ministerof the SlovakRepublic,in a letter dated 18 December 1991 toFerencMAdl, the head of the Hungariandelegation,announcedthat the Czech and Slovak Party could
only accepta solutionwhich supportsthe putting intooperationof the GabcikovoBarrage and for this
purpose continued the construction of the Gabcikovo NagymarosBarrage. This also includes
constructionwhichdeviatesfrom the Joint ContractualPlan. Rie HungarianParty has yet to receivc
informationwith regardto theresultsandaimsofthisconstruction. -,
Withregard to the worksched out unilaterally and illegallyon the territorof the Czech and Slovak
Republic, 1 regretto state that thereis less and less of a chanceto set up the planncdJoint Expert
Cornmitteeand to reach a well-foundedmutual decision. It would be rational to establish the Joint
ExpertCornmitteeonlyifbathPartiesundertooktorakeinto account theconclusionsof the expertsin the
future. Thus [theParties] shouldbe openta the conclusions of the experts,insteadof puttingimproper
pressureuponthemby acceleratingtheworkand implyingtheirreversibilityofthe construction.
DearMr. PrimeMinister; 1am hopeful that threpresentativesofthe GovemmentandtheParliamentof
the Czech and SlovakRepublichavingregard to theirhistoricresponsibilitywill finan opportunity to
take the abovereasonablepointsof viewinto consideration. If this expectation proves to be futile,the
Government of the RepubIic of Hungary would be compelled to review the consequences of the
discontinuationof the negotiations,the fate of the 1977 interstateTreaty and the necessary counter-
measures,
Pleaseacçeptmy highestregards.
Withthanks,
J6zsefAntall Annex 71
~
1 LE~R FROMMR. FERENCEMADL ,UNGARIANMINISTE WRITHOUTPORTFOLIOT, MR.JAN
CARNOGURS K Y,VAKPRIMEMINISTE 23,DE~MBER 1991
Dr. FerencMid1
Minister WithouiPortfolio
JanCarnogursky
Presideof the Governmentof theSlovakRepublic
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
I recaivedyour letter 18December1991informingme of the continuationof the boftheng
GabcikovoNagymarosBarrageand includingthe woverand abovethe scopeof the agreement
pian.The Hungariandelegationrepeatedlyinitiatedthe suspensionof the latter. 1must disclose with
sincereregretthatthe rejectheHungarian minimum requesftmulated duringthe negotontion
2 December1991 in Budapestwill render the estabandhaim ofthejoint speçialistcornmittee
impassible.
The Governmentf the Republicof Hungarydiscussedthe contentsof your letter in its session heldon
19December1991 andreceivedwithregretunjustifiablyinflexible positionof ttheCzechf
and SlovakdelegatiInlightof the fact thatthisdifficult situationcouldonlybe ameliotatedby taking
into considerationthe Hungarim initiatives,Prime Minister J6zsef Antall addressed a letter to Mr.
MarianCalfa,the Presidentof the Goveofthe Czech andSlovakFederalRepublic, which,on the
basisofan autharisafromJ6zsefAntal1willsendtogethwitmine.
DearMT.PrimeMinister,allometoassureyouofmy highesteem.
Budapest23December1991. Annex 72
Bratislava,8January1992
Dear Mr. Minister!
1 received yourletter dated 23 Decernber1991fulfilmentwith great appreciation, In your Ietter, you
expressyour opinion thatthe non-fulfilmentof the demands made by the Hungarian Governmental
delegationduring the negotiationsof 2 December1991 wouldmake the work of the proposedmixed
committee of experts to judge the problem of the Gakikovo Nagymaros Barrage System in a
comprehensivcmarinerimpossible.
DearMr. Minister, theproblemof theconstruction and operatinf the Danube barrageis multi-faceted.
Primarily,weare speakingof a set ofeconomic questions which incteeproblemsof the utilisationof
theDanube's energypoiential,the problemof the almostfinishedGabcikovohydroelectricplant and the
furthet fate of the region destroyedby construction work. Not less importaarethe quesrionsof
unimpedednavigation on theentireCzechoslovak sectioof the Danube,theprimaryfmus of European
shippers. In the near future, followingthe Rhine-Main-DanubeCanal'sopening,the importanceof the
Danube watenvay wiIlgrowevenmore.
It isonlynaturalthatwe should respectenvironmentalaspectswhenexaminingthe abovedetailed points
especiailythe demandssetforthfortheprotectionof theregion'sgroundwaterreserves.
Flood defencesalong the Danube,whichcame into view during last yearflood,continue to pose a
seriousproblem,a problem whichis also totally solbytheGabcikovo-Nagymaros BarragS eystem.
PrimeMinisterJ6zsefAntall,in his letterto thePrimeMinisterof the CSFR,mentions the factthat the
HungarianGovernmentsuspendedconstructionwork aiNagymaroson 13 May 1989, and suspended
workon the obstructionof the Danubeat Dunakiliti on 20 lune 1989because, in al1probability,it
became convinced thatthe commencementof the operationsof the Gabcikovo-NagymarwBarrage
System would pose anecologicalemergencysituation.
DearMr, Minister,at the end of the negotiations heldin Budapeston 2 December1991,1gaveyou the
notes of the scientific work undertakeby the BratislavaWater Management Institute from 1951
regardingthe BarrageSystem. The notes contain364 titles. This is only the result of activitiesat one
workplace, that is to say, the number of articles dealing with theaforementioned problem by
Czechoslovak expertsis most likelymuch mater. They do not,however, make my mention of the
threat ofany ecological catastrophe. Individuelxperts cal1attention to the possibleecological risks
posed by the operations of the barrage system, butçoncede, at the same time, that these may be
minimisedby technologicalmeasures within Ourmeans. In theSlovak National Council, even the
representatives of theGreen Party expressed their supportfor the completion of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage System as longas the19conditions,seforthby the SlovakEnvironmentalStudies
Institute within theframeworkof expert opiniongiven tthe GabcikovoBarrage investor as per the
water law,were followed.This,also,atteststo the fact that theadministrativebodiesin our Republicpay
adequnteamntion ta the ecological questisurroundingtheGabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Syste m
Sincethe time when theHungarianParty unilaterally suspendethe work which was underwayon the
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systern, a period of over two years, you have not submitted any
scientificor technological arguments whichjustifywomesas totheEhreatof ecologicalcatasrrophe.
Dear Mr. Minister,inaccordancewiththehotocol ofthe Amendment zotheAgreement signedbetween
the Governrnentof CSFR and the Govemmentof the HungarianPeople'sRepublicin Budapest on 16
September, on Mutual Assistance concerning the construction and operationof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem, thefirst gtnerator shouldhave beguoperationon 1 July 1990 and thelaçt
(theeighth)in 1942. Youare wellaware of how realitydiffe~ from this conception.Ourexpertsassess
the daily Iossesincurredby the CSFR,as a resultof the failureto commence operations,at 20 MiIIion
Kcs. The Government of the Czechand Slovak FederalRepublicand the Govemmentof the Slovak
Republicare attemptingto diminishthiseconomiclosstaa minimum.
We repeatedly emphasised atjoint negotiations undertakenby the GovemmentalDeIegations of the
CSFR and the Republic of Hungary that we cm only accept a solution whichis aimed at the
commencementof operationsofthe Gabcikovo Barrage.Thisdemandisjustified by theadvancedstage
oftheconstructionatGabcikovoandtheamountofmaterialresourcesinvested.
The CzechoslovakParty has ben attempting,sinceMay 1989, tofind away out of the present situation
regarding theGakikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systern, a situation which is unacceptableto both Parties.
These attempts were made apparein ntJuly1991 ,duringa negoliationof GovemmentalDeiegationsin
Bratislava asto the formationofa mixed specialcomrnitteeaf expertsconsisting of experts from the
CSFR, the Republicof Hungary and the European Community , committeewhich wouldjudge the
question regardingthe barragesysternin a comprehensivernanner. Concretenegotiations regardingthis
proposa1were undertakenon 2 December 1991in Budapest,during the meetingof the Govemmental
hlegations of theCSFRand the Republicof Hungary.
Dear Mr. Minister,despiteyour positionofrejectionexpresse$ inyour letterdate23 Decernber1991, it
is my opinion thai the work of a cornmitteeconsistingof experts, as rnentionedabove, would have
significanceeveninthe present situation.The Governmentof the CSFR isprepasedtunameits experts,
who wouldtakepartinthecommistee's activities.
The participationofthe expertsof the European Community in the workof the aforementionedrnixed
committeeof expertsistiedto the conditionsof thepetitionsmadeby theGovernmentsof both nations,
which must be addressedto the European Community and which mu esxtpress thecondirion that this
internationalinstituteRameits own expertsto the committee. F.eiterateour readinessto sendsuch a
petitionatonce.
Dear Mr. Minister,pleaseinfom meof your positioninthismatter.
'IneCzechosIovak Partyiçwillingto takeintoconsideration the conclusions theworkdone by sucha
comrnitteeof expertsin anyfurtherproceduresregardingthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem. It
is aIsoknownthat the Governmentof theCSFRis willingto suspendtheprovisionalsoIutionon its own
sovereignterritio nsyfaras theGovernmentof theRepublicof Hungaryis able to findan opportunity
to ente ntoajoint solution.
Dear Mr. Minister,pleaseconsiderthe argumentslistedhereinand useyour influence and position to
assure theformationof a mixed committeeof experts,in which theexpertsof the Republicof Hungary,
theCSFR and the EuropeanCommunitywould be represented.1,personally,amof the opinionthat the
formationof suchanobjectivebodyisnecessaryandworthwhile.
DearMr. Minister, 1assureyou of rnyregard.
Jan Camogursky. Annex 73
LE~R FROM MR. ~IAN CALFA ,ZECHOSLOV PRAKEMINISTE RO,MR. J~ZSEA FNTALL,
HUNGARIANPRIME MINISTER 2,3JANUAR 1992
Prague,23 January 1992
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
Itis withgreatappreciationthat1receivedyour letterdat18 December1941. In connectionwiththe
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System,1would liketo pointout that the constructioand operationof
theDanubeBarrage Systemis of exuaordinaryimportanceto theCSFRandis manifestedin questionsof
the economics, ecology, water management and navigation conditions to be developed within the
territoriof ournation.
In connection wiih the compljudgementof thisentiregroupof problemsfroma modempoint of view,
we mustrealise thatthe InterstateTreatyRegardingthe Construction andOperationof the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage System of 1977is valid and demandsthe fulfilrnentof contractualobIigationsby
both Parties. TheCzechoslovakPartiys readytacompletethe workon the constnictionof the Danube
Barrage System, while at the same time, minimisingthe verifiable ecological consequences, thus
complyingwithcontractual obligations.
1would like toemphasisethat the constructionof the power plantundertakenstep by step, witthe
agreementof theGovernmentsof both States, until13May 1989,whentheGovernmentof theRepublic
of Hungary decided, unilaterally,to suspend the construcof the Nagymaros PowerPlant, led by
worriesas to the creationof an ecological stateof necebythe Commencementof the operationsof
theNagymarosBarrageSystem.
DespitenegotiationsbetweentheCSFRandthe REPUBLIC OFHUNGARYon a governmentallevelby
the Plenipotentiariesof the Governrnentsof the CSFR and theREPUBLICOF HUNGARY,duringthe
course ofwhich theCzechoslovakParty endeavouredto gainthe recognitionof a solution acceptable to
both negotiating partners, the positions of the Hungarian Governmentand Parliament remained
unchanged. Asa matter of fact, the Hungarian Parliamenti,n its Resolutiondated 23 April 1991
comrnittedtheHungarianGovernmentlo negotiatewiththe Governmentof the CSFRthe terminationof
the InterstateTreatyof 1977and toconcludea newTreatyas to theassigrnent of rightsandobIigations
resultingfromtheab:r..inlimenoftheconstnictionoftheDanube BarrageSystem.
1,myself, underscorethe assessmentthat the problempertainingto the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage
Systemisprimarily aquestionof aprofessionallscientinature. Ithis light,1wouldliketo bring your
attentioto the fact ttheCzechoslovak Party has drawnup a series of professional documents, a list of
which itgave to the i-iungarianParty, which decthatnoneof the studieson the listhave provthe
danger ofconçrete andirreversibleecological catastras a result of thecompletionof the Nagyrnaros
Barrage Systern TheHungarian Part has not yet presentedanytypofmaterialof anevidentiarynature
as to this question.
Dear Mr. Prime Minister, in your letter, your write that the work in progress on the Gabcikovo-
Nagymams isunlawfuland endangersthecreationof a JointCommission.
In this light,I would like to emphasisethat the decisionbythe HungarianGovernment to stop the
constructionof the DanubeBarrage Systemis unlawfuland has anegativeeffwt on the CSFR,on the
territorofwhichextensiveconstructionhasbeencarriedoutinthe recent past, with agreementof the
Governmentsof both nations,and where,as a resulthemajorpart of the projectsare in a high state of
readiness. In the interestof minimisingthe increasinglycumulativeeconomicand ecolodamage on'
Czechoslovak tenitory and so thatthe energypotentialat Ourdisposa1is optimalIyutilised and that the
Danube's bai becornessuitablefor thefulhlmentofthe absolutely indispensneedsof navigation....
In the eventthatthe conclusions[ofthe Cornmittee]and the monitoringof theGabcikovo Barrage'stest
plant prove that the negative ecologicalconsquences are greater than the expected profit, -. -
l
Czechoslovakiaisreadyto stopworkon theprovisionalsolutionand tocontinueconstructionbased on
mutualagreement. -61
In this spirit,1proposethawe turn ,ointly to the Euopean Commwnity,requestingthatthey send
exw totheCzechoslovak-HungkanJointCornmitte essoonaspossible,sothatitmaykgin itswork
withintheshortestpossibleperiodoftirne.
DearMr.Pnme Minister,
1 would like to assureyou thata furtherescalatianofthe problemis no1 inthe interests of the
Czechoslov Pakrtra,thejusttheopposite. The CzechoslovakPartyis endeavouringi,n thespiritof
theexisting,~aditiondlygoodandfriendlyrelationsbetweenthetwo nations,to trto opena pathfor
thedevelopmeno tfa çommonsolutionwhichisacceptable tobothPdes.
Dear ML. PnmeMinisterp , leaseacceptmyhighestregards.
MarianCalfa
ToHonourable
J6zsefAntall,
PrimeMinisterof the
Hungaian Republic
Budapest Annex 74
NOTE VERBA L EOMTHE MINISTR OF FOREIGA NFFATR OFTHE REPUBL ICHUNGARY M THE
EMBASS YFTHE CÇZECHAND SMVAK FEDERAL REPUBLIC, 14FF,BRUARY 1992
NOTEVERBALE
2014192
The Ministty of Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungary presentsits complimentsto the Ernbassyof
the Czech andSlovakFederalRepubEicandin thename of the Hungarian Governrnenthas the honour to
disdose thefollowing:
The Hungarian Governrnentina letterfrom Mr. MarianCalfa, Pnme Minister ofCzech and Slovak
Federal Republic,ated23 Janriary 1992received on 4 Febnrary1992by the Mr. Joseph Antall,Prime
Ministerof Hungarywasnotifiedhim of the Czechand Slovak FederalRepublic'sdecisionbrought about
an 12Deçember1991whichsupportsthe completionof constructioand the putting into operationof the
GabcikovoHydmlectric Plant onthe territofytheCzechandSlovakFederalRepublic.
The Hungarian Governmentis compelledtoascertain thatthe decisionby the Governmentof the Czech
and Slovak Federal Republic andtwork being caniedoutin Iighofit is inequitableand aiatthe
diversionof the Danube bas4 on a unilateral decisioThe Hungarian Government would like te
emphasise its opinion previously expressed during the course of intergovemmental negotiations
regardingthe Gabcikovo Nagymaros Barrage that the resolution of the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republic andits implementationis in contravention of theInterstate Treain forcesince1977
regardingthe construction and operationthe Galxikovo Nagymaros Barrage and the convention
rarifiein 1976regardingthe water managementof boundarywaters.
The Hungarian Governrnentbringsto the attention of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic thata
unilateral decision to divert the Danube is inconsistent with the pinciples of sovereignty, territorial
integritywith the inviolability of state borasrwell as with the general customaty noms on
international rivers and the spirit of the 1948 Belgrade Danube ConventInnlightof thisthe
Hungarian Government deems the decision brought abouon 12 December 1991 by the Czech and
Slovak Federal Republiç unlawfuland unacceptable ancallsupon the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republicta discontinue workothediversionof theDanube.
The Hungari Gaovtrnmenwt illrepeatedlyrnakeuseof the opportutotexpress its intent to achieve a
mutual:agreement with regato thedisputedquestions concerningthe GabcikovoNagymaros Barrage.
At the sametirne,tHungarian Governrnentrnustestablishthat thedecisionbrought by theCzech
and SlovakFederal Republicand its implementawillimpedethis endeavour.
The Minis~ of Foreign Affairs theRepublicof Hungary avails itsof thiopportunityto renew to
the Ernbassofthe Czeçhand SlovakFederalRepublicthe assurancesof its highesrconsideration. :' Annex 75
L ~ R FROM MR. J~ZSE AFNTALL H, UNGAKIP ANIMEMIN~STE RO,MR.MARIAC NALFA,
CZECHOSLOV PRAIKEMINISTER, 26 ~RUARY 1992
Republicof Bungary
PrimeMidster
MarianCalfa
President of the
Govemment of the Czech and Slovak Republic
Dear Mr. Prime Minister!
1 thank you for you letter of January 23, 1992, which is inspited by Governrnental worry and
responsibility about for the Danube Barrage System. worq and responsibility are shared. Weare
responsible for the natural living conditions of our peoples and for the development of good neighbour
relations. In this vein, and 1am surethat you, Mr. Prime Minister, wwelmust make the rational
decisionand not allow tensions to develop betwOUTnations in place of European CO-operation. The
maintenance of good CO-operationbetween the States of the region, the "Visegrdd three" is in our
cornmon interests as is the resolution of tenwaynof negotiation.
The Hungarian Govemment has repeatedly dealt with thesituation whichhas developed inrelation to the
Gabcikovo Barrage. Ailow me to.inform you on the position of the Government. The Danube Barrage
system is a serious problem inherited from the past. The unanswered questions, the profoundly difficult
tasks standing before us, the materialwhichsunjustly burden the futand the rootofthedamage
areal1the result of the past political system'sfaulty decision-makingmechanisms.
During the long yearsof preparation, they, irresponsibly, left out the rnajority of the representatives of
those professions whicwerenecessarytolay the foundations of the plans and silencedwhoospoke
out against the construction. For the most part, the natural and environmental vatheaffected
regionremained unravelled. The plant was king built while the decision-makers of both nations were
ignorant of thereversible, damaging ecological consequences.
The period following the suspension of constructiotheHungarian side presented an opportunito
examine the Barrage'senvironmentalconsquences and to supplementessential studies, werenever
undertaken.
1askyou, to allow me, onceagain, to summarisethe most seriousecological risks.
According tothe Hungarianexpertsand the leadeof the foreign experwho wereasked to participate,
the commencement of operations of theGabcikovo Barrage would be an extraordinarily drastand
considerable, interference in the natural order. The Danube is to be placed km long, isolated
canal. Such interference isnotbefound anywherealong the Danube.
The alteration of the dynamic balance in the water systems of the affected tenitories will irreparably
damageboih Hungary'sand Çzech andSlovakia'smost significant drinking waterresource; the long-term
protection of which being one of the most important strategic questionsthernations of Europe.
The Danube bed'fltration qualitiesaadeciding factor thequality andquantity of water in bthe
presently operational water-front fibation wells,guaranteeing Bratislava'swater sin thewater
stored in the grave1sedimentary cap at Zitny Ostrov-Szigetktiz,isseveral hundred metres thick.
Interferencesofarhas not affected the constantly replenished supwhich could,in theIong-term,
guarantee for the future 3 million m3 of water which doeneedto becleaned, water enough for 5
million persons. With the commencement of the Barrage'soperations, this water supply, among other
aspects, is also endangered. The expense of investing in replacements to substitute for the potential
damage and loss of these water bases is inestimable.Withchangesin the groundwater,the region'sexcellentagriculturaland forest lands wibe lost. With
changesto theground'swater housekeeping, thegrounssmineralnatureand constitutionwillalter. The
alterationsinthiswillinducechangesinplantcoverandintheanimalcommunity. The plantand animal
comrnunities whichlive hereare acclimatisedto the water'sseasonaldynarnicsThesecommunities are
abIeto keep in step with this process only in gradua1stages. Thedrastic changes resultingfkornthe
Danube'srelocationwill be answered by thedegradation and annihilatioof natural and environmental
values.
In connectionwiththeabove,Iwould mention that the Treatyof Association signedby Hungaryandthe
EuropeanCommunitylast year considers thati,n harmonywith intemàtionalenvironmentalprotection
law,thebattleagainstlocal,regiond,andcross-borderairand water pollution,the protectionof the water
qualityofwaterways crossingborders,and co-operationinsuch efforttobeofelevated importance.
We aIso cannot consideras unimportant the fact that the region'sseismologicallinks andthe related
dangers hadnotbeen revealed.
Dear Mr. Prime Minister!The Hungarian Governmenh t as, since its suspensionof constructionwork,
soughtto resolvethe problem by disclosing oursharedenvironmenta1problerns and negotiations. We
have informedourCzech andSlovaknegotiatingpartnersbothoralIyandin writtenfom of the questions
we considerto be serious.At the sametime, yourexperts have not,as yet, presentedto us onestudy
which wouldprovethatthe expecteddamageand riskspresentedby us arenot realistic. This is why we
proposedthe creationof atri-lateral expertcammission,withtheparticipationof internationalexperts, so
that both Partiesmaybe in possessionof the information necessary to arriet a responsibledecision.
This is of decisire importance to both Parties.. Tri-lateral discussiocnosuld betheld until now
becausethe Czech and Slovak Part yas not agreed,eitherat the meetingof Decernber1991or since,to
suspend the constructionworkwhichis in progressin contraventionof the interstate Treatyof 1977, a
step which we considerto bea necessaryprerequisiteto the creationafjoint expertcommission. Asa
matterof façr,to ourgreatdismay,in yourlettersentsubsequenttothe December meetingd , atedJanuary
23, 1492, Mr. %me Minister,you informed us of the GovernrnentalDecision regarding unilateral
construction workaimedatbringingtheGabcikovoPowerPlant intooperation to bedoneon Czechand
Slovakterritoryonly. In the time which hasincepassed, newshasarrivedthatthe conclusion thePace
of constructionhas accelerated This, without acceleraany tri-lateral examinationin the mean time,
serves to the ecoIogica1danger andthe relocationof the Danubeas a result of a unilateral decision
constitutea seriousbreachof internationallaw.
The worktowards the unilateralrelocationothe Danube was announced by the Czech andSlovakParty
as aresponse tothe Hungariandecisionto suspend work,a supplementarysolution,based onthe opinion
thatthe Hungariandecisianconsticutes abreachof the inter state Treaty of 1977. On the contrary, 1
wouldliketoemphasisethat the suspension ofworkon theHungarianpartwasnot onlyunavoidable,but
was a measureinçomplete agreemen tithinternationallaw. 'ïhereare severalargumentsto supportthis
assertion.1wouldreferhere toonly themostimportant. The Hungariap nartyundertookthismeasure as
a responseto an eeologicalemergency. This excludesthe unlawfulnessof Govemmentalmeasuresto
order suspensionbecausethiswas the onlypossibilityavailableforthe protectioof the interestsaf the
populationofthenation and theregion. It cabe recordedas a fundamental questioof international law
that theadherenceto this Treaty would have entailed unbearableecologicalconsequences,which a
responsibIeGovtrnrnent could no accept. Thus, the Hungariandecision tosuspend work was not
unlawful.
On the oppositeside,theunilateralrelocationof the Danubenotonlymakesthe validityof the intstate
Treaty of 1977questionable andis in contraventionthereof,but also breachesseveralfurtherprovisions
of internationallaw. The supplementary solution standisn oppositionto the principIeof respect for
sovereigntyand territorial integrity, whare obligatoryrulesof internationallawWhen the Danube
leaves Bratislava,it homes an internationalboundq river, and cornes under Hungarian supreme
authorityon the onehand andCzech and Slovaksupremeauthoriîyon the other. It proceedsfrom thisthatthe fateof theshared boundaryriver can be decided onIy by theagreement of bbathnations. The
temporary solution is in contraventionof the principleof inviolabilityof state borders. Thus, the
executionthereof cannotconfom withthefundamentalprinciplessetforthin the Charterof the UN and
the Helsinki ClosingDocument. The relocationof the Danubewould move the navigablemain line,
whichispresently, accordingto theprovisionsof the ParisPeactreaty(and,indirectlyBe PeaceTreaty
of Trianon),constitutesthe borderbetweenthe twoStates,fromcommonterritoryta Czech and Slovak
territory. Theexecutionof unilateralmeasureswouldfundamentallychangethe characteroftheborder.
EsteemedMr. PrimeMinister!
At the meetingsofthe Plenipotentiariesof our Govemmentsheld lastyear, therewas agreement on the
fact that the primaryproblemsare of a professionalJscientifnature. Theeffort to create a irilateral
expertcommissionwasa sharedone. The purposeand wmk of the trilateralcommissionis being made
questionableby the constructionworkbeing undertakenon the Czechand Slovak side to cornplete
unilaterallythe GabcikovoBarrage,work which is approvedby a high-level,Govemmentaldecision. A
responsible, common positionis inconceivablewithout a clear view of the professionallscientific
problems. Thus,in accordancewiththeDecisionarrivedat by the HungarianGovernmenton February
20, 1992, 1 onceagainrequestthe suspensionof constructionwork irseconcilable with the inter state
Treaty of 1977 and the general noms of international law,that the trilateral inquiries may,thus,
commence,without delay and the international legal conflbietresolvedby way ofcommon agreement
assoon as possible. The decisiveîask, now, is to guaranteepeace and stability,here, in the heart of
Europe,andthe CO-operation of the "Visegradthree,"insteadof inçreasingtensions. This tesponsibility
burdensus, now. Weawaitthe Czechand SlovakGovernment's responseto the commonpath outlined.
If the Governmentof the Czech and Slovak Federal Republiwc ere10reject our proposais anywayand
continue theworkaimedat the diversion ofthe Danube,whichis a senous breachof internationallaw,
then it will create a very difficultsituation. This wouIddernonsrratenot onlythe further breach of a
seriesof internationalbeaties,but with its unilateralact the Czeçhand SlovakPartyinsbreachof the
1977Inter-stateTreatyitself,is questioningits continuedeffectivenand,is consideringthe Treatyto
no longerbe in effect. The Governmentof the Cmh and SlovakRepublicwould thus be placing the
HungarianGovernmentinroa stateof necessityforcingit toterminatethe Treaty. ...Insofaras ...the
Govemment of theCzechand Slovak Republicdoes not find the opportunityto commence miladterril
inquiries withina rational periodoftime and simultaneouslysuspendthe unilateral work while said
inquiriesare underway,theHungarian Governmentwillhavenochoicebutto respond tothissituationof
necessity by terminating the 1977 inter-state Treaty. It must do so in defence of the
envitonmental/ecov llges,the peoples of the region,the living conditionsof future generations,
international law,andtheterritorialsovereigntyof Hungary.
1informyouthat t/ Governent has askedforthepriorauthorisationofParliamentas tothe above.
In conclusion,1expressmy faiththatthe outlined solution discussecan beacceptedby public opinion,
the sphereof professionals/sc iedthirssso,nsibleGovemmentalfactorsinbothnations.
Please acceptybestregards.
Sincerely, 139
..,
Annex 76
NOTE VERBA LEOMTHE MINISTR YFFOREIGN AFFAIR OSFTHE CZECH AND SMYAKFEDERAL
REPUBLIC TOTHEMINISTRYOF FOREIG ANFFAIR SFTHE REPI~LI OCFHUNGARY 17MARÇA 1992
NOTEVERBALE
83.015192
The MinistryofForeign Affairsof theCzech and SlovakFederd Republic ptesentsits complimentsto
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Hungary and ackn~wledges receiptof the
Memorandumof the Republicof Hungar yumber KUM 2014/92,dated14 February1992and hasthe
honourto conveythefollowing:
The Govemmentof the Ctech and Slovak Federal Republiarrivedat its decisionon the completionof
workon the Projectexclusivelyon tterritorof the CzechandSlovakFederalRepublic,and ajmedat
the ternporary commencemenotf operationssubsequenttthefact that the 2 December1991 rounof
negotiationsbetwten Governmentalhlegations ended unsuccessfulbecauseof the HungarianParty's
positio. Since13May 1989,the Republicof Hungaryhas notbeenfulfillingits obligatsetforthin
the 1977TreatyRegardingthe Construction and Operatiof the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosHydroelectric
PowerPlant, hasnot showna willingnessto resolvetheseproblemsby way of negotiationand has not
accepted the proposa1to create a joint professionalcommissionwith the participation of European
Cornmuni tyexperts.
Following more than two andone half years of unsuccessful negotia,rimarilyin defenceof the
State'sfundamental ecologilndeconomicinterests,anddueto the actionsof theHungarianParty,the
Govemmentof theÇzech and SlovakFederaiRepublic has beenforcedto commenceworkon a purely
provisional solution. Thisprovisional solution natprevent parties continuing negotiationsand
implementingthepurposeofthe 1977Tteaty.
The Govemrnentof the Czech andSlovakFederalRepublic, whichfirstproposedthe creation of ajoint
professional commission with the participaof EC experts, without prior conditions, once again
reiteratesitsinterinthe creationof sucha commissioand is preparedto take into considertheon
conclusionsof suchacommissionin comingto a decisionontheproblemsrelatedtothe ProjectInthe
event of ptoof that the negativeec~logicalconsequeneesof theoperationsaf the Project outweigh the
benefitsarisingtherefrom, theCzechoslovakPatis prepareto cease work on a provisional solution
and todecidethepowerplant'sfateonthebasisofajointagreement.
Work on the temporarymeasureswillalsosease if the HungarianPartydiscontinuesits unilateralbteach
of the 1977 Treaty and recommencestheobligationsprovided for it therein if an agreement is
concludedbetween theRepublicof Hungaryand theCzechandSlovakFederaERepriblicasto someother
solutionregardingthefateoftheProject.
Dueto the reasonsexpressa ebove,theGovemrnentof the Czech and SlovakFederalRepublic rejects
the allegation thatthe Resolutionpssby theGovernmenton 12December 1991 is unlawfuland in
contraventionof the fundamentalrinciples contained in the previously mentioned memoranda and
treaties.
TheGovemmeritof theCzechandSlovakFederal Republic isgreparedtocontinue negotiationswiththe
HungarianGovemment onal1levelsregardingthe situationwhich hasdeveloped. Atthe sametime, it
cannot agree to the cessation work on the provisional solution. According to the view of the
Czechoslovak Part h,eamount of time at Ourdisposa!prior to the diversion of the Danube should
sufficefortheresolutionofthedebatedissuesthroughajointagreementbetween ttwonations.
The Minjstryof Foreign Affairs of the Czech andSIovak Federal Republic avails itself of this
opportunitytorenew totheMinistryofForeign Affairsof theRepublicof Hungarythe assurancofits
highestconsideration.
Prague,17March1992. /- 140
Annex 77
Dr. Ferenc Midl
Mnister withoutportfolio
1037Budapest
P.O.B. 2
Te1:2528-996
Fax:1533-622
Mr. JanCamogursky
Prim e inisteroftheGovernrnent
of theSlovakRepublic
DearMr. PrimeMinister,
1thank youforyourlenerdated23March1992.
It is reallycruciallyimportosurveythetasksconcerningtheformationof thetripartitecommission
dealing with professional-scienquestions,andtherefore1 rhankyou for yourinvitationto the
personalmeeting. PIeaseallowme howevertocd1yourattentioto theresolutionof 24. Marcofthe
HungarianParliament,accordingto whichit is necessaryto stopworkscontraryto the 1977Interstate
Treaty in orderto startthe tripartitesurveys. 1 mist 1 can presentyou wiresolution of &he
HungarianParliamentindetailatourpersonmeeting,and wecanresolvethisdifficultsituationthrough
the spiritof yourprogressiveideas.
DearMrPrimeMinister,p1easeacceptherewithmysincereappreciation.
Budapest,30 March 992
(MgdlFerenc)13.IV. COFYRETYPEDFOPURPOSEOFLM~IBILITY
~russels, 13. IV. 1992.
Dear Minister,
With reference to Prime Minister Antall's letter
to gresident Delors of 5 March last and my meeting
with Professor Madl in Brussels on March 19, 1992
çoncerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Dam, 1 would hereby
like to çonfirm that the Commission of the European
Cornmunitieç in principle would be wiïling to assist the
two Governments in identifying a technically and economi-
cally feasible solution to this serious problem.
The Commission is willing to participate in and to
chair a Cornmittee of independent experts with represen-
tatives from the two wountries. The objective of this
Cornmittee would be to assess the scientific and ecological
effects of the project as well as the relevant aspects of
international public law applying to it, on the basis of
which the two Gevernments can identify a mutually accep-
table solution.
The members of the Committee should be independent
professionals with solid experience in the relevant fields
and neither civil servants nor politicians. The work of
the Committee should, in our view, be based as much as
possible on existing documentation and informationand the
Committee should prepare its assessrnent within six ptonths. A possible Commission involment would depend on
the following:
1, receipt of a joint letter, or two letters of similar
text, inviting the Commission to participate, and settig
out the terms of re£erence or mandate for the work of
the Committee,
2, the acceptance that the outcome of this assessrnent
would provide the agreed scientific/ecological and legal
basis for subsequent decision-making; and
3, each Government would not take any steps, while 'the
Committee is at work, which would prejudice passible actions
to be undertaken on the basis of the report's findings.
The Commission of the European Communities is, pro-
vided these conditions are met, willing to support the
work of the Cornmittee with civil servants as well as exter-
nal expertise if necessary.
3 also would like to inform you that a letter of a
similar nature and content has been sent to Mr. Dlenstbier,
Minister in Prague.
1 hope that it may be passible for the Governments of
Hungary and Czechoslovakia to reaçh agreement on the above
suggestions, as 1 believe that such a Committee can function
as an important catalyst in finding a solution to this very
serious, cornplex and sensitive problern.
Your respe~tfully, Annex 79
LE'ITE RROM MR.MARIAN CALFAC , ZECHOSLOVP ARKIMEMINISTE MR,MR. J~ZSEFANTAU,
HUNGARM PRMEMINISTE 23 APRL 1992
Marian Calfa
Czech andSlovakFederalPrimeMinister
Pnme Minister
J6zsefAntall's
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
1meived yourletterdated26 Febmary 1992 w;thappreciation.1,personally,shrtrethe opinionthat al1
the questionsreIatedtothe Gabcikovo-Nagyrnars arrage Systemareacornmonconcernwhich must be
resolved,before ai1else, in accordancewith the Treaty conçludedin 1977 between ?RH and the
CSFRon the construction andoperationof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System in; accordance,
therefore,with the Treaty ththe Czech and SlovakFederalrepubliç considersvalid and haalways
consideredvalid. The Governmentof theCzech and Slovak Federal Republic and otherrsponsible
Czechoslovakbodies have,duringthe course of their decision-making procedureisn relatiotothe
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros'Barrage System,alwaysproceeded in line withtheir obligationsascontainedin
the 1977Treaty and have, atthe sametime, keptheentireDanuberegion'secological interestsin view.
1would like to emphasiseimmediatelyat the beginningthat the Czech and Slovak FederalRepublic
considered theproblems which arasein relatioto the constnictionand operationof the Gabcikovo-
Nagyrnaros Barrage System subsequent to 13 May 1989 to be professional problemsand have
endeavoured to resolve these problems at a professional level, without emotional and politicd
interference. It is in theinterestsof the Governmentof the CzechandSlovak Federal Republic that this
question does not have a negativeeffect upon otherareas of its traditionallygood, and many sided
relationships.
The Governmentof the Republicof Hungaryhas, since 13May 1989,when, withoutany consultations
with the Czechoslovak Partyandincontraventionofthe 1977Treaty,it broke off the fulfilmentof the
obIigationsset forth for it in the 1977Treaty, no1submittedany scientificallyand technicallyfounded
documents which wouldjustify the HungarianParty'sworries concerningan ecological catastrophe. In
thisIight,1was surprisedby that sectofnyouletterwhichexpressed yoursurprisethat the Czechand
Slovak expertshave giventheHungatianPartyno documents toprovethat the HungarianParty'sworries
aregroundless. Therecan be no doubt that the HungarianParty is the Pawhich must prove your
'
allegationsconcerninganecological catastrophe anatthe sarnetime, rnakea proposa1which would
respect boththe existingstate of theconstructwork on the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage Sysrem
and the globalecologicalstaofthegiven region.
Almost threeyearshave passedsincetheHungarian Govemment's unlawfuldecisionandduringthattime
we,on the Czechoslovak parthave undertakena seriesof studiesand planning workintendedto findan
optimal solutionwhichwould beacceptableto hth Partiesfora resolutionof the problemsrelatedto the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage SystemT . he Czech and Slovak Federal Republialso considersthe
protectionof the undergroundwatersuppliesand the ecosystem be of great importance, however the
aforementioned studieshave forind no grounds for the Hungarian Party'sworries concerningan
ecologicalcatastrophe.
As regards the seisrnologicalconditioTsam of the opinion that this questwas exarninedby our
AcademiesofScienceand that theyhaveresolved thismatter.Dear Mr. PrimeMinister!
Pleaseallowme to callyout attentiotothefact îhatthe suspensionof workby your Govemmentthree
years ago is causing aseriesof seriousecological,economicand oîherproblemson the tenitory the
CSFR. As a result of the fact that a series of barrageshken built on the DanuWsGerman and
Austriansectionsthe amountof debriscarriedby the riverhas significantlydecreased,resulting in the
increaseoferosionactivitydong thesectionof theRiverbelowBratislava. ThewaterleveI in the river
has, for thisreason,sunk1-1.5 metres,cuttingoff a seriesof tributaries,whichresultedin the fact that,
forinstance,theMosonbranchwasleftwithoutwaterflowingthroughit forsorne300daysduring 1991.
In the absenceof a speedyintervention,the forestsof the region'sfloodparencondemnedto death.
Fundamentalecologicalproblernsare raised,also, by a 25 km Iong,and, on average,350 metre wide,
head-racecanal,unusedas of yet, which wasbuiIton our sovereignterritoryby not only Czechoslovak,
but Hungarian organisation,s well,onthebasisof the 197Treaty.
Duringthe selection of further proceduresaimed at resolving the questions at issue concerning the
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systemit is absolutelynecessarythat other importantcorrelatioare
also taken into account. Last August'sflood has oncagain demonstratedthat flood protection for
CzechosIovakand Hungarian territory in the Bratislava-Medveregion is totally insufficient. The
utilisationof theGabcikovoHydroelectricPowerPlant'shead-racecanal carry the flood waves would,
for thisveryreasan, be a significantcontribution tothe growth of the security of the entire region's
population.
TheRhine-Main-Danubecanal,whichwouldprovide a Iinkbetweenthe ArcticSea to the Black Sea is
nearingcompletion. Its opening,scheduledfor Auturnnof thisyearwillplace new demands upon the
improvement of navigationdong the joint Czechoslovak-Hungariansection of the Danube. In the
interestof ournations'econorniewe mustsatisfythesedemands as quickly as possiblIn thisma, as
well,theProjectis thefastest,the mosteffectiveand also, inallprobability,the mostacceptablefroman
ecologicalpointofview.
We also must take noteof the fact that the Danubeis, for our nations,by far the largestself-renewing
energy sesourcethe utilisationof whicforthe praductionof electrienerg n anecologicalIyviable ,
mannercouldfundamentallyimproveournations'difficultenergysituations. Atthesame time,thiscould i
contribute totheresolution of pressing problernsarisifrom the use of coal for energy purposes,
especiallyin the CSFR,intheNyitraregionand in thenorth-eastemareasof the CzechRepublic. The
CSFR'p sresenteconomic situationmakesit our responsibilityto pseriouattentiontothose immense
amoutits of money which we have used up during thecourse of the constmctionof the Project. We
cannotallow ourselves toabandonour previouswork , orto demolishit when has not ben proved
convincingly that thecommencement of operations wouPd lead to the "catastrophic ecological
consequences"whichyouhavementioned. .
We believethatduringthecourseof arrivingat itsdecision the Rojectthe Hungarian Part will take
dl theecologicalsecurityn,avigationenergy a,deconomic correlationproperlyinto account. Forthe
CSFR,the earliest possible resolutioof the unresolvedquestions regarding the construction of the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystemisof specialimportance.
Bar Mr. PrimeMinister!
Inyour letteryou writethatheHungari Paarthas madeeffortsto createatnlateraljoint cornmitteeof
expertswith theparticipationof internationalexperts.InthisIight,pleaseameoto callyourattention
to the fact that the Plenipotentiaryof the Governmenof the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic
responsiblefor the constructionand operationof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem submitted
the proposal for the creation aftrilatera1cornmitteeto the HungariaPart yuring the meeting of
GovernmentaiPIenipotentiarieon 6 September1990. Our pmposalwasrepeatedly submittedatvarious
levels,the las1occasionbeingthe meetingof our GovernmentalDelegationsin Bratislavaon 14-15July
1991, but the Hungaria Party has always rejected this proposal. Durinthe negotiations held inBudapest on 1-2 December 1991, Hungary did acceptthe Czechoslovak proposal,but made the
acceptanceof thatcontingentuponthe unilaterdlydefinedcondition thaal1work underway towards the
provisionalcommencementof operationsbe suspendeci,said conditionbeing of the same nature asan
ultimatum.
You also mention thatthe Hungarian Party has sought
resolution of the problems by way of
negotiations. Duringthecourse of the pastthwe years, however,thHungari Partyhas not submitted
one singleconstructiveroposaltowardstheresolutionofthesituation whichhasdeveloped.
Roposals to liquidate,orconserve the almosftinishedplant anddemandsforthe terminationofthe1977
Treatycannot,inmy view,belistedarnong the constructive solutionsT.heseproposais also avoidedany
definite ideas ato the technicalresolution of the liquidation, conservationor the settlernentof the
financial questions whicrelate tohese. Unfortunately,it is obviousfrom your letter of 26 February
1992that the HungarianParty is still unwillito agee to the commencementof the operationof the
GabcikovoProject in an ecologicallysafe manner, evenif its effectson the environmentare strictly
rnonitored,includingthequalityofthe sub-surfacewatersupplies,as well.
Due tothe abovereasons and the actionsof the HungarianGovemment,theGovemmentof the CSIFRa,s
I inforrnedyou inmy letter of 23 January 1992,was forced ttopassaResoIution as to the taking of
measureswhich wouldprovisionallybegin the operationof the Gabcikovo Barrageexclusivelyon the
territoryof the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic.
In relationto this matter,hiotocol no83.015/92-M of the Federal ForeignMinistryof the CSER,
dated 18March 1992containsfwrtherinformationwhichalsojustifies therejectionbythe Governmentof
theCSFR oftheallegationthat thedecisiontoundertakea provisionalsolutionis unlawful.
1amfirmlyconvinced that the resolutioonf theexistingproblems cannotbebasedonthe giving of such
ultimatums whiçh would influence not only relations betwetntes,butalso theentireCentrai European
situationin a negative manner. 1 see nothing positivein the declarations made by Hungarian
representatives ihat HungarianPartyisconsidering the unilateratlemination of the Treaty concluded
in 1977on the consmictionof the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage Systemif the CzechoslovakParty
doesnot suspendal1workrelated to the provisionalsolutionby 30Apri1992,
The Governmentof theCzech andSlovakFederal Republicis preparedto discuss,at a11levels,any and
al1 aspects of the irnplementationof the 1977 Treaty, Le., the construction andoperation of the
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystern. 1proposethat thePlenipotentiariesof our Governmentsfirst
discusstheprofessional/technicaluestions, in the manner forthin articl3 ofthe 1977 Treaty. Itis,
however, the responsibilityofthe Governmentof the Czech andSlovak Federal Republic and the
governmentof the Republic of Hungary alike to create the proper conditions for their worto be
undertaken. Czechoslovakhas shownenoughgoodintentions anda readiness tonegotiate,but it can no
longer giveconsiderationto the tirne-wastinganddelayswhicharebeing used by Hungary, and thus, it
cannot suspend workreIatedto the provisionalsolution. Inmy view, untilthe Danube is dosed (31
October 1992) thereis still an opportunitto resolve the debated questionby way of an agreement
between the twoStates, 1 once againrepeat thatthe Governmentof the CSFR, which was thefirscto
propose thecreationof ajoint cornmitteeof expertwiththe participationof expertsfrom the European
Community,is interested inthe creationof thiscornmitteewithout pre-conditions.It is preparedto use
the conclusionsdrawn andrecommendations made by thecornmitteeas thestartingpointfor any further
decisionsmadeinrelation tothe Projec Tthe Czechoslovak Partyisawaitinga similardedarationby the
Republicof Hungary. In keepingwith the contentsof the letter writtenby the Vice-Presidentof the
European Community Commission F,. Andriessen,datai 13 April 1992,1 propose that the Foreign
Ministers of our Governmentsturn to the EuropeanComrnunityand request that the Community
nominatespecialiststo participatein the expert cornmittee. Pleafindappended the draft of such a
letter.At present,whentechnology and conditionsrelateto the naturof theDanubelimitthe tirne wehave to
arriveata decisionregarding thefate of Gabcikovoasone part ofaBarrageSystem,the Czechoslovak
Part awaits the HungarianParty'spromptresponse on the issueof the creatofnatrilateralcornmittee.
1take this opportunityto onceagainbesobold asto bringyour attentioto the fact that the Nagymaros
Barrageis alsa an integralpart of the BarrageSystthefurtherfate owhich the twe Partiesmust also
dea1with.
DearMr. Mme Minister!
1wouldlike to assureyou that it is in the eminentinterestsof the andcSlovak FederalRepublicto
preventthe escalationofthis entireproblem.istinits intereststhat theprobwhichresultedhom the
Hungarian Party un'lateralstepsberesolvedobjectively,withoutpropagandacarnpaignson the basis of
scientificallysound informatiand in the spirit of the iraditionally goodand friend1yrelations between
our nations. BothParties must be preparedto compromise in the interests of a solution which is
acceptableto both Parties. The CzechoslovaParty,duringthe course of negotiations,has declaredits
willingness to compromise and continues to beready to seek out the optimal, mutually acceptable
solution. Atthe sametirne, itexpresses the convictionthat the negotiationotibe usedto win time
and to delay the resolutionof questionswhich, dtoa seriesof fundamentalecological, economiçand
politicalquestionsareunkarable.
Pleaseacceptmybest regards.
MarianCalfa
Appendix
The HonourabEe
Mr. JozsefAnrall,
Prime Ministerofthe RepubIicofHungary.
Budapest. Annex 80
LE~R FROM MR. JAN CARNOGURSS KLYO,VAKRWEM~NISTE R,MR. FERENM CADL,HUNGARIAN
MINISTERWITHOUT PORTFOL1I1 O, AY1992
11May 1992(letterto MinisterMid[)
DearMr. Minister!
In referençeto out telephonediscussionon 8 May 1992and1twouldIiketo thankyou for sending
thetextof the Governmentofthe Republicof Hungary'rsesoof7iMay1992terminatingtheTreaty
brought about in 1977 between the CzechoslovakSocialist Republic andthe Peoples Republic of
Hungaryregardingthe building and operoftheGabcikovo- NagymarosBarrageSystem.
Attoday'sextraordinmysessiontheGovemmentof the Slovak Republicclwiththe abovernenlloned
resolutionof the GovemmentoftheRepublicof Hungary. I informetheGovernmentof theSlovak
Republicofyourinvitationto Gyon 13May.
The Govemment of the Slovak Republicadopteda resolution the appendixof which is alsoain
statement. 1enclosedboth documentailetter1hasenttyou.
It is the opinionof theGovernmentof theSlovakRepublithecontinuationof the negotiationswith
the HuagarianPartyregnrdingthe problernssurroundingtheGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystemis
useful and necessary. We emphasisethat we are prepared tnegotiatwith you on a possible
modificationof thedeadlinethediversionof the Danube-bytheCzechoslovakparty. But we titnk
would beinappropriatetolimittthem ef thenegotiationspreconditions,Thenegotiationbetweenthe
government delegationsf the CSFR and the Republic of Hungary on the fulfilmenthef1977
interstate Treatyeven more desirableespeciallybecause the propofathe Commission of the
EuropeanCommunities onthesettingupofa trilatexpertsCommitteeshould alsbedea1twith. The
plenipotentiaryof the CSFR and the authorisedgovernmentPlenipotentMr.y,Kocinger, of the
govemmentsof the CSFRand the SR for the buildingandoperatioof the Gabcikovo- Nagymaros
BarrageSystemwas commissioned topreparein concert withhis Hungariancolleagues,the documents
forthe negotiation. 1enclosedtheletterwithwhichMr. Kocinger willfurnishhis Hungatiancolleague,
Mr. Haj6s.
DearMr. Minister!
1 welcome yourproposal for the meeting which1 hop will deal with al1 the relevant questions
concemingthebuildingandoperationothe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage.
Dear Mr. Minister!
1assure youof mydtep esteem.
Jan Camogursky
Aesidentof theGovemmentof theSlovak Republic. Annex 81
LErITEFROM MR. ~RENC MADLH , UNGARIA MNINISTE RITHOUT PORTFOLIO ,O MR.JAN
CARNOGURSS KMY, APRIME MINISTE 13,MAY1992
Dr.Ferenc MM1
MinisterWiUiout Podolie
JanCmogursky
PresidentftheGovernmentoftheSlovakRepublic
Bratislava
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
1thankyoufor yourletterdelivered 12May 1992. Naturally,thefacwe mustcontinue negotiations
in thematterof the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage System is unchanged. This is necessary in the
interestofnegotiatianewtreatyafterthetemination of the 1977Treaty:
This time as containedin îheresolutionof the HungarianPdiament deliyoueon 7 March 1992
and on whichyounegotiatedwith PrimMinisterJdzsefAntdl in Prague,we wouldhavdiscussethe
conditions forEC participationduringour direct meetingin Gy&,and the commencementof trilateral
examinationsupon the implementationafmoratoriumon varian"G" o,n the basisof whiwe may
arrivata decisioninourinterstate'dispute.
1am sorryMr.PrimeMinister, thatyou wereunableto acceptour invitationto sucha meetingand that
you hold negotiationsto be worthwhileonly according to theconditionsoutIined in Pnme Minister
Calfa'letterof 23 April 1992. In this letter,PnmerninisterCalfausthat workon variant"Cu
would not be halted and wouldcontinue despite the repeatedrequests of the Hungarian Government.
Afterthis,theresolutionoftheHungarianGovernmentof 7 May 1992,withwhicyouare familiar,was
born,aresolutionto whichHungarwas forcedtoresortas a resultof the rejectionsof theCzechoslovak
Party. The Hungarian legaldocument regarding the temination will naturally al1pertinent
elemenwofthe Hungarian position.
1wouldrefer to twothingshere. The firstis theallegation thatthe HuPartpyroposedtheGy6r
meeting asan ultimatum. You,Mr. Prime Minister,are well awarof the fact ththe Hungarian
Governmenahas been requestingsucha moratoriumfomany months. Therefore,becauswe repeated
ourrequest,therecanbe nomentionof ultimatums.
Accordirigto the press, the PragueGovernmenttakes exceptionto the fact thatthe HungarianRime
Minister didot replytoPrime MinisterCalfaisletter of 23 April and2that therefoithas no
official knowledgeof the HungananGovement's Resolutiof7 May 1992. To this,please allowme
to state th1as Plenipotentiaryof the HungarianGovemment,delivered to you,as Plenipotentiaryof
the Czechand SlovakGovemment,the text of the HungarianGovernment esolution. The Hungarian
legaEdocumentcontainingthe terminationof the Treaty,justifid in detail, will shortlybe deIiveredta
Prime MinisterCalfaby the Hungarian Governmenandwillserveas a replytPrimeMinisterCalfa's
letter. In relation tothis, I wouldremindyou that PrimeMinisterCalfarepliedto the HuogarianPrime
Minister'sletterof 26 Eebr1992on 23April.
Dear Mr. Mme Minister, please acct yexpressionsof regard.
Budapest,13May 1992.
FerencMgdl Annex 82
HUNGAR~ DAECLARAT OINNHE TERMENATIO NFTHE1977 TREATY, SIGNEDBY MR. J~ZSEF
ANTALL H,UNGARIA PRIMEMINISTE BRU,DAPES 16,MAY 1992,WITHCOVERMGLEmR FROM MR.
J~ZSEFANTW, HUNGARIA PRIME MINISTE R ,MR. MARIAN CALFA , ZECHOSLUV PRLKME
MINISTER 1,MAY 1992
ToMr. MarianCalfa
PresidentoftheGovernment of the
CzechandSlovakFederalRepubIic
Prague
Budapest,19 May 1942
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
It is withdisappointmenithwasinfomed, byyourletterdated23April1992,that the Govemmentof
the Czech andSEovakFederal Republicdoes not intendto suspenduniiandrunlawfulworkrelated
to thesa-cal1provisional solutionatthe diversionof the Danube. A similarfeelingis expressedin
the appenditoyourletter,whichcontaineaplanned jointresponseto the EuropeanCornmunisffer
of CO-operation.
I am forced to detemine that the FederalGovernmentdid not agree with the HungarianGovemment's
severalrequeststhaworkon theprovisionalsolutionbe suspendedby the Czecho-SlovakParty during
the course of professional studWesfinditunacceptable thatour negotiating partneris creating a
finalisedsituationby wayof unlawfulworkduringcoursoefnegoriations.
A studyof your lener ledthe Hungarian Governmtoconcludeat its meetingofMay 1992that the
Czechoslovakand was unwillingto fully acceptthe conditions setfor co-operationby the European
Comrnunitiesinaneffortopromotea common agreement ,hujeopardisinga promisingopportunityfor
negotiationseekin jgint action. Therefore, Government of the Republicof Hungarypassed a
Decision asro theterminationof the 1977 lnterstate Treaty Regarding the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Barrage System,effective25 May.
Led by an intention of joint CO-opernndoin the constructive atmospofrthe VisegraThree's
summitconferencein Prague on6 May, itwas with understandingand trust t1acceptedthe oral
suggestionmade by MY. Jan Carnogursky,who knows the positionof the Hungarian Governmentin
detailand the Plenipotentiaryof the Federal Govemmentresponsible for the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
BarrageSysternissue that weattempt,inthe presenceof representativesof the EuropeanCotomunity,
resolvethe conditionsfor their assistance whichare being questionwereforcedto doubt the
seriousness of this intention after Our repeated suggestionsfor negotiation and wheJanr.
Carnogurskycommunicatedto us inwritingthat hewas willing to conduct negotiatiln basisof
the conditionssetorth in your lette23April. To srrengthenthis, the GovemmentotheSlovak
RepublicpassedaResolutiondurinitsextraordinarymeetingof 11May.
After al1of this, was with renewed hopes for joint thatI received the FederalGovemment's
statemento thepress, madeaftitmeetingof 14May [I992],envisaginga suspensionof ocnscruction,
intendedasa temporarysolutionduritheactivityof theTrilateralExpertCornmittee. Again,however,
1hadtonote with disappointmenttheofficommunication whichmade no teferenceto a readinessfor
a suspensionof construction. Thathaddefinitelyput an end, were,to Ouratternptto reacha
cornmonagreementregardingthe 1977inter-stateTreaty,eventhoughthe Hungarian NegotPartner
was willingtoconducr negotiations aimed atthe suspensionof work on the provisional andution
creation of a trilateral professional commissionwell as to obligate itself to accept the
recomrnendationofthetrilateralprofessionalcomrpission.In thismanner,in accordance with theResolutionof the Parliament,theGovemmentof the Republicof
1-Iungaryis forced taunilaterallytenninate the InterstateTreaty of 1977 Regardingthe Gabcikovo-
Nagyrnaros Barrage System andal1agreemenlsrelated tothe executionof the same. The justifications
forthissteparedetailedinmyGovemment's Declaration.
in relationto this,I wouldlike to informyouthattheGovernmentof the Republicof Hungar yasceased
al1actsand workof any kind related tothe Treaty in questionand expectsthe Federal Governmentto
likewise takethe necessarymeasuresfor the cessationof al1workand implementationrelated to the
BarrageSystemwithoutdelay.
DearMr. Prime Minister!
1 sincerelyhope thatregardless of thedecision of the Governmentof the Republic of Hungaq as
announcedabove, thepromisingdevelopment of co-operationbetweenournations in other areas of Our
bilateralrelationswillcontinuand thatthe conflictemergingas a resultof theBarragequestionwillnot
have an unfavourableeffectuponregionalCO-opration.
In the spirit of the afotementione1,would liketo emphasisethat the Governmentof the Republicof
Hungaryis prepared toconductnegotiationsas tothe settlementof the consequencesof thetermination
of the InterstateTreatyo1971 and theresolutionof theregion'secological,flooddefenceand navigation
problems.
1 trusthatthis initiativewillmeetwiththe earliestpossible agreementoftheFederalGovernment.
Please acceptmy sincereesteem.
With appreciation, of the Goverment of the Republic ofHungary
on the Terminationof the Treaty
ConcIudedBetween the People'sRepublic of Hungary
and the Soçialist Republicof Çzechoslovakia
on the Constructionand Joint Operation
of the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systern,
Signed inBudapest on 16September1977
Handed over, accompanying a note verbal,tuthe Embassy of the
Czech and Slovak Federal RepublicinBudapest on the19thMay 1992. of the Goverment of the Republie of Hungary
on the Terminationof the Treaty
Concluded Betweenthe People'sRepubllcof Hungary
and the SocialistRepublicof Czechoslovakia
on.theConstructionandJoint Operation
of theGabcikoro-Nagymaro s arrage System,
Signedin Budapeston 16 September1917
The Governrnent ofthe RepublicofHungary, accordingto the sesolution
oftheHungarian Parli~rnenof24 March 1992and taking intoaccounttherules
of internationalaw, terminates the Treaty Betweethe People's Republicof
Hungary and the Socidist Republiof Czechoslovakiaon the Constructionand
Joint Operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System, signed in
Budapest on 16September1977,rnodified by the Protocol signedin Pragueon
10 October1983, includindI relateagreements specifiein itsAnnex;asfrom
25 May1992.
The Governrnentof theRepublicof Hungar yasbeen cornpelleto doing
so forthefolIowingmainreasons:
- Hungarycannotnccept
- thatthe populatioof the regionsuffersfromthe consequencesof
thefunçtioningof a barragesystem pIanned withoutprofessional and
publiccontrol,
--thatirreversibldamageaffIicts theecoIogicaiand environmental
resourcesof theregion, firofdl thepresentlyavailableandpotential
dsinkingwater resewes of miIIionsof peopIe,
-- that degradationand, in certaincases, extinctionthreatenthe
vegetationandfauna of theregion,
--thatseriousdamageafflicts unique landscapes, --thatimminentcatastrophethreatens the populatiodue tobarrages
and dykes of insufficientstabilas a consequence of shortcomings
of researchandplanning.
-TheGovernmentof theRepublic ofHungary cannotacceptthefactthat
theGovernrneno tfthe Czechand Slovak FederalRepublic continuesthe
constructiooftheso-calledprovisional solution,thcausingpractically
asseriousa danger asitwouldhappen by the realizatioof theoriginal
pIansof theGabcikovo powerstation.Withthisbehaviour, the Czecand
SlovaP karty has made it impossibl- despite the efforts madon the
Hungarian side - thata trilateral special cornmittee, incIvdthe
repsesentativesfthe EriropeanComrnunities,beginitswork.
- Inthe opinionof the HungarianPartythe so-called provisionalsolution
infringesnumerous international agreements and does violate the
territondintegritofthe Hunghan Stateby divertingthe natural course
of the Danube. 1.
AN'ïECEDENTS OF THE TERMINATION OF THX TREAïY
Antecedentsof the Conclusionof the Treaty
1.In April 1963, government cornmitteesof the Peoples's RepubIiof
Hungaryand the SocialistRepublic of Czechoslovakiaagreed tdraw up ajoint
investrnentpirogrammein order to realize the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage
Systern. The finalschemeof the project was finishedin 1973.It was accepted
by theGovernment of theSocidist RepubliofCzechoslovakia inJanuary1974
andby theGovernment of the People'sRepublicofHungary in February 1974.
Permission to preparatory work of the psojewas grantedat the sarnetime.
First a so-called Joint Agreed Plan was drafted which became an inter--
governmentalagreement on 6 May 1976.
According to the Joint Agreed Plan, tgoal of the construction of the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem was the complex utilisation of the
Danube
-for the productionof eJectric power,
-for internationinlandnavigation,
-for themanagement of water supplies,
-for the economicdevelopment of neighbouringregions.
The Joint Agreed Planadmitted that the maximumenergyproduction of
the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystemcould supply onlya srnallpartofthe
demandin both çoirntriesbut stated thaas a power stationin apeak-load
operationalmode couldplayan important role.
Sinceithadbeenknownfor a Iongtime thattheoperation ofsuch a type
of hydroeIectripower plants an lowlands involves seriouecologicalconse-
quences,theJointAgreed PIanlaiddownthe neeessityof complexinvestigations
ontheenvironmentai effectsofthesystem. Accordingto the inter-govetnrnental
. agreement that put the Joint Agreed Plan into force, the CzechoslovState
becamethe responsiblePartyfor this task. Sigaing and Madification of tbe Treaty
2. The prime ministers ofthe People's Republic of Hungary and the
SocialistRepublicof Czechoslovakiasigned the Treaty on the Constructionand
Operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systemin Budapest, on 16
September1977. The exchange of ratificationstook place in Prague o30 June
1978. At the same time, the two Parties concIuded an Agreement on their
mutualassistance dunng the constructionof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage
System. This Agreement provided particulars on the time schedule of the
construction,work assurnedon each sideand quotasof the eiectric poweto be
"
produced until 1989. The contracting Parties engaged themselves to put the
power generatorsinto operationbetween 1986 and 1990.
3. AFtersignirigthe1977 Treaty,due to the economicdifficultiearising
sirnultaneouçIyin both countries, the two Parties started inter-governmental
negotiationsin 1981,consideringa significantpostponement or even a possible
renouncernent ofthe project. Finally the Parties rnodified 1977 Treaty by
signinga ProtocolinPragueon 10 October 1983. They decidedto postpone the
operationof the power generators by 5 years. Accordingiy, they signed also
anotherProtocol on themodificationof the Agreementthatregulatedthe mutual
assistance. They put the final deadline of the construction to 1995. This
Agreement was rnodifiedonce more in Budapeston 6February 1989,then the
finaldeadlinewas changedto 1994. This Iast modification of the Agreementon
the mutual assistancedid not involve the modificationof the 1977Treaty.
4. Duringthe yearswhen the programmeand plans wereestablished, the
public opinion's attention wasmore and more focused on the protection of
environmentaa ind natural resources. This was manifestedparticuIarly by the
Declarationacceptedat the UN Conference on the Human Environmentin
Stockholm, 1972, by the World Charter on Nature accepted at the General
AssernbIyin 1982, and by the document of the UN World Commissioo nn
Environment and DeveIopment ('Brundtland Report 7). This change of
approache n the pubIicopinion broughtabout a revduationof environmental
and othervalues notmeasutablein economictesms, aswellas the acceptanceof
thekeyidea of sustainabledevelopmentasbasicprincipleofthe management of
naturairesources. Atthe same timetheworld has seen a decreasingprestigeof
technologieswithlow efficiencyinenergyandrnw-materid consumption,which
dso impliedthe reassessmenotf the basicconceptionsofenergy production. Inthe yearsof theernergingneedfor changingthe politicalregime, theHungarXan
society changed alsoits attitude towards environmentby its growing environ-
mental consciousnessand by acknowledgingthe ecologicalpriorities. ThiIed
to therevaîuationofthegoalsof the Gabcikovo-NagymaroB çarrageSystem.
5. The necessityof ascientifiçinvestigationof the environmeneffects
arosein Hungaryatthe time ofthe re-examinationofthe Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaroç
Barrage Systemin 1981. At the request of the Central Cornmittee of the
Hungarian SocialistWorkers'Party, the HungarianAcademyof Sciencesset up
an ad hoc cornmitteeto investigate the scientificacontested problems of
the Gabcikavo-NagymarosBarrageSystem.
The reportofthe adhoc cornmitteecompiledfromtechnical,agricultural,
hydrotechnical,transport,economic,environmentalandresettlementstudies,was
approved by the Presidium of the Academyin a statement of December 1983.
The statementsaid:"TheJoint Agreed Plan did not consider in any cornprehen-
sive way the ecologicaeffectsand consequencesof the Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaroç
Barrage System. No assessrnent hasbeen made of the technicalecological,
economic risksof theproject as a coherent and interactivesystOn.thebaçis
of theenumerated andother factors, the Presidium of the HungariaAcademy
of Sciences considereditjustified and, at least reasonable to postpone signifi-
cantlythe constructionwork, to makechangesin the plans, or rather to cancel
the constructioonce forall"Itwascharacteristicforthe politiccircumstances
at thattimt, that the statemwas completely neglectedby the governmentand
$y partyofficiaianditp sublicationwas simplyprohibited.
6. By the mid-eightiesit became evident that the construction of the
Nagymarosdam exceeded the possibilitieof Hungary both in financialand
technologicalterms. Therefore the Bungarian investor concluded a psivate
contractwith an Austriancompany for financing and accomplishment ofthe
constrilctian.The dam at Dunakilitwas builtmaidy by Austrian cornpanies,
financedfrom Auskian bank loans. The dredgingof the downstream channel
was madeby a Yugoslaviancompany on the basis ofanotherprivate contract. Antecedentsof the Suspension of the Construction
7. When the dam constructionat Nagymuos started,the Hungarian
Parliamentmadeinquiriesaboutthe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSysternand
thecontestedecologicaland environmental problems. Following a governrnent ,,
report, the Parliamentpassed a resolution on 7 October 1988 about the
continuationof the construction on the condition of abservinstricrulesof
environmentprotection. Accordingto the resolution, "TheecoIogicrisksmust
be minimized, therefore the ecologicd interests musthave priorityover the
ecorhmic interests during constructionas well as during operation. The
fundamentalprinciple ofthe operationmust be that the qualityothe water of
the rivermust notdeteriorate. The peak-load operation must not begin before
buildingsewagefarmson both sideswhichis necessa rorthe safeoperationof
the barragesystem, freeof environmentairisks."
8, In accordancewith the resolutioofthe Parliament, the revieof the
constructionprogramme continuedin1988 and 1989. Agreatnumberof serious
insufficiencieswere discovered in the preparatory work carried out in the
70's,e.g. the lackofa detailedgeologicd and seisrnological survey necessary
for constructionplanning, the lack of an establishedhydrogeologicd mode1and
the lack of hydrobiologiçd and water qudity studies. To allow sufficient
additionaltimefor detailedinvestigatioitseemedinevitableto pospone every
irreversible constniction workThis was dso recommended by an US expert
board, 'Ecologia'(üniversity of Massachusetts),which prepareareportat the
requestof theHungariangovernmentin Masch 1989.
Suspendingthe Construction
9. The Hungariangovernmentsuspendedthe construction atNagymatos
on13May1989. The Hungaria prime minister informed the Czechoslovak
prime ministerseveraidays later, on24 May,propesinghrther studies and a
joint andysisoftheecologicalrisksarisinfrom theoperationof theGabcikovu-
-Nagymaros BarrageSystem. IO.On 2June 1989, the Hungarian Parliament approved the resolution
of the governmentof 13 May, and sbated that "further investigations were
necessaq on the conditionsand consequenceof the constructio"At the same
time, the Puliament authorized the government "to enter into preiiminary
negotiationswith the Czechoslovak Party about the conditions and possible
consequences of themodificationof th1977 Treaty, shouldthisberequired by
the xesultsof investigationscarried out during the suspen"ion.
11. ThroughdipIornaticchannels,on 26 June1989, the Hungatian Party
sub'mittedthe surnrnary of findingsthathad been prepared by the ad hoc
committee of the Hungmian Academy of Sciences in June 1989 about the
technologicd-scientific reasons leading tu suspension. The reply of the
Czechoslovak governmentcommissioner,whichclaimedthefindingsunfounded,
'was handed over to the Hungarian Party on 14 July 1989. (Itis worth
mentioningthatthe Czechoslovakgovernment has submitted only two wxitten
expertanalysesduring the three years of the dispute. The secondone was
handed over in July1991.)
Between 17 and 19 July 1989 a Hungarian-CzechosIovakexpert
conference washeld in Budapest onecology, hydrology, geology,seismoIogy,
pedologyand agricultutalproduction. The recordsaF the meeting showed that
theparticipantsagreedonconsideringtheGabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrageSystem
as an immense interventionin nature which affects invaluableecological
resources. Mutuai consent was recorded in the protection odrinking water
reserves: "It is ovitalinterestto keep undisturbed water supply from the
Danubeterraceconcerned. This is the water supply o3million(or, in the long
nin, 5million)peoplein Hungaryand 5million people in Czechoslovaki"The
disagreementbetweenthe two countriesappeared in the way ihey wanted to
preserve the naturd resources: the CzechosIovak experts considered that
subsequenttechnical comectianswould be sufficient for this purpose while the
Hungarian Part yid not accept this concept.
Thesame kindofagreementand disagreement were seen at theexpert
conferenceheld in Bratislavabetween 25 and 27 September 1989. The final
jointstatementlaiddown:"Thequdityoftheundergroundwater reserves should
by d means be protected for the purpose of dnnking water supply. All
neçessa ryeasureshave tobe done in orderto neutralizethe menace on the
self-deaning capacityof the Danube water." The dissenting opinion of the
Hungarianexpertswasrecorded asfollows: "We do not agreewith the opinion
of the Czechoslovakdeiegationthatthe majoriof theproblemscouldbe solved
afteraccomplishingthe constructionof the barragesystem and fillingup the
Dunakiliti-Hrusov reservoir.The possible alternativare uriknownin many
cases,theteforeit iextremelydangerous to cany out 'experiments'in nature.We consider it asa proven fact that the fvnctioning of the Dunakiliti-Hmsov
reservoir wouIdresultina disadvantageouschangein thetrophityindex, namely
in a multiplicatioof thealgd biomass,"
12. Thetwo prime ministersmet againin Budapeston 20July 1989. The
Hungarian primeminister announcedtheprolongedsuspensionoftheNagymarus
construction until31 October 1989, and the suspension of the work at
DunakiIititiIl the samedate.The reason for this decision wasthat,according
to the re-examinationof the project, the Dunakiliti reservoimplied seriaus
environmental riskseveninthecontinuousoperationalmode. (The resesvoir had
origindlybeen planned ta serve ina peak-loadmode.) The Hungarianprime
ministeroffered aItemativeforthe jointrevisionsuspension ofthe eonstniction
workfor 1 or for 3 to5 years. Among the possiblealternativestherewas a
proposai for the definitiveabandonmentof the barrage system.
The Czechoslovak Part refused the Hungarian proposais,firstian aide
memoire of 25 July 1989, then in a diplornaticnote of 18 August1989. This
was also the content of the letter of the Czechoslovak prime minister of 31
August 1989,in which he gave notice of the possible provisional solution, i.e.
divertingthe Danube on Czechoçlov& territory, icase the Hungarian Party
suspendedthe constructionfor a long time or for eves.
In hisreply on 4 (3ctober1989, the Hungarianprime minister expressed
hisprotestagainst the provisionalsolution, notingthatit wobedirreconciIabIe
with the noms of international law. At the same time he noted that, in
accordance with the resuItsof expert investigations,the Hungariangovernment
wouId initiate negotiationson the modificationof the bilateral Treaty with the
proposition ofabandoningthepeak-Ioadoperationd mode and, consequentiy, the
Nagymarospowerplant.
The officialpositionsdidnotcornecloser at the nextmeetinof the prime
rninist ierBratislavaon26 October 1989. The CzechosIovakprimemirister
outlined the prospect of recurring to the provisional solution. Hungarian
prime minister protested against it and stressed that the behaviourof two
Partieswas not regulated solely by the 1977 Treaty but dso by the general
internationalruleof environmentprotection. In case ofecologicaidanger,
international law requiresthe suspension of work on both sides, starting
negotiations,and themodificationof the treaty iorder to keep theecologicai
consequences at atolerableIevel. 13. On the basis afgovernment report thatsummarizedthe results of
technical and scientific investigatcmied outduring the suspension,the
Hungarian Puliament took astand on 31 October 1989 on abandoning the
peak-load operational mode and, consequently ,abandoning the Nagymaros
power station, too. The resolution considereditnecessq to continuethe
investigations about the ecological risks andto conclude a new inter--
governrnental agreement on the ecologicd guarantees, prior to putting the
Gabcikovoplant into operation.The Hungarian government was authorizedto
propose the CzechcisIovaPart ymodification of theTreaty in this senThe
Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairsindicatedthe intentionof modifythe
Treaty ina mernosandurnof 3 November 1989. The Hungarianproposaiwas
handedover tothe CzechoslovakPart n an Annex of the memorandum on30
Novernber 1989. The government of theSociaiistRepubliof Czechoslovakia
neverreplied to this proposai.
14. As to the workdone by Austrianand Yugoslavinncompanies, the
related privatecontractswere terminated in November 1989 and June 1990,
.respectively. The parties agreed on the financiai consequences of the
temination.
15. The Hungarian Party hoped that the new Prague government,
fo1Iowingthe historicd changes, would take a new stand on the debated
questionsin accordancewithearliedeclarationofprominentpersonalitieswho
had condemnedthe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystern, Therefore, in his
Ietter of 10 January1990, the Hungarianprime minister did not proposany
discussionon the modificationof the Treaty, but recommended joint investi-
gationson the ecologicdeffectsof the Gabcikovo.dam. He announced that
Hungarywould suspend dl constructionwork for the &meofthe investigations
andrecommended to do thesame on the Czechoslovaksac. He considered it
desirablethat the finaldecisionsbe madeby the newgovernments afterthefree
electionsin both countries. The Czechoslovak primeministerrefuse$ the
Hungatianproposais inhisreply inFebruary. Ina nextZetteof 6March 1990,
the Hungarian primeminlsterexpressedhis regret thatheCzechoslovak Party
was unwilling tobegin cornmon investigations, and recommendedeven more
explicitlythsuspensionof the constructionwork ontheCzechoslovak side. Inter-GovernmentalNegotiationson the 1977 Treaty
in tbe Years1991-1992
16. After the change of the politicd regime, the new Hungarian
government publishedhis generalpolitied programme on 22 May 1990. The
programmeannouncedamongothersthat "The government, on thegroundof the
experts'opinion, considersthe construction of the Danube BarrageSysternas a
mistakenproject, and wilI initiate, soen as possible,negotiation'on the
sehabilitationandthe shariofthedamageswith the ÇzechosIovak government
tabe elected"At a meetingin GyOron 31 May 1990 theHringariangovernment
cornrnissionerhanded over to his CzechosIovak counterpart details ofthe
govenirnent programme related tothe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem.
17. After the politicachanges in both countries,inter-governrnental
negotiations were started againin Apr1991, Pior to that, the government
commissioners met inBratislavaon9January 199 1where the HungarianParty,
at his partner'ç request, handed over the report prepared by the expertsof the
HungarianAcademy of Sciences in Decernber 1990 about the ecologicd--
environmentalrisksof the barrage system, together with a study made by an
expertgroup of the World Wide Fund for Nature. (This latter workwas
requested by the Hungarian government isummer 1989.)
18. In aresoiution made on 16 April199 1, the Hungarian Parliament
authorizedthegovernrnentto enterintonegotiationwiththe CzechandSlovak
governmentonthe termination of the 1977Treaty by agreement aswell ason
thepreparationofa new treatyThislatter shouldsettledl consequencarising
from the abandonment of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System, by
obsewing the priorityofecologicalaspects.
19. On 22 April 1991, the two Parties met again at inter-govern-
mentallevelin orderto discuss the officiaistandpoinof their governments.
The standpoints differed significa.yIThe Hungarian Part ytressedthe
principleof the protection of natural conditionhuman life and human
communities aswell asthe maintenance of friendship andcooperationof the
two nations. The functioningof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem
would triggerirreversible andamaging ecological processes with serious
environmentalçonsequenceson theterritorof bothcountries,Accordingto theCzech andSlovik and EC) expertCommitteewhich couIdprepare a proposalto
the governrnentswithinseveralrnonths,,specifyina technicd soIutionfor the
operationof theGabcikovopowerplant. They notedthat, failingto agreeon the
issue, the unilateral solution,i.e. putting the Gabcikovo plant intoopbyation
constructionwork made exclusively on Czech and Slorak temitory, could be
realized.The Hungarian Partyrepliedthatthisolution,bydivertingtheDanube
unilaterallywould seriously violate the temtorial integrofythe Hungarian
Stateanda numberofrulesof internationallaw. The HungarianParty proposed
a bilateral(Hungarianand Czechand Slovak) cornmitteefor the assessrnentof
ecologicalïiskssequestingat the sametime the cancellationof workon Czech
and Slovak territory.
21. The next inter-governmentalmeetingtook place in Budapest, on 2
December 1991. The delegations agreed that the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Barrage Systernconstituted a cornplextechnical-scientificprobIemanditwas
reasonableto setup ajoint expertCornmittefor reviewingthe wholequestion.
BothPartieshadprepared proposals for themandateand tasksof theCornmittee.
The Hungarian Party acceptedtheCzechand Slovakproposa1to complernentthe
Committeewith the expertsof a third Party, the European Comrnunities. The
Hungariandelegation pointed out thatthe goal of the work of the Committee
would be to prepare a well-estabIishedcornmon decision. Therefore, the
cornmittee" activityhas no sense if the Czech and SlovParty continuesthe
work aiming at the so-called provisionalsolution, i.e. diverting the Danube.
The head of the Czech and Slovak deIegation declared, however, that the
suspensionof theconstruction,even temporarily, was out of question.
The headof the Czech and Slovakdelegation,in alettes sentto the head
of theHungaria dnlegationon 18December1991, confirmedthe above Czech
and Slovakstandpoint.He stressedthat theonly solutionhe couacceptshovld
containthe functioning of the Gabcikovo powerplant.
22. On 19 December 1991, the Hungarian primeminister addtessed a
letter to the Czechand SIovakprime rninisterexpressinhis concernsthatthe
chances of settinup the plannedjoint Committeewere very littleHe pointed
out thatthe establishmetf sucha Committee would only be reasonableiboth
Pahes agreedto takeinio accounttheexperts' opinionin their future decisions.
The simuftaneousredizationof the provisional solution,he stressed, wouldput
irnproperpressure on the experts by suggesting the irreversibiliiy of the
construction. Under such circumstnncesthe Hungariangovernrnentwouldbe
compelled to consider the fateof the 1977 Treaty and the necessary In n reply of 23 January 1992, the Czech and Slovak prime minister
assertedthathis government was ready to take into account the cornmittee's
conclusionsbut not tsuspend thework of the provisional solution. He wrote:
"Ibese concIusionsandthe trial operationof theGabcikovoplantprovethatthe
harmfulecoIogica2consequencesare higherthantheexpectedbenefits, theCzech
and SlovakParty will be ready to cancel the work onthe provisionalsolution."
23.On 14 February 1992,the HungarianMinistry of Foreign Affairs
protestedat the Czeçhand SIovakPwîy in a verbal note against the uniIateral
constructiowork thathadbeenstartedto divert the Danube. anreplynoteof
18Mach 1992, the Czechand SlovakMinistry of ForeignAffairsrefusidthe
protes.
24. On 26 February 1992,the Hungarian prime minister sent another
Ietter ttheCzech and Slovakprimeminister. He pointed outthat theCzeçh
and SlovakPart yad not presented any expertopinproving that thepossible
damages and rish descnbed by the Hungarianexpertswere implausible. The
primerninisterconfirmedthat the HungariPart ycceptedthe establishmentof
a trilateraCornmittee. This body, however, cou1d not be set up while
constructionwork of the unilaterai provisionaIsolution were in progr.ss
Repeatlngthat the diversionof the Danube violated seriously the niles of
internationlaw, theHungarianprime ministerwarned thatthebehaviourofthe
Czechand Slovakgovernrnentwould compel the Hungarian Partyto terminate
theTreaty.
Accordingto the contents of the prime rninister"setter, the Hungarian
governrnenctontactedthe Commissionof theEuropeanCommunities. In alettet
addressed to the foreign ministersthetwo countnes on 13 April 1992,the
vice-presidenof the Commissionexpressedthe readinesofthe Commissionto
takepartin theresolutioof the dispute. Howeverhe laid dewnthe condition
thatbothçountriesrefrain fromstepsthat couinfluencoranticipatethefuture
conclusionof the trilatecornmittee.
Ena repIyletterof 23April1992,the Czech and Slovakprime rninister
calledtheHungarianrequestaimingat the cancellatiofunilateralconstniction
workas "ultimatum".He announcedthat the Czechand SlovakPart wyouidnot
suspen dutcontinue thework of the provisional solution. Hindicated31
October 1992, asthe find deadlineofthe accomplishment of theprovisional
solution,i.e. thdiversion of the Danube. Thusthe Czech andSIova karty
made itimpossibleto setupthe trilateral Committee. On 8 May 1992,the Hungarian government proposed furthes
negotiationto theheadoftheCzechandSlovakdelegationin order tostar te
trilateralinvestigationswiahsimultaneousmoratorium on the provisional
solutionThe investigationscouldleadtotheresolutidnof thedisputebyrnutual
consent.The head of theCzechandSlovak delegationrefused this proposal,
rnaintainithattheCzech and SlovakPart wyasunwillingto suspendthework
oftheprovisionalsolution. As to otherquestions,i.e. thedateof damming-up
theDanube,he would beready to negotiate.
15.Itis cleafromtheforegoingthattheHungarian Partyhastned again
andagain toreachamutriaalgreementsince1989,formorethan threeyearsbut
meta permanent and consequentrefusaon theCzechand Slova kideatevery
occasion, The HungarianPartypresentednumerous expert opinionson the
seriousenvironmentalrisksandirreversibledamages ariçingfrom theoperation
of the Gabcikovo-NagymaroB s arrageSystern. The Czechand Slovak Party
regardedthese opinionsunfounded,althoughwithout detailed andysis, anddid
not present any result that could psove tlack of danger. Finally, the
HungarianPartytriedtu cd1 theattentiof theCzech and Slovakgovernment
in vainto thfactthatthediversionof theDanubewould seriouslyviolatethe
noms of internationalIaw. Its Iegal argumemet the same refusaias the
effortsaimiriatthernutuarlecognitionof ecologicd risks. ECOLOGICAL-ENVIRONMENTAL NSKS OF
THE GABCIKOVO-NAGYMARS BARRAGESYSTEM
Duhg the long-lasting penod of planning the Gabcikovo- Nagymaros
BarrageSystem, fundamentalresearchand investigationswere negIectedand not
carriedout. The program and plans were preparedwithout the invitationand
participation of institutionsthatwouId have been cornpetent in the problems to
be solved.
The constructioof theGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systemapproach-
ing thestagewhen the naturai environment was to undergo profound changes,
severalprognosticschemesand environmentalrisk assessments were compile$
by the experts ofsuch questions, althoughofficial demand had never been
express ed this goal before the endof the 80's. These schemes were
sufficientlypreçiseto showthedimensionsof the natural resouinvolvedand
calledattentionto theseriousdanger caused by the construction.However,
presentation of the sisksin texact fom was not possibIedue tothe laçkof
investigationsthat would have been fundarnenid dunngthe planning and early
constructions.
Intherecentpast,admittedly witha longtime lost, thHungarian Party
startedthe assessrnentof environmentai conditions and the solutofnsome
modellingproblemsdong thecommonHungnrian - Csechand Slovak sectionof
the Danube. Thus, the most urgent tasks of environment protectionand water
managementwill have enoughgrouridto be planned on.
Three times since the suspension of constructithe Hungarian Party
handedover tohis partner sumrnariespreparedby institutionsinvestigatheg
environmental risks ofthe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System. Bungary
urgedjoint researchand investigations. On the otherband, the Czech and
Slovak Partyhas neve rresentedresults that wouldprovthensksto be under
a toIerablelevel. It isregrettable thntthe radical differenceof viewpointsapparent in
officialopinionsof thetwophes stilpreventthe technical-scientificdiscussions
from being statted. Without this, the problemof the region are not likely to
find solution.
Geologicaland geophysica1risks
1. Frorn the point of view of geology, the greatest risk is the lack of
detailedknowledge of thema: in such circumçtancea number of preparatory
andplanning tasks(environmentalimpactassessrnent,technicalplanning)cannot
reach grounded resuIts. Safe prognosis can be made only on the basis of
systematicstudiesrevealing the background geoIogiçaIconditions.
2. The planning of the Danube dams was not preceded by a detaiied
geological survey of the region. A serious mistake is that there was no
structure-exploringdeep drilling in the impact area of the dams. The insuffi-
cienciesofplanningare wel demonstratedby thefact that the contractors didnot
even have the necessaq permit of the geologicd authorities.
3. A hrther probIem isthat the research resultsobtained separatelyin
Hungaty and Czech and Slovak Republic have never been integrated. For
example,the su-cdled Gabcikovofaultlinediscoveredin Slovak territohns not
been traced further in Hungary. This fauIt was treason why thesiteof the
Gabcikovadam was çhanged in the early 70's, althougby not more than600
rn with respect to the originalplan. Thus, as is admitted by a Slovak expertise,
thi dam has been built in the neighbourhoodofageologicdly young fault.
4. The mostimportantelementof thedeep structure intheimpactarea of
theGabcikovo dam istheRAbaline, theborderof theAlpineand Transdanubian
tectonicunits. Itsposition is higuncertain,atpresentitcan be traced itwo
alternativvariants. Structural explorationby means of drillingsin the young
sedimenthas not been carried out; satellitephotos whicmay be evaluated in
numerouspossible ways do not ailow to form a unanimous and profound
opinion. In the structureof the neogenesedimenfslistic and other fnultplanes
canbe foundby the andysisof seismicprofiles. Consequently,clear structural
viewcannot be constnictedyet. 5. Another setofproblemsçoncerns the seismology of thearea of the
GabcikovuNagymarosBarrage System. The seismicity values of the Joint
Agteed Plan cannot be accepted; the seismicity problem cannot be answered
with areliabilityrequireby internationanoms sincethe necessary.studiesare
rnissing.The seriousnessof theproblem isshownby the factthatthe expected
intensityestimatedfor theDunakilitiareafrom historic quakesi8.7-9.0 MSK
at the usual securitythreshold, while the original planswere prepared by
assuming6.0 MÇS.
6. The sizing ofthe embankment is an especially grave probIemamong
the uncertaintiesofplanning, owing again to insufficienciofpsiorinvestiga-
tions.The weakestpoint oftheDunakllitireservoir is the embankment:it is the
largeststructureregardingitsvolumebut it is dso the most heterogeneousone
in itssize, structuraiconstitution, material and quality.One of the most
important pieces ofinformationobtained from the geophysicdanaiysisof the
Dunakilitiresetvoiron theHungarianside (1991) isthathigh-reçistivitygravelly
structures- ancientriverbeds - have been found beneath the embankment at
severaiplaces. This was notexploredearlier. Examples-fsomthepastshowthat
thisstructure can leadto a breach in the embanhent and, subsequently, to
S~~OUS flood. The stability of certain partsof the embankment cannot be
conçideredsafeagainstearthquaketçhat are likelyhere. Theçame appliesto the
stabilityofthe bah highes than 7 m, as theyare not sufficientlsafeagainst
sliding. On the contact surfacbetween the base and the body ofthe embank-
ment, soi1liquefactioncanoccur.
Security tests dong the DunakiIiti reservoir show that the safety
characteristicsfthe embankment do not fit the internationalstandardnoms.
The risk leveI taken into consideration in the plansapplieonlyto cornmon
buildings whereenvironmentaleffects can be excluded.
Effectsidluencing thegroundwater
The environmentaiand ecological consequences of the Gabcikovo dam
will follawfrom thehydrologicaiandhydraulicchanges andfromthe poilution
of water. These phenornena will accumulate and amplifyeach othes, their
interactionmaygive rise tfurther effects,
For the predictionof the resuItingdamage itisto be takeninto account
that the self-inducingeffect of thechanging environmental conditionswillmanifestitself slowly, andpady in a hidden manneatleastin some aspectsaf
the changingecologicalsystem. Thus theconclusionsdrawnfrom short-pend
mode1studiesmaybe higtilyuncertainand unredistic.
There isa group of damagesand drawbacks that are provenunambigu-
ously,furtheronessupportedby fielddatabutnot hlly verified,analastgroup
which has notbeen studiedyet but3svery probable.
7. Itisnght inthe areaof the Danubeaffected by theGabcikovo-Nagy-
marosBarrage System where the most important drinking water resetvo efs:
both Hungaryand Czechand SlovakRepubliccan be found. 45%of Hungary's
drînkingwatersupply cornesfrompercolatedwater in the area of the Gabcikovo-
-Nagymaros Barrage System, providing e.g. Budapest with dnnking and
industrialwaterfor more than a century. A sirnii sastem serves the wnter
supplyof Bratislava.Therelevantpartofpercolationand naturd filteringoccurs
in the uppemost Iayerof the riverbeci, some centimetres th&It is therefore
highlynecessaryto maintainthe conditions thatpreservethe original stateof this
biologicdly activelayer providing physico-chernicalfiltering.
8. Jtis againthe filtering capacity of the riverbecithat determines the
quantity and qualityof the water stored in the alluvial cone of Csall6koz--
Szigetkoz,a grave1layer several hundred metres thick. Fortunately enthis
water teserve,which is perrnanentlyrefreshed fiom the Danube, hanot been
disturbed ithe course of the construction activitiesrelatedto the Gabcikovo--
NagymarosBarrageSystem. Thusboth countrieshaveriverbeds ofgreat length,
Rungaryabout 40 km and Slovak miare than70 km, thatcan beused later for
wates supplyaccording todetailewnterqualityandhydrogeochernical analyses.
On theHungarian side, this meansa capacityof 1 miilionrn'ldaypermanent
drinkingwater supply -the average needof the Hungarian capita-, whiIein
Slovakiathi amounts to 2 milIionm3lday.
9. As a resuItaf the operationof the barrage, fundamentalchangeswill
occur in the areofthe DunakiIitireservoirThe basicproblem wiI1becaused
by thedepositionof po1Iutedsilt, withits anaerobic dynamics, iron and
manganesemobitzation, and infiltration toxlc organic materiais.This silt
wouId meana permanentsource of vird contamination.
10. Because of thespecifichydrogeologicalsituationofSzigetkoz,the
toxicmaterialswillpollutthe groundwater reserv eithinsome tensof years.
Moreover,since periodidredging ispIanned for therernovalof accumuIatingsiIt, this wilI nody be harrnfulto the qualityof the surfacewaterbut, by
destroyingthe filterlayeritwilI allow organic micropollutantsand microbesto
reach the ground water level.The channel system, planned io counterbalance
the deepeningwatertable(groundwater level)dongthe Old-Danubeunderthe
Dunakilitidam, wiIlresultinthe poIlutionand loss of stored water dependingon
the qualityof the idet water and thestofethe colmatatedrive?branches. The
degree of thispoIIutionand loscanbe estimatedoniy very roughly, duetothe
lackof detailed long-periodhydrological and water qudity studies.
To presewetherole of thenverbed in fiIteringand decomposingthe toxic
organic matter,the present dynamiçs of the Danube should be maintained.
Without this,the requiredoxygeri supply, the self-purifyingcapacityof the
Danubewater and the regular renewal of the filtering bedsurface cannot be
guaranteed.
Itis tobe notedthatthe conclusionsofthe Hungarianexperts concerning
ground water areidentical tthose found in the febmary 1990reportof the
Slova scientists. Asto the missinginvestigationssirnil corcIusions were
obbined by the HydroquebecCompany: this Canadian firmwas requestedby
the Slovak government to forman opinion in the faIl o1990.
The water table willrisearound the resewoir owing to the damming-up
and to the changein the riverbeci, whilwiIIsink around the Old-Danubeand
thepower canal due to the decrease of natinfiltratiofrom the mainbranch.
11. Wherethe water table is lowered, mineralization ofthe vegetation
remainsis accelerated;the organic materialcontent of the soil isdiminished;
detenoration ofthe soi1structure and the eluviationof nutrientsgrowsdanger-
ous. Where the operationof thebarrage lowerstheground waterleveIfrom the
finesurfacelayer downto the gravel, capillarwater svpplyof the root zoneis
stoppai. As aresult, the crop of cultivatedplaissreducedconsiderablyand
becornes uncertaindrought-resistanceis weakened; water supply of the forests
intheinundation ma changesunfavourably;nowcontiguous ecosystems become
isolatedpatcheswith a reducedproduction oforganic matelid. (Asis testified
by theUpper-Rhinedams, a50cm lowenng of the water tabIeresuItsia 50%
lossof crop.)
12. Where the water table is raised, air ventilation of the soil is
diminished and anaerobic processesbecome predominant; there is a growing
danger of inland waters; secondary sodification can occur iareas with bad
naturaldrainageconditions,especiallyan thelftbank ofthe Danube, eastof the
mouthof the riverVig. (Severalyearsafterdammingup theriverTisza attheTisza II barragein Hungary, the surrounding agncultural area became a
marshland anda dramaticloss of cropresulted on manythousandsof hectares.
This processcould not be counterbalanced, thereforethe goid crown value of
these lands was halvedby the authorities.)
Effects on the surfacewaters
13. The Dunakiliti reservoir, after befillecup, willbe the scene of
unambiguouswater qualitydeterioration. The reproduction of phytopIanktan,
which plays a key rolein the materiai exchang of the Danube water, is now
hinder eydtwo factors: the flow speed and the quantityof light. (The nutrient
surplus is dreadyconsiderable.) As a consequence of the damming-up,the
water speed in the resewoir wiIl slow down, stagnant bays will fom, the
sedimentationrate will shootup(thdeposition of 3-5million m3/yeasuspended
materialis estimated) and the ground water surface will rise due to the initial
infiltration surplus.Since the flow speed will slow down and the water
transparencywill increase, the efficiency of the factors hindering the re-
production of dgae will diminish: thus eutrophication is inevitable. The
orgallicmntterproductionof dgae is already 100tons a day in dry weight dong
theRajka-Nagymaros river sectionThis amount wiIlbe multipliecas soon as
the reservoir iput into operation, and the consequenceç of the decay of this
algalbiornasswill afflicthe Hungarian sectionof the Danube above alI.
14. The soi1 humidity of the inundation areas dong the abandoned
riverbec if the Danube will decrease, the ground water surface will sinkand
arborescent vegetation will spreadover the dry riverbed.
15.The sedirnentsof the reservoir, an expected quantitof 3-5 million
m3/year as mentionedabove, wiIl containindustrial, agncultural acommunai
pollutants (vira1 and bacterid contamination, toxic organic matter, heavy
metals), This imp1iesdeteriorationof water quality and, in additionserious
reposition problernsif the removal of sediments, costly for itself, seems
necessary. Rygienicand bacteriologicindices show thatthe water is polluted
alreadyand this situationmay worsen if therese'woiris filledup.The human
andnon-humanbiologicaleffectsof thebiturninousinsulation bat has been laiddown in someplaceson thereservoisernbankment are still uncleared. Similar
asphalttnsulation habeen builtinthe embankmental1dong the 17 km long
powes canal,again withoutclear knowledge of its effect on water qudity.
Fishingutilizationothepower canalmayreachonly a smallfractionoftheone
ofthe Old-Danubep , resentmainbranchof theriver. The consequencesofthe
negativeeffectdiscussedaboveare likeltobe feltdowntheriverfor, possibly,
150-200km (Le. alsoatBudapest)in thebestpart ofthe year. A significant
and prolonged increaseoftheorganic matterload,decay oftheself-clarifying
capacity,possibldeterioratiooftheoxyge nirculationand hygienicindiare
factorsthatcan causegrave and costiydamagesin the drinkingandindustriai
watersupply.
Ecologicaland genetical problems
From the point of view of biology, the affected region constitanes
integraisystem. TheconstructiooftheGabcikovo- NagymarosBarrageSystem
çaused damagetotwoareas of outstandinnaturdvalue:Szigetk~z and thebend
of theDanube (Dunakanyar). Althoughthedevastationof thenaturalresources
andthatof the landscapeissignificant,thedarnageis mostlyreparable.
16.The biocenos ofSzigetkozstilloccupyaconsiderablema Innaturd
or ne=-naturd conditions,especialIyin theinundationzone. These ecstems
have adaptedthemselvesto the seasonal dynarnicsof water. They follow
graduallythe constantchangesin the Szigetkozbranch system (cenological
succession).Inthecaseof forestpopulationthisprocessis considerablyslowes
and canbe rneasured in termsof centuries. Theanswerto quickandcirastic
changesis degradationand decay. For the regenerationofforestslivingin
near-naturaclonditions,centurieswoulbe needed atthevery best.
17.Thefarests of SzigetkozareHungary's highestyield growingstock,
thetwo-thirdsofwhiçh iç constitutbypoplarsspreading everywherefromthe
1930'son(30 rn3/heçtarelyearThis populationutilizesthe fluctuatofnlow
and high water optimdly. On accountof theriverregulationtheprductivity
of thesepopulationhas beendiminishedsignificantly.By furtherlowenngof
the watertable,theseexcellentwooded areas willbe lostandonly forestsof
much lowerproductivitycould bereplanteciater. 18. Szigetkozis especiallrich in speciesonly of flowenng plants60
protectedonescanbefound inthisarea. A considerablepartof thefioweriess
plantsand microorganismsis unknown so far. Inthe pastfewyears oniy,II
new species of fungi - unknowninotherparts of thecountry - have been
discoveredhere. The faunaof Szigetkazissimilarlrich. 63 fishspecieof the
80 ones livingin Hungarycan be documentedin the area. Severalgroupsof
animalshave not been documented fully untilnow. Each year,there area
numberof new species found. Al1 of them areof national value: their
presetvationforthefuturegenerationsis amoralobligation.
19. Et isevident fromthe consequences of the constnictionactivities
cded out so farthattheextensivedestructionobiologicd sesourcescannotbe
evadedeven by the most carefuloperationof the Gabcikavo barrage. The
indirecteffectarefar moredangerousthanthedirectones. Changeslike that
of thewatertable,disappearancoef theseasonalfluctuation,modificationof the
oxygen supply of water, dl have their effect on species erganized into
popuIationswithredoubledintensity. New conditionsof cornpetition,predation
and other interactionsin the new environment lead to the Iocalextinctofn
speciesor theirdegradation.The probabilitof survivd afterany significant
environmental change depends on the scope of genetic diversity. Only
numerous,geneticallydiversepopulationscanhave achance to accommodation.
20. Itis morewonying that thedisappearanc e fgeneticdiversityanda
consequentIack of adaptabilitymay causefurther extinction,leadingfinalto
a severedegradationof theregion and an 80-90% decrease in the number of
species.
Part of the describedecologicaland environmental nsks are proven
unambiguouslyf,urther onesaresupported by analogousexperienceabroad and
athome: thereforetheycan be predictedreiiably.TheCzechandSlovakParty
has,up to now, notpresentedresultsdemonstrating thattheseS~~OUS dangers
could bereduced toa to1erabIedegree byposteriortechnicd measures. INTERNATIONAL LEGALARGUMENTS
FOR TEE TERMINATION OF THE TREATY
The 1977Treaty, likethe majority of international treaties, does not
contain any provision for termination. Refemng to this fact, the Czech and
SlovakPartyhas proclaimed many times that the Treaty cannot be terminated
unilaterdIy. However,in everycase when the textof n treatyissilenton the
possibilitof termination,the subsidiaryrules of generalinternationaarewto
be npplied. These rules ailow unilaterai termination, even in absenceof
agreement between the parties, if theis sufficieground for termination.
Not onlyinternationalpracticepoints ithisdirectionbutdso numerous
ArticlesofPart V of th1969 ViennaConventiononinvalidity, termination,and
suspension of treaties. AIthoughthe Vienna Convention cannot directlybe
applied inthe Iegaldispute of the 1977 Treaty (it entered into force for boîh
countriesafier1977),itsprovisionare guidingin manyrespects, concerning the
content of generallyaccepteinternationlegalnorms at the time the Treaiy's
conclusion. This doesnot mean that theparties may not invoke other rules of
generaIinternationallawnot mentionedIn the Vienna Convention, neithedoes
itmean that norms of the Vienna Convention, even if indirectly applicable,
literatlapplyin thepresent case. One of threasonsisthattheConvention, at
the time of its forrnuIadipartidly conformedwith customary law; in some
respectsitdeveloped and tightenedthesedes.
In the opinion of the Hungarian Party, the 19Treaty can lawfully be
terminatedforthe followingreasons:
1. As a consequence of thefactorsenurnerateciin Chapteril,thecons-
tructionand operation of the barrage system causes an ecologicd state of
necessitywhich precludesthe wrongfulnessof the terrnination. This nom of generalinternationallawappears, first oail,in Article33
ofthe Draft on State Responsibilityprepared by the UN InternationdLaw
Commission, Accordingto paragraph1 of this Article, a state çan invokethe
stat of necessityas a ground for preduding the wrongfulness of its actif (a)
"the act was the ody means of safeguarding an essentid interest ofthe state
againsta grave andimminentperil; " and (b) "the act dinotseriouslyimpair an
essential intereosftthe State towards which the obligation existed."For the
Hungarian State, graveand imminent periI would follow from the operationof
the barragesystem. Since, in his letter dated Apnl 231992, the Czech and
Slovak PnmeMinister has setOctober 31, 1992 as the time of the unilaterd
diversion of the Danube, the perilcan be regarded as imminent. In the
comrnentary appendedto the above-mentionedArticle (to which there was not
objection by the representative ofCzech and Slovak Federal Republic), the
InternationaiLaw Commissionpointed out that "Reference can be made tothe
state of necessity. as a ground for State conduct not in conforrnity with
international Iaw in cases where such conduct proves neçessary by way of
exception, inorder to averta serious and imminent danger which , even ifnot
inevitable, nevertheIesça threat to a vital ecologicalinterest.
As to subparagraph (b)ofthe Draft, the HungarianPart ys of the opinion
that the environmentaldanger would be justas significantin Czech and Slovaik
Republicas in Hungary. Consequentlythe termination of the Treaty would not
seriouslyimpair an essentiaiinteresof the Czech and Slovak Republic.
2. The temination of the 1977 Treaty cannot be considered wrongful
because international law accepts the principle ad impossibilia nemo tenatur
maxima,that is one cannot be obliged toperform theimpossibIe.
'In1912 RussianIndemnitycase, the arbitration awardconfirrned that a
treaty obligationneed nobe performed "sil'observation du devoir internationd
est .... selfdestructive" (R.I.A.A. vol.XI., p.443). Thus, the Republic of
Hungarycannot be obliged to fulfil a practically impossibIe tanamely to
constnict a barragesystem on its own temitory that wouId cause irreparable
environmentaldamages.
3. Since theconclusionof the 1977 Treaty, theunderlyingcircumstances
have çhanged fundamentally .
d
This principleconcerning afundamental changeof circumstances has a
longhistory ininternationa. aw. andis also includedinthe ViennaConvention
on the Law ofTreaties. Accordingto Art. 62. par. 1 of the Convention, a
fundamentaichange ofcircurnstanceswhich has occurred with regardto thosecircumstancesexisting at thetirne of the conclusiof a treatyandwhich was
not foreseen by the partiesmay be i'nvoked if "(a)the existence of those
circumstancesconstituted anessentialbasisof the consent ofthe partiestobe
bound by thetreaty".
The preamble ofthe 1977 Treatystatedexplicitlythat thconstructionof
thebarrage system wouId"significantlycontributeto bringingabout thesocidist
integrationofthe memberstates ofCMEA". ObviousIy, the histoncd changes
thattook place in bothcountnes in1989could notbe foreseen. Thesechanges
resultedin a comp1eteturnover of the domestic and international situation,
includingthe endof theCMEA andthe "socialistintegration"Itis also obvious
that this led to radical changein the circurnstanceof the barrage system,
puttingsimilargiganticconstructionsin a different li.hThese changesmade
itpossible forenvironmental considerationsto becorne a prioity, at leastIn
Hungary ,
As tothe second conditionin the cited subparagraph(b) of the Vienna
Convention ("the effect of the change radically to transform the extent of
obligationstilto be perforrneunder the treaty"), this cannyet be appliedto
the rektionsof the two countries. Thisis one of the new provisions of the
ViennaConvention,whichwas meantto nmow thepossibiIityof theapplication
of theclausuIarebussic stantibus. In internationaljiidpracticethere was no
case in which eitherof the parties would have successfully relied on this
condition before the adoptionof the texof the Vienna Convention. In other
words, this condition was not part of the customary law that regulatedthe
relationsof thetwo countriesin 1977.
Finally, the circumstanceshave radicalIy changed from anotherpoint of
view as well: namely,theimportance ofenvironmentalresources and values has
increasednot only in Hungar yut al1over the world.
4. TheCzechand SlovakPartydid notfulfilits dutiesprescribedin the
1977 Treatyfor theprotectionofnature andwaterquaIity. Therefore Czech and
Slovak Republiccanbe csndemned formaterid breachof theTreaty. According
to generalsules of international law, a treaty cabe terminated unilaterdly
againsta violatingstate.
Asit is dearfromChapter II of thepresentDeclaration,the Czechand
Slovak Party,çontihuingtheconstructions,didnot fulfil the obligationsincluded
in Articles 15and19of theTreatyaccordingto which "The ContraçtingParties
ensurethat the qbidityof the waterIn the Danubeis not impaireasa resultof
the cunstnictionand operation of the barrage system" and ''ensurecornpliance
with theobligationsfor the protectioof natureansing in çonnectionwith theçonstmction and operation of the barrage systern". Considering that the
above-mentionedfactç imply "the violation of (a)provision(s) essentid to the
accompIishrnent of the object or purpose of the treaty"as it isexpressedin
Art.60, subparagraph 3(6) of the Vienna Convention, the Hungarian Partycan
invoke "a materialbreachofa bilateral treat...asa groundfor terminatingthe
treaty" (A~t.60,par.1).
The so-called "provisional solution"can be regarded as an even more
severebreachof the Trenty. The Centracting Parties determined ver=precisely
the work to be carriedout in the original Treain 1977 and in thesubsequent
relatedagreements. The diversion ofthe Danubenear Bratislavawas not part
ofthemin any form. Dunng the implementation of a treaty neither of the
partieshas the rightto activitiesthat not authonzed to by the treat:such a
behnviouramountsto a material breach of the treaty.
5. The "provisionalsolution" senously violates other norms of intema-
tiond law. This fact,in accordance with the rules of general international.law,
entitles the injurePart o take lawful counter-measures (repressdia). The
terminationof bilateraltreatieseffectivebetween two parties may constisuch
a counter-measure.
The "provisiond solution" - the diversion of the Danube - violates the
following internationallegal norms and agreements:
a) Itconstitutesa breach of the sovereigntyand tenitorid integrityof the
Republic of Hungary, which is protected by peremptory rules of
internationallaw. Leaving Bratislava, the Danube becomes an interna-
tional boundary river, partiunder Hungarian, partly underCzech and
Slovaksovereignty. Neither of theparties can determine unilaterallythe
fate ofthe river. Thus, neithera£ them may divertthe river to its own
territa osif itwere its own nationalriver.
b) The "provisiondsolution"violates the inviolabilityof the frontiers of
Hungary, protected by peremptory des of international law. The
diversion ofthe river would transfer thmain navigation routeto Csech
and Slovak territoryfrom thejoint stretch. This route was designatedas
the fiontier Iine between the two countnesfirstby the Peace Treatyof
Trianon, Art.27, paragraph 4, thenby the Peace Treaty ofPari As,t.1,
paragraph 4(a),and finalIyby a bilateral treaty concernitheregime of
the statefrontierconcluded in 1956,Art.2. paragraph 3.c) The "provisionalsolution"violatesthe1976bilaterdTreaty of the two
coudes, regulatingthe questions of water managementof the boundary
rivers. This postulates thatthe preconditionof any water management
activityisthe agreementof the contractingparties. In Art.3, paragraph
,
1, of this Treaty, the parties undertook "a) not to practiçe water
management 'in such manner, that would prejudice the jointly
established wates relationsunfavourabl yb) to maintainthe waterbedin
their own territory in good condition and to utiIize them iaway that
they do not do damage to each other".Anothesprovision of the treaty,
A~t.4, paragraph3, unarnbiguouslypreclvdesunilateralsteps, statingthat
"in accordancewiththe laws and regulations of both ContractingParties
a previousconsentis neededtoany water managementactivitythat would
resultin changingtheline or character ofthe statebordert1.
d) The "provisionalsolution" violates the des and principles of
customary international law that regulate the utilization of international
environmentalresources . The "provisional solution" would deprive
Hungary of its due share of water quantity,wates quality and power
potential. These principles have been formulaiedin various documents,
e.g.,in theInternationalLawAssociation'sRuleson the uses of waters
of international rivers, adopted in Helsinkiin 1966. ArticIeY, para-
graphs1 (0, (g) and (i)of this document prescribe thateach state is
entitled to the usof partsof an international drainage basinwithin its
territory only within the Iirnits of reasonableness and equity. Whiie
shating theresourçe, severalrelevantfactorsrnustbe considered,likethe
sizeof thepopuIation dependenton the waters of the basin, the costof
aiternatives tothe planned use, and the need to avoid waste in the
utilizatio'f waters. This documentstates that no use is entitled to an
inherent preference over the other. The expert group of Iawyers on
environmental law of theBrundtlandCommissionhas also adopted, inits
principleNo.9, theprincipIe of reasonable and equitable use of trans-
boundarynatural resources, refemng in its cornmentary to various
agreements and judicid decisions.
The principleof reasonableandequitable useis enshrined inprinciples5
and 8 oftheUnitedNationsInternationalLaw Commission'sdrafton the
law of non-navigational uses of internationalwatereourses.According
to themtheaffected stateshave toconsultif they do not reaçhagreement
çoncerning effectsof the planned activity on the conservation of water
resources, on their protection, development, andeconomic viability of
theiruses. For the duration of the dispute,butat Zeastfor sixmonths,
the planned measureshave to be suspended.ArticIe2 oftheConvention on theProtectionand Use of Transboundary
WatercoursesandInternationalLakes,prepared underthe auspicesofthe
UN Economic Commissio for Europe not ody obliges the Parties to
rational management, but dso to a use which is ecologicalIy sound,
conserves thewaterresources andprotects the environment.
e) The "prc~visionalolution"violates the pnncipleof theprohibitionof
transboundary hum affectingthe neighbouriqgstate. This principwas
reflectedinthearbitrationawardofthe Trail Smelter arbitrationin 1941,
in the judgement of the InternationalCourt of Justice in theCo&
Channel case in1949, by Principle No.21 of the Declaration adoptedby
the Stockholm Conferenceon. the Human Environment in 1972; by
principIeNo. 1I and 21 of theBrundtIandReport'srecommendations on
environmentallaw, Art.294the Conventionon Law of Sea of 1982,and
by Art.2 of the 1991 Conventionadopted in Espoo on environmental
impact assessrnenin ntransboundarycontext,
9 The "provisionalsolution" iin contradiction with the spiritthe
BelgradeConventionon the Danube adopted in 1948. The dangerthat
oneof theCantraçtingStateswoulddivertthe natural coursof the river
fiom its natural riverbed did not occur to the signatoies, therefore the
Convention does not contain an explicit prohibitionfor this case.
However, other regulationsof the Convention, likArt.3 which deals
with work thatbecome required by unforeseen circumstances andare
ched out within the fmntiers oa country, make itclearthat lawful
interventionscanbe carried out only by agreementof the riparianstates.
g) The argumentappearing,for example, inthereply noteof the Czech
and SlovakMiriistryfor Foreign Affairs,dated 12 March 1992 that the
"provisional substitute solution" is being carcout because of the
suspensionof constructionon the Hungarianside, ive., ozderto fulfil
the 1977 Treaty,isincorrect. The presentpractice of generalinterna-
tionallawdoesnot acceptthe su-calledteleologicway of interpretation
and applicatioof internationtreatiesaccordingtowhichthe aimsof a
treatycouIdbe achievedwithoutthe unanirnouswiElof theParties.This
isplainlydemonstratedby the discussionsof theUN InternationaLaw
Commission on the Law of Treaties(seeYearbookof the International
Law Commission, 1966, vo1.2,page 219). 6. Returning to thereasons for the terminatioof the 1977Treaty, it is
important to notethatthe rules of general international law on environmental
protection,whichhavedeveIopedsince the adoptionof thepIansfor thesystem,
take precedenceover treaty provisions which wese adopted earlier or are
contradictoryto them(Iexpostenorderogatlegipriori,lex çpecialisderogatlegi
generali). These noms have recently been expresseclin a number of intema-
tionaldocuments.
The most important des prescribing theprotection of the naturaland
humanenvironment, the priorityof environment, the necessity of thepreserva-
tionof ecosystems,and the abandonment of contradicting economic activities
are as fo2Iows:
Principle No.4 of the Stockholm Declaration prescribes that "Nature
consesvation,inçludingwildlife,must thereforereceiveimportancein planning
foreconomic development. " PrincipleNo.3 of theWorld Charter for Nature
adoptedby the UN General Assemblyin 1982declares that "bpecialprotection
shallbe given to unique areas,to representative samplesofdl differenttypes
of ecosystemsand tothe habitatsof rareor endangered species." It dsa states
, that"man'sneedscanbe metonlyby ensuring the proper fvnctioningof natural
systems",andthat conservation of naturemustbecomean integral partof the
planningproçess. Therecommendationsof the Brundtland Report on the law
of environmental protectionprescnbethat "Statesshallmaintainecosystems and
ecologicalprocessesessentid forthe functioninof the biosphereshallpreserve
biologiçaldiversity,andshdl observetheprincipleof optimumsustainableyield
inthe use ofliving naturaresourcesand ecosystems."
The importanceandpriority of thecooperationinenvironmentalproblerns
were emphasized by the Helsinki FinalAct and the Final Documentof the
Viennafollowup meeting.
7. The foregoing paragraphs justify the decisions of the Hungarian
GovernmentandParliamentwhich ledto theunilaterasuspensionof construction
firsat Nagymaros, laterat the upperDanube. As it is clear from the cited
regulationsof the Vienna Convention, the reasons serving as grounds for
terminationof a treatcanaIso be invoked as grounds forthe suspensionof the
applicationof a treaty.Section3 of the ViennaConvention(Termination and
Suspensionof the Operation ofTreaties)treatsthesetwo rneasuresina paraIIel
mariner.Therefore it is sufficiehereto refer tChapterXII,sections 3,4, and
5 of thepresent Declaration. These sectionsprove that the suspension of the
constnictionwas a lawfulact inthe sameway as the terminationitself. Inaddition, it can be estaHished thatthe Hungarian Party has met the
requirements of internationlaw afterthesuspensionin everyrespect. Hungary
didnotconfrontthe CzechandSlovakPartywith afaitaccomplibutrathermade
continuingefforts, accordingto thecitedParliamentresolution, to achievethe
temination of the 1977 Treatyby mutual agreement. Thus, Hungary has met
her obligation establishedby Art. 65 of the Vienna Convention, to settle
disputesarisingfrom a treatybypeacefulmeans. N
CONSEQUENCES OF THE TERMINATIONOF THE 1977 TREATY
Considering thathe 1977 Treaty is terminated in its entitety with
effect from May 25, 1992, the Governent of the RepubIiç of Hungq
requests the GovernmentoftheCzech and Slova Federd RepubIic to take
measurestowards theimrnediatestopof dlwork andconstruction related to
the Gabcikovo-Nagymaro BsarrageSystem.
The PHunguianGovernmentis ready to conclude anew treatin order
to setue, jointiy, everyconsequecrising fromthe termination the1977
Treatyinview of thefollowingorder ofpriorities:
1. rehabilitation and maintenance of the ecological and natutal
resourcesand valuesof theregion, primarily, thprotection of the
drinlûngwaterreserves;
2. flood control;
3. deveIopmentof navigation, in conformitwith the naturaçond-
itionsoftheregion.
The Governmentof the RepublicofHungaryawaits theresponseof the
Governmentof the Czech and Slovak FederalRepubIic, 30that thenegoti-
ationson thenew treatcm be starteas earlyaspossible.
Budapest, 16thMay 1992
J6zsefAntan
PrimeEvlinisteof theRepublicof Hungary
Handsdover,accompanyig notverbaltotheEmbassyof the CzechandSlovak
FederalRepublinBudapest the19tMay 1992. Annex 83
NOTEVERBAL EROM THEMINISTRYOF FOREIGNAFFAIR SFTHEREPUBLIC OFHUNGAR Y THE
EMBASS YFTHE CZECH AND SLOVAK FEDERA RLEPUBLI 1C9,MAY1992
NOTE VERBALE
The MinistrofForeignAffairsof theRepublic of Hungary presentsits comptomthe Embassyof
the CzechandSlovakFederal Republicin Budapestand has the honourto invitethe hEmbassy
toforwardthe 19May 1992letterofMr.JozefAntall,PrimeMinisterof theRepublicof HungaMr. to
Marian Calfa,Head of the Governrnentof the Czech and Slovak Federal Repu,siwellas the
Statementof the Governmentof the Republicof Hungaryto the Governmentof the Czech and Slovak
FederalRepublic.
On the basisothepowersgivenby the Parliamentof the Republicof Hungary, the Governrnentof the
Republicof HungaryterminatestheTreatyconcerning the construction and oof the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrage System, signedin Budapest on 16 Septernber 1977 and al1related agreements
concludedby thePartiesor cheirauthorhiesin order to fulfilthe provisionsof this Treaty;effective25
May 1992,
The Ministq of Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungaryavailsitselfof this opportuntoyto renew
the Embassyof theCzah and SlovakFederalRepubltheassuranceofithighestconsideration.
Budapest,14May 1992. Annex84
MlNlSTER
FOR FOREIGN.AFFAIRS
REPUBLICOF HUNGARY
HisExcellency
FransAndriessen
VicePresidentof theCommission
oftheEutopean Cornrnunities
Budapest,May19,1992
Dear Mr.VicePresident,
InrnyietteofApril16,1992, 1expressedrnyagreement, on behalf of
theGovernment of theRepublicofH-ungary, iththeEuropean Communities'
wPlingnessand conditions forcooperation inseeking a solutionto the
Hungarian-Czech-Slovakinternationaldisputeconcerningthe Gabcikovo/Bds-
Nagymaros barragescheme.
InhisIetterofApril2Mr.MarianCalfa,thePrimeMinisteof theCzech
andSfovak FederalRepublici,nformePrimeMinisterbzsefAntallofHungary
aboutth8positionoftheCzech-Slova Gkovernmentregardingthe projectHe
stated,interalithatthe Czech-Slovaksidecould not suspendthe açtivity
connectedwith the constructioof the ço called'temporarysolution(AS
known,constructionworkcurrentlcarriedouton Czecho-Slovakterritowill
resufintheunilaterdliversiofthewateroftheDanube, the riverwhichwas
determined by the 1920and 1947 peace treatiesas the bordeofthetwo
States.Thisdiversioiscontrarto internationlw andnot acceptabletothe
Hungaria novernment.)
The abovedecisionas communicated by the Head of the Czecho-
SIovak Government isconsideredby the Governmeno t fthe Republicof
Hungary asbeing notinaccordance withthe thiof theconditiosetdown in
yourletteofAprii13. Therefore, the HungarianGovernment, incornpliancewiththe relevant
decisionof the NationalAssembly,will becornpelledto terminate, with effect
concerning2the Gabcikovo/BBs-Nagymarosbarrageçcheme.agreement of 1977
At the sametirne,the HungarianGovernmentwillpropose to thCzech-
SlovakGovernmentthat a new agreementbe signed tosolvethe problemsof
ecology, floodcontroland navigationinthe re ionI should fike te take this
opportunitytoexpress my Government's hop8 t at, maintainingtheofferthe
European Communities will cooperate through the good offices of their
experts even under the new conditions towards finding a solutionto the
seriousproblemswhich continuetu existin the Gabcikovo/BtSs-Nagymaros
region.
Yours respectfufly, Annex 85
NOTE VERBALEFEOM EMBASS YFTHE CZECH AND SLOVAK DERA A PUBLIC TO MINISTR OF
FOREIG ANFFAIROSFTHEREPUBL ICHUNGAR 22M, AY1992
NOTEVERBALE
The Budapest Embassyof the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic presents its compliments to the
Ministry of Foreign AffairtheRcpublicof Hungaryand hasthehonour to confimi that Note 365-
69B2 19 May 1992of the Ministq of ForeignAffairstheRepublicof Hungaryhas been received.
The Govemment of the Czech and Slorak FederaERepublic after leaming the contents of the
aforementionedNoteand the Statementof the Governmentof the HungarianRepublicdat16 May
1992,reiteratesthe position thatthe Republicof Hungaryhas no legal reasonsto unilaterally terminate
the T~eatysigned in1977by the CzechodovakSocialistRepublicthePeoplesRepublicof Hungar~r
regarding the cornpletion and puinto operationof the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarraswell as
other agreementwhichwereconcIudedwiththeaimof enforcing the aforementioned TreatyI.n lightof
thisthe Noteof the MinistryofForeign Affairsofthe Republic of HungaryMaye1992may have
no legal effeonsthe validityoftheTreatyof 1977andtheagreements concforenforcingit.
At the sarne time, afttheihoroughand extensiveevaluation of al1 the presented d~uments' the
Govemmentof the Czech andSlovak~ed&alRepublic reservesthright to forth its opinionin detai
with regard to al1 arguments madeby the Govemment of the Republic of Hungary, including
compensationof damagesincurredby the Czech and Slovak Federal Republicas a result of the non-
cornpliancewith thelegaldutietheRepublicofHungary.
The BudapestEmbassyof theCzechandSIovakRepublicavailsitseof thisopportunitorenewto the
Ministryof ForeignAffaioftheRepublicof Hungarythe assuranofitshighestconsideration.
Budapest22 May 1992
TheMinistryofForeign AffairstheRepublicof Hungary Annex 86
NOTE VERBA FLOM THEMWISTR YFFOREIGA NFFAIR SFTHEREPUBLI CFHWGARY TO THE
EMB ASSYOFTHE CZECH AND SLOVAKFEDERALREPUBLIC, 10JUNE1992
NOTEVERBALE
The Ministryof ForeignAffairsof the Republicof Hungarypresentsits complimentsto the Embassyof
theCzech andSEovakFederal Republicin Budapest,and referring to Note 158819eon 22 May
1992regrets toestablishbat at variance with theNote VerbaIeand PositionPaper of the Governmentof
the Republic of Hungaryndedoveron 19May 1992,in the opinionof the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republic the Governmentofe Republicof Hungary hasno legaljustificationfor the termination of the
Interstate Treaty of 1977 on the implementation and operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage
System, and that the GovernmofttheCzechand Slovak FederalRepublic holds the Treaty of 1977
legallyvalidevenafter25May.
In the name of the Govemmentof the Republicof Hungarythe Ministryof Foreign Affairsconfirms the
contentof the PositionPaper of 19May 1992and its requestfor rneasuresconnected with the immediate
suspensionf workon theGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem.
According ttheinformationavailableto the Governmentof the Republicof HingMay 1992,the
undertakingsof theCzecand SlovaFederal Republistartewater decantingactivity at CstilLiszt6,in
the course which theywere pumpingwater from the river-bed of the Danube which is the boundary
river sharedby both parties.
The Governrnentof the RepublofI-iungarinvites the Governmentof the Czechand SIovakFederal
Republicto immediately stop this injuriousogical'tyharmful workand to observetherules of the
Boundary Waters Agreementof 1376.
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungary would liketo ethedisposition of
the Govemment of the Republiof Hungary for the joint arrangemoftthe consequenceof the
termination of the Interstate Treatyof 1977,and to the joint awaiting fulfilment waits for the answer of
the Governmentof the ~zeih and Slovak Repusoithat negotiationscanbe cornmencd as soon as it
ispossibleforhe preparationforthe new interstatetreaty.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungary avaiis itself of the opportonity to renew
theEmbassy of the Czech andSlovakRepublicthe assurancesof itshighestconsideration.
Budapest, 10June, 1992 Annex 87
MTEVERBAL FROM THE MINISTR OF FOREIGNAEFAIRS OFTHEREPUBLI OFHUNGAR MY THE
EMEASS OFTHE CZEÇH AND SLOVAK FEDERA REPUBLIC 8JWLY 1992
NOTEVERBALE
The Ministryof ForeignAffairstheRepublicof Wungarypresentsils complimentsto the Embassyof
theCzech and SlovakFederal Republicin Budapestandhas thehonou o say thatitfeels that the
Ministryof ForeignAffairs hasdetemined on the basisof the informationavaithntdespite the
repeated protesofthe Governmentof the Republic of Hungart,e Czech and Slovak construction
Companyhasonceagainbegun to siphonthewaterfromthebedof the border ritheDanube.
The Governmentof theRepublic ofHungary cdls upon theGovernrnentof the Czechand Slovak
Federal Republitoimmediatelystopanddesist from theaforementionedunlawand environmentally
damagingwork,aswellas to adhereto the pertinentregulatiotheBoundaryWaters Conventionof
1976.
Inthenarneof theGovernrnentof theRepublicof Hungary,the Ministryof ForeignAffairs reiteratesthe
contentsof theNoteVerbaledeliveredon 10June 1992andrequeststhat workrelatedto theGabcikovo-
Nagymaros BarrageSystembe stoppedwithoutfurtherdelay.
The Ministryof Foreign Affairs would like to emphasise the intentions of the Govenunent of the
RepublicofHungary toresolvethe consequencesof theterminatiotheInterstateTreatyof 19and
the issues requiring a solutionin the regiway of CO-operation,andawaitsthe response of the
Governrnentof the Czechnd SlovakFederalRepublic,so thatnegotiationsregarding thepreparationof
a new interstatetreatymaybegassoonas possible.
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungaryavailoftthis apportunitarenew to
theEmbassyoftheCzechand SlovakFederalRepublictheassuranceofits highestconsideration.
Budapest,8July 1992 Annex 88
LE~R FROM MR. R~LF C~FL, CZECHOSLOV AMAKBASSADO LO HUNGARY T,MR. H,
STRASSED RI,RE~R OF THEGENEWLOFFICF OFTHE DANUBC EOMMISSIO 5AUGUST1992
The Ambassadorof theCzech and SlovakFederalRepublic
Budapest5 August1992
To thedirectorof theGeneralOfficeoftheDanubeCornmittee,
Mr. Strasser
Budapest
DearDirector!
Due tothe temporaryputting into operaofotheGabcikovoHydroelectricPlanton the territoryof the
CSFR Danube'sflowwillbeginwithinthe scopeof thebuildintheconstructionworks.
In lighofthis,we informyou on the basisof the:resolutionof theDanube Cornmi45 session that
forthe purpose of caqing outthe building otheaforementionedconstructionworks, workon the
severancecuttingthroughof theDanuWs flowwillbeginon 15October1992 atthe 1851,754kilometre
line. In accordance withthesçhedule for this constnicdon work, it beInecessa iorsuspend
navigationfrom Bratislava Palkovicovoforabout10 days sometime between 15and 30 November
whenthe severanceof therivewilloccur. Theexactdateof this willbe comrnunicattothe General
Office 15dayspriortothesuspensionofnavigation. Whenthe waterlevreaches128metresabovesea
levelduringthe cuttiofthewater'flow thelineof navigatiwillbe relmatedtothe powercanal and
thelock-chambersoftheGabcikovo plant.
At the same time al1necessarynautical installationsbelput into operation including the lock-
chambers ofthe Gabcikovo Plant.
1 requestthayoumake my declarationknowntotherepresentativesof the Danulx Cornmits emk
statesandto the govements of othercounwieswita frontieon the Danube in ordto providethem
withan oppoaunitytonotifytheirautharisedinstitutandauthoritiesintime.
Irequestthat the HonourableDirectoracceptrnysincereregards.
R. Chmel, PrepresentativoeftheCzecand SlovakFederal RepublicDanubeCornmittee. Annex 89
ThePresident of theGovernmentofthe
CzechandSlovakFederalRepublic
Prague, 6 August 1992
Dear Mt. Prime Minister!
With reference to yourietterdated 19May 1992,I must conclude that the proposals made by the Prime
Minister of the CSFR in his letter dated23 Apd of this year were not echoed in your reply. 1 had
anticipated that the Hungarian Governrnent would valueowrreadiness conceming negotiations about the
interstatetreatyon the çonstsuctianand operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System and
whichwere airned at a resolution which respects the interests of both nations. The Government of the
Republic of Hungary, however, had decided that it would unilaterally terminate the intqstattreaty
regarding the construction and operation of the Gakikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System concluded
between the CSFRand the Republic of Hungary in 1977aswell as al1agreements which were concluded
for the purposesof executing the same.
The Czech and SlovakFederalRepublic'sGovernments disappointment at the unilateral step takenby the
Government of the Republic of Hungary has ben increased substantially by the fact that your
Govemment has taken this step when diplomatiç activities are ongoing which areaimedatthe formation
of a trilateral cornmitteeof experts with the participation of the European Comrnunity,. The assignment
of this comrnittee would be the in depth examination of the professional aspects related to the
construction and operation of the Gakikovo -Nagymaros BarrageSystem.
In connection with this I wouldliketo mention that the Govemment ofthe CSFR at its session on 14
May 1992 welcomed thjs activity and nominated the rnernbers of a delegation to be given a broad
mandate and sent to Vienna in order to reaçh a reasonable solution of the dispute. Atrame time the
then Psime Minister of CSFRin his press declaration, as atso mentionedin hisletter, made known his
readiness toenter into negotiations combined witha suspensionof work on the provisional solution.
DearMr. PrimeMinister!
The Govemment of the Czech and Slovak FederalRepublickasbecome familiar with the contents of the
declaration oftheGovernment of the Republic of Hungasydated 16May 1992 and has authwised me to
convey to you the following: the Government of the Czechand Slovak Federal Republic, reiterating its
position,is of the opinion that the Govemrnent of the Republic ofHungar yas no legalbasis for the
unilateral termination of the interstate treaty on the constructiand operation of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage Systern concluded between the CSSR and the HPR in Budapest on 16 September
1977andof al1agreements concluded forthe purposes of executing the same. Therefore, the decision of
the Hungarian Govemmentto terminate the validity of the 1977 Treaty and a11related contractual
documents does not have the effect upon the interstate treaty of 1977or any related treaties concerning
the operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem assumed bythe Hungarian Govemment.
At the same time, the Government of the CSFRreserves theright to express itsopinion, following the
detailed and multi-faceted examination of al1pertinent documents swing as the a foundation forthe
decision of theHungarian Govemment, said opinion to be expressed not only as regards the individual
arguments of the Govemment of the Republic of Hungary , but also on as to the question of
compensation for darnagewhich occasioned on the territory of the CSFR as a consequence of the fact
that the RepubYicof Hungary has not fulfilled and is noe fulfilling its responsibilities arising from the
Treaty.Dear MT. Prime Minister!
Withconsiderationfor the fact that the Govemmeriof theCzechand Slova kederal Republic is still
quite interested in not allowing the problem of the Barrage Systocontinue to grow and also not
wishingthe bilateral andmultilateralnegotiationsking held betweentCSFR and the RHto break off,
1have authorisedthe Foreignministerofthe CSFRto repeat our requestfor assistancefrtheEuropean
CammunityCommissionin orderto findarationalcompromisefor thepresent situation.
1am convinced that,withgood-willand a readiness tocooperage, we can resolve the situation through
negotiations basedon the 1977Treatyand the valid contractual documents pertaining thereto. The
CzechoslovakPartyremainsfullypreparedto act inthe interestsofthsuccessofsuch negotiations.
Pleaseacceptmy sincereregards.
(SignatureofJan Strasky)
JozefAntall
PrimeMinister
Republic of Hungary Annex 90
LE~R FROM MR. J~ZSE FNTALL, HUNGARIA PRIME MINISTER T, MR. JANSTRASKY,
CZECHOSLOV ARIMEMINISTER, 6AUGUS1 T992
The Prime Ministerof theRepublicofHungary
To Mr. Jan StrAsky,
the Rime Ministerof
theCzechand SlovakFederal Republic
Prague
Budapest,6 August1992.
DearMr. Prime Minister,
The improvement of good neighbour relations is the traditional ambition of Ourfreed cauntries.
Unfortunatelythe caseof the Gabcikovo-NagymaroBarrage Systeminterfereswith the successof these
endeavours.
1 haveinforrnedMarian Calfa the Headof the Govemrnentin my 19 May 1992 letter about the
resolutionof the Hungarim Parliamenand Government toterminatethe 1977 Treaty conceming the
constnictianoftheGabikovo-NagymarosBarrage Systemthroughdiplomaticchannels by way of the
Declarationof 14Mayeffective25May 1992.
The Statementgave detailedreasons fothe Hungariandecisionstatingantecedentsand asked the
Governmentof the CzechandSlovakFederal Republic tostop al1operationsrelatito the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrage Systemimrnediately.At the sametime,in the interestofa joint settlementof the
consequencesarising from the Terminationof théTreaty,the HungarianGovernrnent proposedthe
conclusionofa new TreatyintheStatementon thesolutionofproblemsrelatedto the commonsectionof
the Danubeand its connecteregions. Wetookintoconsiderationthe following aspects:
-the preservationotheecological-naturalwealbutprimarilythaof thedrinkingwatersupplies
-theprotection against fland
-theestabIishmentofnavigationconformingto thenatural conditionsof theregion.
Inthecourse of tharrangementof the new Treatythereare severalquestionaoprofessionalnature
to be answeredin connectionwith theconditionof the region. Thereforeit would breasonab tle
involveECexpertsinOurwork.
To date, our letter andproposais have notken answered,rneanwhilethe Czechoslovakconstruction
Companyis continuing thecompletionof preparatoryworksin readinessfor the commencementof the
operationof theGabcikovopower-plant.
Whilstaware of thenumemus urgenttasksconnectedwithelestionswhichhaverecentlytakenplace
and the establishmentofa Govemment1think it reasonablefor usto becorneacquaintedin the near
futurewiththepositionof thCzech and SlovakGovemrnentontheHungarian proposition.
The construction, continuing without interrupt,engthensthe belief that the Czand Slovak
Parties do not intend to resotheproblem within the frarneworkof bilateral negotiations. For this
reason the Hungarian Governmentwill consider the involvementof highly respected non-partisan
authoritiesin the resolutofntheDanubedispute,firstofal1the InternationalCourt of Justin the
Hague would beadvisable.Dear Mr.PrimeMinister,
Repeatingthe closing lines of my letter writtento MarianCalfa, the Headof the GovernmentI
strongly hope chatthe interstateconflicts concerningthe Danube BarrageSystem will not affect
unfavourably our promisingbilateralrelationand reglonal co-operation.Enthisspirit,I emphasisethat
the Governmentof the Republic of Hungary is readytu enter intobilateralnegotiationsconceming a
settlernenof theconsequences arîsingfromtheterminationof the 1977Treaty. 1 trustthatthisinitiative
willmeet the understandinogftheCzechandSlovakGovernment.
Please,acçeptmysincereregards.
S incerely,
J6zsefAntall Annex 81
To AmbassadorRudoIfChmel
Vice-Presidentofthe
Danub e ommission
Budapest
Dear Mr. Vice-President!
1received your letter date5 August 1492 in which, as the representativethe Czech and Slovak
FederalRepublic to theDanubeCommission, you informeûme of the commencementof a stoppage of
navigationof the Danube as a resultof the temporcommencementof operationsof the Gabcikovo-
NagymarosBarrage System .
The HungananPartydraws attentioto thefact ththisstoppageis related toworkon projectsagainsr
whichtheHungarianGovemmenthasmaderepeatedofficialprotests.
The plannedcommencementof operationsof the equiprnentbuilt intthebed of the Danubetoobstnict
the Danubeand ofthe powercanal,asyou know,has a serioliseffecton Hungary'sinterests. Pleasebrief
us as soonaspossibleonthe technicalcharacteristicsof theequiprtsed tocloseoff theDanubeand
on theplannedorderofoperationof thepowercanalandtheGabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System .
I also askyou to kindly briefus as soaas possible on what the CzechoslovakParty means by the
provisionalnatureof thecommencement ofoperationaof thafoternentionedfacilities.
The Hungarian Govemmentfindsall unilateral stepsreIatedto thecornmonsectionof theDanubetobe
unacceptableas the Govemmentis convincedthat a solution acceptato botsidesmay stilk arrived
atby way ofbilateralnegotiations.
Budapest 17August 1992
IvanBaba
HungarianRepresentativeto
theDanube Commission Annex 82
LE~TE mR0M MR. J~ZSEFANTAU, HUNGÀR IAME MINISTER T, MR. JAN STRASKY,
ÇZECHOSLOVAK ~IME MINISTER 1,AUGUST 1992
The PrimeMinisterof the Republic ofHungary
Budapest 18August 1992
To Mr. Jan Strasky
The Prime Minister of theGovernment
ofthe Czech and Slovak Federal Republic
Prague
DearMr, hime Minister!
The issue of the Gabcikovo -Nagymaros Barrage is a senous probIem inherited from the past which
stems from the former faulty decision-making mechanism. However, subsequent tothe change of the
political systerns the positions on to this issue have not been hmoniDuringthe negotiations in
1991 an agreement was reachedthat theissue of thbarrage wasa professional scientific problem. The
joint deliberation of the disputed questions has not begun ofthe consistent rejection by the Czech
and Slovak party of Hungasian party'srequest for the suspension of the building of the Gabcikovo
Barrage, which is a rational minimum requirernent in order to ensure an undisturbed examination of the
issue.
In 1992 the temporary solution, the building of the so-called "Cuvariation, for the diversion of the
Danube had been enthusiastically. The continuation of this, despite repeated Hungarian protests,
rendered impossible theoffer of assistance by the Cornmittee of the European Community for the
establishment oa joint spécialistgroup.
Due to the continuation of the building programme violatingthe territorial integrity of Huhopey,any
for a decision by the two govemments on the fate of the Interstate Treatof 1977 concerning the
completion of the barrage has disappeared. This is why the Governmofthe Republicof Hungary, on
the basis of an authorisatjon fParliament,terminated the treaty as of 25 May 1992 and proposed the
bringing about of new Interstate Treatyfor thejoint settlementof the consequences.
Inmy recent letter dated 6 August 19921restated that the Governmentof the Republic of Hungary would
liketo continue discussions concerning thesetdement of consequences emanating from the temination
ofthe Interstate Treaty of 1977.
According to the contents of your letter of reply , Mr. hime Ministerdooseea possibility for the
Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic,after reviewing al1the problems surrounding the
Gabcikovo -Nagymaros Bat-rage,to accept a resolution which is reasonable for both parties. Ho1ever,
regretfully ascertain that construction work to diveri the Danuk thereby threatening the temitonal
integrityofHungary is king continued with unchanged pace. The president of the Danube Committee
peridically informed me of the CzechandSlovak party'official notification in which he announced that
the Danube willbe diverted to CzechandSlovak territory withina few weeks subsequento15 October
1992 thereby unilatetally changing the frontier. In light of this the opportunity for a seviaement
bilateral negotiations hasgreatIydiminis.ed
At the same time the Government of the Republic of Hungarywould like to solve the dispute once and
for alin accordance with international law which is why it proposes the subrnisthedispute toan
impartial authority1thetefore propose thatheGovernment of the Czechand Slovak Republic and the
Govemmenr of the Republic of Hungary mutuallyagree to submitthe dispute over the implementatofn
Variant C to the International Court of Justice and request a decision. In adtotrecognising thejurisdictionof thCourt,the representativof out Govemmentsshould detemine in writingthe
questionto be subrnitttotheHagueCourtofJustice.
Bar Mr,Prime Minister!
Thenegotiationsbetweenthegovemments oftheRepublicof HungaryandtheCzechandSlovakFederal
Republichave notaccomplishedresults.ThepetitioningtheInternationalouristhepathwhichmay
lead toareasonableresolutionof theconflictin accordancewith Eurovalues. Thisisin thejoint
interestof both oui couriwhichiswhy1amhopefulthatthe proposition bytheGovenirnentof the
RepublicofHungar wyillbcaccepteby theGovernmeno tftheCzwhandSlovakFedernlRepublic.
1will notifythe forumsfortheCO-operatiof EuropeanCouniriesof the initiativesof theGovernment
of the RepubIicof Hungary, First and forernostheCornmitteeof the EuropeanCommunity,the
EuropeanCouncilandtheEuropean ConferenceforSafetand Co-operation.
Pleaseacceptrnykindregards.
Many thanks, Annex 93
LmTER FROM MR. IVANBABA H,UNGAR~ ~EPRESENTATIVE M THEBANUBC EOMMISSIO TNM, R.ION
DIACON V,AWOF THEDANUBE COMMISSIO 2NA, UGUST1892
Mlnisîryfor theForeignAffairs
UnderSecretaryofState
Budapest,28 August, 1992
Mr. IonDiaconu
Ambassador
Chairpersonof the
DanubeCommission
Bucharest
DearMr. Chairman:
OR5 August, 1992the Governmentof theCzechandSlovakFederal Republicmade awritten statement
on the commencementof the workcuttingacrossthe courseof the Danone15October,1992 atthe
1851rkm with thintentitoreplacethnavigational routes thecommencementof operationof the
Gabcikovo hydroelectricpowerplant.
Hereby,1would like toinfom youthaton25May, 1942the Governmentof the HungarianRepubhas
announced the temination of the Hungarian-CzechInterstate Treaty conceming the Gabcikovo
Nagymaros 'BarragSysternandasaresultof thatthe intentionof theandeSlovakGovernmentfor
the diversionof the Danubeand tcommencementof operationof thGabcikovoBarrageSysternis
concrary to the intereststhe Hungarian Republic, furthemore, it violates the basic noms of
InternationLaw and a seriesof regiilatibnsof internationalconandit cartieswith it serious
ecologicalriskstheregionoftheconcefiedreachoftheDanube.
AElowme, Mr. Chairmanto send for your informationthe communiquéof the Governmentof the
HungarianRepublic.In thisdocumentthe Govemmentof the HungarianRepublicterminatedthe 1977
InterstateTreatyand pointedout al1of the dangers and risks whichare the consetheCze~hf
andSlovakintentionwhichhas dreadybeenannounced.
In confmity withtheaboveinthename oftheGovernmentoftheHungarian Republic1herebyexpress
my protestagainstheannounced intentof theGovernmentof theCzech andSlovakFederalRepublic
on5 August,1992.
1 wouldliketoaskyoutoinfom theMemberStatesof theDanubeCommissionofrny standpoint.
Allow me, Mr. Chairmantoensuryou ofmydeepestappreciation.
WithRespect,
SvinBaba
Representativeof theGovemmentof
theHungarianRepublicinthe Danube
Commission IonDiaconuur Budapest,1992.augusztus28.
nagykovet
DunaBizottsiig
elnoke
Bukarest
TiszteltElnokiir!
1992.augusztus5-én aCseh ésSzlovakSzovetségiKoztfhsasAgKorrninya irasban
jelentettebea Duna Bizottsignakhogy 1992.oktiibe15-6 m1e1kezdia Duna folyisinak
Atvigiisimunkalataiaz 1851,79fkm-nel,azzaia szandékkalh,ogy ithelyezzeahaj6ziisi
utvondat6s üzernbehelyezzea BÔsiVizer6mûvef.
EzUtonkivhom Ont tijékoztatnirr61hogya MagyarKozthsas6gKormanya 1992.
rndjus25-ei hatAilmegszüntnek nyilvinitotaBos-NagyrnarosiVizlépcsôrôsz6lo 1977.
évimagyar-csehszlovakQlamkoziszerz6dkst,aminekk~vetkeztébeacseh-szlovakkorrnhy
szhdkka aDunaelterelésérées aB6si Vizlkpcsôüzernbehelyezésé elleentétaMagyar
K~zthsasig érdekeivel,ovibb6 sulyosanmegsértia nemzetkozijog alapvet6 normiit 4s
szhos nemzetkoziegyezményel0ir&at,valamintkomolyokoldgiaikockizatokkjiraDuna
&intettszakaszhak tkrségéen. Engedje meg, TisztelElnokur, hogy szives tiijékoztathkamellékeljemOnnea
Magyar Koztatsasag kormhynyilatkozatat.E dokumentumbana Magyar KoztArsasAg
Kormhya megszüntettaz 1977.éviQlarnkozszerz0dést srhutatott mindazon veszélyehkre
éskockihatokram, elyea bejeletettçseh-szlovszdndékbb flkadnak.
Fentiekkelosszhangb aanagyar KoztdrsasagKomhya nevébe eziitonkivhom
kifejezésruttatnitiltakoz&omat Cseh6s SzlovakSzovetségiKozthrsasagKormhyhak
1992.augusztus5-61 b1jelentettszaindéka.iemben.
Keremdlispontemr61sziveskedjéka Duna BizottsAgtagillamaittlijékoztatni.
Engedjemeg, ElnokUr,hogy legmélyebbnagysabecsülésemr6 biztositsam.
Tisztelettei:
a MagyarKozt5rsasAg KormdnyAnak
képvisel6je
a Duna Bizottsigban Annex 94
TheForeign Ministerof
the RepublicofHungary
Budapest,14September1992
TQMr. JozefMoravcik
Foreign Ministerof the
Czech and Slovak Federal Republic
DearMr.Foreign Minister,
It becameunambiguousat the meeting of Prime MinisterJ6zsef Antall and Vladimir Meciar
whichtookplace inBudapest9Septemkr 1992 that wemustclarifythemannerof settiingour probfems
concerningthe barrage-system. Mr. PrimeMinisterJ6zsefAntallset forth inhis letter to Mr. Prime
MinisterJan Straskydated 18August1492,that themostsuitableway to achieveEuropeanidealswould
be by nirningtothe InternationalCourt of Justand he suggestedthat our governmentsjointly submic
the casetothishonouredinstitution.
Our Prime Ministeragreed at the Budapest meetin hat they will start preparatorynegotiations
betweentheHungariant,heCzechoslovakand theSlovakGovemrnentswiththe aim of prepaing ajoint
submission ofthecaseto the InternationCour tf Justice,establishantrilateralcornmitteeof experts
to examine ecologicaland environmentalprotectionquestions with involvement of EC experts, and
fming a simultaneouspositionon theseissues.
1propose thatthe plenipotentiariesof our governmentsstartnegotiations toharmonisedetails
of thetwo issuesabove. The governmentaldelegations of the Republic of Hungaryis ready to hold
negotiationsimrnediatelyeitherin Budapestoinbague with therepresentativeof the Czecand Slovak
Federal Republic.
1 suggestthatwe harmonise thedetailsof the negotiationson a colleague-levelif you awith
the aboveinpnnciple. Annex 95 ,-
The PrimeMinisterof theRepublicof Hungary
Budapest 1& September1992
To MT.JanSrrasky
The Prime Minister of the Govemment of the Czech md Slovak Federal Republic
Rague
WonourablePrime Minister,
The issue of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage is nseriousproblem inherited frorn thpasi which stems
frornthe former faulty decision mechanism. However, subsequentto the change of the political systems
the positionswith regard to this issue have notbeen harmonised. Duringthe negotiations in 1991 an
agreement was reached in that the issue of the barrage is a professional scientific problem. The joint
deliberation of theisputed questions has begun due tthe consistent rejectioby theCzech and Slovak
pariy ofHungarian party'srequest fothe suspensionof thebuilding oftheGabcikovo Barrage, whichis a
rational minimum requirement for the assurance of undisturbed exarninations.
In 1992 the ternporaty solution, the building ofthe so-called"C" variation, for rhe diversion of the
Danube had begun with zeal. Thecontinuation of this, despite repeated Hungarian protests, rendered the
offer of assistance by the Cornmittee of the European Community for the establishment of a joint
specialist impossible.
Due tothe continuation of the building violating theterritorial integrity of Hungary, the hope for the two
governments to decide the fate of the Interstate Treaty of 1977 with regard to the completion the
barrage has disappemed, This is why the Government of the Republic of Hungary, on the basis of an
authorisation fromthe Parliameni, terminated the treaty starting 25 May 1992and proposed the bringing
about of anew Interstate Treaty for thejoint settlementof the consequences.
In my recent letter dated 6 August 19921restated thatthe Government of the Republic of Hungary would
like to continue discussions with regard to the settlement of the consequences emanating from the
termination of the Interstate Treofy1977.
According to the contents of your responsive letter, MT.Pnme Minister youdo see a possibility for the
Govemment of the Czech and Slovak, afterreviewing al1the problems surrounding the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage, to accept a resolution reasonable for both parties, However, 1ascertain wlregret
that the building for the diversion of the Danube threatentheterritorial integnty of Hungary is being
continued with unchanged pace. The president of theDanube Cornmittee periodically infomed me of
theCzech and Slovak party'sofficial notification in which he announced that the Danubewill bediverted
to Czech and Slovakterritory within a few weekssubsequent to t5October 1992
unilaterally changingthefrontier. Withthitshe opportunity for a setdement via bilateral negotiations is
little.
At the same timethe Government of the Republic of Hungaryinsist on settiing this conflict between the
two countries in hamony with International Lawwhich is why it proposes the submission of the dispute
to an impartial authority1 initiate that the Govemment of the Czechand SlovakFederal Republic and
the Govemment of the Republic of Hungary jointly submit to the International Courtat The Hague the
disputeregarding thecompletion of the "C"variation of the Gabcikovo Barrage. I requestthat a decision
by the InternationaCour be rendered on thebasis of a joint agreement. In addition to the acceptance of
the jurisdiction of the International Court our governments should, within a short time, put issues
down in writing for which the two governments request a position fromthe International Couriat TheHague.
HonourablePrimeMinisterSir!
The negotiaiiansbetweenthe govemmentsof theRepublicofHungaryand theCzech andSlovak Federal
Republic havenotaccomplishedresults. Thepetitioningofthe International Courtis thepathwhichrnay
lead to a reasonablesesolutionof the confliin accordancewith European values. This is the joint
interestof both ourcountrieswhichiswhy1am hopefulthat the propositioby the Government ofthe
Republicof Hungary will
winacceptancebytheGovernmentof theCzechandSlovak FederalRepublic.
1will notifythe forumsfor the CO-operatioofEuropeanCountriesof the initiativesof the Government
of the Republic of Hungary. First and foremost,the Committeeof theEuropean Community,the
European CouncilandtheEuropean Conference for Safety an do-operation.
Irequestthatyouacceptmy deepesteem.
Manythanks,
J6zsef Antall1 Annex 46
L ~ R FROM MR, JAN STRASKY, C~CKOSLOVA PK IMEMINIS~, TO MR.J~ZSEA FNTALL,
HUNGARI ARIMEMINISTER. 23SEPTEMBE 1R92
Presidentof
the Governmentof theCzeA and SlovakFederalRepublic
Prague,23 September 1992
Dear Mr. hime Minister!
1 was grateful to receive your letter datedAugust 1992, and woulà like to add the following
cornments:
The stepstakenby theGovernmentof Czechand SlovakFederal Republicduring the constructionof the
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem werein completeharmonywith the 1977Treaty and al1related
treaty dwuments, whichwere al1validduring this period and wewere alwaysready to discuss, without
any prior conditions,anyquestions whichthe Hungarian Partyhad concerns. CzechoslovakParty
considered it to bea natural precondition that the HungarianGovernment watleast substantiate
those conons identifiedin thmain points andgive conrrete evidence of them. This, however, never
occurred. In harrnony with the Treatyof 1977,these questions mustbe resolvby Governmental
Plenipotentiaries,but the propoof the CzechoslovakParty'sPlenipotentiary havenot met with any
answerhm the Hungarian Party.
The position of the Govemmentof the Czechand Slovak Federal Republicconcerning the decibyon
the Government ofthe Republic of Hungary to unilaterallyzeminate the 1977Treaty and al1mlated
treaty documents andits viewpoint on the justifications whichled the Republic of Hungary to this
decisioare included in my letter dated 6 August 1992. I would only liketo emphasise that the
Govemment of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republichad stood ready to fom a trilateral expert
commission. Ifs delegationwas given a mandate broad enough to make it possible for a jointly
acceptable resolutiontobe arrivedat.
Likewise, you were informed of the so-call"C" variant'scompletion in the letter wribyethe
Presidentof the Governmentof the Czechand SlovakFederal Republic.1wouldonly like to remind you
thattliprovisionaltechnicalsolutiondoesnot obstructthe achievementof goalsset forthin the Treatyof
1977, as the main objectiveof thitoiminimise the damage which the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republicis sufferinasa resulof the unlawfulbehaviour of the FiungaianParty since 13May 1989.
Onthefulfilmentof thso-calle"C" variant1considerit necessaryto emphasisethat the objethis
wasnot,nor is it,the "diversionof the Danube,"asyou allegein your letter. It was onlytof utilisation
the waters of the Danube in the manner assumedin the 1977treaty. Therefore, this variant does not
endangerthe territorialintegrityofthe RepublicofHungary.
In theclosing section of your letter, you propose that we bring the dispute betweenoonthetions
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystembefore theInternationalCourtof Justicein theHague.
Iask myself what this rneans in çonnection with as regathe European Community'soffers of
assistancein theforementioneddispute,to its incidentalrole as mediator,and fmmthe point of view of
negotiations which have ntsyetbeen adjourned?
Pleaseallowmeto remindyouthat the CzechoslovakPart proposedduringnegotiationheldon 15July
1991betweenthe Governmentaldelegations,when it becme convincedthst bilateral negotiationswere
not leadinto positiveresults,twetinvolvethe EuropeanÇommunity Commissionin theresolutionof
thedispute.,The Govemment of theRepublicof Hungary, which had previouslyrejectedthis proposal,setcertain
pseçonditionsfor its acceptanceas of December1991. In Mayof this year,we were very close to the
pointwhere we couldagreeonthe involvemeneof theEC Commissionin the resolutionof the dispute. It
is exactlyfor this reason t1awasverydisappointedby theHungananParty'sdecisionnot to participate
in the trilateral negotiatplannedfor 18May 1992,withtheEC Commission's participation i, Vienna.
Despitetheproblernwhich we have yet tosolve, the CzechoslovakPartyisçonvincedthatweare notfar
from jointly agreeing that a resolution of this dispute should involve the European Cornmunity
Commissionin the roleof rnediator. Nottoo longago,1wasreinforceciin rny belief in the positionthat
"itwould be worthwhileto includeEC expertsfromthirdpartycountliesin our commonwork,"by your
letterdated6 August1992. Itis forexactIythis reason that,basedon yourletterof 18August1492, itis
not clear to me whether the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic shouc lonsider the fact that the
Hungarian Partydesiresto bring lhis disputed questionbefore theInternationalCourt of Justice in the
Hague tcibea conclusionof the negotiationsabout theassistanceofferedby the European Community
Commission. If thiswere the case,itwould be a step backwards for both Parties on the roadto a
resolution. This wouldnegatethe discussions held todatewiththe EuropeanCommunity Commission
and would,in practice,mean the commencementof a new setof negotiationsfor the bringingof the
matter before the InternationaICourt of Justice withoutus having any reason toassume that these
negotiations wouldbeany easierthanthoseundertaken so far. The processby which we are auempting
to find the proper procedurefor solvingthe disputedquestionwouldonce again be extended and the
damagcssuffered by the Czech and Slovak Federal Republicand. eventually, theRepublicof Hungary
wouldgrow evergreater.
The Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republichas a great deal of respect for the
InternationalCourt ofJusticein the Hagueand has great faithin its objectivity. Despitethisay's
world, whentime is of the essence, OurGovernmentconsiders the participation of the European
CommunityCommission to bethemostessentialfactor. Apart from this,thetrilateralcornmittee(Czech
andSlovak Federal Republic, Republio cf Hungary, and European CommunitC yommission}mayjudge
vher aspects, not onlythe legai,in particularecological, navigatio,nd economic issues. In recent
tirnes,the Czech and SlovakFederalRepublichas completed researchprogramswhich leaned on the
partialconclusionsof thePHARE programwhichdealswiththernodeIlingof the Danube region'swater
reserves and in the work ofwhich theexperts of variousmember Stateof the European Community
participate. The resultsof these may be used during thedeterminationof the ecologicalaspect, the
importance of which théHungarianPartyhasalwaysemphasised.
It can beseen from the lettersentby Mr. F. Anmessen, Vice-Presidentof the European Community
Commission tothe Foreign Ministerof the Czech andSlovakFederal Republic,J. Moravcik, dated 30
July 1942, that the European Community Commission is stillpreparetoassistin the resolution of the
dispute aboutthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem. He assumes, at the same tirne,that Ournations
willcorne toan agreement as tothescope of the mandatewhichwill be givento thistrilateralcornmittee,
formed withthe participationof the European Comrnunity Commission. For th risason,1propose that
our nations'expertsmeetas soonas ablein order to preparea joint petitionto the European Community
Commission asspeedilyaspossible.
DearMr. PrimeMinister, pleaseacceptmy sincereregards.
JanStrasky Annex 97
23 September1992,hague
Dear Mr. Minister!
Thankyouforyour lettewhich 1receivedon 23 Septemberin whichyoumade suggestionsonresolving
disputedquestionsconcerningthe Gabcikovo-NagymarciBsarrageSystem.
The CzechoslovakFederal Republic willannounceits standpointconneczedwith bhimatter in thnext
days in a letteaddress todPrimeMinsterAntallJozsef and signed by thePresident of the Federal
Govemment Mr. Jan Srhsky.
The essence of theCzechoslovakstandpointisaimedat the eaïliestimplernentationof the meetingof the
experts of the Govemmentof the CzechoslovakFederal Republicand of the HungarianGovemmentin
order tomake preparationsforOUT joint requesEothe Commissionof the EuropeanCornrnunity, in
which we cal1upontheCommission's helpto settlethe dispute,
The ideato submitthedisputeto the InternationalCourt ofJuswould virtudly prolontheprocessaf
findingthesolutiontothedispute, exactlythen,whentimealreadybecarneacrucialfactor.
When yau have becorne aquatinted with the detailed standpoint of the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republic, I would bedelighted to hearyourreaction in order to set in motion the processof the
negotiationsas soonas possible.
WithRegards, Annex 48
LE'ITE RROM MR. J~ZSEF ANTALL,HUNGARlAN~TME M~ISTER T,UMR. JANSTRASKY,
CZECHOSLOV PAIKMEMINISTER 28,SEPTEMBE1R 992
The PrimeMinister
of the RepublicofHungary
Ta Mr. Jan Strasky
Resident ofthe Govemmentof
the CzechandSlovakFederal Republic
Prague
DearMr. PrimeMinister,
1 was gratef tolreceive your letter of 23 September 1992. 1 have concluded thatthe position of the
FederaiGovemmentcontinuestoremainunchangedfollowingthe statementmade bythe Governmentof
the Republic of Hungary on 19May 1992and that duringthistime, workon the so-ca1ledprovisional
solution,Ieadingto the unilateral diversionof the Danubeis beingconcludedthreateningthe sovereignty
and territorialintegrityofthe RepublicofHungary.
In connection with theextensiveunilateralconstruction activitiespresentIyundenvay on Czechoslovak
territory, 1must emphasise,once again, that the Governent of the Republicof Hunwas forced to
terminalethe InterstateTrearyof 1977dto the seriousecologicalrisksposedby the commencementof
operationsof the planned BarrageSystemandhas proposed thatnegotiationsaimed at the conclusaonof
newinterstateagreementbegin.
I would like to exprerny sorrowthat despitethe differencofopinion in judging the Iegalitthe
issue,theGovernmentof the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic wilnlot accept rnyproposal and is
unwilling tosubmitajoint petititotheInternational Courtof Justicein the Hague. In my opinion, the
resolutionf thepredominantlylega1problemsbetweenour staresmaybe resolvedby submitiingthemto
the International Courtof Justice in Hague, a process which wouldbe entirety in harmony with
European principles. For this reason, my Governmentis unwilling togive up its eftorbring the
issuesatdisputebeforetheInternational CourtofJustictheHagueas soonas possible.
ORthe other hand I agreewith youthat there are some aspectsof the interstatediwhich seemto
requirethe setting up ofatrilateral expert Cornmitteewith the participation of specialisthefrorn
European Community. 1naturallyconsiderthat ithisbobe fmed in accordancewiththe framework
setforth bythe Vice-Fresidentof the European Cornmunity, Commissi, r. F. Andnessen and thatic
workswithin thisframework.
Therefore,1acceptyour proposa1thatour Governrnentsexpertprepare a joint petittothe European
Cornmunity Commissionas soon as possibleand arrivat an agreementregarding the planned trilateral
cornmittee'msandate.Inconsiderationof ourmutualintentiontoinvolvetheEuropeanCommunity,1propose thatwe authonse
out Under-secretarieosf State and/orDeputy Ministersfor ForeignAffairs to lead the negotiating
delegations.
The Hungariandelegationis preparedto traveta Pragueon 30September1992. 1propose thatfurther
deails beagreedupon via ourrespectiveAmbassadors.
Pleaseacceptmy sincerregards.
Budapest,28September1992. Annex 99
LETER FROM MR.JAN STRASKC Y, EXHOSLOV PRAIMEMINISTE R, MR. J~ZEF ANTALL,
HUNGARIA NRIMEMINIS~,2 OCTOBH 1R92
Prime Ministerofthe
CzechandSlovakFeded Repubiic
Prague,2 October1992
Dear Mr. PrimeMinister!
1receivedyourletterdateé28 September1992and1notedwithpleasurethat you acceptedthe proposa1
regardingnegotiationsbetweenourGovemmentse'xpertswithoutanypreconditions. Thesenegotiations
referto ourjoint requestto theEur~peanCommunity Commissionr,egatdingthe subjectof the mandate
ofthe trilatelommissionasis containedinour previous proposal.
As Ireceivedyourletteron 29 September1992,the datewhichyouproposedcannotbe seenas realistic.
At thesametime, 1am çonvinced that anewdate fthesenegotiationswillbe determinedsoonthrough
diplornaticchannels.
Asregards thefurtherpartsofyourletter,1wouldliketoemphasisethefollowing:
Theredisation of thetemporarytechnicalsoIutdoes not amounttothediversionof the Danube, but
the utilisationof a portionof the waters acctothe procedurepresumedby the1977Treaty. The
aforementionedtemporarysolutionisbeingundertakenexclusiveon the territoryof CSFR and will
have noeffecton the continuityof the stateborder,therefore,I çanriotagreewith your assertion thaitt
wouldendangerthe territorialintegri~ and sovereigntyof the Republicof Hungary. The Czechoslovak
Party is oaly bringingto fruition,on itsownTemtory,that whichis providedfor inthe 1977Treatyand
the agreementcontainedwithintherelatedtreatydocuments, The CSFRis ready,immediatelyaftet the
Republic of Hungaryresumesthe performanceof its obligationsstemmingfrornthe 1977 Treaty, to
continue thconstruct oithnGakikovo Nagymaros Barrage accordingto the original plans,basedon
joint agreement.
The Czechoslovak position concemingthedecision ofthe MungarianGovernmenton the unilateral
terminatioof the 1977Treatyandthe maty documentspertainingthereto,as wellas the Czechoslovak
rqly to theHungarianjustificationsare containedinmy letterdated6August1992. TheGovernmentof
theCSFR continuestoholdal1of theaforementioned documentsoevalid.
Dear Mr. PrimeMinister,1am afraidthatthe proposalsubmittby you,in your letdated 23rd Sept.
1992, totakeour disputeto the International Courtof Justice in the Hague was influebyea
misunderstandingof the reasons for our position on the issue. Today, when time has becomean
extremely important factor, 1 am of the opinion thatit is urgent thatwe finish negoonathens
participationby the EuropeanCommunity Commissiointhe solutionta our dispute. The subrnissionof
our dispute to the InternationalCourt of Justice in the Hague wmean that the resulof our
negotiations withthe EuropeanCommunityto date, wouldcorneto nothing. Indeed Czechoslovakia's
reçonçiliationto the CzechosEokonstitutionalprovisionspriortothe subrnissionof ourdispute before
theInternationalCourofJusticeintheHaguewouldrequirea greadealof timeindeed.
Dear Mi. PrimeMinister,pleaseacceptrnysincereexpressionsofresp.ct
JanStrasky Annex 100
NOTE VERBAL EROM THE MWISTR OF FOREIG ANFFAIRSOFTHEREPUBLI CFHUNGAR TaMINISTRY
OFFOREIG AFFAIRSOFTHE CZECII ANDSLOVAK FEDERA RLEPUBLI1 C2,OCTOBE R992
NOTEVERBALE
No. 4611/92
The Ministryof ForeignAffairsofthe Govemmentof the Republicof Hungarypresentsitscompliments
to the Ministryof Foreign Affairsof the Czech and SlovakFederal ~e~ublicand has the honour to
convey the following.
The Govemrnent of the Republicof Hungary, in its Nose Verbale of 19 May 1992, taking into
considerationthehigh probabilityof ecologicaldamageand the negative effectson benef,chasuse
terminatedthe interstatetreaty regarding the construction andoperationof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Barrage System concluded between theeopIe'sRepublicof Hungary and the CzechoslovakSocialist
Republic, whichlook effect 29 October 1977, saidterrninationtaking effect 25 May 1992. hrther
terminatedare all agreements concluby the ContractlngPartiesand their respectivebodietheor
purposesof executionandalsoproposed,simuItaneously,is the conclusionof a new interstatekeaty for
the purposesofresolvingthe consequencesof saidterrnination.
The Govemmentof the Republicof Hungary, however,has been unable,despiterepeatedattemptto
anive atan agreementwith the Governmentofthe Czechand SlovakFederal Republic regardinthe
disputedquestionon the BarrageSystem. The Governmentof the Czechand Slovak FederalRepublic
has also shownno willingness aIlowthe Governmentsof the two nations toturn to the International
Courtof Justicein the Hagueassooas possibleor to allacornmitteeof expertswhichincludesthe
expertsof the EuropeanCornmunitytobegin work according tothe conditioforthby theEuropean
Community.
The GovernrnentoftheCzechand SlovakFederal Republic,çontemporaneouslywith the attemptsof the
Government of the Republicof Hungary toresolve the questionby way ofjoint agreement,has
undertakenintensive constructworkon theterritoryoftheSlovakRepublicanddeclaron 5 October
1992to theDanubeCommissionthaton20 October1992it wouldbegin diversionof theDanubeatriver
km 1851 into the indusmal canal which constitutesa part of the Gabcikovo Barrage in order to
commenceoperationsof theGabcikovoHyhlectric Plant.
During the time of the constructionwork, the Governmentof the Republic of Hungary repeatedly
protested,in both writtenand oralfom, the intentof the Goremofthe Czech andSlovakFederaE
Republicto diverttheDanube.
As a result of the executionof the measuresannouncedby the Governmentof Czech and SIovak
Federal Republic,great amountsof water are being lost to the Danube, cotorthe wish of the
Governmentof the Republicof Hungary. The Danube constitutesthe border betweenthe Repubofc
Hungary and theCzech and Slovak FederaFRepublicbetweenriverkm 1708 and 1850 in accordance
with Part1,adde 1, point 4 of tPari seace Treaty of 1947, whichfurthersthe provisions of the
Trianon PeaceTreatyof 1921.
The Government of the Republicof Hungary holds theunilateral changeto the Danube'swater
conditionsand water utilisationbea aerious violationof the nation'ssovereignty and territorial
integrity. The Govemmentof theCztchandSlovak FederalRcpubIicstepsarein furthercontravention
of numerous internationtreaties,primarilythe convention concludedin Belgradeon 18 August 1948
regarding the regulation of navigationoo the Danube as asthe bilateral agreementsconcluded
regardingCO-operationnstateborders.
The unilateral modificationofwater conditionsof a boundaryrivand the arbitrary closingoff
natural power resourceas a result thereofis contradicttoythe basicprinciples governinthe
inviolabilityof state bordersand the inofgstateterritoriesto whichthe Statesparticipatingin theCouncil of SecurityandCo-operation inEuropeaccededin theHelsinkiFinal Document andwhich they
solemnlyreinforcd on 21 November1990in the "Charterof Parisfor aNewEurope."
The GovemmentoftheRepublicofHungarycallsattention to the factthatthe diversionof theDanubeat
riverkm 1851 was notprovidedfor in anyway in the 1977Treatyand is, thexfore,in contraventionof
thatTreaty,as well.
Takingintoaccouncal1the abovementionedcircumstances,theHungarianGovernmentconsidersthat an
emergency situation is deveIoping,and in accordancewith the paragraph1. of the Mechanismfor
Consultationand Co-operationwith Regard to EmergencySituation, as itsetforth in annex 2 of the
Summaryof Conclusions [sic], adopted by the First Meeting of the CSCE Council, requests the
Governmentof the Czechand SlovakFederal Republic to providethe HungarianGovemment, on the
basisof theabovedesckbedcausesof concern withclarificationonthefollowingquestions:
1. Does the Government of the Cmh and SlovakFederal Republicconfimi , in iight of the above
circurnstances,that it is gotodiveertthe Danubeat 1851river km intothe Gabcikovopowercanal on
20th Oct 1992?
2. 1sthe Govemmentof the Czech and SlovakFederal Republicready to suspendthe construction
work aimedat the diversionof the borderriverwhile ajoint expertcommitteeinvestigates thedisputed
questions?
3. Doesthe GovemmentoftheCzechandSlovakFederal RepublicconsiderthepIanntddiversion of
the Danube tobe withinthe noms of internationallaw mentionedinthis Note?
4. Now willthe Goverment of the Czechand SlovakFederal Republicavoidthe politicaltensions
and instabilityresultingformthediversionof thDanube?
The Ministry ofForeign Affairsof theRepublic of Hungar availsitselfof thisopportunityto renewto
the Ministryof ForeignAffairsof the Czech and Slovak FederdRepublicthe assurances of its highest
consideration.
Budapest,12October1992. Annex 101
NOTE VERBAL FEOM MINISTR OF FOREIGA NFFAIR OFTHE CZECH AND SLOYAK FEDERA LEPUBLICTO
THEEMB ASSY OFTHE REPUBLI CFHUNGARY 2,OCTOBER 1992
NOTE VERBALE
~~fTlÏ3~.250/92-~~0
The MinistryofForeign Affairsof the Czeand Slovak Federal Republicpresents its compliments to
theEmbassyof theRepublic of Hungary and has the honour tobe able to convey thefollowing with
reference to the note sent by the Hungarian Ministryof Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Hungary
numliered461 1/92, dated 18 October 1992 and conceming the formation of a trilateral cornmittee of
expertswiththe participationof the European Community toexamine the questions of theconstruction
andoperationoftheGabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrageSystern:
The CzechosIovakParty hadpropsed theinclusionof the European Communityin the resolution of the
dispute sumunding the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSysternin September 1990. The Czechoslovak
Party proposedtheestablishmentof the aforementionedtrilateral committee during the meeting of the
GovernmentaEDelegationsof the Republicof Hungary andthe Czechand Slovak Federal Republicin
July1991.
In light of the fact that the HungarianParty did not accept this Czechoslovak proposal,the Government
of theCzechruid Slovak Federal Republiwas forcedby the procedures followeby the Ilungaian
Party, toarriveat a decision regardithe commencement of the temporary technical provisional
solution.
The Govemment of the Czechand Slovak Federal Republicis ready to accept al1conditions set by the
Commissionof the EriropeanCommunitywithregard tothe setting upof a trilateral Committee,and has
decidedthat it willnot startthe closure of the Danubeuntil the beginningof the workof the Committee,
moreprecisely,untiE2 Novemkr. At the sametime,it doesnotconsiderthe realisationof the temporary
technical provisional solutionto be a measurewhich wouldobstructthe CzechoslovakParty in being able
to çomplete the plant accordtogthe original plans or in any manner agreed between the Czech and
Slovak Federal Republic and theRepubIic.of Hungary based on the conclusions of the trilateral
cornmittee.
In relation to this, theGovernaent of the Czech andSlovakFederalRepublic is led to believe that the
Hungarian Party haslready arrived at two decisions warenotin harmonywith the conditions set
forth bythe European Community.
1. It has arriveata decision which would terminate the validltheo1977 Treaty and related
documents.
2. It hasdecided,unilaterally,to demolishthe wwkditch atNagyrnaros.
Despite the Government of the Republic of Hungq's decision regarding the nbove, the Czechoslovak
Party continues to stand prepatoform abilateral committeeand proposes thatboth Parties commit
themselvesto base any further decisions retotthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systeron the
conclusionsof this committee. The Czechand SlovakFederalRepublic'srepresentativeshavmadet
thiscornmitmentquestionableon a singleoccasion.
Regarding the negotiations under preparation for the participation of the European Community
Commission,the Czechand SlovakFederaIRepublicdoes not findit necessaryto have the leaders of the
two natio novernmentaEBelegations meet phor to the trilateral meetihowever,the Hungarian
Partyinsjston suchnegotiations,the CzechoslovakPartyis alsoprepto takpart.
Asfar as the requestmade by the Republic Hungar yated17 August 1992 showing interest in the
details othetemporq technicd provisional solution is concerned, the Ministry of ForeignofffairsTheRepublicof Hungq of theCzexhand SlovakFederalRepublicis sorry tosay thatihasreceived no
such request.
TheGovemrnentof the CzechandSlovakFederalRepubliconce again reiteraittepsositionthatthe
temporary technicaprovisionaslolutionhasnoeffectoneithertheterritoriailntegrîtyorthesovereignty
of theRepublicof Hungary nardoes itviolatHungarim stateborders.
The Ministryof ForeignAffairsof TheRepublicof Hungary oftheCzechandSlovakFederalRepublic
availsitselofthisoppmunity torenew to the Embassyof theRepublicof Hungaiytheassurancesof its
highestconsideration.
Prague,21October1492.
HrindedtoAmbassadorGytirgyVarga
by ForeignMinisterJozefMoravcik
at 2:30PM. Anne102
AI'PLICATJ ON'l'lieiilidcrsigr~ed,nctiiig as Agclil uf flic Iicliiiblic of t,iiirigni.y11:)[lieIiiiiiciler
triirislitule 1iroceerlEiig siefor.c[lie Iiitcr~ialioiialCourt of J~isticcagairisl [lie
Czccllaiicl Slovak FcclecalRc~iril~li or ils aclivities aitried;if(lie cviis~r~~içtiori
of [lieso callcd "~iruvisiuriilsrrlii2iuiit\oli UieDnii~ibctliril tIiverts williuiil[tic
exl~licitor kcil coiisc~itof [lie1Iillignr.iaiiGover~iriiertl ilie i[i(er-ri~tiori:itl.ivcr
wliicli cviist ititlcflic Iicii.tlIictwceii llic two cri~iiiIr*ics.
1;. 1fii~igarylins tii;irlcscvc~.;ilaitctiililsIo scllEc [lie clisl~iilc~I~t.o~ig (Ii[.ect
iiegoliniiuris aricllinsofci.cd trir.csuIvc Ilicdisliutc wiili llicnssislaricc of Ilic
CtiiiiiiiissioriUT tlic Eiii-i~l~cinCii~.iriiiiiiiitiiicUiifcirlitriatcy, Ilicsc*cffor-is
prtlved i~~isi~ccessf~r' ll.'laitittitleof Cxcclio-Slovakia cciriiliclsI liiiig;ilnyZo
iriiliaic (]lisiiialtcrI~c~oI-c tlic Co~irt, ap11cari11 2s appl ic:tnt. 1 iunga~+y ,II
iïli~~g\bisAl)plicatio~ ~O ~IICCmirt, SII~III~~Slu ~IICCot~rl's juris(lic~io~~ Ilic I
liiirpcises uf tIiiscaiisc iiililer Ar.(ide 36, par. ( I}. Sti rai-Czcclio-Slrivnkin
npl?c;lr* iisut Io liavc ftlctfaiiy rIccl;ira~io~ i iiliIlic Criii~I,altliciirgll1liiiigai-y
1i;ts i~ivilcrl il itrdo su. C;reçlio-Slovrikia is qilalifier1 Io siiliiiiitio tlie
j~iris~lictiu~i~~itliis11~11tc ar+(1III~~, ~IIJUII~iotificatiou (.~ftl~isA\~lklicntiui~ by
tlic I<cgis\rai- iliaccordaricc wif li(lie Riilcs cif (IicCoiirl, 1;1kc tlic iicccss:ii-y
stclis to eiinbte tlic Coiirt ((1cotifir-iijiirisdictioii ovct- iiciili Par-iics rti klic
ciispiiie ~iiirsirnitu Ar~iclc36, [)nt'.(1) OC ~licStaliite. I1iirigcir.1-ccliiesttlial
a ctrjiy ri[ if~c pccseiic Alil1i1c31ion I)e tr'arisiiiittctIo C7,ccIic~-S1rrvaki ~ii
;icc~trInrice willi Ai.~ictc 38 of ilic liiilcs oC ific CI O tlic
Sect-clary-Ceneral of llic \)iiitcd Nniions, niid, to o(lici- SLa~cs ciilillctlI(i
:i~)~)c:it)cfot-c(lie Ct)t~i.fIEII(~CA~~liçl4 c2,.hf.111~ s:litl Ilril.cs~ .2. (111 16Sc~~~c~~il1 ~9rr'7,Ili[:l.l~~~~g:~r i:~oti)icvs lbq)111 q1 :111(111c Socialist
IZc~)rtl~I tifcC7,cclioslovnkE: siigiictl iri 1lii1l:i~ics3 '1.1-c:ilypr-tividiiig for-llic
Critislriic~iuii niitl Joitit Olici-nticiii of ~lic Gnl)cikovr~-Nngytiinr-oU s ;II-r-ngc
Sysleiii (lier-ciiinlier [lie "1977 Traeaty "1. Accusrliiig to tlie ter-111 sf ilie 1977
'I'rcnly, 111~ 1 ';ii.lic;igr.cc~ Io ILIJÎI ~~IC I11111;1kilili(I;IIII311~1 I.CSCI.V{I~I*,(IIC
Ihi-rnge Syslciii wliiclz iiicl~iclct twri 1iycli.o-cIcr.li-icliriwcr sl;i( iotiç, olic riil
C~.rclio-S[ov:~klcil.ilory, :ilC~:iiwikovo, :~[I( OIIIC 011 i i1111g;lr;~r ICI Ii!i~ry, ;II
N:igyiii:ii.os, :iiica 25 krii Ior~g 1)y-1i:iss r.:iii:~Tririiivci [iiig itic 1ii;iiiiit~I'oiii
ils ~ir.igirrliIcoiii.sc iIii~ciiiplilic sysicii~ OS Iocks :iiicl itieii Ei:ick ag:iirl.
Oi.igiiially, tlzc 19-17 '1' nty c:iIlcd for- ~iiltiiig tlic jicinlci.gcrirr :rlrirs itilo
cilici;itioiil~ei.wccr1 i 98G ,71i(11990; Sioivcvci-, riti 10Uctolicr- 3983. rlieI'ar-tics
sigiicrl a PI-ci!cirb~i~icislliiiiiiitlic projcril kir- {ive yc:ii.s. 'l'liistlc:iiIlii\cwns
Inlcr cli:itigcicIo 1904.
.1. lluri~~g IIIC yc:irs follo~vitig IIIC ~O~~~I~ICII~CII~CII~ of [lit pi.oAjc~>l, 1l1c
~~I~III~~I p~\~l)lII:'nl[ci~tio~i NICI opi11io11 cvolvct~~ ~OCIIS~II~ IIIO~C aii(1 1tIoi.e
oti tlie iieerl lu lit-c'ilcllie ccitiii11,y'ciivii~ciriiiicriaiitl ii;-iliir1-csoiii.ccs. 'f'l~is
ecological evolii~iciii, occiiri-iiig sitiitittn~icriiisy wiili I:Iiitig:ii-y's ~iriIiic:iI
cvoliiliori, L~i~oisgli~aliciiila ~iolltilar.~~ccciiisiriei~;i~iri[if crivi~~cit~i~iciil;v;ilitcs
liot ;ilwnys iiic;isiirnIilciri ct*o~iciriiitci~iis; Uic ncccliInricc or (tic kcy irlc;itlial
s~~skii~iabl ~~VC[II~IIICII[ js 2 I~asicpt.i~iciplc i11 [lie ~)I-L[(IC ~JIIII~~CIII~II~ or
riallira1 resour.ces. AI Ilic s;iiiic liiiic,111c wtir+l d nw :I ~lcclitic iilIlie cfiicacy
81111l)t.csligc wf (~cllil~logi~s IOW CIICI*~~ crfi~ir.tli-';III(lligll irl I~W-1ii:ilct-i:il
corisrrrii~itiori. Evcii Iiclrir-c~Iic c.li:iiigof gcivct-iiiiictili~iIItitig;ii+ytlrir.iil1:iic
9 I I rsisi 1 C S 1 1 c 1 , 1 1 i v Iliic Io
tllis iiici.c;isiiigpalilic ~ir.cssiir-e. IIic Ci<ivct-tiiiicril w:is Toicd 1ti iiiii:ilc a
scicritiiic: rc-cxniiii~i;iticiii(il'tlic 13;ir.i.;igSyslerii's ctivii~oriiiicrit:i1cffccls iri
1983. 'Tite~+eliur or l(lierc-cxatiiiria\iotipi'rq~osc rlos\pririiiig or-ça~iccl ing ilie
~lrojccl tirilia riiore eoinyirelicrisive stiidy ccitiltl Ile cloiie. Coiiscc~iierilly, Ilie
crii~ti~iii;ilin~ur siislictisi~iiiri[ Ilicctiiisli-ilclicirwas a tii:iicirissiic cliir-iiiIliis
lm-iud uC liiiic. Fiirally, i,ti 1988 [tic tltirigni-ifiiiI1:ii-liailiciircsotved tliat4. 011 13 May 1989, as ri r-cstilt of Ilic r-r-cv:iIiinliciii,Ilic iIiiiigni.ifi~i
Govei+iiriieiil ~lecillctl lti siisliciitl coiisli-1ic(iii ni Nngyiiinr-FIS.'I.lii~igm-y
inct~ticsletl1iioi.eliiiic for r~irllicrsliidics arirl stiiigIit a ioirila!i:ifysis or tlic
ccolrigicnl risks posctl Iiy flic ll;ii-ragc Systcrii; Coi- Ilriil iartics 10 cx~)loi.c
aller.li~ilives. 011 20 Jidy 1989, [tic Pti~lie M illisterof CxeçIiu-Slovakia was
irifciriiieclLliat [lie suspc~isioti ciC ccitislriicticiriaç(ivElicsori Iliiiigai.i:iiisciil
woiil tIcuri~iiiiie31 least iiiiil3 1C)ctnl>cr1939. Nego~inticiiissi:ii-leclliciivceii
clc\icsls fr~oriiIiollisliilcs. Nciv fitiditigs sli~~wcdilint ri(i(cirilyltic wtitks ;il
Nagyiiiaros, t-iiialsri :ilDtriinki titi, w1ier.c lliekcy lock riitlic rcser-voir wiis
iiritlct-cciris~i~itctioiinil to lie siispcriclctl triri. pl'l~c1lit[~g:~[*ia ~Oi VC~III~IV[I~
riiatlc flic rlcccssnry rlccisiriti ;iritl ~ir*ol?rrsct lii 20 .Iitly 1989 Ir) \tic
C;ieclici-SlovfikGcivcriiriicrit a joiii! r-cvisioi(iftlic wlic~lc lit-cijcci[lcl~itliriiiril
orily Nngyriiarcis, l~rilalso ilic liciwci. s[;lliollnt Galiçikovri niitlilic Icsct-vciit.c
at 11111~tkiIiii.
5. Cxccl~o-Slova kia I-C~IISC II~I1 1~111ga1* ~i)[x~i~os: ~11f.lc"~, 31AII~IIS~
1989, iis I'i.i~iic' Mitiis~cr.w;irricil iii ri.Icltci. of n liossililc "1ii-civisio[i1il
sri1iiifo~i"--theirriilalernlrlivcrsiciiiof 111 cln~ililiciiituCzcclici-Slciva k ict-1~oi.y.
fi. AIlct ~lic "vclvcl icvoliitioii" Icarliiig Iti (Iic fciriii:iticiirif iicw
C~ovei*iiriicii ii Czcclio-Slovrilcia! 1Iiirigai.y11;itlIiciy~ctilIi:ii Iliiiriiv I'r.:igiic
Govetiisizeiil wutiId revisc its siritiçe oii ille issiic iiiacccit.J;irzcc willi tlie
carlier clcclar;ilio~isor liruiiiiiicrit~>ci.soriaitIics--iiiclirtli[igMr.Vnç1:iv 1lavel--
wlio Iiailcri~itlelii~ictfic I3ai.r:igcSystcrii. Iltifrir~t~iiiael tlic Czcc1ic1-S1ov;ik
Pt4iir~cMillister i~~fornietl.ilbcIIi~iig~ria~C ~~~~VC~+IH 111:hCIII~~C~:~~O-SI~~V;I~~~~
irisislecl 011 pi-riçeerlirrgwiill tlie ltr+c!jeclrrccoi-tlirito tlic 1977 l7res(y.
7. Frillr>wilig[lie firsl fi-cc elcctioris iri IIi~~igiii~y,flic [icw C;ovcimiiriierit
~iiililislicdils ptrlilicriIirograIiiIzic ciri22 ivI;iy 1990, s;iyitig iIi:iit "ciitisii1ci.s
iiic corislriictioil or [lie Datiiihc Barrage Sysieiiia iiiisliikeaiirlwill i~iiliatc,as
sciririris~wissihle,ticgotislioiis oti (Iic i.cIialiililn(iciiiaiitl Ilic sli;ir+itigOC Ilic
rlniiiages witli tlicCzeclio-Slovnk Gcivcrtiilicrit lo be c.lcçterl". 'I'iieIEii~ignr-iari
Govcr~iiiic~it cri~iiriiissioticiIiniiilctIovcr io liis Cr,cclici-Sltivak ctiiiiiIcr.li;zrttlctails tif its Iirograiiiiiic cri~icci.iiirigIlic Darr4age Sysicrii.
Il, Afte~"fl~c ct~~~soli~lalio~ o~f 11cw pal itical S~S~CIIIS il1 l)o!l~ co~~~ttrics,
i~~~cr-Gvvet~~~i~~ ~~ecg~(aiIiati(~[vs rc rcsi~~t~ecl~A i~1~11-il99 1 . '~IIc I-I\it~garia~i
I~nrlinriietit ni~tliclrixerlklic Grivcrtiiiicii~ tci ciifet. iiilo ~i&~otintioiis witli
Czcclio-Slovnkin oii aii agrccriicril to Icr+iiiiiintc Ilic 1977'~'reaiy ,s wcll as 011
tlic III-cl~rirritio~or a IICW. lcc;ily oti Llic co~iscquciiccsof (Iic cilinii~luii~iicr~of
(Iic prqjcct aiirl tlic rclialiilitlilioii ri[ tlic Dniiiilie nrcri. 7'\vo ~iiui.c
Eiitei--govcrtiriiei~La ~Icgci~iciliriiiç Iricik plncc lictwccii Ilirtigrir.y arirl
C7,~r~lici-S10v:iki;l iiiJuly ;III~ I)cc'c~I~~) 10I- 1. C~,C~*IIO-SI~IV V~;T.iioi I.F:I~~
tri 3gi.c~ ;iiiiicilclv:iIc<lils tlrici~iiiiri;iiiciIli riiiislillir lii'cijccl,:il'l?i.iiiitil1i:it
il still iiilcritlcil tci iiiililriiic*iillic lllii.rivisiciti:isotiilioii" Iiy ~iii~liiig iiifci
c.ciiisislciilIy r-crliiiidcil Izccl~o-SEovnki:~ iIi:it:iiiy iiiiil:ilcr~;itiic:isiic \viiiiItl
vic~laIc a iiiiiiit~ei.of rirlcs tif t)il;ilci~;i:iritl riiiillil:i~rii~i(i.e:ltirs :ilid of
~~rciicst, prcrerciiig iiot Io ;i~ldi.css iii aiiy c1ct:iiI jIiiiig;ii.i;irinr.giriiieiils.
Uiif~irlitrintely, illis Cicliavicitii- lias Iiccti cli;ir;ictct.istic: rot. (tic wliiilc
Czccllo-Slovak riegotialiori siratcgy. Ncitlicr tlic I'ctIc~.;iI,rior. tlic Slcivnk
Ciovcl-111ireri iris cver* rqcadil ylisciisscd iii ~lc~illintiy IIiiiigni.iniiccolrigicnl or
Icg;il ai-giii~icii~ii.Vcr.li;il ariilivi.ii2ciicoitiiii~triir.;iliritI'toi~i (.:zcc~liri-SI~i~;iki;i
IE:IY C :OIIS~S(C CIIII~!I~~IIC l;it ~.C~IIS;~~S;i1111S[:~~CIZICII~Çor iIIICIII20 (ICCCII
t~~iilakrally,
11). IIIa Ieitcr.tif 2.13 Fc1itiini.y 1992, Iliirig:ir-y's I'i.iiiihliiiislct- c.ulii+cssc~l
liis coiicerii nlicitittlie divcl.siriii tif tlic 13;irllil~caritl rclicalcrl [lia[ tliis tCI11111,
woiild lie a serious violaiiori OS tlie r-zilcsor iiiter~ir~iri~ialI:iw. I.Ic war~ied tli:ii
flic I>clinvioiir of Ilie Czcclio-Slovnk Govcriiiiiciii coiilcl ctiiiil,el1-1iiiigni.y hi
Icr~tiiiiaie Ilic 1977 'ri-c:ily. Il. 111 a r-clily Icltes ril 27 Alii il 1992, tlic C7.cc.litr-5lriv:ik I'r.iiiicMiiiis(cr
icr~t~c~ lIIC 111trig:lri;11rcq~i~*sl C:IIICC 11I1iiIatcr:11:OIISIIIICIi4)11IVOI~ as a11
il [~I~MI~IIII" 1 lc ~[IIIO~II~CL~ tI~atC~,cc.l~o-S~ovaki aVOIIIL\ SIISI)CII(~, 1~11
ivot~ld co~il~INIC 10 111,t)ccc (itfl tlic "~~~.ovisit)~s~ o:~li~io~~ "i~~tli~!i~ligIIiat 011
3 l CIC~~~I 1I9c1I2*~I IlCvcrsiori or lie lla11111i )co~iI(l11rgi11.
12. At ~IIC i~iicr-govcr-iiiiicrii;iFriegoti;iliotis ci[ 2 Dcccrii\ici 199 1 aricl
i~c~~mice ytll ftci-w:ir~.lsI,ales~ trri8 May 1992, 11ic 1ltrrig:ii~i;iiGovcr~eiiiicii~
pr'oliusctl Io [lieC7,cclici-Slrivak Govcr~iiiiiciit iiiif i:iliiii=il~iicr.iiivcs[ig:i~iriiis,
91i[l a S~IIII~~~~I~P~IISt~io~~:ifo~ii1111 [IIIcxi-~~~~!io~i01. Ilir "~~i~ovisio~l:~ stil~itic~~~".
111 ilic I~IC.:III~~IIIri:~~iicIy,1 Iii~ig:i~.~CTPII~L:~~ ~lic (~7.~!~~lio-,S[o~~ Ii(II~PS[ 111;if
ific Lriiiirtiissio~i of Ilic 17iii.tiiwnriC~i~i~~i~i~~ii(ic:s~~~.ovi[ll*:ISS~S(;I~I~C10 Iiiiila
tcc.liiiicnlly :iritc~t~iicitriic:ilEyft:asilllcstill~tiotiIo tlic issiic. (III 1.1Al~i~il IOY2
Ilir ("otiriiiissic~rii.cslioii(lctl ~icisiiivcly tiitlic t.ct~iicst, ~lt~c.l:iriiiils i~c:irliticss
tri cqliriin Ir-il:ilcrnlClotiiri~iicr of cxi~ci,ls. AL Ilic s;iriiriliiiicIlic C+'oriiiiiissiriti
laicl tlowii Ilic ctiiirlitiriitli;itliii.itigllic iiivcslig:i!ioris Oot IIciciiiiItics rcfr-;iiii
f'r.oiiis(clis i.lialwoiilil "pr.r,iicliccM ~iossil.iIc;iciiciiis(ii tic ii~it!ci.r:ik~roii ilic
Iinsis of flic Coiiiiiiiiicc's liiirlitigs. IJiifoi.tiiti:itcly,(_'7.rc.tici-Slo\f;iki~cliisccl
[lie 1lttiigari:it~ 111*(111t?s ~i~iiit:ii~ii[~g!!i:itC7,ccl~o-Slov~ki~ IV:IS i~r~ivilli~~ Ig)
siispcricl wort oii 11ic "~ii.civisiciii:~stiliitic)ii". 'lli\ri, {IIC.IIC C'oi~\~\\issii)i~'s
riiosl iriilit11.2nrctiri~lilicir\V:IS 110(IIIC~;III~ tlic(i.iI;~tc~.a~oi~ii~~il!~~ IV:IS EI~I:IIIIC
[O 1)egininvcstig;~ ~u~is.
1). 1Jr1dcrflicsc ~.~~~cL~IIIs~;~IIc~si{~~[\g:~ry \V:IS lcli fviI1\ ilci tq)!io~\ 1111t (O
~~!!'~liill~l111~ 19-1'7 '~I'C;I[Y. 11 tlid Sc) !?y ~~)VC~II~IIC[I~t~~.~~il~'il~i~)~iotl16 h(l;iy
1992, ,cfrcctivc rlntc 2.5 May 1992, 'Tlic clcclnr.:iiici[icnllctl ~q)riii [lie
Govci~i~tiicii~ of ~lic Cxcc1i niirl SIovak Fctlcrnl EIcl>itiiic "[ri t:ikc [iicfisiiCS
toiva~ds the i11~111ct1ia scol~l~:~g or al1ivo1.k a~cl cot~str~~ ioi~ 1 cla~cd [O I11c
C;;ilicikrivo-Nagyriiai-OS Uarsflgc sys!ctii". Iririsliort "iiolr vt~i.linlr"or 2% h.Iiiy
1992 rlic C7,cclio-S1~iv:ik I;ovci-iitiicri liliii;itgcl:~ii.~~ ioti--i.cs~iriiitlcil
tciIlic tlr*cl;ii-nticiilAccririliiig Ir) ~lic ~icilc,Ilic 1l~i~ig;ii-i:iclcsl ;II-nitiiclic1 ii(~I
IT~CI- ((3sufficic~~t lcgd ~I~~IUII f(IiStcrii~i~ntio~~ ~,IIIICS7.ccl~o-Slov:~kia 1vot11~1
cri~iiirii~cItrviciv (tic 1977'1' 1:ity fis iriI'or-c~. Alicir-.liritig iriliiiiiric:itjciri(lie
I ltitig:ir.i:irlccisiciti ii) ici~iiiiri;ilcilic 'l'i.c:ily! Ilte Vicc-llr.csiclciit rjf Ilic
C'oiiiiiiissitiri(if IFK 1Jiii.cipc;itCririiiiiii~ii(ics.iti :iIcttci-r.i:itcd 29 Jiirir, 1992,ngairi offcrerl tlic assistaricc of tlic Cotiiriiissioii iri rcsolvirig Ilie disliiite,
riiairit;iiiii~tlic satiic coriililicirisct i~iflic prcviorrs Icltct. riT 13 Al~i'il 1992.
14. 'Tliccepieseii~ativc or Lzcclio-SluvakFeder;il Re~.iiililicIo li~c Da~itit)~
Coi~iiiiissivriiiifc>rriictiilic Cotiiriiissici~i tiy leilcr-oii 5 Aiigiisl 1992 11131 [lie
13atiiibewilt lie ciit tlirriiigl;il rivct.kiloiiic(cr 1551 ;ititlIlitis tinvi~ntici~\ivil1
Ije siisyicrrrlerlfor ;il)ciut 10 rlays, sriIirc tiiiic lictwccri 15 Or~illter nit1 30
Novciiil~ct. Acctit.iliiigIO 11icIc~tct-,wlicii 11ic lcvcl of Elie river.i+cnclics128
riiclcr.~above !lie Qaliic sca Icvcl, [liectiitr.sc ril1iavig:iliciiwi ill l~cc!ivc~.lct!Io
II tc+I I I i l s t t 1s : : l ~ k 01 fi A ]YI)%,
Ilic I}ii.cdrii- of Ilic Scvi rt;ii.i:iof tlic I3:itiillicC'iitriiiiissioiiirili)iilcil Ilic
1Iilrigm-i;iir-clit-csczil;itivof lliishi(-(. '1'1 1111115:11i:lr~r811~~(:srd:i~iv~ctxircsictl
to Ille Coiitriiissioti 3g:iiilstIlir tlivcisicirioii 17 Aiigiist I0C)Z iiiirlrc~liicslctl
ll13tC~~.r.cl~o-Slo~~: ii!<.i;r:l~iio~x tlci:~i[sOII [tict1iv~:sio~i. <~7.(:~'110Sl[~v:~ki:~
1 1 0 cl t II 1i i i i t. 13it1,oii5 Oc.icilici. 1992 izillii.iiictl
IIic I:):itiiilicCoi~~iiiissititi:itilirilivci.siriiiwill lir,cffci.! iv:IS (il20 Ociolici
1992.
15. Oii G Aiigiist 1'992, ~lic1Iiiiigar,i;ii1'1-irirh4itiis~ert.ir-gctlIiisrriii~it~~li;li.t
ici i.cs(iriii(o Ilic 1Eiirigarinir t.ciryirc[i ciaticcl nll rvcii-k(III!tic:Ilfir-rxgc
1-Iei~i(licnictl (1i;ilIliiiig;-ir-\vas coiisii!cr.itigwlicllicr Ici Iir.itigIlic
Syslerii.
(1is~u~ic \icTcircIlic 1rilci.ii;iliciitiIoiii'Iuf J iislicc (1C.1) :is Ilie ~it.c~ini-;ilinri
tlivet-t tzc D:III~I~~ cCI~I~~[I~IcI~. 011 19 AII~IIS2 ~992, Ilic Idiirigni~irirIiII-iiiie
Mi tiislerdefitiitely proli(~sctl ((1C;l.cclio-Slrivaki; IIi:iilic Iwo 1i;irtiesbritig Ille
case tiy curisclrt IicToi~ {lit:ICJ. 'I'lic Cxcclio-Slov:il{ l'i+iiiic btitiister
resl)oiitlctlori23 Scptciiilicr./1)92 111n Iic wtiiilclII[-clci tlic;issis(aiicc riSrci.ctl
Iiy tlic Errl-ulicni l oiiiiiiiiiiitics, biit (lid~iot scriisc (Iic Ilirrig;i~+i;ipir-olicisnl
rcgaidirig tlic ICJ. Ilc also slnlctl ~Iiriltlic "lii~riv3siori:s ilt~liiticiir"ijilsi.a
riilfilliiicntor ille "slillcxistiiig" 1977 'I'reaty ,cc~ii(crirlii~ gist Ilicr-cwciul~l tic
rici "tlivcrsiriti" or ihe IIniiii\)c, aiirl tlic jilniitictl si~i~st~~t~:tio iv~~i11tI1101
iiifr.irigetlicIci+ri(ot-irirllcge.i(y(if 1liiiig:ir.y. Rritlicin,icclairticil !Ilalil ivoill~l
iiici-cly1carI to Ilic ilse of TIccstairi aiiioliiilor ivatci-, as frir.csccti'tiytlie 1977
'I'r-cal. [ri. ?'lie Pririle M i~iisterof Slovakiavisi tccl Dutlripcst oii 8 Scpiciiil~ei. 1992
aiitl agrectl wilIi Iiis 1lu~igariari çoiiiilcr~inr-L Iliat riegt~iinlitiris sliciiill;ir.t
IICI.~VCC t11c~~iiiiistrics of forcigii :IU~~I,S 011 [IIC 11ossil1lcII~~II(~:Io ~f [IIC
Ii.iI:ilcinafCoiiiri~illec, as Ii:itl Iiccii sirggcslecl cal-licr- Iiy , llie I~rii+cqicaii
Corii~irissirit~. Th livo 1'1-iii1Mi~~istcrs also t;iIkccl nl~~~~i i11c IIIII~I~~
accepiarice of tlijiirisdic~iori of lj~e1lilel.ii:iliotialCoi11.lf Jiislice. 1~oIlow ig
!Ilal, or128 Sepleiliber 1992 LEicFE~rrignrin Pri~iie M iriisler.~iro~~osct(ci liis
CzccIi~i-Sloviik coiiiilcr.lifiiii ri Icltcr. iicgolia(iciiis otitlic ri~;iiriiI;cfo lit
hi l;i(ci.al uiiiriiillce.
17. I'rcili:rliIi~csliciricliii siiiii(iFiiirig:ii~isil:iic~iic*iiti flirliirss:iliriii;t
wisli (ifSlic C;rivci.ii~iiciiO I I I I S C C I 1 I I 1 1'1-iic
blitiistci tirIJic (7~c~.liri-.SIov;ili-rIci;iI(;civct~iiriiciixciit;iiio(IicrIcilci cir2
Oc~ol~cr1992 [O IIW1Iii[~gai.iat1~'1-iltii~lii~is!cr. lc 1ci~er:~~r1 ~I;ss:~lis~x.tio~~
\vi[11tl~ci.exli~~es(s ~f1Ii111ga1 (y1ciilci-i[l(oilcgolialiot~s OII ~IICt~ifii~iI;~ic[IIC
tIil;~lcralC~~IIIII~~~C WCi,lli l+cg:iiIo (11cIr~lcrii:~ii(~ii:~Ol IIIof JIIS~~L liC,
\vi.otc IIinlie still ~it.cfcr-i.cirllic nssisi:i(ililic Etlt.cyicnri :t~ii~iiiirriiIic.lc
sttggcslerl lliriiiriy ~iegoti;ilioititi1ii.iiigitiIlic cnsc Iir.flii-Ific Coiii t wc)iiIcJ
iakc s very Iriiig tiriic, Iiccnitsc of clcl;iys caiisc~t Iiy tloriicsiic ~)tc~cctIiir~cs
rctlt~ir,ccly tlicCzccli arirlSlovrikcoiisiiritiiciri,liritvevcr. Iic(liirioic.uliIicilly
t~cfiiscI11ej~~t.isclicli~~C~I^lle COIII1.
1 'flic iicgutinlio[is[iftlic iiiiiiisll-EIT loi-cigri;iTCnii.tsc~okptnc-c iii I1i.;igiic
<ui 13 Oçii>l~cr 1992. l'lit Ezccliii-~lov;ik dclcgnliiiii wns slill iiiiwilliiiLi)
:iccepl Uiecoliditi~)~ o~f ElleVicc-lit-csidcill[if {lieCoiiiiiiiçsirirtifIlic Eiri.cilic;iii
Coliitiiii~iiticsi-e., (liesiis~icrisii~r~Ç uiiilatel-al1iienst11-esC. riliscqrir~iy, \lie
Iwci delegatiriris rlid iiot critiie iu nriy agr-ccriieiii. 'I'liisiiriwiIlirigCzeclio-
SIovtik~icisiiioii was i.criffii~iii\Iy tlic "riolc vcrli:ilc" r~f tlicCzccliu-Sloviik
GCIV~~IIIII~lIiI a~,iilcl vcr to ~IICAr~bassaclur of ~ficI Ii~i~gn~-ia R~ci~JL~icII[I
13t.ngiic o~i 2 1 Oclolier- 1 Y 92. At tlic irilcs-govci.iiiiicr;il ~icgci(i:it iisiil
13r.iissclsoii 22 Oc.(olicr t992, cfi;iiscrlI)y Ilic i.clit.csci;iitiivrif lic: L;,C
Cr)ritissiori,niiiii~int eslrililisIii~tllctrilnlcr-:il ex1ierl ciiiiiiiillec,(lCzeclio-
Slovak Govet-tiriiciilrigairirc-jcclctltlie iiiornloi.iiiioi~clivci-siciii.Fvlc;iriivIiile
Ilic wrirks of ciiltiiigIlirriiiplinrid rlivcr-siciriÇJtlic I~nriiil~cwci-c iii ac~iinl
OIIC.I~iw, 19. Acccil-dirig to 1-liiilgacinreixlieris, if Czcclio-SIciv:ikin follows IJii.origli
ivii.Ii Ilic"1irovisiori;iIsolii iori" , ir-r~cvci.sil~lcliiiiagc to (lie cc.iilrigy aiicl
crivii*oiiriiei~tnresources ci.itlic rcgiori.wilI ocvur. 'I'ficpi-csciilly availnlilc n~itl
1iolerilin1clsiiikiiig walet. rcservcs of rtiillioiis (if~ierl~~lcarc ~lii~calciictl.T11e
vcgclriIioi~ atid faiiiia or 1lic rcgiciii 3i.c ciitlatigct-ctl Iiy ~legi.ntlatori aiitl
cxliiiclioii, Mot-covcr, iriiiiiiiicc;il;isrvcil,len11 ticcitrIo tlic litiliiilioii tliic
~o I.irir-ragegiid tlaiiis. 'I'licsiatiil (iflycr~aiii l)al'(sor [lie cililiariktiicil~
c;lriilriOe cuiisidc.i-et1safc agniiisl enr+tlirlii,cis11~1are likcty lrcrc.
20, 'I'lic clivcr-siciii of ~lic IS;ir~irlicvicil:itcs IIiiiig:ir-i:xiivct.cigti~y ;iritl
ci-il i~giiy. ,1IicI1;iiiiil.i~isaiiiilciiinticitinIrivetwliic-11lilici'Icavitig
illc ai-caof Di-atislavn Iicco~iicsa bol-dci. r+ivctI*cliilcciiIlittigiir-aiirCi.cclio--
Slrivakia. 'Tliiis,lliis scctioii or ~lic Ilri[izrlictiiilililr~cadics Ilic ar-c:i of
S(iirovo, is iiilder.llic~crritori;iljiirisdic.!ioior i tictivcistritcs. Alrlioiigii [lie
iiini~icriizcscoTiiavigatirirz,"'l'nlweg," rlivirlcsiiicjrir-istlictioriIiclwee~i(lie(wu
siales, orlestatc riiny rioi~iriilatci-nllclisliosc of tliat~iat-t(I Clic i-iver*,wiiicli
wtiiild otlieiwise bc iiiidci. ils jiir.isrlicliciii, lt:tll~c,I iypc f~f ~)a~~r~llcl
s~vei-eigrily exislir avcr Illerivcr, as r.cllecterl,nIiinrigullici.rigi.eeiiicritsi~i(lie
1921 I'soiocul ol tlie Darccltiii;i CotiTct+crice. Ctriisctlticti~ly, wliile a slatc
iiiay, iiidcccl, cli:irigc ~lic coiirsc tif n ~+ivci vliicli is srilcty iiridei.ils
jiii-isdicliclrri srarc riltrstiiottft3[lie satiic witli a sccliorl ivIiicliscr-ves as a
I~cii'cIebrelweeri lwo states. 13er.;iztsc2ic cliver+sicioir tlicD;i[iiilieoii Stcivnk
tc~,r+itr~ r.ould aPTcc( tlic~ic~i'lioi f (fie1-ivercui-i-critlsci'viiig ris[lie borrlei-,
flic tliversiciiclear.lyviola!cs 1Iiirigar+ias~tiivcr-eigtiiriiirter-r-iltir-iritcgr-ily.
2 1. 'I'lictlivcrsiriiior Ilic Il:i~iiil)viol:ilcs Ilic ~iriivisiriicit'ille 1917 1'ni.i~
cc y erg t II ICI 01 of iI I l~tlrs. Acciirdi~ig
tri Art. 1 ,par. 4 (b) or the 1947 'Treaty , "\.illii-rniiEerIiciweeii 1-liiiignl-yiiiitl
C:zcc:lici-Slovaki i;iIici-cliy~.cslrii.lis ilexistctl or1 Jriiiii:ii.y1, 1938" srtl).jcct
tria fcw riiiiiuiexceptioiis (iri ractIliallerrilory, riiciiigt31.alisl;ivoti (lie i-iglrl
i.ivcitiairkwliese fsci siiwi 1.1 z1iiilatcr.atlivcrsiori rif 11icUaiiiilic wurild Ziccai4r-icd oiil o~iC7,eçlio-Slovk a let+rilory). W il11tlrcse iiiiilcicxcc~iliosis, (lie
1938 i)cii4(Ier wsere ideiiilcnt wi tIitlicisc tlinlIincI Iiccri rlc~crriiirirrlIiy llic 1920
'I'I-inrio1 1eace 'i'reaty. Açc~irç iiig lo Art. 27, 1i;ir.4 oftllc 'I'rinrioiinPcace
'I're:ity, iiie bol-dcï uF tliiiigni-y is "le rrilirs 1ii.iricip:iliic riavigaiioli du
~~aiiiilio~~. ri 1, par. 4 (c) of (lie ParisPence 'i'renty iiit~esEi-i~~iii~t~ic SI iglil
cfcvial iciiisor [lie Eioi.clcrs ri-oiii1Y38 Iirirtlcrs dcfiiics ilic Iioi-dci* iil Ilic sniiic
iiisrtiicr, as ducs Ai.t. 2, ~);ii=(3) oCtlic bilateral Trc:ily uii Ilegiilslioii of tlic
licgiriieof Slalc Uoi.rIcrs of 1956 belwccri Czcclici-Slovnkiri ailcl 1-1ii1igni.yA . s
riricd iii tlie SI:iteiiierlt (if f7;icts, ~ioirit 14, Ilic i-el~rcscii liivt* of Cxcclici-
Sliivnkie iii tlic Ilniiiilic Ctiliitliissirili iiifoi.iiiciIlic Criiiitriissiiiii's iiic1iilici.s 1
Ilixt prcçiscly at (Iiis scc(iciei ri[ tlic r-ivci. Ilic Ilniiiilic woiiltl tic! ilivci.lcr1.
Ac:crir.tliiigto Art. 3, pr. (1) (ru 11ic 1Y56 13i1a1cr~ 11'i~:iiy rirll3c1t.tlcts,oiity
rinliiral clintigcs iii [ticwalci-i-oirt.sc of 11i~~i.ivciqwoiil(t li:ivc :II\;illcr.irigcl'f'cc.(
oti (Iic burdciIitie. Ariy cli;iiigc Ilinl wnrilcl ~.csiil[iii [.lie altcrnliori riP Ilic
11oi.tfcrliiiewoiilrl Iiave to lie.Iiy Ilic iiiii~ii:iccirisciit or I~iEli P;irlics. Siiicc iri
clic c:isc of Zlielilniiiic~l~livrri~sioii,110 tiiiiliincti[isc~i~ cxists, ilic Iiciixlcrwcizild
,.
~'ciiiniiias ZlicI)rcsc~it ivnici- coiii'sc rcg;it~rlIcss of clivci.siciii. 1lic ~livci.siciii,
Irciwcvct., woiild ziI(ci*tlic cli:ii-nclrrcif (IicIicirdcr-cotiililc(c1y Iiccaiise 11ic iiiairl
ctiiii-SCof ~i;ivig;i!iuiiwu~rlcl rio Iorigcr ctirt-clntc ivitlitlic 1ioi.~Icriiie, delsri vilig
IIiirigary of its Inwfril jiirisdiclic~ii ovcr' n riirijos ccoiioiiiic lifel iiic. Clcarl y,
!lie I'arlies, 1tl)oii sigriiiig ihc.'I'r-caiy iri 1956, iievci. tilt-cs:iwa~iy iiiil:iwTril,
~~~~ilakvcd 11a11g ici tl~ 1i13i[1coi~rscuf [iavig;i~io~i (~i{IIC 13n1il1I~.
22. Czecliu-Sloviikin's "lit.civisiuiinl soltrtiori" irifr-iiigcs ils 1)ilaIei-al
Agr.eeliiciiI wi~liI.Iiiiigary ori Ilic Maiiagciiierit OP ~V~~ci~-Si oif~Il(~.cr~ics
JVnl.crs, ctiiicl~idctl iii 1976. Açcor-~li~ig (O Ar.1. ., ~i:ir'.1 rif ilic Agi.ceiiiciil,
(fie Iwu sfritcsagr-eeIliril"(a} ... wi2lioiil iiiiitiircoiisciit tlicy clri i~ril:ikc aiiy
actiu~i iiitlie ~tiaiiagcrticrilof w:itcr-sitliolics (Iiritwoiild ir~ilnvoiii-;11,iIiy 12ci.lei.c
wiili Ilic ilii~iiinyl tlctcritiirictlcoeiclitici~isof tlic wai CI-sarid (II) ... Iticy [iikc
11s; uf ~+ivei-lici ls. iiisiicli :i i~i:iiiiicllinl!Iicy di, iiot r:iiisc <I;iiii;igcsIo c;icli
~llici.". Accui.rliiig lo Aini. 4, pas. 3, "a pi+ecc<liiig al~l)i-uvn s reiliiiied Iiy
IrtitliI'ailies, iii ;lçcortlnricc willi llicii.duriics ticlegal 1-irles foi-nii ~ciiciii of
in;iiingc.iiiciiIIlin! iuoiild i-cs~it!iriIlic :iIlc~.;ilir~~if tllc litieor- cli:ti.:ic.icuf tlie
Skile borders". l'litis, clciii-y, ;iiiy ~iiiilntci:ilacliiiii I)yei tliei- 1liiiigni.y or
Czcclio-Slovakia is iriilnwl'rll.23. '~IIc tlive~*sio ~~f ~IIC ~.ivci.locs coiiros~ii iviiliilic IIIICS SC[ foi 111i11
IIE 111t111ihtcra C Io~~vc~~kitc~ o~~iiccr*~~irIiIICIItgi~iic or N:i~igi1Ii011 011 ~fic
II;itiiilic, coriçlritlcciii Iielgi-a(1c oti 1U Aiig~lsi 1948. Al [IIC titm of tliis
C'oiiveiititir~'csoiicltisiori, ilie~~ossiljiliiyIlial s shlc wtiiild tli'verl(lie llaiirilie
~ii~ila~ecalls ycciiictl cciiiililelcy irii~iossiblc. Cotisctli~ctil l, 'lic Colivciitiori
clcics ~iotccitil:iiin sliccific ,~ii.diiliitioii;rg:ii~istJivct'çiriii.Art. 3 ~ii+r~virlcs,
Iiciwever., tli;i("siri(cs iiiay witliiri IIieir owrijiii-iscliClioiiitti~lcr.t;iivot-ksfoi.
tlic iii;iiiitciiaiicciC ii:ivig;itiori,Ilic cxcciit ioii (if .rvliic.Iiis iicc*cssit;ilctIiy
iri.gciil;i[itiiriftir+csccriir+ciiiiisl~riccs.''Art. 5 :ilst1~c.iliiii.s.si2ristrirriiisiili
I6it:I.l:iiiirlCr iriiiiiissioriif Ilitiywisliitir:ir.r.yoiiiivorks. ivliilc Ari. H lil;iccs
\~i~!ci +lielI;~in~licC~~i~t[~iissi(iijii't+is(Iidi(111llicC~I- yrir~goiit of :IIIIVOI-k s II
-.
Ilic Uz[iiilic. Ilic irii~iic.:itiri(3f (I~CSÇ I)I.I)Y~S~~IISi.sI11:11 :IC'IIIIII~IC~~~IIIOI
~i~iilzlcn~lly(livc1.1f11c lI:i11~11ir..
211. <['tic"lit.ovisiuii;iistilitli{)ii"viul:ilcs ilhci.tilniiilliiiicililcs oI'cilstuiiiar.y
i~ilcriialiciiinlIAWllinl e.egiil;ilcilic slnliis niitliitiliz:i~iolitir ttniisliiiii11tl:ii.y
m .
ctivir'oriiiie1ila1rcstiitr.ces siicli as irilci-iin1io1i;ii.ivcr.s. IIic "li[civisici[ial
soliitioti" ~ttuiildrlc~ii.ivcIliiiig:ii-yriT ils diic slinr-c or wnlcr-qii:iri(ity, w;iIer-
t111;ily ~IN I1uiverpuk~iii:~l ~IN IVC)~I! si~11s~a111 ~yi;iilIiip:~ir [lie131ity ~IUI
rl~ai~tily or otlier ii;iiiii+r*estiirrAccs si,icli riiliefor.cslsof lfiefio1~~ 11.~:1,(lie
gr.ii~iticl atei-r-esct-vcs riricltfle geilclic divci-sity of tlicr-cgicli~ ,iilUTivliicfi
SI t I I I I V I II vro~sc. Aççortliiig [O wrIl cs(ab1 islictl
~u~iric:i~) niil riilcs (ifiiitcrti;iIiriiictivir-oiiriiciii~l~w, :iriyslatc :ictaCrcctiiig
a ti-niisliouridri~~1y-esoiircciiiiist tic iiictiiiforiiiiiywii IIcci.i:iiripi-iriciplcs niitl
i-rilcsof ciislorii:ii-yiriici-ii:itiotinllnw. A disçtissiciii of Ilirisc rclev;irit tu
Cxcciici-Slovakia's"lir'civisiciii:isIciliitirlri" Trilows.
25. Statcs s1i;ill zii;iiiittiiccosyslcriis nII(! I-cn tctl ccriIogic;il IH.UCCSSCS
csscii(i:ilfor focirl~iruductioii.l~clillli a~irlollictv risliccts(irli~iiiitisirrvivnl a[id
siistniilableclevelol)iiieiit of ~hc I cgioii iii wliicli (lieIi~iiiislioiiti<l:~iycsoiit~ccs
21-c ici be Criiirid. Scvci-al ctocrtriieii~sr-cficciirig tlic iritciilicriis of i.lic
irilei.iinlio~incloriiriiuiii~ctii~tairtliisritiig;itin~i: Pi.iiicililcs I-3 r)TtlicWoi.Ic1
C:li;ir.lef-r-Nature aclnptcrl Iiy tlic Gcrici.alAssciillily of tlic Uiiitcrl Nrilioiis
(UN Ge1icr;ilAsseiii1)Iy1~esriliif.inrN i o. 3717 ndoliicd riii28 Oclcilici. 1982,
" Wl)r.lil Cltnr-ter Tor- Nnliirnc"). 1'1-iticil~lc 3 or Itic Leg;il IJi.iiiciljlcs roin Eiivicuiiiiieiilal I'rolectioii rrilriSrisl;iiri;ililcI3cvcl~ip1iic1iI Adoliletl Iry tlic
Wot.1~ 1tiiiiiriissiori nrl tlriviro~iiiici~l n[i(l Ilcvclo~iii~eii~ Expcin stGi'ciiili riil
Erivit-oiiiiieiiln Llaw (" Ex~~ei-1G s i.oiil-i"),nrid nrEiclc 5 of ilie lUCN D~'art
Çaven;irit ori E~ivirriririic n~ifCoiisei.v;llioii aritl Srrs tiririlileUse of Nahiral
Resou~~ce s"IUCN Dtnft"). 'ffie clcvaslliliiig 'errcc(s oT Ilie "lit-ovisiorial
soliitioii" wIiicI1 wtiiilrl111-cn tke li [c ssuyiliortirigsyslc[iis riT tlie rcgiori Yiolate
T-l~iiigtiry's ciglil lo linvc iiriirii1i;iiincdjiii+isrlictioiiovc.i4 iliosc csscrilial
ccusysteriis niid r.eInleciccolugic I-inoccsses.
2fi. States :II.C IIIK!C~ :I di~[y 10 CIIS~I~C IIIC SIII.V~V:I~ ;I~ILI ~)i~i~i~loic(11e
coriservntiriii iii (Iieir-riaiiir+nl listiilaof raitria :iiitIloi.:~.iri ~i;-ir-lictililicisc
wliiclr arc idarc, c~iclciiiicor. ciicl;irigci-crl. EXIIC [I Gr-u\~l) I~i.ii~cii~[c (II), 111~
World C11aric1 -or N;I~\II.c l'~.it~ciplc 3F atid IUCN Drart A11. .5 ptovklc
~IIII~KII~ Tor tlic wirlc-slir.c;irl ;iccclil;iiic~cor lliis I'ti~icililc. Slildics li:ivc
rlerriotislratcd ilini Ilic"lii.ovisici~i;lIsolr~liriii" woii11I cniisc ~lictlisnyi~~c~r;iiicc
(iïsliccies cliversity atirlgcric(ic val-iclics, atid tlini cvc11lii;iIlycigllly or tii~icty
pcr-cctitof ilic firit.anrirlI';iiiriwtiriltl vat~isli.
27. Slntcs sltnll co-oyicr:i(c iti gciritl kiiili i~i ilir. iii~~ilciiicti~a~iot~of (tic
~~ririciptes iiffec~iiig ir-;iiisliriiiiidriSI-S. '1 Cli:iiter t}T ~lic Uliitctl
Nri~iutis, ctrsloriirii-yiiilci-ii;itiori;Inw niid sevci4:il Iiilnlc~.:il;iri~I iiitila-ci+;il
li,catics biridiiig ori Çzcçlio-Slovakin atid I1iirigat.y i~liligc IIirsc çciiiiilrics10
iicgntiatc ~II go(~il fait!\ ~IIIL ~II n spii-it or co-ol~c~~ia o[~, (1 r 1~11 [ici1a[-
i~~ipoi-triricc aeirl lit-iorily is ci-cilicrnlio niiitl :il cip(itiiizi~ig risc or n
ti-;irishoitriclar-yiinl~iril i+csriiii+cb(11- ~i~~cvciiliiig 01. ;iii:iliiig:i ii.;iiisrinliori:iI
.m
c~ivi~.o~i~~ic~~(nI irllct-rc~.c~ii*c. 1 tlti~y rcq\iii~cs siitbIict)-(~~)c~.rilio i1~ {IIP
[)IT,VCII~~OII of clis1)11lcs,:IS ive11 ;is in !!IC sctll iiig of clis~)~i!t:s. 'l'lic l~kc
I,niic~ux Aibitrnliori lligliigli[ctl(tic pni'ticiilrir. i~ii~iorifirritçiiolici-3tioii iIItlic
ilse ol watcrs 01 (211irltc~.t~ntiol~nW;I~CI.LOIII~SC, S~I.CSS~II~111c ~111 tr stnles lo
çoc~pei~al ititiifiiritniriiilIIIi.esloririg Ilicii-reasorinlilc niid cl111italilc lise or iri
ccitriitcractii~g ti~;iiislioiiiic[rciivit-ciiiiiic~il;iiiitcr.lCi.c;icc. Eliiiigrir+ylins liceii
ririci corztirilles Irr lie i.c:i~ly lo slntl tircaiiirzgTri! iiegrili;iiuris witli
CTeclirj-Slovakia uri liow (O r-cço[içilc tlic cti[ifictitig sets iiI iritcr~cs~s irr
ncctiirlaticc ~villi ititcriiniiciii;Inw.1 ZR. Statcs slialli~sct i~nrisl~ciriii~lcc-yourccs iria rcasotialilc alid erliiitaIilc
III~IIII~wikh a vimv io gl[:~i~~iiqi)ti~i~nI1~tiIi7.atiolhel-cofcot~sister~t %vitIlthe
arlecluateprtitcctioti of tlic r;i~isbriiinrlaryrcsoiircc. A ririiiil-icroCrises a~id
clacirriieiitsiridicnliv~J Tiistoii~;iriritcrr~atio~iallaw II;IY cCo~~lailicd1.1tis uiy
of stateshi iisc ~i*aiisboiiiiclarresoziincc sia reasoriablc a11d cqkiilal~lciiiairricr.
171cPcriilni~ciil C(1ii1.of Iii(cr-iialioriaJtisticc iiiilic liiver Otlcin cnsc [7i+si
estalilisliedtlle 1)riiicillof etluitriblc irtilizatioof rivcr-s,siriiirig r11:"[tjliis
cotiiriliiriiof iiile~.esliiia iirivignble river-i~ccuiiicst2ic liasis of a ctiiiiriioii
lcgal rigllt, tIie csse~itial fcnlures ri[ wliicli arc tlie 1icr.rcct cclilglity of al1
ril~nriaristaics iiitliciist:(if lie wliolc cour-sc uf llic i.ivcr.." At'[.5 US[lie
I
1I,C Ilraft uiitlie Law of Noii-ii:ivig;îtirilinlUscs of 1~i(er~[i;ilirir:i;itei,cc~iics
("ILC Drrifi") sliccificnlly i~ictirlcs tliis Pritici~ilcctili(li[ig s1:ilciii iisc a
r.c;isti~i;ilriricctlit;it)lcsIi:i1.cofIlic \v:itt-sof riiiritcrri:i!lc~il ;ilei'cr)iir-se.
Accciiclirig tciciislo~iiaiid lir-:iklicc,:i1-cnsriti;ili;iiiccqiiil:i[ifc s1i;iriti llic
Iictiericialiises of (Iic wntcr-s of aii iti(ci.iintioti:ilclt-;iiiI1;1sitb~I1oi1lcIIC
Iciiil I lilt o Il ICVI 'l'lieiriilitii.l;tcTc(Iicse ctiiicc~iis
Ii:isbeeri sii-esseclitiEtii-ullci[iiilcCo[ivciiticiiiuii tlic I~i~olcç~ici;iti(lUse of
7'1nrisliuiiiic1:iWyritcrctiiit-scsarid Iritci~~i:itir;iakcs' At-[.2, picyi;ii~ilrlridci-
(Iicriiisjiiceof ilicUN Ecu~iniiiic Coitiiirissiuri for Eiircilie. ?'lit Co~iveiitioii
~iulu111y obliges[IIC lJartiestn ra[iu~~a l~I~II~~c~II~I~~,)iitnlso 10 a lise1vliic11
is ecoIogicaEI y soilrici,criiisci-vcs ilie writcl- resoiiixcs n ricl ~irotects Ilie
eriviroiiirreiit.If coiiflict rii.iscsbclnlcc[~iscs or iiiiir~tcrtiaiiciril atercuurse
Ille ILC DI-aft Art. 10 par. 2 stales 1Ii:itil lialn [ic i-cstilvcd\vi[llrcfcr.ciice
Io (liese faclors "s~iccirilrcg31.dbcitig giveii io,tlie recliiii.ctiieriol vitnl
.<
lit~tii:r~ecds".
29. Stritcs plaiiriiiigtu c:i~-ty oirl or pcriiiil acZivitics wliicli iiiay elil:iil ri
Ira~isbou~idaryi~itei.fererice or a sigiiificati1 risk ~lierctifwilli Ilic rcnsoiiable
niid eqiiitablc iisc OS a It-arisbouiidary ~ialur-ali-esoirr-cor wliicli iiiay clilaila
Iiailsbouiidriry eiiviroi~rireriiairr(crfere~icc ciiisirigsigni ticaiil adverse eCCccls
i~i miarc3 under Illejiirisdicliuiiof ai~o~lie rlate siirill provide tliat State witli
ti~iicl riolificnlioii. Siicli iiciifica(ioii slinllbc riccoritliarrictIiy nvai1;ililc
lccliriicnl(lalanritliiifor~ii iii(JI-iciin cilnlllclliciiolificd sl:i!iIo cv:iunlc
tlicpossible cPrecls or tlic~ilarliietriieristercs. Accurtlirig triArt. 12 (il [lie
ILC Dr+;li ais wcll ns At.[.3 !iIille ESI'OO Coiivcritioii wliicli e~iibcidicsgeiie~msiirli~erri;itioiinllnw iii cnscor dnriis aiitlarge tcset-voir-s, the Party of
or-ig i (Czeclio-Slovnkia) Csiindcr 3 rIuty 10 iiotifywlie~i tlial rictivily istikely
lo caiise a sigiiificaiitadverse traiisbotiiiclary iiii~isct. Czeclio-Slbvakia lias
Iiever provided Hitrignry wiUi npproprililely detailecf notice 1111-oiig lificial
cliaiiiielsof ilsplniiiictlactioiis. Nor lins~zcclio-~lowkiaomcially providecl
1.Ii11ignr w-iai t (ccli[iicnldriiaanrl i~ifurriintiorio nssess tlic iiil~laiiiagc tliat
will occur lipori iiiipleiiieiilnio~iof iIic "li~+ovisio~is nlliitiori".
30. CoiisiiltalioiissilaIII)c IicldiiigootIfaitli, lilioii rccliicsl:ilari caidy singc
Iicl.~vccriIlle iicilifyitslnlc nricl11icpciierilinlly or siclii:~Ilal'fcclcclsiale willi
n view tu art-ivirigai ail ctliti1;iliIc~~csc~l~iii~oi~111~siliiatir)tl. Dl~l-illI~ICSC
çi~iiçiillalicirs>odli Lslcs riirisirigood fnil2i13;iyclilci,cg;ir.tcitlic~'iglilsaiid
Icgiliiiinlc iiitcics(s of (Iir:riltici- State. 'll~r vo~~stiliaiiot~sIII~ISIco~~si~lcr
~~rissihle aller-ii;ilivcs10 (Irc ~it'ol~oscrl ivily, iIICIIIi(I~g ll~c ~1~1-actio11
alicr+iialie aiirl~iossiEilIelIcasiirestriiiiiligalc ;ilil)r-cci:ztirlvei.seeffecls. As
siaied i~iille LakcLaiioiixAr-liiir-aiioti;,il tliorigliIlieoliig:itici11 1cotisiit clocs
iiol itiipy asioliligat ioti10 t.c,.icliagr.cciiicri"ir dit!1sir] 011i1gc tlic Slntc 10
~iiirsiic [ticc.o~iszil!ntiriiss far as ~iossiblc iviiliri vicw ((1cciriclrrtli[iari
agreeiiieril." IIiiiigaiqylias ;~(tcrtiliieiriguotl-rait11 Io coiisiiltwitti Llicaiiii oc
1.esc1 1ig aii ngr.eenieirl;C7,ecIio-Slovakialins t-cfitsctl.
31. States slinll cake ~ii+ccaiilio~inry iiieasures Ici ;iiiticilin(c, III-evciit or
tiiiliiliiizc daiilage Io Uieir. tra~isbou~idriryr.essiiiccs niid ~iiitig;ilesdverse
cCCccts. 1Vlier.c~1ie1-a ere 11ircalsof scrioiis or ir-r+cvci~silirIaiiinge, lack of
fttllscie~iiific cei.lnirilsliatl riut lieiisccI as a ic;isuri li~ pr~.slpririiiigsuçli
rileasures. Arl. 2, par;ige.;rlil5i (ti)of llic Cri~ivcriticiiiii tlie Prulccliori a~id
Use uT Tra~isbo\iriclacyWaierçoiir-ses nrid Iiilcriirioii;ilLakes, ntlol~iedin
IIeIsiliki or1 17 Marc11 1992, ris well as ilic IUCN Di.riit Ail. G nrid tlie
DriiiitIariJ Report, Art. 10, pt.ovidc srililioi.lCuc ilie uliligaiiori iii geiieral
iii(crrintiona1eriviruiiriicrilaInw lo apply tiicpr.eçaii(iririai~ii+iiicilicoprutect
iili+a~isboliriclrirresotir+cc. 'I'liisdriiy lias cx(reiiic iiiiprislriiiceiri ilclisl~ute
wliere aie daiziagetlireateiiii~g 1-Iii~igaryis irrepar*;zblcarid eIioriliuus.
32.
A Stalr: is rcspo~isiblc tiiidcr iiiicriraticirinlInw foi. ;i Itr-eacll or ari
iritc~.~ialioii alligtiliolirel;i(iiito LIielise of n ~irihrrnlscsourcc nriclisririçIerail obligatioii triccn.i;ctllc iritcrrialiorially ivroiigl'tilnet, i-e-establisli the
silriaiioriwliicIiwcililrlIi:ivccxistctl if tIieac( Iinti iicitrikcii1il:iccnrid~wc~vide
coiiipeiisaiioii Tor ilieIiari~iwliicIi i-csuliedIsoiii lliewivtigriil act. '~iiiiilary,
s(;itesn1-e Iiouiid(ri tlie fi~~idnii~cillsiilile sirrer-etrio irfnlie~rrriiiiorrlnedns.
'I'liiriilciiiiplics tlicdtity IIOIto cniise sigiiificaii(Iini.iiIririflicrwatcrcoiirse
stntcs i~i riiiyrii;iIiiier'I'licscp~.iriciliIesIiavc beeii relleclecl iiia iiittibcr of
decisioiis aiid dociiiiieiiis~Iuririg IEieIast fiTtyyews iri~licalr ilgils wide siiread
acccp(aiice n~id 1cgaIsigiiifica~icc. Tlie jiitlgiiicri(ifIlic IIilcr11:ioiirilCuii1.l
ciCJitsIirc iritlicCoi.riiClin~iticl casc ili 194'4, ilic'1'1-:\iliiiclict-ar.liilnwarvl
iri 1941, AI.!..7 riT tlirr 11,C Dt.nlt, 1'1~iii~iliI cri. 21 of Ific Slocklicilrii
ll~cl~r~~~i~l~ 't~,i~ici~~2l1s:111t22 (f 111cLVot.1~ C1I~:IIIC I~r N~IIII c. a1~1 1110st
1~ccc11~ liy I'I-~IIc~~ 15~of (IICIZioIIcc.lar+atio~ fil ~IIL~oI~~~~ IllisII:IcIIC~~)[C.
As tlciiiriiisli*ntici(licalicivc lia[-agi-alilis,(Iic"111.ovisioiiasItiltiori"viol ntcs
n ~ii~iiiber(-ifC~ccliri-S1ovnki;i'sititct.rintiorinI lcgnl cililig:iticii:ilid c.;iriscs
cxac~ly iliat lypc or ~i~~c~liil)iI~i:rtl~i.
33. Czccliri-Sluvakia cgiitlot clriiiti (liai ~lic "pi'rivixiciri;sol iiio~i" gocs 110
IUrtlici.tliririthegcints arirl cililigatiritis siiitlie--liy iiciivICIniirialeil--'I'I-eaty
(if 1977. Ar-giiirig11131llic "pr-rivisiciii;loliitiori" is a 1iiet.et-cnlizatiorof (lie
19771-1-eaiy flicsiii (lie Iacc or r-c;ilily. Firs~Iy, ~lic 1977 'I'rcatydocs ~iol
exisl aiiy luiigel-; ilsiri~~ifcriic~i~ntilciriiiiiiin~edeffective25 May 1992. Ariy
acliuri liased oiimi nIlcgct1Irc:iryiniist bc cva1iiaicrI031 tlicIiiisisof cit.licrs-~ilcs
itifur .c Iiclwccii Ili11ig;ii.aiid Czcclio-Sluvnkin. As slt.csscr1ni~civc,ricitlici
I~ ailral us t11iItc11 1I'C~~~CS iii ~OI.CC IIC~~VCC 1III a11d
Czeçlio-Slovakia, rior getier-al iiitc~.riatioiinlInw grivci-tiifig tlic ji[.otcctiori,
iiiai~itcii;iiicc arid iisc of Ir-ziiisiit~~ial ii;ilalir r.estjtii.ccs czililes
Czcclio-Sl~ivakia 10 t1ivc1.tlic U:iiritiliciiitoitskt-ritor-y williciiii!Piecxliress
cririsciilof 1-1irrig:iry.Sccriridly, cvcri if 1-i~-r~visiroifitlic 1977 'I'i.cal.ywci-e
slilla1-iplicable, Ilic "~irhwvisioii~ slolritiori"~voiilrllic iii cotifliclwilli tlictii.
'Ilir:1977 '1-~+ ca1j:il;iticcclt-iglitmit1 cliilics (II Iiotlsl:itcs.;ittciii~ilirigtri
estal~lisl~lt~alcrial eq~i:dity i11[lie cor~sti+\~ctiua ~icl o~~cr:i w!n p11;1se (2 ~IK
~)rojecl. Tlie ~i;iiIic11x1 Io ngi+cc uj-roiievei-y sig~iil?c:iritsiçl~;~licy Ii:ir(o
~ICVC~ LOl~c~)I;II If u11craLio1j1 oii~[ly NILI i~iii~)Ie~iic~it~tiisi~ig dct~~ilc~l
,-
t~ir:cliniiisrrTor- 1inriiiriiiiz;ilirofiiiitcrcsls 1lic I~cricliIsUT tlic o~~crrditiii
wriiilrlhave acci-ircc1liitilioituiia[y lu bol11 ~i;ii'tEcs'I'licBar1-;kge Syslcriiwas desigriecl lo be tilricerl iii ccrtiii~i IoçrilioricfiCCcr.eiifr.oiil lic site of Ilie
"pvisio~inI suliiiiriii". 'Tlic;r.cfrjrc,clicnrfiÎlsnr-y ,?C If C~~~Iio-SIovakifi
sigrlificarilly ~i.rcjiirIiçific ter=cilurialrigllls of Iliiiignry, riglils ivlriclwoiiId
Iiave beeti eiflier.ir~iafTe~ict Ir i-egul:i~cd willi flie coriseiil of I.ltiiig:iriT tjic
1977 'Tseziy IiatIIiccii frilly irn~)Iciliciil.clrirfiiriair-e:irFytcr~rtiiri;iilcd.'Pfic
i2c(ilytiolc urflic Czcctici-SEriva ! vliri i sFtol-eigriAfhir.s, daicd 18 ikIat.cl1
1992, cotiletirlcc .lia[tlic "~ir.ovisio[insoEii[ioiiq i1 lieirigcar-r-ic tlil iriot.rlcl-
lo fiifiIl[lie 1977Tt-calyhccarisc of ilic siis~ictisicir)f csotist,iicliorioti (tic
,.
1Iliiigariaiisidc. 1liis al-gtiriiciilwoiiIrEbc iriccir-rcctcvcii if ilic l'i.c;ilitlci-ci
stitliiiÎorcc. '1.1 ~1I~CSCII111:idisc ~CIICI~;~~i~l[c~.i~:~[ioIrI:~l,II:IIIIC~(I,(IPS
rio1 riccelil tl~c 1 I i 1 way or i11Ic1-c1:itio~i :III(! ~i~~~)li~~:~ lior~
i~ifcrtialiriri;rc;ikics. 'I'liis 1il;iEillyr~criiririslr~;i~iO tlicrlisc-iissiciror tlic
ON III~CI~II~~ l:~i~ I~(I~~~r~iissi oiii~IIC l.~w {)r'1'ca~ics (sec YcarI~oolc(~f
Ilic I~I~CI~II~~ I~~:III:~{)~~~t~iissii1 ii,66, ilol,'2, 11.2If1).
1. I1iirig:ii-Icrliiçsis tlic 1701ir.trintlj~irlgc ;iiitlccl;ii-c,:l'tiiic.ciiisit!ciirig
!l~cCOII~CII~~OLIS of l!ic I1~~~~lics,
(1) Ilii~IIIC st~ c:~lIc~ ll~i~-ovisio~~ s;~li~iot~",i.c., 11~ tiivci sio11 OSIIIC
D~[UI[IC c,~~~sti(idc ~svioIa(ioii uf geiici~~l ~II~(!or ~~IICI-IIIo~~a l:hiv
siid sl~ccific jii.ovisi(iiis of I)il;i(eral a11(111ii1til;3[~1*;tre;~tics niiil
agrcciiictils,
(2) tlialC~,CCI~~-SIO~J;iI ~~:~~~~c~li:tc ~iuyccl:!Ilwot ks lli:t;I[.ai111cd :it
Ilic cciiisIrziclioOC llic"~ir~civisiciiis:oIliilici.iiircslicctivc of ivlicllict-
(lie corisIi.iic'liois iri aii arca of t11cI~nriiilicsolcl y iiiidcr-Stovnk
scivcreigrily oi-ititlic ni-ca alt~iig[tic cti~iiiiiciieclioii IIIIlle I>;irii1lie,
(4) rt~rtlrerrnuic, or.clcr+ ,lirc Io llie tir-gcricy or liis [~tnttcr., Zlic
i~niiicdiale stislicril;ic[ifwur-ks loivnrds tlic" pr-ovisiciiirilsrii~ioii s"
i~~~~)lc~~~c[~l; IIiSII~II~ tv~ Art. 4 1 , ]MI-. 1 O[' III(:S~:I~II~ [~f ~IIC
C0tit.1,if Czcc.tir~-Slciviiki~;iciiiscrilsIo tlic Cotrrt's j~~risdi~lio~~. 23 1
35. 1-ItiiigarywilI siiliii~ilo [lieCoiirt as carly as ~~ossil~l eiIIiieccssary
dociiiiieiiistli:irarer.crcrr+edlo iiltliisAp1iIicaticirlIfiini-c riotycl eiicli~scd iri
~licA~iricxes.I.liirignry gcriernlly rcservcs tlier-igliIci sii~ipleiiieaiid riiodify
ilssiibiiiissioris.XI IrrrliciilarIli~~igtiryrcscr-ves~lic riglilIor+cqiies ItlieCourt
to urtlecfir+ac~icrIiieasiit.esto erisureçutiipliarice byCzec1ir1-Slovakir wiiiii Ilie
jiidgri~eliio Iicdelivct-eiiby Ilie Cuurt. Eluiignryriit.lIics reservcs tIie riglit
tri ask ~licÇririrE EU sel seliaratio~is wliicli Czeclio-SlovnkinslicilIpay to
11tiiigar. ii coiirorriiitywilli Article 36 (2) (d) of tlic S~aliilcof llle Coiirt.
'I'liiititIcr.sigrids ali(iciiiit1)ytlic Govcl-iitiic~itof ~lic12cyiirlilitif1.Iiiiigar.y
as its Agcrii fc~.Illepiii-lioscof lic ~ircscritAlililicritirinrid nll pi-cicecrliligs
11ierco11 ..tic is arrllior.izccl10irifoi.ii(iicCoiiiAt [liai fcirt31c~iii~~iosc of n1I
~iotificaliotisatid cc~r~~ti~i~~iiçii ticIl~i ii;i~lciti IIicsc lii.occc~Iiiigs,[lie
1Iiitigar+iaG~iovcrririicrisclccts as ils atldrcssLlic1lzitigaria~I iSiiilinssy ?'lie
I.Ingite.
Riirlnpcs ,t22 Oclolici- 19'32
vci-y it.illyyciiii.s,
c,- 'iLfl:6~-..
i
Pi UT.Fcteriç bIricll
Miriister wirliciiiI'ortfulici
Agcrit for LEie GovernriicritUT the RepriliIic of I-lirrigary
I, tlic i11idc1-sigiicdt,lic M iriislcr of Forcigil ACfi~ii- ir tlic Iiel~ui~c of
Iliiiigal-yccciiry (ticciiiIlieii2iciof il16 abovc sigrialiircof Miriiisier Fer-clic
MAdl, Ageiil for tlieGovei~iiiieiit of Uic Re1,iil)licoi Iliiiigni-y.
1 Uiidsl~est ,2 Ocic~l~c i992IY<OVISIONALSOLUTIONOP GABCIICOVO
ON TX-ITERRITOl<Y OF'
CZECtIO-SLOVAICIA Annex 103
hroTEVERBAL EROMTHEMINISTR YFFOREIG NFFAIRSOFTHECZECHAND SLOVAF KEDERAL
REPUBL ICTUE M~ISTRY OF FOREIG ANFFAIR 1:THE REPUBL ICHUWGAR 2YO,CTOBER 1992
NOTEVERBALE
Appendix to30-511admj1992
USZ:108.858192-MPO
This rnorninat 10:15AM, Federal Prime MinisterJan Slraskyand Federal Foreign Minister Jozef
Moravcik handedoverthefollowinnote:
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof the Czechand SlovakFederalRepublicpresentsits complimentsto
the Ministryof Foreign AffairtheRepublicof Hungaryand has thehonoutobe abletoconveythe
following.
The Govemment of the Republic of Hungary, in keeping witheconsultationspertaining this
extraordinarysituatand as a firststagetheprocessof CO-operati, requested,in a note dated 23
October1992,thattheGovermant ofthe CzechandSlovakFederal Republicgive anexplanationto the
Governmentof theRepublicof Hungaryonthe questionsregardingthediversionof theDanube.
In keepingwith Point 1.1of thisprocess , theGovernmentof the Czechand Slovak Federal Republicis
asked toreplyto the Govemmentof the Republicof Hungary on the question posed in the above
mentionedNote Verbale.
The Govemmentof theCzechandSlovakFederalRepubIichas notagreedto the suspensionof work nt
riverkm 1851.
The Governmentof the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic maintahe legal position expressedin
previousstatementsbtheresponsibleuthorîtiofthe Czechand SIovakFederalRepubli.
Copiesof this presentnoteshbeldelivered,bway of the Secretariatof the European Confeceno
Security andCo-operation, tothe other participatingnaandto the Chairmanof the council of
leadingofficiais.
The Midistry of Foreign Affairs otheCzech and Slovak Federal Republic availirselof this
opportunitytorenewto the Ministryof Foreign AffatheRepublicof Hungary the assurancesof its
highestconsideration.
Prague,27October 1992. Annex 104
NOTE VERBALEFROMTHE MINISTR YFFOREIG ANFFAIROF THECZECH AND S~VAK FEDERAL
REPUBLICTOTHE EMBASS YFTHEREPUBLI CFHUNGAR5 YN, OVEMBE 1992
NOTEVERBALE
Usz: 109.362192-MPO
The Ministryof ForeiAffairof the Czech and Slovak Federal Repubiicpitsomplimentsto
fortheEmbass of the RepublofHungaryand has thhonou o be able to propose, withreftoence
point 4ofthe minutes taken duringthe meeting of representativesof the Czechand Slovak Federal
Republic,the Republicof Hungary and the EuropeanÇommunity in London on 28 October 1992, that
negotiations bgin between the Czand Slovak Federal Republic and the Republic of Hungary
regarding compromise (specialagreement) accordtoarticl40,para, 1 oftheCharter of the
International Court,according to which the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic andofhe Republic
Hungary would petition the International Cobetallowedtoplace before it the issue of the
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System, builton the basisof the InterstateTreaiyand the related treaty
documentsignedbythe Czech and SlovakFederal RepublithePmple'sRepubliofHungar on 16
September 1977Itisby this compromisethat the CzechandSlovakFederal RepubIicandthe Republic
ofHungar youldbe ableto definethosequestions whichthe InternationalCourtwoulddecide.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Cand SlovakFederal Republicavaials ilselthiç
opportunitto renew to the Embassyof the Republic of Hungary. The assurances of its highest
consideration.
Prague,5 November1992. Annex 105
Aqreed IdinutCs of the meet Inn bbetwean the CSFR, Hunoary and the
furopean cm iss ion on the Gabc iko~o/l~~~qyaaros ~rolect . Brusse 1s.
27 November 1992.
The part les expressed their appreciotion for Ihe quality of the report
by the m;kin g raup of exp~rls and the spced at which it was
produce d .
On the basis of the 1-ondcn iigrEed ).iiritrttscf Octcltier 28 192 and tlir
above rcpcrt the ICI lowing Kas 2çreed
- The CSF2 znd Hurigary reccxif ir nied the ir- çc:nnli lmerit to s~!bnii t the
dispute corincrtird ivilh t,hc GEL~c i2o*;c-t:cgyiriJrus rirùjr-ct ivitli 21 1 i ts
açpects, iricliidirig Icg7.1, finaricini ziid C'crslc~ical clc-sicrils, :O the
Iritcrriatioi)a! 1 1 ul u . 1iii Iliii; crid iliey i:iider,l?kc lo
establ ish joint ly, 011 tlic tld~is (7: Ilie firo!gi cc$ rr1:de sri f21'. IIic
suecial ayrceriierrt for Ili,: ?~ll!iiii:;Siof~ir~ 111~ vt=~y n~iir fuf~ti.~. Tor
ttiis piirposi: a rricelitig will . II? iri !?.a-?aj!crt jd> Jlie wi:el:
bcg irin iiig 30 I.ioveriitlcr-l6.?2 .
- The CsTF; aiid Hi'rig2ry ?gr ci: to zf:,(!l + ~?ei?i!ii>i;tlic jnd~cfiei~t 2)' the
Internzl ioiiz 1 Cccrl QI Fus1 icc, 2 icrii[:orar y :eg ii:,~ cmf inzriagcincr:t of
th9 Darlribe Hater alc~ig tlie li::cs cl tl:e l.c?r:dcliAureed i.iiF%iitecol
28 Qctober 1992 ai:3 based upcri Ille !eper l ilf :lie Park irig Gi'o:ip of
experts. At the re~uest QI tlic twa Celc~a~iciis ihe Cornmizsion will
provide techniczl su~por 1 for Zlie oncral ioli of scçti a icgiKc.
- The parties Egree tç !icId a luri>er Ir ipzrl Ite iaceling iri Gi'irssels
within fiftecri Jays to fiiiali7e Iiie tieccsszry a:rznGcrr8erits for ltie
a bove .
Fo: the CSFR Deleczticn,
For lhe Hungzrizn Defegaticn, a& Annex 106
COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
PAMS DE U PAIX2513KJL9 HAYE PAYS-BAS PEACE PALACE es1KJ THE HAGUE NETHEALANDG
T~L~PHCIN~IE:(SS2444T~LEx:32323 TELEPHONE: (079924641TELEX:32323
TÉLÉCR.INTEFtCOVRT UHAYE CABLES: INTERCOUATTHEHACUE
TÉLÉFAXI1070)3840928 TELEFAX: 1070) 38498 28
Sir,
1 have the honour to transmit to Your Excellency herewirh a copy of
a letter from the Miniçter for Foreign Affairs of the Gzech and Slovak
/*
Federal Repubvc dated 18 November 1992, and received in the Registryon
1- 27 November 1992, and of the Agreed Minutes of the meeting of 28 October
1992, referred to in, and enclosed with, that letter. The letter was
/ açcompanled by an unofficial Engliçh tranclation, a copy of which is also
enclosed.
Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.
,&?k- 4 /L&~ '5
--._.-Eduard6 V-alencia-Osp ina
Regis trar
His Excellency
Professor Ferenc Madl
Agent of the Republic of Hungary
before the International Court of Justice
Embassy of the Republic of Hungary
The Hague . Unofficial translation
Prague, No.vember 18 , 1992
Ref. No.: 110.800/92-MP0
Dear Sir,
Referring to your letter No. 87.698 of October 23, 1992,
concerning the Application of the Republic of Hungary v. the
Czech and Slovak Federal Republic on the diversion of the Danube
river, 1 have the honour t~~inforrn you that on October 28, 1992 a
meeting of representatives of the Czech and Slovak Federaf
Republic, the Republic of Hungary and the Commission of the
European Communities on the GabCiKovo-Nagymaros project Kas held
*in London.
Pursuant to point 4 of the Apreed Minutes of the meeting, a
copy of whic<h 1 hereby enclose for your information, the
Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic proposed on
November 5, 1992 to the Government of the Republic of Hungary ta
start negotiations on a Speçial Agreement, under Article 40,
paragraph 1 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.
On the basis of this Special Agreement, the dispute concerning
the GabGikovo-Nagymaros System of Locks, constructed under the
Treaty between the Czechoslovak Socialiçt Republic and the
Hungarian People's Republic of Septernber 16, 1977 and documents
related to the Treaty, should be submitted ta the International Court of Justice. The Czech and Slovak Federal Republic is ,
interestéd in a cornplex examination, by the International Court
of Justice, of the whole problem connected with the
implementation of the Treaty between the Czechoslovak Socialist
Republic and the Hungarian People's Republic on the Construction
and Operation of the GabEikova-Nagyrnaros System of Locks and not
merely of one partial issue.
In the event of the conciusion of a Special -4greernent
between the Czech and Slovak Pederal Republic and the Republic of
Hungary, a part of vhich will be also questionç to be decided by
the International Court of Justice, I will inform you, sir, aç
soon as possible.
Accept, Sir, the assurance of my highest consideration.
Mr Bernard Noble
Deputy-Registrar
International Court of Justice
The HagueMIrJISTRZAHRANICNIC VHEC~GSFR
JozefMDRAVÇIK
13
v Praze Jne'v - liçtanadu 1992
r:.j.:' 11Q.BOO/92-MPO
VaZeny pane.
3 odvolanim, ns Va5 dopis $. 87.b38 ze dne 29.
Fi jna 1902 ve véci lalabv Madarske republiky proti
Ceske a ~lovenské Federativni Republ~ce ve veci
odklonëni toku Feky ~una.ic mirn Eest Vas inforrnovat.
Ze dne 28. 10. 1*?S se uskuteinila v Landqné
schûzka zistu~c~J Cesk& a Slovenské Federativni
Re~ubliky. Madarçké republikv a Komise Swropsk~çh
spoledens tvi O ~rojektu Gabfi knvo-~agymarns.
V souladu s bodem 3 Zapisu ï této schdrky, jeho2
kopii pro VaSi informaci iarsflim v ~i-iloze.. se
vlada Ceske a Slovenské Federativni Renubliky
obrAtila 5. -11. 1092 na vladu Mad'arslté republiky 5
navrhern na cahijeni jednani O kom~rornisu podle 151.
40 odst. 1 Statutu rnezinarodniho soudniho dvara. Na
zikladg tohoto kom~romisu by me1 byt spor tykajici
VSleny pan
Bernard N o b 1 e
zastupce tajemnika
Mezinarodni ho saudniho dvora se Soustavy vodnich del GabSikovo-Nagymaras. ktera
je budovana na zaklade Srnlouvv mezi CSSP a MLR z
16. 9. 1977 a na ni navazu licich srnluvnich
dokurnentQ. pFedloZen Mezinarodnimu soudnimu dwori~.
Ceska a Slovenska Federativni Republika ma zaLjern na
tom. aby Metinarodnf soudni dvGr pos~udil kornplexne
celau problematiku r~e.jenou 5 realizsçi Srnlouvy
merl CSSR 3 MLR o v95tsv~e a provozu Soustavy
vodnich del Gabkikovo-Nagymaros 3 nikoii Douce
jednu ailei otazku.
Y npipade. le doide k uzavreni komor-omisu mer 1.
Cesksu a Slovenskou FederaLivni Re~ublikou .3
~adarskou re~ubliku. jehof sou&isti budou i otiz~v.
které ma Mezinarodni soucini dvGr rorhodnout. buau
~aç. v52eny psne. c t4to z2.lo2i tcsti infor~cvat.
Pfijmete. va2enq pane. proiev me hluboké uctv. 242
Annex 107
COMMISSION
OF TEE EUROPEAhi
COMIW'JNITIES
the Puropean coslniaaios oz the 6.zhcika~a-X'rsy;pards prnj~et~
Bms81~5, 10-11 riacmker f 992.
The czaeheslovak anE Etuigeri~~ 3eleq2tic~e ezeheagc2 vievn ah t-ssihle
raC+lities fr~r the teiïcra-y b2:uSe 'h'ât~r Eanecenect :agkz tr, be
i?jlled yanéSzg the juZp&=t of 0.2 fnte-v.zfior.al C~ILZ of ZCZS~CB ES
iç.nvisa~e& hy the =rip=tFte xee=itg ir.3r-saels c= 17 ~ov2rher 1952.
r.'ieCiscus~ionsgare a1cr.g t'ne lineszf th€ r=?.d=r. ~gropg gitictes a:
2f octaber EZ baze? o~ the Ewe=k k'orkicg Grorla cesort cf
25 Notrerker.
rr k: aktens= t= c~tline the Sr026 féz=+z=es 35 L ==gzrazy ire-i;.a r;;~
ceiega~iaas çorsidai~i the oss sel'-.*r cf :zrLiair.~ EEVETE; of the
eccsaries eoataizedfr. the Eep2rE.
rt vas egreed thae fl;-the: dscaiis5 te=;?nitrl disecçsicils at ex~erirç
levèl w~ld tale plzze In the ceEr :u-l:-e a&',F1 fivieij t3 accelera;icc
the estAlith-rnt of rhe te.?.ga=azy rp~trr r~rk.e.
S. The czechosiovzk ~elegzrlez in:çrn& th= aeotitg thac 5: vil1 =se al:
mcrns take aL1 zeceesery meüaizes r~palr the CÜ,,C~E ezcsed by
:l;e flccàs 05 23-24 ~ovenfer es s3en- as p~~sihic, ce chat Cke
tezprzrj usta: xa~eçex~ak Regi?~ tzvia ~ge5 at ',te Trl?.=rzite ,wseti?r
t= 27 Ejat'eez: vill 8tzrt functiczisq. The p=fFes ZurCh~r agrea't
thot a&t~r,t àaze fe ttis ahoiil? be c: a- ~-au:-.C 5 nc=h
3ÇÇ1, czeehaclavakla xi11 mikla nvrtl=iie te =$ë crtk~r tL.o pl,rtirr
detailen iniar~etis~ cn t3ese wazk~.4. The p-ies die~ussed ar.d =de f~irthsr praçrasc oa e &raft sptid
Aqrewient fcr ths submis$ia?I GC éI?e ease e~n2sz-aia~. tke G&eikoP=-
pamae pzoject te th8 ~zternz~ianrc locrt of zastlre in &é 2~~;
fumre. F~B partj~~ eçreori ta ccztinze erer5zior ahhg zt Lke
finaLisation 05 thia te*.
5- ~he parties undertookta recmv~rie sot leter ttaE 2@ 3knrr~ry 135: vit~
a vie* to ~OZE?I esra~%.1= OZ the tw;tgrrzrl~%ak~,vr!acer,,zr %zSe. Annex 108
NOTEVERBAL FREOMTHE MINISTR OYFOREIG AFFAlRSOFTHE CZECHAND SU)VAK DERAL
REPUBL IûTHEMINIS~Y FOR FOREIG AFFAIR SFTHE REPUBC ICHUNGARY, PRAGUE 18
DECEM BR1992
NoteVerbale
EmbassyoftheRepublicofHungary
Prague
TheMinistryfor ForeignAffairsof theCandSlovakFederalRepublichas thehonotopresenits
complimentsto the Ministq for ForeignAfofithe Republicof Wungary.ferringtothe Note
Verbaleof 4 December,1992,No 11265419ithasthe privilegeto forwardthe Note Verbaleof the
MinistryforForeignAffairsof the SlovakRepublicsequesfor recognitionandtheestablishment
ofdiplornatrelationsatambassalevel.
The FederalMinistiyforForeignAffairsof theCzechandSlovakFederalRepavailitselfof this
opportunitto againensutheMinistryfor ForeignAffairsof theRepublicof Hungaryof its deepest
respect.
Prague,18December 1992
21stroundstampof the
FederalMinistryfor
ForeignAffairsof theCzechand
SlovakFederalRepublic Annex 109
1
NOTE VERBALEFROM THE MINISTR OYFOREIG ANPFAIR SFTHE SLOVAR KEPUBL IC THEMINISTRY
FOR FOREIG ANFFARS OFTHE REPUBL ICHUNGAR YR,ATISLAV 18D,ECEMBE 19R92
Note Verbale
Embassyof the Republicof HungaryintheCzech andSlovakRepublic
Prague
The Ministryof Foreign Affairsof theSlovakRepublichasthe honourto presitcampIiments tothe
Ministry for Foreign Affairsof the Republicof Hungary and respectfullynotifies them that from 1
January,1993on theterminationof the CzecandSlovak Federal Republici,t becomesan independent,
sovereign,separatestate onthe basis of the constitutionailaw. The Slovak Republioriginated
fromthedisintegrarionotheCzechoslovakFederationbecornea successorstate.
Commencingfromthe DeclarationoftheNational Councilofthe Slovak Republictothe Parliamentsand
the Nationsof the Worldthe Governmentof the Slovak Republicregulatesitself in its domesticand
foreignpoliciesto thesamevaluessuch as respectihurnanrightsand fundamentalfreedomswithoui
reservationtothe principlofpluraldemocracyand to therule of law, theachievementof whichis a
basis forfreedom,justice andpeaceasis similarto thedemocraticcountries.
The Governmentof the Slovak Republicinthe courseof its international relations adjusts heself tto
regulationsof InternationalLaw and to the aimsand principleswhich are laiddown in the UN Charter
and inthe finalactthe HetsinkiProcessandinrelateddocuments. It willassistthe developmentof co-
operationinEuropewith the aimofthecreationofaneffectisecuriisystem.
The Governmentof the Slovak Republicconsistentlyfulfilsthe obligationwereundertakenin the
fields of disarmament,non-proliferation,anreductionof militaq forces andmilitarystores to the
levelrequiredfor defence, andrnakesefforts to strengthentrust and stathebasis of multi- and
bilateral relations.
The Govemmentof the Slovak Republicin hmony withinternationalnoms will observe the righof
nationalminoritiesandfulfilsitsobligations.
In accordancewith, andro the extent as determinalbtheexistingnoms of InternationaLaw, the
SlovakRepublic initcapacityof oneof the SuccessorStaofthe Czechand Slovak Federal Republic,
considersitself boundwitheffectfrom 1January 1993,by a11bilaandamultiIateraltreatoewhich;
untilthistimeoneofthe partiwas theCzechand Slovak Federal Republic.
On thebasisof theauthorisedconstitutional lawandon theTreaty betthenSlovakRepublicand the
Czech Republic on the Divisionof the Federal Fropertythe Slovak Republicundertthefinancial
responsibilitiesof the Cze~hand Slovak Federal Republic assionit towards third counwiesand
intemationalorganisations.
The Govemment of the Slovak Republiin the interestof speedilyadaptingittothe international
çommunityturns with a request tothe Govemmentofthe RepublicofHungar o observe the Slovak
Republicasa sovereignstateandtobereadyto establishdipIomaticrelationsat ambassrtdorlevel. It will
develop mutual relations on the baofsthe pnnciples of independent equality, non-interventioinn
domesticpolicy,respectfortemtorialand politicalsovereignty,the inviolabilityof borders,the peaceful
setdementofdisputesandof the othergenerallyrecognirulesof InternationalLaw.
The Governmentof the SIovakRepublicdeclaresthat, on the territofthe SlovakRepubIicfrom 1
Jmuary1993,inaccordance with the Vienna Conventionon DiplornaticRelationsit will concedethe
privilegeand immunitiesto thediplomaticmissionsaccrediond31 December,1942in the Czech and
Slovak FederaI Republicand does not request a new "agrément"fromthe ambassador, currently
accreditedto thCzechandSlovakFederalRepuMicif hewillbeaccredited tothe Slovak Republicfrom1 January,1993. In the Czech andSlovak FederalRepublicthe seniorityof the diplornaticcorps
accreditedon 1 December, 1992willbemaintainedafier1January,1993 intheSlovakRepublic.
The Ministryfor ForeignAffairsof the SlovakRepublic availsitself of the opportunityto ensurethe
Embassyof theRepublicof Hungaryof thedeeprespecttheCzech andSlovakFederalRepublic.
Bratislava,18December,1992
MinistryforForeignAffairsof thSlovakRepublic
5throundstamp Annex 1IO
NOTEVERBAL EROM THE EMBASSYOFTHE REFUBLIC OFHUNGARY TO THE MINISTRY OFFOREIGN AFFALRS
OFTHE CCZECAND DLOVAKFEDERAL REPUBLIC.23 DECEMBER 1992
The Embassyof theRepublic ofHungarp yresentsits complimentsto the Ministryof ForeignAffairsof
the SlovakRepublicandwithreferenceto NoteNo.1395192-23 of 18December1492of the Ministryof
Foreign Affairs,has, upon instnictioriof the Governmentof the Republicof Hungary,the honouto
communicatethe following:
The Governmentof the Republicof Hungar yully sharethe principlesof fundamentalimportance
relating to the interna1state structureas well as the internationalrelationsof the Slovak Republic, as
fomulated, upon its becorning an independent, sovereign State, in the above-rnentionedNote.Ie
considers these principlesathebasisfor, as well as a pledge of, the CO-operationbetweenthe two
fnendlyneighbouringStatesin thefuture.
Thereare stableand historicallywell-provenfoundationsfat thefull implementationof theseprinciples.
The two peoples have,duringtheir cohabitationof manycenturies, accumulatan inestimableamount
of common spiritualand materialvalues. It is the convictionof the Governmentof the RepubIicof
Hungary thatthesevalues shouldbe consideredby the twopeoplesasa comrnonmasure. TheirStates,
beingfree in takingdecisionsindependentlyand insovereignty,haveby now al1chanceto evolvefully
the creativeforceof theHungarianandSlovak peoplesandto seektogetherthe wayof theirprosperityin
theCarpathiaB nain and inEurope.
It is therefore with a mostprofoundsatisfactionthat the Govemmentof Hungary acceptsthe requestof
the Governmentof theSlovakRepublic toestablish,as of Januar1.1993,dipIomaticrelationsat the
levelof embassiesinrespectof whichthe above-mentionedNoteof the Minishy of Foreign Affairsand
thisNote of theEmbassyshailçonstitvteanagreementbetweenthe two Governmcnts.
Thegovernmentof Hungarywill,as of January,1993,upgradeitsGeneralConsulatein Bratislava toan
Embassy ofthe Republicof Hungary, headeby a Chargéd'AffairesThe Governmentof theRepiibIicof
Hungary is furthemore ready to enter, within theshortestpossible time, into negotiations with the
Governmen tftheSlovakRepubEic on questionsrelatingtstatsuccessioninrespectof treaties.
The Embassyof the Republic ofHungary avails itseofthis opportunitytorenew to theMinistryof
Foreign AffairsoftheRepublicofSlovakiathe assurancesofitshighestconsideration.
Prague,December23 1992
Tothe MinistryofForeignAffairs
ofthe SlovakRepubIic
Bratislava Annex111
Traduc-tiori?:O?-oFt'icicllc
?reaj sr Klnjstre
de lv Fr&piiblir;ii:: Je Hurig:.ic. 'ir>ute:'oia, gx6ficr; & çc: batuneilt, le ~I'OC:~SUE du +glem~:iI. du cocflit
toiit cn corifel-nit-b ~VPC les 1:zrrnes euro~heiinco ci 4th. mgngi?.,
pue3y.s' ii ssmbli qtie las Cerix partins se suri 1 re~dÿes compte qiie 1;s
seiile voic p:.nttcnhlr: ia eulutfon firale, soi1 IF: so'cmir;üir~ri $1:
cantentieux dcvn:~~ la Çcur Lr.r,e.-ri+ Llor:8l o dc: la Hyye. fi 1' isni~e dcç
e~tretierir au ri jvc:i?: ri'sxpcrrs $c)uI-~ I''Bg:'6rt: CCS n$gccic~,tj cr~b I.r*i-
lfit.6?21t~, 1% d&cl~r?t"..nr. CDPi6ETlE E.1:' 1% B~:~T~SS~OT. p~tci \&c, I;aq;,t
Eyr¢ c.?risii&rEe cü~s- OC~OVC?~.. 'luutef gis, la !:artir: tck;i.qi;e E i.
E.~OV~.SL~~?, di:pant 1z Ccr.r.iGrb~ :*;iscnntni: trilaterale 5 ilr:;x?-: ~r, c2
..
~yriscrite clne telle y095 ~i .xi r;cinii laqirel:~ l'acccst~+ticiri peur SB
. .
pa1-1. dc: Icri4t~ k4clarslic:i ci¢ sci;n:aslciri es L r.5r.f i?iorr.&r :j&:% .;A
. .
curiclu~;c.i:r d-il:: accord ~:.:tre 1~5 j:.31''i6~ ~ 4 - Ur. ~;ysir;Lr~t~I.iri~-ilsclrc
E'uaEr.axerct:ri l' Ecr; caux. L-. trarin i'cirbnzzicn f'an erigoy+n:eti' fr.ccinC i-
',ioriri~l ei.1 iiri,?ii&cgcr.c~t cmciiic;r!r:+l olat cn ?S:-il 1- C;SC.:&R Qe Ln;~t
eceeptk stiiU.cii:ic;i:iv C¢I-.filticn Ze rdgler 3.ei:r ct.intc:fitic-x r.o:i psi% Far
. ...
u:ie 2s.es:::i priliticiii: r::sXs p?,r coritrr par. ur:r JiJ:%clrtlc:~ inter-
netiril-:ale. ?;tiru:.clln'c;cnt., le :ior:g:ie ea l. i rirEncos6c prlrr.ordiiilssisri:,
dcnz 1z :é~litki:;r L:.L:I: RIISL?T(C: &qliitsbltt, :~r'si:<.~oit~~ ct ccrl:,eririb-
Ic~ist ccintr3iB de l'en6i.t:ger:cri 1.der- "a-ir, car .jliutss+:i t,, a'er;t vlic
g:.ii ri6cc!ccite ri= qusr:ti ,I.A s~~i'îi~~~it~ L!'H~!; i 1,ciiç;pctlsc5tl~ ~1 1~
pr9tcct.i 03 tcs irair~ru bi:~ifjki :i~i&s. I.!ai~ pzr critre, c:'BR :.~HPCCCF-
. .
tsble q~i~. :-ini:r,r;r! pi::c;slo;is sc~i,.riet:rc Ic çç:itririlje:.x h Ic Cm:r
Tnt.?rnetlonnia, CU? ~c::s ic cas 03 nüus RVOA6 ~CCB~T~ CG c~ndit,~r~?.
de i'zct~e partie, lesc;ue?lcr; sci-:t unil:+t&:<le4: 2' diffèreri*,
C'ail?t.iir.s rl'unc f'o.:nr.$zbs-tc-::~+ielle te I"~~çrird &e Lui-.drex.
lior;r?c] gilc ir:Fraçees:ie ..evai;t la Ccur L:itsrr;& l.;o:i51~ s'cn~8gl.' Sans
3uc;inv c;;n:lî ti on, hr: 2.~5ai'iSt qiie p~sciibic. Je scis yd:+.Ri.iiiZ[qiie si Vcus Horicirrrr le Pr.P~idenl., vciiis F;rrbex 9 t;8-na d'accurrlex. Ln*
r?r;nfr;tnncc r:'fjcn,7ct A c:: cjü:: JZ voit civilicibc? I?? ~'~~op6cnr.c: do
r8gle:riér , du cur,t.e:itis~x ~'uuvrt! FBs que boefii ble t?L.par ce Tai L yus
riorit: ü:;yurit;cHgablri-; d'extirper Let; rrzine~ des corifiitü pr,litiqi:e&.
I< hr.? 6cl:angs er:t,r,e la Evcgïi?, e Tc:7ér!c;:i<j':a<:ljt! r L la Po;o~.r.e.
kinc: I'espri r di nlitre trni ti d'sssocin;i 33 a-?cc ics ~onir.~iina;iri
eii~opkpn:~es, c t dai?s 1' in%&re t d'ri3 accara f'rtict~ciix riclln aV,iorrsci=-
Cc s8ri. toutcs nas r5ssï~cs r;._iia::t s~irgi b ca.~zc C:J d&tau~r~c;~::cr.t
c!liiot@rnl c?: C,a??i:h:, st r,n;:r:avilrin i::~ vnincrvi sc::t.c cig;r~oi !.rir,1.1'ii
ti'est, m~riiîest&e d2r.s la ricu-/elle rjirrctici:~ tc>.Cqce b l'+gard de l:i
CoCia&iatior, Vicsg!.adie:iiif:,
?err,:.cttea-soi d' cx~ri:nep 5 ia Cçccissio:: ce$ Ço:...P.+.; les BLT'GY~I::I:FS
n:: .r.qt,ii.u<i.i giii:sL le rUle j:.i~:6Y? iWacLivitg dbpl~y6e dan? Ir
r8plaii~sri ! ELI CL)~ leritieax SL:~ le bzrragc . J c: cczsiEErc quc ïn i'ct.;.~r.!
co~g4raticn efficace dc lc? ioa~isslo:; cct 1~:;:. cçcdlticr. iiidis
~eri~,kle pour a:-riirc: h cc oolctior: L-cozïrsr.ti.
JC saisi2 cette <><?Ch3li;r:p~i~:r S'O~CY60~:';ei ter -J:J~ sr.nGe fruc~ucuso,
27, qtii;'e1e Vc~s spcoxe ear.tE et &LCCPS. Annex 112
COMMISSION
OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES
Esfnblisl~ttritof aJoin tllrngoriadSZ voak
WaterManageri errtanriMmiitoring Coniniittce.
lnorder to manage and control as wellas to monitor the impacts of the
TemporaryWater ManagementRegimea Joint Hungarian/Sl ovatkr Management
ControlCornmitteewillbe established.The main functionand resposibilitieswill be:
1. to supervise and control the operation of a~eed Tempocary Water
Manasement Regime and prepare and ensure théunplementation of
adjustrnentsin the.Temporq Water Management Regirne;
II. to laluich a comprehensive programme of environmental monitorins,
studiesand modelling, with a view to assonsa scientific and common
basisthe impactsofthe operation of the Gabcikovo Water CVorkson the
natural environment of the adjacent tenitory in the Slovak Republic and
the Hungrian Republic;
III. to assesthe implicatioofexceptional circurnstancesi.e. floods and ice,
and make recommendationsfor remedialprovisional measures.
This paper containonEya general outline for the organisation, functionsand
r~ponsibilities of the Joint Cornmittee. detailedtechnical components will be
elaborated by the Joint Cornmittee, if necessary witusehof technicW alorking
~'rou~s.A detailed technical description of the organisation and opofathe(i)
Water Management Cont-roISystem and (ii) the Monitoring Programme will be
submitted to the two Govemments and the Commission of the European
CornmunitiesbeforeMarçh 15,1993.
Although a bilaterCornmittee between the Republic of Bungay andthe
Czech andSlovak FederalRepublic, the Commissionof the European Communities
wovld, if requesied, be willingto provide ad hoc technicaltothe Cornmittee. The Committee wilIcomprise:
* One officialgovenunent representative and twa technical experts
nominated by the Governrnentof theSlovak Republic
* One official governent representative and two technical experts
nominatedbytheGovernent of the HungarimRepublic
The Committee can invitetechnicalexpertsand other participantsona case by
case basis,providedtheCommittee isin agreement.The Cornmittee can furthemore
establish variousWorkin g roups i.e.for the establishment and operationof the
monitoringprogramme, or otherrelevantissues.
Until otherwiseaçreed inthe Committee, the Cornmittee wiIlrneet regularon
a monthly basis or estraordinary when requested by one of the parties. Place of
meetingswill altemate between the RepubIicsof Slovakia and Hungary. Secretaxial
support wiIIbe provided by the host country. The meetings will be chaired by the
host country.
The Cornmittee will, every third month prepare ri report 'tothe tivo
Governmentscontaininga descriptionof activities undertaken and summary of the
conclusions from the operationof tlie Ternporary Regirne and the monitorinç.The.
Cornmittee willfiinhrrrnoreensure thnt timely and accurate information rcsultin;
from the ~rorkof the Comrriittez is disseminateci in aapproprinte form to the
population in the Re_oioii hicli wiII enable tlie implications of Rectaebe fully
appreciated.
The Cornmitteewill have thee main functions as outIinedbelow in 4.14.1
and 4.3.
The Committee will:
1. Prepare adetailedOperation Manualwithspecificationsfortheday today
warer management;
2. Establish and operate a Water Management Control System. The basic
components of the control systcrn is outlined inhex A. A detailed
descriptionof the WaterManagementControlSystem will be elaborated
beforeMxçh 15, 1993,and the main cornponentsof thesystem should be
inoperationbefore April1,1993;
3. Prepareand ensurethe implementation of remedialprovisionalmeasures;
and 4. Preparerecommendations foradjustmenttso the agreedTemporary Water
Management Regime and the related Operation Manual, whenever
requiredor suitable,on the basisof the operationalexperiences and the
results from the activities on monitoring, studies and modelling.
Justificationforproposedadjustments shouldbe basedon the degreeof
fulfilmentoftheenvironmentalcriteria(re. item 4.2).
4.2 Est~bli~hand ririernta Joiti!Mmiitr~rir,Modelli~ i ~ndSfrrr!~P~rnerasiter l
Inorderto assess ,na scientifiand commonbasis,the effeçtsand Lmpacts of
the operationof the GabcikovoSystem on the naturd environment in the region a
system of monitoring of commonly agreed data, exchange of data and common
evaluationof the data wilbe establishedandoperatedby the Comrnittee.
A preliminary list ofdatato be monitoredand studied by the partieisfound
inAmex B.
The Cammitiee couldinitiate other studiesafmore generaInatureas well.
l
The Committee will entmst a Working Croup of Monitoring Expests te 1
prepare a detailed Monjtoririg ICInrrrrwlith specifications for joint monitorinof
impacts on environment,navi~ation,agriculture,hydropoiveretc This hiIl:include
definition of environmentalcriteria(e.g.water level dynxnici, \iraterquality in the
reservoir, Danube ivater quality downstream Cunovo, Ground water quality,
sedimentationin the main channel, flerand fauneetc.) which sliouldnotbe violated.
TlieMonitoringMnnualshould be finalisecibefore March 15, 1993
I
The Cornmittee will oversec the establishment and runriinig of the joint
monitoring prograinme as well as plan, CO-ordinateand revizir jointactivitirs on
monitoring, madelling and studies related to thwater management regime and its
impacts.
The Commitreewill assessthe implicationsof exceptionnlcircumstanc~s in
case of floods, ice occurrence and other potential security nsks and make
recommendations forrernediaImeasures tabe taken.
The Republic of Hungary andthe Slovak Re~ublic wiIl financeal1aciiviries
related totheir prrticipationin the Comrnitteeand the reIatedmonitoringandcontrol
activitieson theirterritory.The Commissionof the European Communitieswould
considerto providefinancialsupportfor extemal technicalexpert assistancespecific
monitoring and control equipmentneededand for public informationçampaigns,in
support ofthe activitiesothe Commfttee irequestedby the two sides.
Ruiilt Ii +6-10APBru-&Iglum.
TeIrphon<:dUlitlPbS-sccrllarlt 1-hi 19S.1-Ttka CObIB1187-Ttligriphlc COMEURBrvurt lnthe case of disagreementswhichoccur incannectionwith my of the items
mentionedabeve,theCommissionof the.EuropeanCommunitiesis empowered to
propose amechanisrn to resolvethe disagreement.
ANNEX A Basic Componentsin a Ii'aiMariacenient ConIrSysfemfor tfiehbcikovo
System.
ANNEX B BasicCornponentisna Joint Monitoring andStudyProgrammefor thGabcikovo
Sysrern
Aut<lchlZOO-8-104Df~uib. Bcblum.
Telephani: direct ti-rrcrfl~rk '-3-fia195.75-TclrxCOhIEB1187-Telqriphic iildreu COMEURB-b ANNEX A
Bnsic Criitr~~orie~i ri a Water Manogenr~rrt
Corifru1Systwr for t11eGabcikovo Sysicni
Tliedailydischarge shalIberneasured for.thefollowingpoints:
1, nt Bntislava
2. at Rajka
3. 3t Dunaremete
4. at Medve
5. at tlie By-passWeir
6. 3ttheFloodPlaiiiWeir
7. At tlie Sliip Loch
S. At theTurbines
9. At tlie iiitatoMaly Daiiube
IO. Ar tlieint3keto Mosoiii Danube
11. Ar Dobrohost
12. Ssepagr frotttlireservoirto seepagecaoals.
Tlir "discI13rgt"II~~~~U~~III~Ican FolIowthe prrlsent rourinrsappliedto day, 1.eas
water level tiiwsuieriieiits and subsequeiitçoiiversion to dijcliarvalues by use of
"mting ciirveç" wliicliare updated regularly on the b~is of rcal discli~rge
iiiexureiiieiits. TIie discliargemeasureriieiare tlieresponsibility for therespective
couiitriesi.eSiov~kia 1,5. 6, 7,S .9, 10. 1Iand 12and Hungsiy2,3 and 4.
Huiigariair aiid SIovaki311specialist will have free accrss to participaie in the
nie3sureiiieritsaiid thesubsequend3t3 processing.
Discliar_revalticssliallbeexcliatigeddsilyas pteliniinaryvalues.FinaI valuesslrall be
presentedandnpproved atthe regularmeeting of tliConiniiner.
J,
Tliediscllarge isdrfined asfollows:
D/Cuiiuvo = DIBnt islava -(D/Maly Danube+DIMosonl Danube -+ D/Seepage)
DIDaiiube = D/By-pass Weir + D/FloodPIainWeir
RuciIr LO100-1.1049 Orw-Betium.
Telrlilionc: du2Y65G.79-mtdliZPLf3.1-fis* 'rll.Tol,x COUTUU31831-Tclqripidùrur COhEm#rwb3. Clrcck~con.risicricv
The consistenyfthedischargmeasuredi.e.
D/Danube =D/Rajka- DIDunarenieaedDICunov =oDCMedve
shouldbefulfiIlwitliin+10% ona dailybasisandwithin% ona weekIybais.
In theevatuatioof thesrnaIdischargeinfiltntinthe aquifershouIdbetakeninta
accountIf theaccuncy is notsatisfacthe Cornmittcm decidetocatryoutspecial
studiesbyuseofindependeetperts. Bnsic Cotrrponer fiitrR JoirriMoiriforiiïgPrograriiiir
for the GabcikovoSyrtcni.
The Joint MonitoringProgrammewill be based on systems and procedures
alreadyin operationin the RepublicofSlovakiaandthe Republic ofHungary. A rnap
indieatingexistingobservation pointisfoun dnclosed.
A Groupof MonitoringExpertswill before March 15,1993prepare adetailed
proposal for al1aspectsrelating to the establishmeand operation of thesystem. If
requested by the twa sides the Commission of the EuropeanCummunities could
providetechical input.
The monitoring programme wiIl be coordinatedwith the Water Management
ControIProgramme.
The followingcomponcnts will be included in the monitoringof the impact of
theexistingsituationand futureTetnporary Water ManagementRegimes:.
1. Precipitation
2. Air andsoi1temperatures
3. Windintensity anddirection
4. Airhumidity
Surface waterlevels
GroundWater Ievels
Rate ofFlows
Floatingdebrisand bedload
Watertemperature
Ice occurrence
Humidity of the coveringsoi1IeveI
Transverseprofilesofthe river-bed
DutIetconditions
Erosion
Sedirnentation
3. Efco~o~icdaalta
!
1. Surfacewater quality
2. Groun Wdaterquality
3. Sedimentanalyses fororganicpoltutantsand heavyrnetals
4. Aquaticflora,faunaandhabitats
5. Ecologicalconditions ofthewetlandç
Ru#Irla110-8-fO9russ-Brlglirm.
Selrlrditni Unt198.sru~l~ria119-li295.75.1[1-TtlexCOMEUB1III17iiltkCOMEURBrurrit 4. General
1. Basicagricultura data
2. Basic data onforestrq,
3. Basic data on fishery
4. Basic data on navigation
5. Seismic data
Basedonthemonitoringthe followingissues will be comrnonlyevaluated:
GroundWatesRegime
Surface Water Regimeincludingfloaiingdebris and iceclusters
Water Resourceson the DanubianRiver Bank
Quality of GroundandSurface Wates
Ecologicalconditions of tlieriver and wetlands
AgricuIture
Forestry
Fishery
Navigation
Other influences
The establislimeniof compreliensive niailirmatic~l nisforrhc Ground Warzr cobcring
tlie Danubim~Loiyland anorhtrrelevanaspectscould be considrred31a l~tesrncr This wuuld in
realitybe an exienrion of the PHARE "Danubian LoivEandGround \V\:atrbriodzlto Hunçarian
temtory wiilmorefucuson floodplarecologicalasprcrs
RurdiLLei ZO-tl-IODrurrrBclyiuni.
Telcl>hnn.:rli3VC.56.-Ircrdlr19G33.-fa195.95.-TclcxCOMEV82187-Teligralihic COAiEURrBrurrrb8 -
5; -
!22 2
E Y Qc.
:i;
EZ::
+. a 2
: 2 G
O.9ri'Y
; 34 1 Agreed Miwtss of the meeting between Hungary. Slovakia and the European
Conmiisslon on the Gabclkovo-Nagymaros-projee trussels, January 19, 1993.
1. Hungary and Slovakia. taking into account Slovakia's newly acqufred
status of a sovereign state, underl ined thelr wi l l to soive the
problem of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros project in a friendly way.
Followfng the Agreed Minutes of 11 Decentber 1992. the Parties had met
on 14 January 1993 in Bratislava in the presence of representatives
of the European Commission to examine the technical aspects of the
Temporary Water Management Regime.
2. The Parties exchanged Information on the present state of works of
variant C following the floods of Novernber-December 1992 and the
recent cl irnatic conditions. which temporarily interrupted repair
werks. The urgency of completing these works was underlined.
3. The Parties had a detailed erchange of views on the Quiding principles
on which the Temporary Water Management Regime should be based and
presented several proposais, In this respect they agreed on the heed
to ensure the preservatlon of the Danube and the surroundrng
environment as wee l as the need to take into account other relevant
considerations and iegitirnate interests of both Parties.
It was agreed to entrust an expert grouD to meet in the week beginning
on February 1 with the elaboration of a Ternnorary Water Management
Regime. For this purpose. both Parties presented propasals. The
Cornmisçi~n also presented a written proposal.
4. The Hmgarian and Slovak delegations agreed that exuerts shall meet In
the f irst week of February in order to f inalize the texf of the
Special Agreement for submission of the case to the international
Court of Justice as soon as possible.
5. Recognizing the need to establish a Joint HungarianJSiovak water
Management and Monitoring Cornmittee. the Parties agreed that the
experts ~~z.'*!ioned in par. 3 should alse drscuss the functions and
responsibilities of this Cornmittee on the basis of the proposais that
were made. 80th Parties invited the Commission to participate in the
Cornmittee.
6. The Partfes undertook to reconvene on February 9. 1993 with a view to
finalize an agreement on the Tem~orary water Management Regime and the
Special Agreement.
Signed at Brussels this 19th day of January 1993.
For the Wungarian Delegation, &k+
For the Slovak Delegation,
For the European Commlsslon Delegation. '
i b LL\\ 262
Annex 114
Mr. la di m Mieciar
Prime Minister of the Republic of Slovakia
Bratislava
Dear Mr. Prime Minister,
Please allow me to return tothe questions related to the\Vater Barrase of Gabcikovo
on tvhich our Governments have been carrying on negatiationç for a longer tirne.
At the time of your latest visito Budapest, ive h~d agreed tha t tveshould settle tlus,
dispute as müch as possible through asreen~ent, ho~vever ti-ecould not reni11
agreement on the tvays of çuch settlernent. Since then, regrettably, thIt-aterof the
Danube has been embanked and rerouted, on the one hand, and the Cornmision ol
the European Cornmunitres has begun its good rviII offices nirned at çrr~ting
agreement betcveen the Parties, on the other.
These good offices yielded certain resultsin the recent rnonths Most important os
that repreçentatives of our Governments on Oçtober 28, 1992,signed the A,oreement
of London, whch kvas suitable to ease toa large estent the political tension that had
accumulated behveen the Parties, and to open the road tothe çivilized and Europtian-
style setüement bf the dispute. The most important elements of tkis settlement are
that the Parties çubrnit their dispute to the International Court of Justice and thfor
the period of time ending with the decision of the Court, they agree on such
temporary regime of water management, tvhich takes into account the interests of
bot+ of them.
The tree-party discussions have reached a decisive stage. The experts practically
finished the drafting of the textof the Special Agreement to be submitted ta the
International Court of Justice. With respect to the temporary regime of water
management, the positions ofthe Parties are clearalso the rneasure and importance
of the differences between the two positions are clearly visible. Altheiugh the
discrepancy between these positions issignificant, its economic importance, however,
isrelativeIy minimal, and in any case isdwarfed by that extraordinarily important
interests,toreach agreement on the temporary settlement and to submit thedispute
to the International Court of Justiceto prevent the reappearance of the political
tension. Sirice the Agreement of ~ondbn was achived, the Hungarian Goverment has
sepeatedly made more and more substantial concessions and at the present date
accepts that proposa1 of the EC Commission which would divide the ~vhoiewater
flow of the Danube between the Old-Danube and the operating water channel under
a system differingseasonaIly and depending on the volume ofthe water flow. Based
on tlilproposa1 the power generation would be possible in most time ofthe year
and our common points ofview concerning the preserva tionof the eçologicalsystem
of the region would be also rationallytaken into consideration.
TheIetter of Mr. Jacques Delors, Chaisman of theECCommission addressed to me,
dated January 26, 1993, makes it dear that theECCommission considers the three-
party meeting that was tobe held on February 9, 2993,as a Iastchance to achieve an
agreement. Therefore failing treach an agreemenb rvould result inthe cession ofthe
good will activity of the Commission, and it would imply disadvantageous
çonsequences to our co~infries.Blocking oftaking legal measures rvould entail rvith
the danser of the revival of political tension and affect disadvantageously both the
caopesation bebveen our countries and the resional cooperation framervorkç. The
Europe-poliçy of both coiintry rvould be alsodarnaged, first of a11our objective to
integrate into the Ettropean arclitechtre as soon and as fuIIy as posibie, and to
become the full rnernber of the European Con-in-iunities at the e~rliet d~te. As a
matter of fact we could hardIy esplain that tve are matirred to join the intesration,
to meet all obligations arisins from our rnenibersiup in the Evroperin UnÎon, ~iridiir
those circurnstances ri~hen despi te of tl-ie intensil-e gooci r\*ill acli~s of the
Commission tve aïe unlibIe tu settltl nrnon,o orirs2lvea dispute thlit iç~fter nll
nothng more than a technicn1issue of secondarq- irnporkance.
Itis my conviction thatblr. Prime Minister seesclearly those u-eighh-inttlrests rt.hizli
appeals for the creation of confidence and cooperation behveen our peoples rtphoare
by hstorical and geograpkical reasonç the iinauoidably interhvined, and for our
joiningthe European integration assoon and as fully aspossible. am confident that
the delicatetveighing of these interest willmake possible yous personal and rery
important decision that SIovakis will accept the compromise rvotked out by the EC
Commission. The reachng of agreement could becorne a symbol of the rtrillto
develop the relations betsveen the new Çlovakia and Hungary and at the same tirne
would open to road to deepening of coopesation bekveen the hvo parties the in
political, economic, cultural and any other fields.
PIease accept my highest consideration.
Budapest, February ".y 19"93,
with greetings, Annex 1 15
OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES
Trlpartlta Meetlng between Hungary. Slovakla and the European Comnlsslon
on tha Gabclkovo-Nagymaro psrolect. Brussels, February 16, 1993.
Durlng the Trlpartlte Meetlng betwssn Hiiiigary. Slovakla and ttie Eut'oDean
Commlssloii Ir? Brussels oii Fsbruniy 16, 1993 the Conirnlsslori rnade the
followlrig proposais:
1) The Slovak and the Hungarlan governrnents shotitd conflrm wltliout defay
thelr cmltment to subrnlt the case to the Inter.hatlonal Court of
Justlce. The Commission wlll try to obtain from the Czech government
the necessary ciarlflcatlon wlth regard to its posltlon concernlng
the case.
2) The establishment of a ternporary water management reglme should ba
based on the Commission's proposal wlilch mlght be subject to mlnor
lrnprovements to be agreed upon.
3) Rearlng In mlnd the autstandlng energy .requirements of the Slovak
slde, approprlate solutlonç coutd be explored to establlsh a
cwper.atlon framework among the partles.
On the basls of the above, the parties concluded that further progress
on outstandlng questions couid not be achlevad, Nevertheless, aware of
the overal 1 Importance of the Issue for the further deilelopment of
frlendiy relattons'betwean Hungary and Slovakia. they therefore agreed
to reTer these Issues to tlie highest polltlcal level for declslon. At
the raquest of the Hungarlan and Slovak partles, the Commission 1
Dursue 4ts efforts ta ïeacli a mutual ly accsptable sclut ion. Annex 1 16
INFORMACA IOLi PAENSA PRESSE-MEODE .MEITTSEEiLUANNGOIEPRESSE
ANAROINREHTIA TON TYnO PRESS-RELEA IlEORMATA IOLAPRESSE
INFOFlMAZA IOUAESTAMPA MEDEOELA IAGNDE PERS -CLIMUHICA OD€MPRENSA
Hrussels, 17 February 1993.
Tripartite Meatlng
betwsen Hungary, Slovakla and the European Cmunlsslon
on the Gabc lkov+Nagymaros proJects
Brussels 16 February 1993
On the accaslon of the Trfpartlte Meetlng between Hungary., S.lovzkla and
.the European Commlsslon In Brussels on 16 February,. on the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros system of locks an the Danube, Mr. van den Broek, Comrnlssloner
for externai polltlcal relations, hetd talks wlth the heads of the two
delegat tons, Mr. Martonyl, Secreatry of State, Mlnlstry of Foreign
Affalrs, Budapest, and Mr. Llsuch, Secretary of State, Mlnlstry of
Forelgn Affalrç. Bratislava. Followtng these talks. Mr. van den Broek
made the-fol lowlng statement:
"These ta 1ks have provsd conduc l va to de lus l ngtens Ions over
the Gabclkavo-Nagymaros dam project but mare efforts are
needed by both sldes. I cal1 upon ~ungary and Slovakla to
agree wlthout delay to subml t the case to the Internat ional
Court of Justlce. The Commlsslon has put forward an equltable
proposal for a temporary water management reglrne and made
suggestlon~ concernlng cooperatlon on energy questlonç. Thls
should encourage the partles to corn8 to an early agreement."
COMSIONO-ASCO~J~ DAOESEU~OPKOMUISSIO~IE~.~~~DE ELar,stccssi<recn
*OUMI$< ~NO~*EU~OPL~SCHEI~GEMLI~cn rmn" to~crrona.oiirori.COUMssi~~iI*E~~~~oPEANcO*A~L"~'~ES
COht.<uSSlOPiOESCONYEL~OPEE~NECOUlIISSIOhE OECLECOhI1,Niih €URO+ElO€ EUnOPESECEUCE~SC~UIPPE~
Coli S5A0 DA5 COlACl~?OAOFSEJROPElAS 266
COFY RETYPE FDRmP0sE-S OF LEGIBILm
Annex 117
NOTEVERBA LEOMTHE MINISTR YFFOREIGA NFFAIROFTHECZECH REPUBLI C THE DELEGATION
OFTHE EC COMMISSION, MARCH 1993
NoteVerbale
The MinistqofForeignAffaHsof tCzechRepublicpresentsitscomplimentsto theDeleofthetia
Commissionof theEuropemComrnunitieisPragu endhasthehonourronotifythaton 23 February
1993theHouseof Deputiesof theParliamof thCzechRepublicapprovedthattheCzechRepublic
wouldnotbecornea successionstate totheTreatybetweentheCzechoslovakSocialistRepublicandthe
HungarianPeople'sRepublicon the constrandioperatioofthe Gakikovo-NagyrnarBarrage
System ofLocks,signedin Budapont16 September1977andthe Contractlocumentsrelareto
thisTseaty.
TheMinistq of ForeignAffaofsthCzechRepubliçavailitselfof this opportunityto renewto the
DelegatiooftheCommissi ontheEuropeaCornmunitietsassurancesfitshighestconsideration.
Rague,3 March 1943
DeIegationof theCommission
,oftheEuropeanCommunities
Prague]IF 1 FRH~ j tlll
rir Llir (:oiiiiii ssiati of t lis Fu~rilipnii C'ciniitiiiiif111cs
1' r ;1 g Il 4- Minietnrstvo zahraniEnich vEcf Eeske republiky
projevuje dctu Dnlegaci Komise ~vropskich apoleEenstvi
a ma Eest sdglit, Pe dne 23. finora 1993 PoslaneckA
snemovna Parlamentu Ceçké republiky vyslavila souhlas
s tim, al:y Ceçkd republika neçukcedovala do Smlauvy
mezi Ceskoslovenskou socialistickou republikou a Ma-
aarskou lidovou republikou o vpstavbF a provozu Çaus:a-
vy vodnich del Gabfikovo-Nagymaroç z- 16. 9. 1977 a na
ni navazujicich smluvi~ich drikumentfi.
Ministerstvo zahranienlch v8ci çesk4 republiky
vyuifvb tkto pi-ileiftosti, aby Delegaci Komiçe Evrop-
skgch spoleCenstvi znovu ~jistilo svou hlubokou dctou. 269
Annex 1 18
MINISTER OF FOREIGNAFFAIRS
OF THE SLBVAK REPUBLIC
BratislavaM, ay fi, 1993
Your&cellmq,
On behaIf ofrlreSloi!oReprtblicI have flreiio~iorioiroi loY olrthefoilowing:
112accordaaç,pwitiir~ie~rl.~pfrinc@Iesaalrdnila01 irlrenlntioiiIaivniid10 fhe
e.rlenfdefinedbyifrhe Sis;~kRepublic,as a szdccessoState,bonrfronr (lidksol~rtiollof
IlteCzech and Slavak FederaiReplrblic,co?zsiderirrsebosind,nsof Ja~iiiny 1, 993,ie.
(liedoreon whicltrlreSlovnkRcprrblicnsstlmedr~spotzsibiIor ilsiirlenn=oriart.lntiotl.r,
by m~dtihterd rreatieto ivl~ithe CzecltnlrdSlovak Fideral Repirbiicii'an pnrw as of
31Dccember 1992,itirlri~ir~.stwatioriard deçlnraiior-iade enrlierbyCzecios10POXia,
cs iveIlm objectionsby Czechosiovahnroresewntiotrf somri 1ar.d byoller rrey -parlies.
The Siovak Republic ivirl:~rraher tomniritaill.ifssrnncns n coirfrncritStoreof dre
irearieco wizicliCzechoslodX?a was n co~imcti~igSlaie aitdivliiciveretroyi..i?iforce
arthe date oftlrr dissolirtionof tJreÇrecaiidSlovak Fedem! Reptlblic, nsrvellns tlze
slahrsofn s&intoty Sinle O{ilzefreuh'es iviiiitreprei:iora(sipze l r11ut rnfi;fii y
Czeçloslovakia.
2%~ appliesfofl~eb-eahesdeposired ivitffieSecrelnr-GetzeraIkfed in tlAlurer
fo th& 1ettt.x
In order to ensure rJiecoi7ti1irrormplernenratioliof these ~entiesin relation
betwear the Slovnk Reptblic and allierpartiesro the~emaries, 1 have the hoizorrrto
request YourExcelienq i~your capacig ofdepoiiilot.icornrnunicateihk infimation as
soon aspossible tothepasriesto the treatielkted inrlzeAnnex.
Pleasae ccept,YorirExce?lency Ihe assurancesof my highestconsidem.n.
HLF Excellefiy
Dr.Boulros Boums-Ghali
Secretary-GeneraZ
United Naiiom
New York Annex E19
L E ~ FROM MR. JANUS MARTONH YI,NGARIA STATESECRETAR EOR FOREIGNAFFAIRS TO MR.
JANLISUCH,SLQVAU KNDER-SECRET ARSTAE FORFOREIGNAFFAIRS,2 JUNE1993
The HungarianRepublic
MinistryofForeignAffairs
StateSecretary
To Mr. JhnLisuch
Under-Secretaryf State
Minishyof ForeignAffairs
The SlovakRepublic
Bratislava
DearMisterUnder-Secretaryof State,
TheHeadof OfficeoftheForeignMinistryof the SlovakRepublictold me inhis letterdated 20
May 1993 thatthe SlovakGovernmentwould put on its agenda the guidelinbetfollowedat the
negotiatioof watermanagementexpertsdueafterthe secondhdf of Apandindicated thataftertheir
accepmce the negotiationcould commence immediately. However, according to the officia1
informationof Slovak experts, theGovemmentof the SlovakRepublicdid notdealwith the guidelines
even at itssessionof 1June 1993,thuscausinga furtherdelayof negotiationsonwater management.
1would likto askfor theco-operationof Mr.Under-secretarsothatthe Slovak expertsare
readyfornegotiationsonwater conservaassoon aspossible.
Trecommend thatin the courseof the negotiationsover and abovethe evaluationof the current
situationthe expertsshould examinethe details of the possibility of implementingthe proposal of the
Commissionof the European Communityon water divisionand the establishmentoa consulting-
supervisorysystern.
My opinionis ththecfficiencyothenegotiationswaube positively influeby the written
opinionsof experts onhir standpointconcerninEChsuggestionAs is welknown in Februarythis
yeartheHungarianGovemmentalreadyacceptedtheproposaiof thEC Cornmittee.
Budapest,2June,1993,
Withrespect:
Dr. JhosMartonyi 271
Annex 120
S-tatern-ritof*h= SlovakDelega-ti~~
June 18, 1993
The Slovak side submitted repeatedly the proposal based on
dynamic operation of flows, divided between the Danube and the
power canal, taking into account the necessaxy discharge into the
river branches, ship locks, seepage etc. The proposal was in
detail explained and given to the Hungariandelegation and to the
observer of CEC.
The Slovak side took with regrets notice, that in spite of the
fact that this proposal achieves the goals of protection and
rehabilitation of the previously adversely influenced area of
the inland delta of the Danube, it was not accepted nor diccuased
by the Hungarian side.
The insiçting of the Hungarian side on the inflexible
CEC-proposal, based only on the allocation of flows, doeç not
create a baçis for fulfilling the necessary ecological
conditions, especially for the requirementç of mutual
interconnection of the river with both its branch systems.
The Slovak side presented by its proposa1 the highest level of
flexibility, based on sclentific background and carefull
monitoring of the real impacts, but kt must take into
consideration also the economic aspects, necessary for the
finalization of the whole Projeçt and of production of energy as
well .
The Slovak side also regrets, that the Hungarian side did not
accept even that part of the proposal, which is dealing with the
immediateconstructionof undemater dams in the Danube.
Signed : Annex 121
zvo Elav$Eek, acting Eead QE the Conçnlar Divis.hn of me s~ov*
1rirristryOC ForeignZiffzirs, presesked Lh,eZoLLowing verbzl neaor-
uiam ta o~lr Jmba~sador, enghesiz~-g -kdat be di6 so on the pe-
sonüfSnstmictians of Minis"Lr cnd khat kh2y r~pest ~iain
c sh~e tine e reply on tha confimation of the decision ky the
Rugar'iui ~zzliment wd on tbi provision of a und-&hg thet
we '$211 rot taXe =y tflllegalllzez~ure becore k?e ,Gecisio_tiof =F
Eaye CourL is reached.
it~ co~glfn~~~tç to A&=, mcssy cf &A; Republic of Eu~w Brct-
isI2-v~~ -6 ex-gyesszs its concerr over +i&~6eci~ian OF 3~11577,
1943 Caen by =e Pu~~LY?~? O? Y~EZepzblic 0Z Emq~ry, ;;hcr&y
th5 Rzpblic of Fimq~y, L?~ET 1953 sur,-l.~zzr~t~y bcaget, zs-
siPaa the sui.of 800 cillion Zoi-Lits fcr -kit ys%ztr EXXS~-I&~~L~S
-
t-Fex -&2t zt E ~LT~E ~:2eri r~eEZ-E g1~o--ational CO.= iizs COZ-
sezcod its proceeabgs o_ri 32~15 05 <TE SFPC~E~- CG~GZCCI; si~otï
ir.Briiss~l? on A-iriL 7, 1953 CO;~.CE~~C~ -Le siibnissior. of kk-
pirte betxeon L&e ~2pmlic of s~np-7; j=& elovgc R~c&.lic ove?
C-&C&~vc-~z~-ss ~TO jSCL, CO~E~~C~-GFT~ of cp~ziioi15
c~mrcked wi'& Lke gem.clitfon of th? K~.ha-=~as cc5fe 276 res-
torrtion of ç'=rour.di?g c92 t~ iks OPigb-zl ~t,=to 16 in 50ai
-
Con.lici wi-&'&ho obliptign ~ ~ & ~ ~ ~ ~y S~OEE ta zw+it
~s "ecisicn of the Hzyue Ict~nationzl Co-. hzlted the constnickibnx~rk~ for whirh the Republic of ~mg-
ia responkibleunder the l977'tret~ and the a0cUQentsattecwng
to Ws. The Hinistry of Foreiy 32f2irs cf the Slovzk B~priblic
therefare expects no sucb hezsure will taXe place ana oul le
r~elcoze the provisionof ttn undert~XFng to Lhis eff~ck by the
Ern~xlw side.
The 3Linis"q of Foreign ESlzire 05 Slovak Rzp-&lic rrsrp~ctfril-
7y recells thzt the 6101ciic2epublic, ~i6t,r lahr I of ICLTZTZPS
c. of Cleuse P Et;&P,zrzgrzphc 1 zxE 3 of CJEnce i cF Fe trzz-
siy& in Eadcgest on Sept=&sr 16, 1517 bzt-wicez the CS3 &:a tb~
IE3 or!&te corisïxction ,252GCEYE~~SZ CC ïtIl G~~-ELXCVC-X: C ~,Z~CS
\rcte~ Ezrrzqz q5tm, is CC-O~vTa CF L&~ ~TCQ~~CS bc-rr~qs
, .
hstzllztioh, rqd GOES not zvee +o ikr &~~?ol~<~oq. Annex 122
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEANCOMMUNITIES
vifoateGenenl
Opm-otlonSaelPHARErs
With referencetomy letterofJuly19, 1993enclosed pleasefinda proposalfor
timeandactivityschedulefor€lieworkof tlieMonitoringCornniittetlieestablisliment
of which hasbarn proposedbytheCommission.
The activityandtirneçchedulesliouldbe the bsis for the work and 1 wonid
apprecintereceivbig;yourcomments md confimaiilinihürHunçnry \vilparticipate
ncrivelyinthework ofthe MonitoringCommitreeassnon aspossible.
Mr, Jan05 Mattonfi, SecrctaofState
Minisk oyfForeignAffairs
BudapestH, ungary
RuadelLol-aôû&ID4BNSS~S,e[ai-Ofice:AM-4/51
Telephadlrectllne(+3333q8,1678sel:95,1!ex35.75.02
Tele: QMEUB21877. elegr!ddrePCOMEURBmsels -- - - - -
275
'
Est~h!i~liiizen ff a Wpic'r fifonftoring Cvlft 1ittc~~lfd a
IYarw Mcasurinn svste~~~
forflie Gahciko vosvstcnt c7fincks
Acrivitv andtime schedule
rrcoiiiriieridatiaregarding:
1, The necessarydischarge iriraiidwartr Icvel intlie old
2. A TcmporaryWater ManagemeniRigime includlnsa
det3iledrnanuatwith speciiicationsforIllday-to-day
opention and remedial mensures to betakçn, and
3. The establishii~eoftaWater Mariagenient and
Monitoring Conimittet rcsponsibtefor theopentjon of the
Establisliiiieiitothe Water Managemeniand Moiiirorilig
Coiiriiiittaiildfinadecision by [lierwa Goveninienrson Annex 123 1
State Secretary
for Foreign Affairs
Mi..Pnblo Berrnvidcs
Director
Coi;~iiiissioriof tire
E~rruyenr ro~iii;iirrritie.s
7/Tlrr colltcti~)nttri~i~t2fls~irqf fh ~cc~s17i ihft~ ftïl7i1i011l fhc
rei~i~~tz~ti~~~d~t(.miidhk~ y111c ii~/Ii~j~(rt~~i~ïu($(ICo~ii~irif!ico11sislr1 1$~ywi3
Hiiii~nrirïinileSln~in riidorteEC LI-~IP.Tliii.in.i/fiisi inclfIIFCotfit~ljtliIlrisIII
hetltccoll~ciio~oiffJrnuilierzlicdi tfiulriclr{iriinront!liedisj~tsiiiqI~t~iShiriinsn
reç~ilt$ ~e~y~il m~lefist~rit~i~ndejoi~dt1ojrSP~IZY~T~C/!~y c~h Silit?.F~it~lizsleps
ci~iiidbed~cirleodir Illbcrsisi$the c.i.i~lii;'~ i1111,i.
2/ ,41ri1/i,rriiii/lit> iiiT~.r1s.~,,ii.yriiirfi~lir'lrE.i.llrJiC;i.orili
ct~tlsisii~i$fiue ~ii~tttbcr(llrriitpp(~iil!id [/ILC~~I~~II~~SI~ lIiIl~t?(o~:k nnd
aiie by IlleHiirz8nria1 siirie)sliuiildrinrriy IIicreairiririr~rrdriif~~~IsIPTi-ilrrrrtilp
Mc~~II,~. Th ~~tnjo~ih ~j,ei~/r~~ ttld/.rji[~rii~(filji~EC~.~pt~ri /st-oits~iii~11s{I
Ixrsiceie~~rc~~ftljteSr~KCLY SIII~eJfi>c y qi1tfyijt1'1tici7)jli111/]l ii?~ilcd L-(~SL~.
Wr thiirk,Iliercfto hntc,titeiiliniii~~r~riiiiil)ri lrcEC r3.qlr irffhi~ Ex/~t'~.f
Groiiy cni~izottieles5Ilinillii-ce. $3/ DLIL 1* //le ~l~o~p~~~~~~tioir~ ~lis~ijiiiu*tlzit~k!/111! ~/ICi~/i~~iil~i~sIzij~
niid prirliciprr iii if lii~Co~i!triissio ii Iliepliiiiii~.T~~lllpi117~1yWII~L M'I.izil,ye~~l~fil
n~ld Morlifor-iiq Coiriiililf~~seeriistribe iirdispeiisi~lile. Annex 124
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
DirecbrataGeneral
ExlemaEconomicRelatians
Operaiioni ervtcePHARE
035x86 *01,fi0,93
Brussels.
ServicdL-3Aicç
Dear Mr. Mamnyi,
Refercnct ismade ro your lerrerto Mr. Benzvidesdnted July 22, 1993atidyour
confirmation that Hungary can suppon the establislrne:?of a Group ci Iiide~endent
Monitoriri,ear,d Waterhlanagemrnt Exl)zris.
Mr. Jan'tisuch, Secretary cf Sta!: !las corifirinrthat alsuSluvakiu ~culd O:
wjllingro panicipate iithe process.iindlias siibini~tedetailrdconmeiits cs weil.
Basedon tlicornmentsr~ceivtc! froriitiretwo sides,aird tliereqricstedr.cedfoi
clarificationof some of tlie as!:ecis1nc1udeSin tlie Ers; draii I:,'cïkingDcccmz:t.t?c
Cominission has~irzpiirtdan adjusted Wor4iiig Document -Estlblish;ncriîcfs G:c?up.cl:
independentblonitoring zrid Wattr h!anagtine9t Experrsfor tlie Gabciko~o sts:em OF
lacks -vhiclijs found attsclied.
The document contains an cpdated tirne and activiiy scliedula:i6it isproposed
-:-lu,. ....- ..-- , ....., -. .-- .."-..
thatthe -fust~meeting.~n-.the~G~pu~p _~a~f.pIac~~~!1~AÜ.iu~t6~,.i935:T.TThe
indipendent E_C Expertswo u.d-bt.avaii..-,for a start.. mevting ai thisdata and itjs
proposedthat'the:fg-slme-etibg,izke,splace!n-Biatislflia.
.--=.-.-.n.a.preciire'ieceyng yncr comments 'tathe.secondWorking~oCurn~t,:' . .
,-.-.Y- b. ,.-.-2-.-%m- .:,. -..
-?%ch'h':%liélln3le3heI~CCo~ sli0..$O,pripaii-th.e-fin.-lO~~,~ZÏ Jbefo~e..AUgu ;s~6,2
1993. AIso I would apsreciate bein~,informed abour the name of rhe independent
Hungarian expertand i18~efu11 you;confirmation tliat tlieHu:igariariExpert-willbc
availableforthe firstmeeting in Bratislava.
I view of the surnrnerh~liday and the absence.uf Mr. Benavidesplease addrtss al1
correspondance directlyto Mr. Marc Fraiicoon telefnsno32 2 79 57502.
Yourssinceiely,
Mr. JanosMartonyi, Secretary of State
Ministryof ForeiçnAffairs
Budapest,Hungary
Rue rie la-2008-IM9BRisse!s.Belgi-OffCo AN-a0 4/51
Telepnondirecl line(-32-2)39sscreiarm55.16tg la: 205 7502
TelexCOtdEU0 21837.TeleçraphicaddrsssCOhEwssils ÇOMMlSSlONOFTHE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Directorceneral
%*ri OperarlonalServicaPHARE
Draft\+'orkingDocument
In order to provide se!iab!e v::dispi!teddataûii :!rr.ii;jrnpoz.-iit tffect;
of ths ciirsent ivatcr dischzrandtli? rc!nzdiaImensurcsalrcadyriidenken as ive!!
asto m&e recommendationsfer hg!..:! 21,proprintz renledialinsasaïes ihe
of Hungary 2nd the Kepubliç of SIovSia wjll estiblish 3 Graiil-,ofIr,:',epl;end~ri:
L,ionitoringzridWaterMznasvmen;Experts. (Gro~;,of Esl-icrts).
The Gr~up of Expe~:sliall coiisistof one iridepeildsnt exper: appointcdby
~uniay and one independeni cxper;e!~poiiiteby Slovakia. One iiidspendenrexpert
appointeciby the Commission of t!ieZurdpeniCi ornrnui~itievil1cl;aithe work for;i
periad of up :O tlu-eirioiitlzT!?e EC exlizi~uill be suppo:îed in liis viaiby< twn
assistaxt expens, aiid tlieEC espc;;; \\.il11zvecspei?ise in Iiydrology ii~cludii-ig
monitoring of Iiydrologicaldata. esoloçicnissuesniid \ratel+Laçed~~i~sinicti~fis.
TIiemoniioriiig will co\.ei- tivliolearea sui~oundii~gthc Gabcikovo system
of lockç, ai~dany moi-iitoriiigand ixelisuring systenlsivillbe establishtd both at
SIovak and Huneanan territory.
No recommendations os activitits arisingfiom the establishineoftlie Group
of Expests or itsoperation wilI effect, orreflecr upo~~,aily orthe issuesof legal
liability whicliinaçcordniicewitli theSpecial Açrecmriit, must be dete;nzinntedby
the International Couisof Justice.
The Group ofExperts will submitrepoirs aiid adapt recornineridationsbased
on consensus between the independent experts.In casesof disputesin the Groupof
Experts the two nationalexperts nj\vellasille EC expert can subinitsepuaîe reports
and recommendritioiiç. 4. Mode and plnce ~f operation
A detailed activity and meeting plan will be prepared attlie firsmeeting in
the Groupof ExpertsP . laceof meetings willalternatebetweenSlovakie and Hvngary
andsecretaria1supponwill be provided by the host country.
, filSiausti~ll!Wiii~riril.l~c~~~~~inl.piil~ci Tne Group ofExperts will:
1. Collectand asses dsataon al1reIevantaspects and eff~cts of thecurrent
water dischargeincluding the effects of thtvarious remedial rneasures
alreadyputinplace.The datz tobe collected\vil1be der'medbythe Group
of Experts within three days afttr ils forma1 establishment. The
methodology to be 2ppIiedin-thesubsequentdataanalyseswiilbe defuiecl
by theGroupofExperrs ircmection witliitsErstreporr 17 days afierits
forma1 establishï~ent.Thcdata tobs collected wiI1atleastinciudz:
* water discharge a!al1relevantplaces;
* surfacewatt: Ievelandqualityincluainssedirnci~tation;
* gound water IeveIandqualit?:
* ecoloyical effvcts:
* clecrricity production
The dnra ~01lccti01 ~.ll be based on tlieesiçtiiigdarz curiently at the
disposa1 of both sidesns ;i resuIrof rtzuIai inzasl?rLq.mxit joinily or
separatclyby eacliside. Furthtr tlie Croupof Expertswi!l&56e an rkcn.
or hamonistd moni:ùriiig proceOures and i0e:ltt;ji~~~~ib leed for
addi;ionalmoniroriiigto bc czrriedout in thefumrv.
II On the basis of the data collection(1) prepare recomendations, for
submission ro thetwo Goveriments,on the followingasptcts with a view
tosafeguardtheenvironrnt~ra tndthe ecologicalconditionsiiU :ieregion:
: A ternporary Waier Management ReAime including 2 detailed
manualivithspecificaiionsfortheday-to-da?opera:ioii;
* Remedialmezsuresto bt taken and the necessaiy water discliarge
md waterlevelin the oldriva-bed;
* The establishrnu~r of a \-Vater Maiiagernent and Monitoring
Cornnittee for the opentioii of the tcinporary Water
ManagementRegime.The mai11 task of the: Water
Management aiid MoiiiioringCo13lrnitte~loiild be to:
- adjus1tlieTtmporaiy Water Mai~agcinent Reçime ontliebasis
of t1ioperationai experiei-iceand coiitinuemoiiitoring,
-
initiatand supervise additioiial studirequired, and
- prepare recornmendationsfoi.ui-geiirneasures to be takenin
caseof emergency situations:3. Activity and tiniescfiedule
~ht Group of Expens will work in accordance wirlitheEoIlowing the and
activityschedule.
1. Teinporsry \i:atrr Maiia:e!nriit Reijime including a
dctailed rnai:cnl \vitli specifici;ivii~ f3r [liedzy-to-da?
2. Rerneôizlm:asures t~ be taken and tlieiieccssaiywaier
dischargeaiici~t.a;tlevelinthcoldriver bed;
1.Ternpornry Weter ~MaiiegeinenRtegime;
1933 recoininendations s!ibinirrzdby tlCroupof Expertsarid the
estsblishnieiitof n Wattr Management aiid Moriitaring
Cornmi ttee.
- - 283
Annex 125
COMMISSIONOF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
plrectnOrneral
Exterlwnmk Mations
Op@radoam PHARE
q s
fnrfie Gahcilinsiisfe»f 1t)cli.~
Inarder toproviderelinband undisputeddaton rhemost importanttffects
of thecurentvater dischargeanthe rtmedjameasuresalrendyundertakenasweii
as tomakerecommmdation fsr funherappropriaeemedialmeasuresthe RepubEc
of Hunguy and the Republic ofSlovaki u11 establisa Group of Independent
MonitoringandWaterManagementExpem. (Oroup of Experts).
The Group of Expem shall consiof oneindependeritxpertappointedby
Rugq andoneindependent expertappointed i ;-Sl~vakia.Three independent
expm appointeby theCommissionof theEusopeu Commuriitieswilparticipare
iTtheGroup.The meesiri~willbechairedby oneof theEÇ expertsTlieEC expert
WU have expefise in hydrology includingmonirorins of hydr~lagicaldata,
ecolopicalissuesand water basedconsmictionsThe Slovaki and Hunganaii
expertscm besupportedbyassociateexpens neeessary,
ïhc : ~rïitoiing\vcoverthewhol~aT susround thnGabcikovo system
oflocks: .idany monitoringand measw syçterns be establisheboth at
SlovakandHungarian territ ory
h'orecommendatiortoractivitiesarisingfrthe tstabllshmeofthe Group
of Expensor it$operationwilleffecror refiecupon,my of theissues of legal
liabilitywhicin accorda uire theSpecialAgreemenr,mur?be deienninarsdby
thehtmationd CourtofJustice.
nie Group of Expm wîll submitreponrand ~commendaiionsbasedon
consemu betweenthe independentexperts.IIcasesof disputeslilhe Group of
ExperrtsheSlovak iadnHungarian expmsas utrlasrlieEC cxpenîan submit
sepatatreponsmd recomrriendations. The GroupofExpenswili;
1. Colleet andassessdataon dl relevanr aspecrsand effecof thecurrent
waterdischargeincluding theeffects ofthevariousremdial meastres
aireadyputinplace.'Ihedatatobe colleetedwilIbedefinedbythe Oraup
of Experts within three &YS after its formal establishment. The
rnethodoIosytobeappliedin the subsequcnrataanalysesWUbedefrried
bythe Groupof Expertsincomecsioriwirh its fireport17 daysaftm irs
formaiestabZishmmt.The datatobe collected wiarleastinclude:
* water dischargat alrelevantpIaces; ~
* surfacewaterlevelandqualitylncludingsedimeriration;
- waterleireandqualityinthereservoirandinthe chanrid,
- waterlleveandqualityintheDmube
- quantirand qualityofsedimentsintheresemoir andin the
channe?,
- processoferosioninthe Danube
" gound watetlevel and qdity;
>-
*
impactorifloraand fama in theregion;
" impact on agricultureanfore5tr-y:
~
* urilisatioof tlihydro-energyofrht Danube;
* impact onnavigation;
* flood protection.
1
The data collecti\vilbe basedon the exlsrii#ara currentlat the
disposaiof both sides aa resultof regular measuring made johly or
separatelybyeach çide.FurthertheGroup ofExperrs ~%<llecide onnzw
or hmonised monitorins procedures and idenrify possible need for
additionamloni~orinro be caniedoutin thcfuture.
LI. Ori thebasis af the data collectio(1) prepsrerecommendations for
submissionro theiw6Govenunents,onrliefollowjng aspects14th aview
tosafeguardtheenvironment andthe ecologicalconditionintheregion:
A temporary Water Manasement Reghg includinga detailed
A,
manual ivith specificationfor the day-to-day operation and
differentwaterdischarg~ituations;
B. Rmedial rneasura tobe t3km aiidthe necessaryuratcrdischarge
and %*iltelevel intheold river bed, inthe branches andin the
adjacentareaincludingatirnetablfortheiimplementation; Ç, De establishmentof a Warer Management and Monitoring
Commirreefor rhe operation of the ternporay Water
Manasemen tegime.The main task of the Water
Management andMoniraAg Commirrzewould bcto:
- proposemodificationsintheTemporary Water Management
Regime ornew remedialrneaswcsto betakenonthebasis of
theoperationalexpenenceancontinuedmonitoring,
- initia andsuperviseadditionsrudies, easurementsand
researchrequireand
- preparerecominendationfor ursent mmsuretobe takenin
caseofernergencysituations,
3. Actlvitv and tirneschedule
The Group of Expertswill work in accordnnw1ithrhcfollowingthe znd
activityschedule,Date Activity
Au- 30, 1993 ( Firstmeetingto devdop n detailcictionmd meetingpian.
I
September 3,1993 Repart by the EC Experts on the need for clarificatior
adjwtmentsintheWorkjnçDocument.
September 20,1993 Report on assesment of existing data,the pre1imh.q
£indings from analyshg the data and the recomniendations
reçardingmodifications ro thepresent monitoringpractice.
Report will be submitredto the two Goverrunenta snd the
Commission.
Report summarising the findingsof thedata c~llectioand
analysesandpreliminaryreconimendations regading:
1. Tmporary Water Management Regirne including a
detailed manual wirh specificationfor the day-to-day
operationsanddifferentwaiesdischusesituations;
2. Remedia1measurts ro bzlaken and thenecessary water
discharse andwaer levelin rlizoldrivebed,h the branches
and inthe adjacent area iiicludinga limetable fortheir
imp~emmtation;
3, The establishment of a \Vater Management and
MonitoringCornmirtee re. item 2.II.C.
Finalrecommendations for:
1.Temporary Water ManagementRegme;
2.Remediairneasuresroberaken andnecesçarywatar
discharge
and ivaterlevein theoldriverbed,and
3.Establishmen ota Warer Managemei a-diMonitoring
Cornmirtee4. Madeand aIaw ofo~eration
A detaïleaçtivityandmeetingplanwilbepreparedarrhefirstmeetinIn
theGmupofExperts.Placeofmeetingsyillaltern betweeeSlovakiaandHungary
andsecretarisupponwillbeprovidedby thhostcountry.
5. General
AilproceedjrisatacollectedbyandrecommendationfromrheGroupof
Expenswillbeconfidenrilnrithewo Govemmmts andtheCommissiondecide
othenivis.heIndependent Experts will make nopublicstatementworktof
theGroup. Annen 126
GROUP OF MOMITORINC AKI3 WATER WWAGEMENT EXPERTS FOR THE
GABCKKOVO SYSTEM QF MCKS
Minutes 'from first meeting of the Group of Experts on September
8-9 in Bratislava,
~11 £.ive members of the Working Group participated in the
meeting. In addition the ~ungarian and Slovakian experts were
supported by a number of associate experts. Finally,
representatives from the EC Predency and the CEC participated as
obçervers in part of the meeting. The participants are listed in
~ppendix A.
Before the formal start oE the meeting Mr. Jan Lisuch hosted a
lunch on behalf of the Slovak Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Mr.
Lisucb welcomed the memhers of the Working Group to Bratislava
and expresseci the wish for a succesfull work.
1. ~p~rbval of agenda
The meeting was opened at 16~' hours on September 8 by
Johann Schreiner who presented a proposal for an agends and
a number of proposais Tor variouç items. Following a snort
break for reading the Working Group zdopted the proposed
agenda. The meeting was chaired by Johann Schreiner.
2. Logistics of first meeting
The meeting room facilities and the timing for the meeting
were agreed upon.
3. Commentç to Working Document
Johann Schreiner noted that the working Gr0u.p document
dated August 26, 1993 constitutes the tenns of references
fer the Working Group. Rfter some discussion the f~llowing
points a£ clarification were agreed upon:
3.1 The meetings will be chaired by Johann ~chreiner or
by one of the other EC experts according to hiç
decision. Al1 recornrnendations and concLusions £rom
the EC Experts will be prepared with full consensus
under the coordination of ~ohann Schreiner. It cannot
be guaranteed that al1 three EC experts participate
in al1 meetings.
3.2 Minutes of meetings will be prepared by either hast country or by EÇ experts.
~
3.3 with reference to the fourth para an page one of the
working Document (the one çtarting with "No
recommendations ....") it is the understanding of the
Working Group that in the aim to fulfill Article 4 of
the 'Special Agreement for Submission to the
International Court of ~ustice of the diiferences
between the Republic of Hungasy and the Çlovak
Republik concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project*
the Working Group has been given the task to prepare
the mentioned Temposasy Water Management Regirne.
3.4 The Data Report wilL be finalized and subniitted on
November 2 instead of September 30.
3.5 The Final Report wiPl be finalized and submitted on
December 1 inçtead of November 19.
Para 5 in the working Document to be replaced by the
fellowinq:
Al1 proçeedings and recomendatians from Che'Group of
Experts will be confidential until the two
Governments and the Comnission decide otherwise.
However, the data collected and analysed by each
goverment can be utilized bÿ bath governments .
Public information about the contents of the
discussions in the working Group are strictly
foraidden. $.t the end of each formal meeting a
communique andior a press release will be agreed upon
if necessary. This agreed text foms the irzrnewosk
wlthin which çtatementç of the Working Group members
can, if necesçary, be made. All rnernberç will refrain
from statements which may hinder the achievement of
psogsess in the activities of the Working Group. EC
members will make no public statements.
The reasons for the postponement of the reporting dates
(points 3.4 and 3.5) was the very significant arnount of
work required and praçtical aspects of finding time slots
for the meetings.
I
The suggested modification of the "confidentiality clause"
in point.3.6 was strongiy urged both by the Hungarian and
Çlovakian experts.
The EC experts will request the approval of points 3.3,
3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 in their forthcoming report to CEC due by
13..septembes 1993. 4. Activiky, the çchedule and meeting plan
The activity, tirne schedule and meeting plan given in
~ppendix B was agreed upon.
5. Data to be collected and analysed
The plan fer collection and assessrnent of data described in
Appendix C waç agreed upon.
~t was enquired from the Hungarian and Slovakian Experts
whether it weuld be possible to obtain financial support
from CEC for the modifications and strengthening of the
preçent monitoring practiseç to be recommended in the Data
Report. The EC experts will make an enquiry on this issue
to CEC Brussels.
6. Scenarios for Temposary Hater Management ~eghes lncluding
remedial measures
It was agreed to base the analyses of Ternpor.ary Water
Management Regimes and remedial measures on sone of the
çame scenarios as described in the November 1992 Working
Group Report. These scenarios need to be updeted
correspanding to the present iield situation. iience, the
scenarios outlined in Appendix D were agreed upon as the
first draft, on which basis the horneworks specified for the
Hungarian and Slovakian experts were dedided,
7. Contacts until next meeting
Realizing the very significant amount of work required to
be carried out by the Hungarian and SLovak experts before
the next meeting scheduled to start on October 27 and the
necceçity for arriving at a homogenious data base and
methodology for the data analyses it was agreed ta
encourage informa1 contacts among the mernbers of the
Working Group in cases where doubts on the details given in
Appendix C may arise. The contact adresseçs and
telephone/fax nurnbesç are given in Appendix E. AL1 the EC
experts have commitments outçide their home offices in
parts of the period until the next meeting; however they
can alwayç be contacted through their respective home
of fices. 8. Next meeting
Ta accordance with the tirne schedule given in Appendix B
the next meeting will be held during the period Octoher 27
- Navernber 1. The meeting will start on October 27 at 11''
hours. Gabor Vida will ensure suitable facilities for a one
week meeting (incl. PC with WP5.1 office facilities, etc
of similar good quality as for the Working Group meeting in
Budapest in November 1992) and communicate location and
telephone/fax numbers to the othermembers of the Working
Group by Bctober 20.
communique
With reference to point 3.6 above the communique enclosed
as Appendix F waç agreed upon.
The enclosed appendices A - F Tom part of the official minutes.
Bratislava, 9. çeptember 1993
Johann Schreiner
.' Igor Mucha Gabor Vida
J 9, van APPENDIX A Participants of the first meeting of the Workinq
Group
Msmbess of the Workkng Group
Johann Schreiner,, EC
Jan M. van ~eese, EC
Jens Christian Refçgaard, EC
Igor Mucha, Slovakia
Gabor Vida, Hungary
Associate experts from Hungary
Adrienne Hajosy
Zoltan Nagy
Associate experts from ~lovakia
Ladislav Somsak
Jozef Oblozinsky
Gabriel Niznansky
Ludek Krajhanel
Ferdinand Kubicek
Stefan Molnar
Others
Dusan Ondrejicka, CEC PHARE deleqation in Bratislava
Veronique Eiaronnek, Belgian Embassy Bratislava
(repsesenting the EC Precedençy) APPENDIX B Activity, time schedule and meeting plan for the
Working Group
papers on
levels and remedkal rneasures
Ta be faxed to al1 members of
Finalization and subrniss~on
of Data Report
One day field visit
rirst discussion of
principles for'Temporary
Watet Management Regime
Fizst discussion of necessary
water d~scharge and water
level in the old river and in
ary Water Management
Minutes
8-9. september1W3 VorkingGroup of Honitorinand üarcr hanagcmcnt foGabc~OVO
- --.-Nov 22 Comments to discussion papers af Home H + S
93.11.15. To be faxed to al1 members offices Experts
of the Workinq troup.
Third meeting with finalization of Bratislava Al1
Mov 29
- Dec 1 work and submission of Final Report Annex 127
GRO~ OF .HONITORXNG WATER MANAGEMENT EXPERTS FOR THE
G~c~KOVO SYST%ÈI OF LOGES
Minutes fr~m second meeting of the Group of Experts on Odober 27
- November 2 Budapst.
al1 five members of the Working Group participated in the
meeting. In addition the Hungarian and Slovakian experts were
supportedby a numberof associate experts. The participants are
liçted in Appendix A.
Beforethe fanal startof the meeting Mr. Janoç Gyurko, Minister
of Environmentwelconed the members of the Working Group to
Budapeçt and expressed the wish for a succeçfull work.
Upon re&est from the Nungarian Parlament the Working Group paid
a visit to the Parlamentan November 1, 1993.
1. Approval of agenda
The meeting w2s opened on October 27 by Johann Schreiner
who presented a proposal for a work plan for the following
days. The meeting uas chaired by Johann Schreiner.
Logistics of firçt meeting
The meeting hed its opening sessian in the Ministry of
Environment. Subsequently, the.Working Group worked at the
Water Research Center (YITUKI), except for Çaturday,
October 30, where a full day field visit was made 2nd on
Sunday, Octaber 31, where the group worked at office
facilities at the Hungarian Natural History Museum.
3. Data Report
The Data Report comprisingan assessrnent of impacts of the
Gabcikavo Project and recommendationsfor strengtheningof
monitoringçystem was completed by the end a£ the meeting.
The work on the Data Report was made difficult becauçe the
time çcheduleagreedupon at the lastmeeting was not kept.
Thuç,. the HungarianData Repart was.delayed by a week and
did not containal1 the data and analyses agreed upon.
Minutes
, 27Ott-2Huv1993 barkinGrowofMonitoriandYater HanagefrnCabcikava 4, possibilitp for CEG support to strengtheningof Monitoring
system
Jchann schreinerinformed about the response from CEC to
the minutes from last meeting, where the Slovakian and
Hungaxian experts enquired about the possibility for
obtaining financial support for strengthening the
monitoring after December 1993.
CEC requests the more information, includingfinancial
estimates, on this issue. The Working Group therefore
decided to prepare tentative financial estimatesfor the
monitoring activitiesreccmmended in the Data Report.
Hençe the Hungarian and Slovakian parts willprepare drafts
on this issue before the next meeting.
5. Temporary Uater Hanagement Regime
The work plan enclosed in Appendix B wa agreed upon.
6. Home work to Be carried out during the coming period until
next meeting
(a) Fimancial estimates of monitoring programmes (only
coarse estimates). To be faxed to WG-members by
November 23.
(b) Work related to preparation of the Temporary Water
Management Regime as specifked in Appendix B.
In light in the difficultieç with the Data Report (point 3
above) Gabor Vida promised that Hungary would do its best
to provide the requested data. However, he could not at
-thisstage glve a firm guarantee.
7. Hext meeting
According to the minutes from the first meeting the next
meeting shbuld be held during the period November 29 -
December 1. In light of the extreme time presçure of the
present meeting the Working Group decided to start the next
meeting on Sunday, November 28 at 17~ heurs. The meeting
wilL be held in Bratislava.Igor Mucha vil1 çommunicate
locationand telephone/fax numbers to the othermembers of
the Working Group by November 19.
Uorkingr- ofHonitorirdUater Mamgment for Gabcikow communique
The communiqueencloçed as Appendix Cwas agreed upon.
.
The encloçedappendicesR - C form part of the officiaminutes.
Budapest, 2. November1993
Johann Schreiner
Gu- - "
/ IgorMucha Gabor Vldè
Yhrking piHonitonrsidVater Managewnrfor Gabcikaw=PENDIX A participants of the third meeting of the Working
Gr0up
Members of the Working Group
Johann Schreicer,EC (primus inter pares)
Jan M. van Gaest, EC
Jens Christian Refsgaard, EC
Gabor Vida, Hungary
Igor Mucha, Slovakia
Associate experts from Hungary
Karoly Barosç, North Transdanubian District Water
Authority, Gyor
Rdrienne Hajasy, Ministry for Environmental and Regional
Policy, Budapest
Lajos Horvath, North Transdanubian DistrictEnvironmental
Authority, 'Gy6r
Ferenc Meszaros,~ungarian Natural History Muçeum, Budapest
201th Nagy, North Transdanubian District Environmental
Authority, Gy6r
J~~os Szekeres, Water ResourcesResearchCenter, Budapest
Gyargy Toth, Hungarian Geological Survey, Budapest
~ssociate experts from SLevakia
Vaclav Mikulka, Law Expert, WB, Prague
Maria Holobrada, Water Research Lnstitute,Bratislava
Ing. Ferdinand Kubieek, Institute of Ecobiology, Slovak
Academy 05 Sciences, Bratislava
MiroslavLiska,Vodohospodarskavystavba, Bratislava
Ivan Uhlar, Hydroconsult, Bratislava work plan for preparation of Temprary Water kfanagement Reghe
Table of contents.
rntroduction.
~eçcription of existingwater çystemç.
Formulationcf scenarioç.
Elaborationof çcenario 2
lmprovernent of present situation (shorttenu scenario).
Obj eetives.
Approach.
A~siisiptions.
Design of additonal measureç.
Watermanagementregimes.
~escription of inpact~.
Description of other çcenarios.
Conclusions and recommandations with regard to Tkm
operationmanual for TWHR
Commenta to above points:
Ad 2. Description of the existing systems.
2.1.Main rives.
Items. Homewark.
-Water supply system EC
-topography (map, river cross sections
from 1993). Preliminarilyprocessed
data £rom 5-10 repreçentatkve
croçsseetions - to the extent
possible H
-relation discharge, waterdepth
and velocities (rating cuves) for 1993
at Rajka,Dunaremete and if possible
two other representative sites H
-ice management Sl
2.2.Inundatianarea on the left side.
Rems. Hornework.
-water supply çystem S1
-topography (map) af the branches,
dams, structures S1
- 5-10 representative erosssections S1
-relationdischarge, wide, waterdepth
and velacitiesby relevantdischarges
Mlnures
27Oct-Z Nov1W3 Yorking GrofMonitoriadUateHanagenentfor Gabclkr in repreçentive cross -sections S1
-bottomconditions S1
2.3,Inundation area on the right side.
Same items as 2.2. H
2.4.Total system.
- connectionsbetweenbranches and
main river. H and sl
Ad 3. ~ormulationof çcenarios.
Scenario 1: Present situation.
-400m3?sec into the main river.
-30-50 into the left inundation area.
-10 into the right inundation area.
Scenario 2: Improvement of the present situation.
-50-100 intothe right inundation area.
-30-140 intothe left inundationarea.
-600 imediatly into the main river and 600-1000 from may
1994.
-1-3 floods a year, more than 3500 (if technical
possible).
Scenario 3: Scenaria 2 plus construction of some under ,
nater weirs
'
Scenario 4: Fullcapacity of variant C structures used for
watersupply to the main river and the branches.
Two steps 1. phase 1 structures.
2. phase 2 strctures.
In addition, the Slovak expert gets free hands to prepase
an independentsçenario for inclusionas an Appendix to the
report
Ad 4. Elaborationof scenario 2.
4.1.Objectives.
1. Water quality in the main river should be as good as
possible. ~edimentation and erosion should approach
natural conditions as far as pbçsible.
2. The water level and diseharge regime in the
inundationarea shculd at least apptoach the predam
conditions.
2. The qroundwater regime on bath sides of the river
Yorking Frof'nunitoadnYatcr ManagemnCakikovo should be as good as in the predam conditions.
4. No irreversible technical measures.
4.2.Approach.
The approach wilL be to look çeperately at
I.The main Danube.
2.The inundation area on the left side.
3.The inundation area on the right side.
4.The connections in the total system.
The length of the short term period is uncestain depending
on the decission of the internationalcourt (within three
years) and the period needed for implementatian of the
decission (may be 0-2 years). Scenario 2 deals with the
period untill tha decission of the court.
4.3.Assumptions.
We assume that the the objectives 1, 2 and 3 will be
achieved under the next conditions (according to our best
judgement)
4.3.1.Main river.
Two times a year a discharge of 3500 will be enough to
clean the river bed sufficiently.
4.3.2 /4.3.3. Inundationarea.
-More than 501 of the inundation area should be flooded
sometimes per year.
-A variation of the wateslevel within 2 m will be enough
to ensure the dynamic character.
-If 10 % of the branches (lenght) iç free from mud the
water can infiltratesufficiently,and the conditions for
biocenosiç will be sufficient.
-To remove the mud from the bottem of the branches a
velocity of the water of 0.6-lm per sec is enough.
-To keep the bottem of the branches free from mud 0.2m
per sec will be enough.
4,3,4.~onnections in the tata1 systen.
Migration of wetlandspecies between main channe1 and side
branches should be enabled even by using fish passes.
4.3.5.An adequate water management regime.
Above mentianed açsumptions are design criteria for the
meaçureç t~ be taken in this scenario. 4.4.Design of additonal measures.
4.4.1.min river.
-supply system for 750, 1500, and S1
3500 m3 per sec.
-fish passes S1
-technicalpossibilitieç and
compli¢ations S 1
-implementationtime, cost indication Ç1
4.4.2.1nundation area on the left side.
-fish passes S1
-implementation tirne, cost indication ~1
4.4.3.Inundation area on the right side.
-Calculation of max and min discharges H
-water supply system, elaboration of
three variants
i.supply cannalfrom inundation weir
to first side branch
2.under water weir near Dunakliliti
3,optirnalizatio of supply through the
seepage cannal and additional a
syphon between the reservoir and the
Eisst side branche, crosslng the
river. (dicharge 50 m3 per sec) .
Included irnplementatio nimes and
cost indications. H and sl
-0ptimalizationbranch system, dams,
weirs,. .. H
-structures, fish passes H
-technical possibilitieç and
complications H
-implementation time, cost indication H
4.5.Watermangement regimes.
Main river, propoçalEc.
Inundation areas, left side proposa1 S1, right side propoçal H.
4.6. Description of impacts of scenario 2.
First draft will be written by Ec (JCR). Contributions are
welcom .
5,Other scenarios,
First draft will be mitken by EC(JCR).
.orkiGr.-ofHonitoriad Uateneneg-tfor Gabcikwo 6.~0nclusionç and recomandationç.
First draft will be written by EC (JCR).
The sehedule:
Nov 11: Input from H + SK to JCR (available e.g. text via fax)
~ov 16: First versionfaxed to H + SX for ccments
Nov 22: DeadLine for submitting comments from H t SK te JCR
Nov 28: Second versionpseçented at start of meeting. communique from the second Meeting of the "Wosking Group of
~onitoring and Water Hanagement EXPAS for the Gabcikovo System
of acksH held October 27 - Nowember 2, 1993 in Budapest
Monitoring means the continuous observation of specified
parameters with standardized methods. It iç desirable to get an
objective estimation of changes caused by construction of the
VariantC of the GabcikovoSystem of Locks. A five person working
group establishedby the Republic of Hungary, the SLovak Ropublic
and the ~ammiçsionof the European Communitieshas analysed the
availôble data and assessed the present monitoring practise in
the ares inf luençed by damming the Danube. In a meeting from
October 27 to November 02, 1993 in Budapest the Working Group
asçessed the present impacts of the Gabcikovo Project and
prepared recommendations for strengthening the monitoring system
in the influenced area.
Major general impacts çould be identiiied on the discharge in the
D~nube,levels of the surface wators, sedinentationand erasion
procesçes, the ground vater levels and on electricitypro0ucrion.
. In the Old Danube the discharge ha5 in 1993 been reduced to in
average about 400 mJ/s corresponding to about 20 % es compzred to
the pre-dam conditions. At Bratislava the water levels dcring Low
flow periads have increased by 1-2 n as compared to pre-dam
conditions, i.e. to a level correspondinq to the situztion 40
years ago. In the upstrean part of the Old Bznube the 1993 vates
levelç have been reduced by 2-4 m as çompased to pre-dam
conditions, and have thus reached a level 2 m below the lowest
ever recorded values. In addition, the characteristic natural
dynamics of the water level fluctuatians have been changed
(reduced) significantly.siqnificanterosion occurred the first
500 m downstream the Cunovo structures under the Novenber 1992
flood event. This material has beon deposited downstreanin the
Old Danube. Sedimentation of f ine material/silt czn be secn in
the Old Danube, Most likely,sedimentztionof the total bed load
and a substantialprrt of the suspended load have occurred in the
reservoir. In June/July 1993 the situation in slovakia shows that
over the entire area the ground water levels have increased or
have not been affected. The increaseç have mainly occurred in the
upstream area close to the reservoir, i.e. in the area which has
been most negatively affected by the long term trend af
decseasingground water levels. On the Hungarian side it appears
that grouna water levels have increased close to the reservoir
(Rajka - Dunakilitiregion). Furthermore, it appears that in the
middlepart of Szigetkazbetween Dunakiliti and Asvanyraraground
waterleveis have decreased in areaç close to the main Danube. On
bath sides the groundwater level fluctuationshave been reduced
çignif icantly. The Gabcikovo hydrapower plant has psoduced 150 -
200 Gwhjmonth in 1993. This corresponds to about 10% of
slovakia's electricityconsurnption.
nir'urcs ,. .
L?Oct-ZHov1993 -UorkinCrouof nonitgandWater nanagemeGabcikovo In addition minor impacts or no significant impacts could be
detected from the available data until now for surface water
quality, ground water quality, flora and fauna, agriculture and
forestry.
The Warking group recommended that the presant monitoring
practice in Hungary and Slovakia should be continued, In
addition,some aspects (e-g. sedimentationand erosion, floraand
fauna) reqirire more measurements.
Based on the monitoringdata the Working Group will from now on
prepare recommendationçfor a Temporary Water Management Regime
as well as for necessarydischarges, water levels and remedial
measures. Temporary means in that case for about the next three
years until the decisionof the ~nternationalcourt of Justice is
expected. The final repart of the Working GrOUp is scheduled for
the beginning of December 1993.NOTE VERBALEFROMTHEMINTST RFFOREIG ANFFATROSTHE SLUVARKEPUBL ICEMBASS YFTHE
REFUBLI OFHUNGARY 1,5NOVEMBE 1993
NOTE VERBALE
268193-NO
TheMinistry ofForeignAffairtheSlovakRepublicpresentsits compltothe Ernbassy
of theRepublicofHungaryadasthhonourtocommunicatthattheMinistryofForeign Afof the
Slovak Republi,tanytimethatis suitablefortheHungside,is readyto ho1dnegotiationson the
questionsoftheSlovakRepublirs'sstatesuctobilateralinternationaclonvandagreements
whichwereconcludebetweentheCzechoalovFederalRepublicandtheRepublicofHungary.
TheMinistqof ForeignAffairsoftheSlovakRepublicavailsitselfof thistorenewtoty
theErnbassoftheRepublicof Hungarytheassurasfiis highestc&sideration.
15November1993 Annex 129
MiMiSTOFMREIGNAFFAIOSFTHEREPüBUOFHUN~R~
A~GKAIIK&U~ABSA SLOLOGYMIN~SZ~ERIUMA DiiERNATI(LAWDEPARiMEKi
Fmdm-KDP lm1FtmzrLLY
TheMinistryofForeignAffdrsoftheRepubIi cfHungar yresentitscompliments 0
heEmbas~ yftheSIova RkepubIicndha ihehonourtorefe10theVerbalMmomdum of
& Ministrof theSlora RkepubIiceiivereon13J~ly1993 totheEmbassy of the&public
ofHungar ynBratisIavi,ncorneclionwittheHungarianparimentaryappropriatiforthe
dernolitiof thNagyrnaro sofferdamandtherestoiationthesurroundin greas.
Inthi comectiontheMinistryofForeignAffairswishetopointoutthatit wasathe
insistenofthe Slovaksidethathicle 4 wasinsertedintheSpecialAgreementof7 April
1993.Underthat ArticlthePartieagd ihat,duringtheperiod beforeternporarwater
managemen rtgirnwasestablished,theycouldrquest immediateconsultationandreference,
inecessary,oexperts,hcludinthe CommissionoftheEuropean Cornunifies, witaview
to protectinganrights a Partybelievmay be endangered.twa furtheragreedthat,by
reasonof the availabiliexpertsincIiidiLheCommissionof the EuropeanCornmunities,
LheParti weouldnotduringthiperiodseekprotectionfromthCourtunderArticle41ofthe
Statute.
Therequestconlahed inrheVerbaMemorandur nf thehlinistry.ofForeignAffairsof
rheSlovakRepublicisin he naturofa requesfor interimeasuresof protectioanditiz
opento IhSlova kepublito requestconsultarandreferencto experbunderArticIe4 of
the SpecialAgreernenl.AltematireIy,the Governrnentof the RepubIic of i3ungai-yivouldbe
prcpareta consider refehg alissueof inlerirneasuresof protectiinrelation to the
disputebelweenthpartielothe InternatioCourtof JusticeunderArti41eof theStatule,
onthebais ofan understandingthateachparlyivouagreeto compIywith anymearuresaf
proteclioneventuallyhdicatedbyrheCourt.
The Ministryof ForeignAffairsivishfurtfierto point out thacoffer dm at
Nagymar~s wasetecta edatemporar)itructureanwasno[oneofthe installationscoveredby
theprovisionof he Treaiyof 1971to whichIheMinistryof ForeignAffaiof theSlovak
Republicrefers. The cofdam,as a terngorastructure,wawarrantedsafe onlfor afew
yem andÎEsafetyçanno now be relieon.Moreover.thepurposeforwhich Lhecoffedam
wasconstmctedh~lapsedwith~edi~appearanceoftheTreatyof1977.TheMinistryof
ForeignAffairbelievethatCheGovernmentofrheRepublicof Hungarywa fulIy entittod
seekhm he Parliamenan appropriatiof moneywith theview to thedernolitionof the
coffedam atNagymaros.
The MinistryofForeign Affairof the RepublicofHungary avails itseof this
oppomuiityto renew tothe Embassyof ihe Slovak RepubIicthassuran cests hiehest
consideration. Annex130
GROUP OF MONITORING AND MATER MANAGEMENT EXPERTS FOR THE
GABCIKOVO SYSTEM OF MCKS
Minutes from third meeting of the Group of Experts on November 28
- December 1 1993 in Bratislava.
~ll five members of the Working Group participated in the
meeting. In addition the Hungarian and Slovakian experts were
supported by a number of associate experts. The participantsare
listed in Appendix A.
The Working Group was welcomed to Slovakia by Mr. Dominik
Kocinger who on behalf of the Slovak Goverment expressed the
wish for a çuccesfullmeeting.Furthemore, he rnentioned that the
SlovakGovernment would like to çee the result obtained so far by
the Working Group, i.e. the Data Report, be published and made
fully availableto the poblic.
On the first night of the meeting Mr. Jan Eisuch hoçted a lunch
on behalf of the SlovakMinistry of Foreign Affairs. Mr.
Lisuch
welcorned the members of' the Working Gsoup to Bratislava and
expressed the wish for a succesfull work.
1. Approval of agenda
The meeting was opened at 17'' hours on November 28 by
Johann Schreiner who presented a proposa1 for a work plan
for the following days. The meeting was chaired by Johann
Schreiner.
2. Logistics of firçt meeting
The Working Group held al1 its meetings at Karloveska 2,
Bratislava, where meeting roam facikities and other
necessarylogisticswere made available.
3, Report on Temporary Water Management Regims
The home work agreed at the last meeting to be carried out
by al1 three parties had basically been carried out within
Rinutes
28 üo-1 Dc7993 Wrkir-g Grwp of MitandVatenanagementGabcikovo the deadlines agreed upon. On this baçiç the EC experts had
prepared a Draft Final Report, which was presented as the
basiç for the discussions at the beginning of the meeting
on November 28.
The final report with recommendations for a Temporary Water
Management Regime as well as for necessary discharges,
water levels and remedial meaçures was completed by the end
of the meeting.
4. Possibility for CEC support to stzerigthening of monitoring
systsm
As a follow-up to the decision at the last meeting Slovakia
and Hungary preçented specific proposals including
financial estimates for monitoringprogrammes. '
An overview cf the topiçs and the cost estimates is
provided in Appendix B. The estbated costs for a three
year programme are 2.5 mil1 ECU for the Slovakian part and
* 5.3 mil1 ECU for the Hungarian part.
The Working Group did not have the for studying the
specific proposals but confirmed that the topfcs were in
agreement with the recommendationç made in the Data Report
of 2 November 1993.
As the Working Group does not exist after the completionof
this meeting, it noticed that further progress in
implernentatioo nf the recommendations on strengthening of
monitzri5g system will now depend on the two governments
and the CEC.
5. Commun1 que
1
The communique enclosed as Appendix C was agreed upon.
6. Other issues
I
Mr , Gabor Vidadistributeda new report prepared on changes
in ground water levels "GroundWater Level Szigetkoz Area,
Budapest November 1993".
Vorking Grwp of nonanVaetErmanagementfor GabcikuvoThe enclosed appenA-C fom parofthe officia1 minutes.
Bratislav1.Decembe1993
Johann Çehreiner
/ IgoMucha GaboVida
Ja6M vanGeeçt
YorGmpof mitMdUiillanageGabcikova APPENDIX A Participants of the first meeting of the Working
Group
Hembers of the Working Group
Johann Schreiner,EC
Jan M. van Geest, EC
Jens ChristianRefsgaard, Ec
Igor Mucha, ~lovakia
Gabor Vida, Hungary
~ssociate experts fromHungary
Çandor BOLLA
Raroly BAROSS
Adrienne ~JOÇY
Lajos HORVATH
PZ1 LIEBE
I Fesenc MÉSZAROS
ZoltSn NAGY
Jeno SASS
JSnos SZEKERES
Gyorgy TOTH
, Associate experts from Slovakia
Ludek Krajhanel
Ferdinand Kubicek
Stefan Molnar
WorkiGrq OHunftorlandMaterUaoegamfor Gakikova ESTImTED COSTS FOR STREHGTHENINC OF MONITORING SFSTEM
~roposals from slovakia
t turbinesGabcikowo
Sediwnt trmsprt
Fldplain forests
MonitorinogfFauna
1 ECU= 36.5ÇKK 313
ESTIHATED COSTS OF THE MONITORING
(in millions of HUF)
Running coasts Investment eosts
(aefisLJZ
BYDROLOGY
1. Bischarge: 12 32
2. Surface water level: 5 15
3. Suçpended sediment disch.: 4 2
4. Bed-load discharge: 6 3
5. Ground water level: 15 35
-
WATER QUALITY
6. surface water quality: 35 30
7. Ground water quality: 24 1O
BIOLXlCY
8. Geobotanic: 2 -
9. Bird: 1 1.5
10. Fish: 1 3.5
11. Carabidae: 1 -
12. Orthoptera: O.5 -
13. Mollusca: 0.5 -
14. Plankton: I -
15. Forestry: 3 1
16. Agriculture: 5 -
OTHERS
River mapping: 11 -
Quality analysis of susp.
material : 5 -
Sum of the costsr 132 133Annex 131 316
Annex 132
Mr. Pdlo Benavides
Director
Directorate- General,
External Economic Relations
Commission ofthe European Comrnunlties
Decr Jlr. Director,
I refer tu Jour IetterofDc.cember. 72, 1993, rclntin~ ta IlleRqort or:
Tenzporaïy +VaterManastlntcnt Resime ofDecember 1, 1993,of triIl'orrling gr ou.^
of Monitoring and Tiraterhf~nc;ement E-rpertsfor fheGn 6cikouoSjstenz of Locks.
In thal Report,the experts appointeu' bthe Comniission recon~rnend50 thepcrtres
on interim wafermanazement regime,as describedinporaxraph 9 3.
A most Cmporfantpart ofthebackground totheRepoid isthe cornmiinientof
the partiesto agree tlponand establisha temporary rliafermanagement rz~ime.
Xhat commitment iscontained inArticle 40) of the Specia Algreement ofApil I;
1993, and is euen stated fobe a findamental obligation CseeArticle 4(311. Thrrs
while itistrue, as the Workin Ggrouppoints out atgage 70 of ifsReporf, thata
decisionhas tu bemade on uthichregimeshould beirn~lemented, thecornmitment to
"establishand implement a temporary mater management regime for the Danube"
has already beenmade by bothparties. Moreousrbothparties have agreed tuthe
inuolvement oftheEqropean Commissionin seeking toesfablishsucha regime. As you are amare, we haue reached the present stage only efter arduous
negotiation~. The negatiueeficts of the Variant'C structures on nature and the
enuironrnenthauebecome obuiorrs ,s the European ParEiament has already noted.
But during alZ thistime the Slouak Republic has done nothing to mitigate the
damage ocçurringin the cornmon riuerbed downstream of theVariant Cstructures,
tuhilthe European Commission haspaidagrowing attention tothe Slouak enei-m
production, irrespectivofour ecologicaldamages (C London: 95 per cent,Brusselsi
70 per cent, Bratislaua:POper cent ulaterdischarge to the comtrzonsection of the
Ranu bel.
Under tliese circrrrizstaricesin~pcrliclai-huuirig reprd fo -4riicl4 of
theSpeci aglreemer~!,the Goverrtnlelof Hrin~nry~despite the dissenfiri; qniliior~
ofthe Hunxarinnmpert, Irasfiler-tifocon:^-- reluctantly AIL!fir;?:!--f~ fhe
conclusio tintffiereis~ titlrmr2nlrslrr,.at41r:iiti;.n!c.th~rlgciir2,+:~rsilfi12
short term thrrrthnt of theeinliorationO/*fi2~;~id~itrcAytrJrzcorr:~::~-:ib;Jti!~
EC Mernbers ofthe IITorkirGrorrp
Accordin;ly the Gover?iiiîèrtics dccidcdprovided llraf tlic Sloi-c.::Il2,urrbllc
shall,by Jartirary 15, 199-iJ hoür gicertc sii~zilcl-corrirrsifn'or?i:~ ~;cr-t,to
nego tiatean cgreenzerlt50giueeFect fothilrccorrzrrzendatioty tlw EC ?fc:);li otfrs
theWorkin ~roup, OR the establishmelit crrtrrzplerneritoitiof[A-. tti.7;zpora-
uater manazenient regint untilJfarch 31, IS.94,nt the Lntest.
Assurning thatitfoo accepfs therecon;mendetio~~sof the EC ni~rr.tt.of the
Working Group, 1would be gratefirifsou could ssekfrom the Governnc.-ztofthe
Slovak Republic acornmitment foagree,t? yebruaiy 15, 1994, on theesteb/ishrnent
and implementation of thetempomry water management regime..
Since ththereno basisfor any beliefthat sucha regime could beagreed upon
and efectivel iyplemenfed without the Inuoluement and rnediatwn of the
Commission, and since the regime will include a Temporary Water Management
and Monitoring Committee, I trust, while expressing the gratitude of my
Gouernmentfor the Commission's assistanceand involvement, that MeChmission
wiil beprepared to continuetaplay a sirnil rak in theforfipming negotktwm
the agreement fora temporary water management regime, as well thr?u&
membership andparticipation in thafCornmittee. Dear Mr. Director,
Whik confirming the preparedness of my Gouernment to agree on the
recommended temparary wu ter management regime, I would not 'miss ths
Eipportunittocomment onand stres ssueralimportan feature osthirsegime.
Firstt,he regime isto be applicable"pending the final judzment ofthe
Court", Iiisa short-lerm rneasureonly.
Secondly, thleouerall objectof l'lzeregime isthe "mininairatlortof arty
irreuersibledeuelapmenls':and notin any sense llreestablishnienof c baianccd
lonz-term sesime uliich takintonccoir nli*ehts O/llreparties, asSiruillhave
beenestabLFishcby ihejild3ntelofihz Coilrt, nl~tens srrstninablensiro on :'iri
conditions.
Thir-dly, itisaisoimplicil inthe Contnzitttle'sReport tiiti:~r;zint s
established ruithout prejudicto the risltts nrrd legal pusilioof tlizpnrtics,
inclrrdingthoseundertheLoizdon &orcernentof23 Ocfober 1995.
Foui-thZyJhekçommendations constiti arleckage . resruse $a tecilnicnl
nature can.meuseeitherpcdy fionr co»qliancervit hhengrzement estcblishing the
r~zime.
These are the understandings of my Gouernment, zuhich underlie its
reciprocal cornmitment'foagreeon the establishment and implementaf'ionof the
temporai water management regimereoommended by the experts appointeb$ythe
Commissionin theReport ofthe WorkingGrnup.
Dear Mr.Director,
I saidabovz that my Goventmentkas corne$0 theconcluswn expressedin thu
lettefirmly but reluctantly.Although thisdues nat inony woy Ib-act from its
cornmitment tothejnterim regimerecommended intheWorking Group'sEZepod ,n
orderto avoid any misunderstimdbtg I feel1 should outfine my Government's
~&attit&detoth scktific. md environmentolissuesoddregsed.therein. The Gouernmenfofthe Republic of Bungary belieues thai the proposed
regime fallfsur short of theminimum necessary toprouide real protectionto th
environment,includtngnaturalresources, ofthe region. Tt isinno way a mode,? or
euenan indicationofan acceptablelong-fermsolution.
There aretwomain reasons forthis.
First as,to the volume ofdischarge:400 ri' per second isfur too low a
minimum, especially takins intoaccount fïoods tuhich will adificiallincrease the
average discharge. This isparticularlythe case since,euen according tothe Slouak
party, tflevariant C strtlctrrrareabte at pr~serlto release600 In per sccond.
allowance is >nadefor seasonal carintiolrallairrparticirlarthe nezd for grt.ntc.r
flows in the uegetafion period. Irttlicsecirçunzsln~rcethe stçori~~ittirinrsrngt'
sltorrldGenzeasured on aIzalryearlytinsis.ilforeoucrthe rcconzniendcdaccragcifiil1.s
far short of thatconlaineciin th2 Lotidon &rsentcnt of 28 Oclobcr 1992, inflte
formulation oftuhich the Conzrnissioitselrcas irivobed.
Secondlu, as .?Othe questiorof rinderground rveirs: ~xperienczshows thcf
they are not a sulution for enuirunntentalproblems. Thcir Izypotlzeticclshort-ternt
advantages thq may haue are orrtrueighedby the damages they ivill iindoubted&
cause tothe environment. Theseinclude a signifiantly loiue rcaler tlelocityIradirzg
tosedimen fation,cotmatation,a decreasedinfiltmtion intor'hegsound-water systern,
and anincreasedrisk ofeutrophication.Theypreuenfthe natural formation ofriucr-
bed structuresand are harmfùl to riverineeçology Their construction fan$,ot the
end of the temporary regime, their remoual)will cause additiond almage to flaud-
plain ecosystems.
Despite fhesecriticismsI hope thatitrnay bepossible, ingiuing effectto the
reçornmendedregime, to optimizeitsdaily operationsu as toensure,in thewordsof
theWorFzing Group, that ifsdynamics "become asclose fothepre-dam conditwm as
possible".But --3 repeat --theproposedregime fallswell shortof whatwouMbe an
acceptable solution #O the dispute, that is to say, a real reüerswn to pre-dam
conditionsthroughthedismantlingof theunhwful sirucfures ofVarian Ct, The Gouernnzent of the Ilepublic ofXilngary notes fit'fh e epod of
December1,1993 isa FinalReport,and h formulateditsattitudtuitassuçh.No
fihr attempts &ytheSlauak Republictoattenuafe the enuironmenfalprofeçfions
~quiredfor the regwn cartthus betoleraand my Gouernrnenthopes thtyou will
make this clear in your communicafions loiththe Gooei-nmentofthe Slovak
Republic. Annex 153
NoteVerbale
The MinistsyofForeignMain afthe&public of FXungargpresentç
its camphents totheMassy of thSlovak Republiçandwith raference
tathe NoieVerbaleNo 16/94-N ofJmuary 10,1994 ,fthe Mini& of
Foreign A£€& of theSlovak &public adikessed ta&e Embassy of the
Republic of R~tnga~yinBratislava,Haç the honour tucomunicat-e the
follo-.
Tbe Miniç4ayofForeignM'airs of the&public of Kwigarq- cnannot
understand thesbtement -de in theNote Verbalerefesreto above,that
the dqmand of the Sla~aEBepubLicforthe retentioof the coffw damat
Naggmarosisnot inthe nature of a request for provisional mexuThe.
viewsofthe p.artieontbe dtence ornon-axisfxnceoftheTreaty of 1977
are weU-hom. Inthe periodp-i- ta thejudgment af theInternational
Court ofJusüce, the retentioof thiscofferdam is plainl ~ maker of
inkrim rneasuresofprokctioq andin itNote VehaIe No 3-113881199of
November,1993, thelkistrg: ofFareign AfFairstheRepubliçofEmgary
suggestd ho ways inwhich thatmatter mightberesohed.
Nor cm f;hehlïnistq ofForeign Affsiofthe &public ofBungary
seewhat damage might be causedto theSlovakRepublicby dernolieanof
temporaryshctures on Hungariaa mil which ha>-epassedthe periodin
mLch thepcan besdely uied fotheV original purpose.
The -3hktxy of Foreip Affairç of the Jlepubof Eugq avails
itseIofthisoppo6Q tareiletuthe Edassy ofthe SZovakRepubJicthe
assuranceofiithighest consideration.
Budapest,Jmu- 19,1994.
Embass yofthe SIovakRepubllic
Budaoest Annex 134
J-8/EK-3/1994
Mr. Pablo Benavides
Director
Directorate-General, ,
External Economic Relations
Commis~ion of theEuropean Cornmunifies
Dear hlr .irector,
I refeto mnyletterofJanuary 14, 1993relatingfatlie Report on Teir~porary
tvater Management Reginie of Decentber 1, 1993, of the \Vorlti?tg Groi~of
hlonitori angd IVaferManagement Experts fothe GabcikovoSystem ofLock.7May
I recall inthisrespect thathereare some cruciadleadlines luhicare ofgreat
importaacefor theHungarian party asstresseinthatletter.
Since thedeadline indicateby the EC passe$ withoutany informatioo nn
reactionosfthe other party,I wobid be gratefül ifyou cauld,apart fronz the
acknowledgrnentofthe receifofmy letter, comrnunicatome proposed actionsof
theEuropean Commi~sianinorder to ensusethat theSlovakRepublic willcompiy
with ifs earlier engagementYotl certainshar my views tkatnegotiations should
starta5 saon as possiblo en an Agreement concerning the establishment ofthe
Temporary Wakr ManagementRegime, asprouidedfor intheSpecieA lgreement of
ApriZ7,1993. Annex 135
EUROPEANCOMMISSION
DIRECTORATE-GEMERAtL
EXTERYALECONOHlRELATEOIS
I/E- The Director
2638527JAN '34
Dear Btate Secretary ,
~hank you very mueh for your letter of January 14 last explainingthe
poeition of the government of Hungary on the recomendatfons by the
Community appointedexperts fer a Temporary Water Hanagemen!Regime ae
well aa for your letter of January 24 last concerningthe fact that the
slovak governmenthas not yet infomd the cmi~sion of ite position.
I muid like to expreas the great appreciation of the European
Couaniaslon for the Hungarian government" cone~usion that "there ia no
other realistic way ... than .,. the elaborationof the inte~h regirne
reeoirnended by the Ec membars of the w~rking Grougn. The Ccnunisaior.is
fully aware of the difficultieswhich the Gabcikovo project presents
for Eungary. The efforts made by the aungariangoverment to reach this
constructive position only further heighten our appreciation. Tour
government's position can ba expected to play a very positive role in
the finalizing of a mutually acceptable solutionwith the slovak side.
Pleaeo be aesured that I have ale0 taken careful note of al1 other
pointa raieed in your letter.
A8 to the slovak government's position 1 cariinform you that Secretary
of State Lisuehwrote to me early this month that he was eonfident that
hie goverment's position could be communicated ta the commission by
the end of January. Hhen no reply had been forthcoming by January 15 1
informed &Ir~isuch in writing that the sinngarian governmenthad replied
, by the deadline of January 15 and reminded him of the importance of
reaching a compromise es early as poeeible. ~ndicatkng that Member
States were following developmentsmpst attentivoly, 1 concludedlby
urging the State secretaryto send his government'sreaction to the
expertam proposala soon in order for the Cornmiraion to be able to
convene a final tripartitemeeting.
nt. Janoe Hartonyi
State Secretary
Ninistryof ForeignAffaira
of the Republiç of HungaryAnnex 136 , Annex k37
wlth rwfermoe t? ybUr &ebk45~407$~ c: 3~iuary 44, 3 vol la^
l' r
~ika tb iniam yaiichat bhepowiitirrkat.2 Che BI- a#@lBa hi
careiulk yfudi&B tiis ka OP tbo uqgk oÈ tk& ~brkh~ pup
or mmit artiis ma Hater m.~gsa~n~ ~~cirfx for the 1hai;o~k~~o
system of loakr ira weLl ts tkbI~~QBOPC~ DI L;LeIYO ewans
~oscernint gh@ Tmpzaty V:atCr ldklà$~flr~gli~e. It 'toalt5~tafp
~cccurttthat Cbe ~ierickggcoug bbb ho: sicceads do nlaotltc JS
coimcuproposal f brLhe %"r which'&c~~ MdYE beeit! 6upp~kbeby
f hs Weebs, a& wi?t se By the $i~vnk md ~-agarl& aqergs,
'Irhe pvernmAL: OE th* B~ovJk R~p*&lic.hL5SZy apsrda$aies
that *th the klp of tEa expceb 9% wee pofieFbZa,bn.erm
regpeïts, t0 brjng nearée the &il;dgoint~ OC tr,o 8.&& anQ
2%~ 9oveËninanD is of Chi vLew thak th@ msaspcas the
rebliqat l.oof.whlcb be FtlU the cbfe~k ,os pil Cc~ea:ripkionr - conabrolilg r;Eb t&vVe mailtiop~d, ~EQGPB aL for th& %'T&'
.t.:rRmil=~hy tls~e fsIi @zntBJ the qhveinnient $8 a: i:h~
,ti.tttnat it contafrle h*@y ÿaZv,Gble ~lenlonta *W.& courd be
rrj~1menteQ fn a &art tim~ W- &t iatels tively lm =gel;.T&$g-
reiimcntation oos2d have a* iitmiediate@osleiv iwack ari th*
1~~ivj.cc,riqe:u4 should aoL: IseLuthsr pafitpofl.sd,
OU ae othex. bmd, tbe voJ.uWof the arerrigs Ui;~.cbneg~~xi;ll~o
I,lLl01.griver bed wkieh ha8 vety ir~~~k~ilb scosomic iiipiicak;lons
~hiild b% furtlzer ~on&ic!erèe.
Diwid-crx lie.fiond masures 81:i~zwi~g Lydt'cIcgieel
.*,inri f.t:.ingkbe ri.53.t;side in4daki1m ana, coht&ineC ie tac
gmro,x~sa Lf kh~ee Et? ew~rt£, eel;va8kh#;efcre CE .- POF c
~'Jpwpusal of the Slcvdre govezm&ati wln'tF, i~ ~P.CLC~BB&LO
.. l.!.!t..
Ir?.;central id~a ai tbis pr~939~k ir th rsàti~arrion' az
4-::!!~!are$otiac;islns on ttis TZB 6n.t ~LG fik?iemehtatioa ir.twa
.~r;isrisThis akould eaaSie to sut irrfo efeact tLfGt Wae
;il.?aecracw)?S.ch hwafulZy cm E~~RCY provide 6 Baal6 fus s=
'rideBlovak ~otr&ment ~wîle! like to stress that; iti
-.~:ieia&~s~it jtüp~rt~at k&.t the m31!iteriwt ~~8 aE
1::fo.rniatiokwl slgtetnbDj.çaiWR~UP:~ cg there~C çOncLnue. bi.the
..IL':F';~ CÇLL~~~UOU~LY c0;34cte$ bat^ it wwzld be ~066ibXe .
..cVIilde ehs zegot iacioz$ on tbe hgpropriate diaeb~ge m.
:#.:jble measirres ig the ola Pmube river bed, L!. 2-*..-2?,
Arlbar JLi.lf,j.r,ttiw :i$$it F.-E-. kJ.F-&4?kFy6te!Y, wi:,.Liwàkc2; Ch$
I I ~ : wér~cr' . 9:IlI be S~'JÛ.!.::A!,QCC ~ht! h88S.s
pt.bnii~i~~~r:! ~iigrlj.~r~,&~.rcl~PLGGie:?i :'.c"6: dj.Bt~?ïtt,c.yc$3 th&
rJve:. bec. CI3.r*he DB.i1:.i,l!e WCI:eE$:'~O~.O~CP; L!:Ï0~4%%~ 23 F~.?GI~~ Rhm
rn~r.ipiilaLirrn ~EQ~CIH vJth re-ssd 1:à:
.A re.1 ai? $TOU.KICJW%~~,Y,'Ln >CE?.&cd 7:;~hkl.;id.?$zE!~ARL b~,
~;rrrL-iel.ent vniotkty OË 'h'EteX ,'Lcw Fri k>*enid', r!vo,i bd r>d
Lho Llatii~b~?,
wakirr quc1~l.y ibn the Lordex yltrt of: ::er)~=uix-
!pW~~ C!!5&J-.
Wiçhwrt. y:er;Hx'a Cu tl:8n5 6Laglrig ezd p:ov$t?efi tkbt th:!
>y~frnlo~j.c!r,l ~onijLLi~i;ls I:!+~:P.itCQSSL~~L ~:!~Y wiLL 135.US bn
te t!&e ~!.eimlj.ngs; 65 hs $r?~lt?Cath~~' rdkE i3Yf?hf: 9$,kh di EIo~~AxBC~
f~lqhc~ khm 3~Lii0d/n,
-'t7ze~h~e~tivei- of f;irtbprb~aaai &?;eaa ZcrLLo~ 1s
- water 3.e;r~lr mG vrlociiy tri the bzb-~b sya[;i,::cri the niom
drid ilrrngiirt~fitezx'ikoxy rwsl. LIE m~l! bet bbr b# r,::mpweil ho
!>un oarn i:iritLj.~in~, tM)Fr PitUSt,GC, IFI~E!:a&iy~oxiihatnl.y xeeaclnd
1-0 L I'Lgcakc ~E~COZ c.l.{~@!rJL~{o !':,ra,ii8~j~ikm ~'6idLzad hl ?.hE
paa t estl navj ga t&os. gi'amaes, I
yr~mdvfit,&r levgl. iiitislihs arlber.sa:dn 1,:-kbqhcrr tG EQWP t:& f;~
r,ittp. rlnai c&fiS?iti0ii5 UI~AEILLfi W&& ;Lbl~fi-t~[n x~m$gkively
II~LUY litec! 1A Ur,,Np=
IL i.g1-p2CBPfIAt:)CO [~JVXI.Btee Cile d,er,~irtr;$e wkf 83' 4B''w;
.;.rittori&141l1jd~.'ialI.E?:~JI::~yELF.I;(.-LiF 6i:: cXi 2B 7:~t~lke~ R3 CYS)
Ç J tbo filst.in:v$clmen.llb e:!'F&F~ r c~ltd~ii CGbn .
I
A] iliC!LII:(id~~.12t,~,~u,tDUriXO~+UC13tLfJ hl 1.116~~&l.iriih!!,~t:
al: rtia ugaë.rws,t;et wei.;: iz: ttc &ri, ci>-er.i.r~i:O!: P.I!~D6nUbei T~S
Shv~ik, :.~rrd~UB~JU~~C~ asit.hn=:.liil*~ !~naea- ready t.l!!csinalreg l.,bm
i89131 nuthrjs.j.~dt,~:sfcor: I.~~cc:orrsrsï;c';ioisi ~iiizlsirw t~raei!w;l.L .e!.
vei t'il1 tlik rh 1H4Y.
.IL%@ ~tingtxvecd.on of E ,107)urideirkiat?s; s.e:.i hr the u'itiple~t
elr.ersiat;vg C,tüdi tike t;ecl~h:'t62.' Fr,i:::O~~tidf ~j,~'kpüj.ht. '''lbi~
xulul j pro vida^ Che Lkt$i:WZ(.C~IEiiiii$i!i!i<!giisidb,~~tl$i: &d th,$
:n.(ir,i ujyi$k 02 rJ&eieQ der,l.lt!1Eofitit.'!R@puX' 5CL'l'hil'~BBS+ 35 .
;~jdfir eotifiiiin oo!idj.t$u:ia, f,t i~ paasik3Zv ~onstrrJ.(r!:khis
ri~rfl~tvuti.erwgJ.r J.tsverjg ~JIoT'!- ~'illi8.
hJ Lc wniild h~2alsc ppp~ihle ta #~i~:zr,*:kqhri5.rkl:BZd~dtlb~kllHB~(:
ry;im+ qil LII'IEuit;iirri&~i i~ui.icl~LL~:~ uren I>y p:"ctv;Ldl hA#bal
{litif~llar~rd(2 - f~t.0 ttf~ E~ngnxL~ ~:..lv*?: 'rirkit2sygkçlzlr
t.kat~qh tka! d,nt&a scz.cct.irtc 41;~.gE11B Hn6Ptr.j:Udir?iue , WI!LiI?~~dib,y iiot OIICY Y# tbfl ::RE~LV~~: 's;~ il.1Che pjvhy
hed el; ch@ I~~iuhn but n41m3 iilthe IIi~iuieiy~t~ii s..Iiibirfigdgn
ni&t be klru b~1~bptisslbl42t
kerlur;~lacl.ty la Uie 0,i.rivar ked c:st~~:cbte ~L'II~>BX&~~t~
prm.dm eitu#r iou *airdtii# whai o CIi$Qil&eg e BG ~Ur~çl~~~g:~~,~d,
rivrt- Lied.8~131di?ayeood $3 J P . Lime, biii,
Qrça
~~~c I)~~J~IJ. C~(>~E$CORP TllJ.816 :.IIQH#a t.ru of IIU~&R~~ ICV~?
d.~cc~orm of'urrdematarwoirs, tfao qb~~~ti~tl O$ EI'JQ~ b.ed rd
pl:oqren~ kvo nai;,tixk3,ciegriiUid.cif frt.i iciA l ~lianfii~t~e,
~rr t of kiru'siçlkedZ~cltAi:fle,
j,l; t\~C~~g&l~r tn c;u#fl~nL t ee;ni,swes r?iltLhc àlcv& *&
MLi,~zri+fl nitje m.ga.rt OP L,iiirawri.res iies ~.iresci).
r(:aL$.hedfi\:tire Si~u~k :.clf,ie)
wik,bj,!6j.6~!it(~~g6.6~3tlq)~ij.tlt~ghrd f Ci2~,a:atic;:l!!>jut.iv&$
Chn mCXlfirirag~:iL'~d~~ti~;:Iélec:lricsf. Citt?KFisheiirla83 @.van, Annex 138
LETER FROM MR DOMINM KOCINGE SR,OVAKGOVERNMEN PT ENIPOTENTI AORYR. LAJOS
ZSA~OKI THEMANAGING DIRECTO OFROVIBER,8 FEBRUARY 1994
DominikKocinger,Engineer
The SlovakGovernmentaP l lenipotentlary
regardingtheGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem
BratislaviFebruary 1994
Number: 54194-110
DenrMr. Managing Director,
It waswitgreatinterestthat1studiedyour commission regardintghe supplementaryinformationrelated
tothecommencementof operationsof theGabcikovo Barraccordingto Varia"CH.
As the leaderof the formeKOCS, appointed bytheGovemmentalPlenipatentiaryregardingthe
Gabcikovo-NagymaroB s arrageSystem,you are certainlyfnrnilithepreparationsfor theKOCS
negotiations.
1herebydeclareto youthatmy commissioninrelation tomy statusas theGovernmentalPlenipotentiary
regntdingthe Gabcikovo-Nagyrnas arrageSysternremainsvalid.
Unfortunately,1 must declare you thrttthe Slovak republic has not auhormeuitolead the
negotiations,nor has it authorisedme to releaseany fundamentalinformationto the opposingparty in
relation to theprweedingsbeforethe InternCourtofJustice.
Al1 informationwhichmay be of intertothe Hungarianpartisincludedin the reportmade by the
expertsof the EurapeanCommunityin the declarationmadebetweenHungaryand Slovakiabetween
NovemberandDecember1993and intheNote Verbale forwardto you btheForeignMinistryofthe
Slovak Republican 12December1993and1considerthese,forthepresetobeentirelysufficient.
RespectfuIly
DominikKminger
To: Dr.LajosZshmboki
Managing Direçtarof OVLBER
Budapest Annex 139
An: PRm3-=
Ta :
Fax-Nr . &pf ange:
Fax-No. receivv: ~.tZ-~-29S8ooS
tha* you very much £or yuus fax message from Eebruary, 8.
In agreement vfth Mr- JenS Christian Refsgaard and WI Jan
H. v. Geegt T send you our cozments to the letter of State
Secretary Jan Lisuch with the enclosed proposal.
As fat as w,e eui see the Slovakfanletter
polftfeaX tespanse aimhq,at delaying the final decision
regatainq the necescary discharge into the Old Danube-'
~a our icnowledge there are no Rew arguments and nb movenent
ih the fundamental pcsitions from b2fi sidei;, that cm l
justify ta skart fumer discusslonq- purther monitoring
uithaut any neasrires daes not impr~ve the preçent situation
as discrlbed In the reports and dues not facilitato the
neg~kiations- 1/2 - 1 yedl more field data will not change
the hsis fer decision substantially Thus, considering tàe I
short time duration of the Tenporary Regine and the urgency
of tke problem, we r~m-ad net Eo -delay *.i- decLsfan-
~he main factor I
the o3d Daube.
Pmplementatio~ of the other recamended masures, wi13 have I
an -diate positive impact on the envhoment-
The reasqn wby the ~~rking Group did not succeed in
elabarating a cornmonproposal for the Thi wzs the
infïexability concernfng the dischargetc 'he Old Danube by
& corlntrles. The slovakian expert ihsistedon a dischaqe
of 400 dlsec , the ~ungarizn exp& oh a disebarge of 5200
a3 oh an average. The pre-sal 6f the EC-PJcperts was in this
cstse a kind of uimpronlse.
In the alternative Cb)of the ne# SIbvak proposal the
djlschg.of the intake struchire has tu feed tuo ~ther
systems teo. nizs anly a dischaxgeof &out 29-25 d/sec
will be avaiïabLe for the right side branch syçteia, The impacts of putthg the GSfb~fk~vo6wta of lwks into
operationhaveken described by the UerUng trnup in me
Data Regart fro~ November 2, 1993 (page 56-59). rt may bs,
tbattheevaluation ade for environmental impacts in VEI
Sletrsk ~epublicfs quite aiff~ent, but every oirprt la the
mst efBurom wfll regardit es a signifiaant ecologi&
&mage iifthe average disdmrge of a rfverr 1s&ced ta
abwt PO % es empared tu na-65 ~onàitioms,if 4500 ha of
allwftrl Fbrests are ~8izeU (sec We Pauma-Flora-Hrtbitat
DLr~~ of the CECI,if thereIs a teduetion of the
riahulalPluetuations oi!the ground and surface vater Jevels
aesrly to zaro and se on-
We agree,tbt thesituatfon is -ter than it would bue
ben whea éxecuting theoriginal TreeQ Projeet-
In ou reeoaimendatfonswe have chosen tireplace for tbq
ug5txeam inundation weirat RKH 1BiiS.sinstead ef RKH 1843.0
au8e es SE rbliawlng reasohs:
- To imgrove the operational rslfability of water supply
Fm tbe inu?dation weir, crest lavel-hasto be the ,
same: Ws mas that an dervater wm- IR&? flmut ke
, '~GCX$UGit 16 furthsr downstreaa. For ecol~gfcal
rs" undema.k?r wirs mut ne as lar às technically
weaihle -
- Dptream the uzzdmatsr weir up to the inunûatlen ueir
therrrArsbwer flou vefccft~. Fot ecologiaal reasans
sections rith lotterflow velocitiesmiist be as short 1s
Hovina the unde-r umir flomstréam ta
O yields h a 2.5 krplanger ream wi.
lwer flaw velocitles.
-RI#Y 1845,s AS me moet upstrsam situated mint whee ik-
@aises sese to inanage directway su~pIyta the sida
bmna syetm ln the Btiagariah£ O- plain.
decrsase of water discharge between aKlI1843 end 1841.
The albxnaUve (a) in the new Slevak ppopoaal Pria an
rtn-ater weir on Slovgkian territory is a new idea. WEI
-6s they mea~ that tbe undervater reir uoiildbG located
just uptream Ieg. 90-200 ml the bréler. Be have net atadied
whether thisis tedmfeal2y fearaible inoembfnatioztwitb the
otlier81ov&Xbn constmetfon varko (spillw&yfrom inmdation
weiz). But açsuming e techniaal feasibflityis may be a gd Idsa.
Whicb even would avoi8 Huq$W from fomally aeeeptingom
of t4e two ruidemmtmr weir~ On theIrterrftory. Eht, as Par
as:we hou, anoths GEUUU mwt thm üe di- ta conneet the
rivas upatream the ueir with the sidebranch sysh,
In thkg eohaection the total discharge at:Cunova is not
menthneci. Does the 40 d/s= b the ai& bianch ~ystaip
aean, thak this amount of wat- h dssing Fortba 03d
Drin-7
Water veloeity in the Old Danube 1s an Lmportantfactor for
the river ecosystem .he present aituatien is, mat, due
ka the lower water velocity,the origfnally eleen grave1 ked
is cotresecwl# silt ahd other fins naterial and therefore
it fails as habitatfor river benthos orgmis~s and for
fish spefes spnfRg oh grave1 ground,
%ter veluzity inçreases withincreasing discharge and wii21
reduction af the cross-sectioncf the rivet. It deckeases
uith decreasingdiacharge, with underueter wei~ (decrei4sing
of the upstream slopel and hcreashg cross-section
(remaving the kkesholds ta the side branches). Tbatis uhy
rec~mendatfons of the GC-Expertsconsfstof a packageof
meam rith an average disebarge of 800 d/sec, whi& is
sK.gniffeant louerthan 2000 $/SM, the natuml average
ascharge, tqether wit)t additfanalnieasuxes.
Johann$.&reinsi
Professor and Head of the NHA. Annex 140
A-;,. p]zsjemdgigidané& pérles2-Z~iil-i; s!oVce!!:s ='os Birpuv-
1- propG&or 8fé&r ,p j'Ei tak~d; 21-:e=ki-Q~ i ,'i~* 6'3errs
par M. Sc&eiw. &fa &cti~~ &&ktzs pr~psirioxsi(?';'c0% kk
prrzpzb Cg$m&s ~fi5xpei~ eiphzm szré3'~erdeh $O:% :
Sm1s ph & mes p;o?os&spzkp~%e :!oic~i!esb~cespur L' cil~2ppa:tn~
au rn ccqrmis exism-, aomzi dt hi;qr?tk pAde hoqcke 2 SEC@ le
principdt basedecerWss ie czsmcçüms ct&s qécW-m~f & a azedc~on des
baga @&DLP,=~ weh$) lecos 12cDeru5c. EZ zc~ulctrsi .rmg!u!
qu&têti'iesmesurespso;cséesmbleni accrp~3!e s,r~:mq~+-~- lrdgag
4'~~ ea~a,gaml-lsl~r r~ @ &bit *,.-- C-'-l.d- le Dm% re&tciYt
wr&= di&&.et 1%CO~~PSI~ c ,CEE~~smz5:e ax propooiûans
dovaques.ïïng NoJ rziim .-T$.Cdqx, k~?Sl e7:qt*m snggg-mït ce
paçîcqui sg-@4Lovz@~.
Silrh b2ss 66c?* rézcric1n%EItS ne=brcr 3e saisrsrUE .- .deki
froh zupb dcP~yeg 4~9ktz &eP - ze-:Cc gcüo so&g- !'~rgg$~~endre
?mg & Ir, locz@e. 12~da-&~ recmm~~~~s 5g e-~YS, k mpe qpt
I1gnionre la gogr-i.-6-s-sL-G-~OZ?= et: e&. !E~kssid
dlanroch&r5pdsm fZga'eilhe des bases olidq~s. LLes &-as @ Cod sonc1&ns~avPesect, kïg.w~~C rQdîît deces
d&éhe~ &id& de~TsliIdl- $u mgcm qrl@ @ide di-ie&Gtio~
apy--k , qlides msureis'ipyrosadm t* prqeetiÿe.
Tze-$reMonsieu reSwCae, m'ber~qui~i & l'a%-c p: j'&prise~ver~
u~u;devousinformeérvosgr2 &'2scSi'spassiodeFIEco.uid&ztiGi~..izol:k. Annex 141 ,
mSTElZE DES &FWRES ETZ%VGERES
DE ~4 REP~LIQ~ DE HONG-
M.Pablo Benauides
Directeur
DirectorateGenérale,
Relations Economiques Extérieures
Commission desCommunautés Européennes
Bruxelles
Budapest,le23févrie1994
Monsieu rDirecteur,
Je vousremercie poul'envode uotrelettdu 18 févrierdernieconcernant
lésd&marches en cours danledicférenentre la Hongriet la Stouaquiàpropos
du barragedeGabcikouo.
Je souscreistièrementau constatselokquel, pour citerproprestermes
de uotrelettre, "l'absd'un engagemenst lovaque surledébi minimum $eau
rend tout compromis akêmement dificile" et je note avec
dans le Danube
satisfactionque la Commissnensaurai souscriarrxpropositionsslovaques.
En réalitd,forcnous est de constater quaEeposition expriméepar Ea
Slovaquie s'analycemme un vdritablerefis des propositidesla Commission,
acceptkes d l'inverpar IQHongrie dans un espritde bonne oolonfk et de
conciliation.
Je tienigakment & vousexprimerl'appréciad tuiGnouvernementhongrois
pour la démarcheentreprise par lal'roda auprèsdu PremieMinistre Meciar et Gouvernement apportera au résultatsde cette
vous essure de l'attentioque
tentative.
Comme vousI'avm à juste titre remarqué, ks suites a donner à cette
ddmrche sont d'autantplus urgentes que lapéri~de de végetationapproche et que
clesmesures s'impose dans cetteperspective. Céstla raison pour laquelleau cas
od les ultimeeflods accompli sar L'UnionEuropéenneauprÈs du Gouoernement de
Bratklaua s'avéreraient infructueux, mon Gouvernement demanderait à lu
Commission de constateroficiellement Z'échedce su tentative de conciliation en
raisondu refisslovaque de segropositioion~.
Le Gouuernement hongrois, au cas ohla Commission lejugerait opportun, et
en accord avec l'articl4, paragraphe 2 du Compromisdu 7 avril 1993 en vertu
duquel ZaCourInternationale de Justic eestactuellement saisida di#&-e+ entre
lesdeuxpays, souscriraif àla constitutiod'un groupe d'expertsjuridique disigné
par la. Commission pour constater,prialablement à I'avide cette derniire, que la
Slovaquie a méconnu par soncornporternenf lestermes de I'artic4edu Compromis
précitë.
Une teLie procédure,si elle paraissaiopportune à laCommission, deureit
toutefois entreprise dales délaislesplus brefsaprès l'échecde L'actuelletentative
, menéepar la Troïka.Pratiquement, et quelle que soitL'inlassab lenne uolonté
manifestée danscetteaffairepar la Commission comme par laHongrie, nous nous
trouvonsdésormais par laforce deschoses sans doute à moinsde deux semaines du
terme définififdecegénéreux efforde conci2iation.
Dans l'attentedes r6sultafs dces ultimesdémarches,je saisitcetteoccasion
de uousmanifester M*onsieurk Directeur, Z'appréctatidu Gouvernement hongrois
pour l'actio entreprise pala Commission etpar vous-mime, et uous assure de ma
trèshaute c0nsside"rationcommede mes sentimentsles meilleurs. Annex 142
NOTE VERBAL FROM THEMMISTRY OFFOREIG ANFFA~RSOFTHEREPUBLIC HUNGAR LO THEEMBASSIES
OF GERMANY N,~ERLANDS, FRANCE ANDTHE MEMBER STATES OFTHE DANUBC EOMMISSIO 24,
MARCH 1994
NoteVerbale
Note Verbale from the Ministty of Foreign Affairs of the Republic Hungary present its
compliments to the Embassy of Gerrnanyin Budapest,tolthe Kingdom of the Netherlands, the
Republic of France atheMember States of the Danube Commission)24 Mach 1994 and has the
honour to presentthextofthe statementof the spokespersonon behalf of the Ministry for Foreign
Affairsadeon 22March, 1994:
The lackof serviceabilityof the weir system of water way convenient for navigation
constmctedin theSlovakreachof the Danube ledto the paralysationof navigation onthe Danube.This
fact made questionablefor the interestedgovemments and navigationalcompanieswheththe under
presentconditions,the utilisatioDanubeas aninternationalrivercouldbe regardedascertain and
guaranted.
The HungarianMinistryforForeign Affairson its own behalf sharesthese doubts. It holds the
opinionthat the utilisationof the Gabcikovopower-canal astheon1yandexclusivewaterway is doubtfuI
becauseof the technicaland constructionfacts and erhavetakenplaceandthe consmicrianof
an alternativewaterwayin theregionaf the aforemenbionedriverreach wouldbejustifiable on behalfof
themaintenanceof continuous andsafenavigation.
TheMinisrryforForeign Affairswouldbe pleased if the governethehonoured Embassy
which has a special interest in partiçipating in the access to the Danube,would make the above
mentioned the object of its consideration and would give information on the standpoint of its
government.
Budapest,24March1994 Annex 143
Dire~tora~te-GenercsE,
Extemal PoliticaRelafaons
Commisaion ofthe Eumpean Cummrsnities
Budapest,MarcJi24,1994
Dear Mr,Piioptnr,
Thank you foryour ktter of March 7, 1994, forwardiq the
Slovak proposal for a Temporary Water Managemnt Regime of
February 8,1994, andth EU expeds' reactiotnitofFebruary 11. It is
obuious thaf the Slovak repZyinuolues a rejection othe EC experts'
recommndation ofDecember1, 1993.I enclosa copyof a Note Verbale
whichthe Ministro yf ForeigAnffairs of the Republic of HungurAm
sent tothe othr party. In the euenofa negativerepzy or temporizing
reply--an eventwhkh 1regret tostateisto beexpected --I should be
grateful iftheCommission couid define itsattitud to the suggestion
made in the thtrd paragraphofmy ktter toyou ofFebruar y4,1994.
(SignedlJdnosMartonyi Annex 144
MAGYARK&ZT&&G
K~JLUGYMINLSZ~~MA
Note Verbale
The Ministry of Foreign Affairsof th Republic of Hungury
presents ifs compliments totheEmbassy of fhe Slovak Republic and
with referenceto the letterFebruary 8, 1994, of tState Secretaryof
the Ministr oyf ForeignAffairsof th Slovak Republic to the Director
General forExternal Political Relations of tEuropean Commission,
has the honourtocommunicate the following.
The Ministry of Foreign Mairs of the Republic of Hungary
agreeswith the view,expressedonbehalfof theEC Experts byProfessor
Sçhwiner, that the letter of February 8, 199isa "politicalresponse
aimed at delaying the necessary discharginto theOld Danube".It is
clearfrom the EC Experts reportthat the inereaseddischarge regim
was "themain factor"in their recommendatjon. It was on tkatbasis,
and in uiew ofthe urgent necessitforan increusecldischarge withthe
onset ofthe uegetationseason, that the EC Experts'recommendation
was accepted bythe Government ofHungary. Itisequally clear thaf the
"proposal"attached ta Mr. Jan Lisuch' lstterreferred toabove isa
rejectioofthat recommendution.
In thicsonnecfiontheMinistry of ForezgnAffairswishes topoint
out oncemore that underArticle 4of the SpeciaAgreement of April 7,
1993, the Partieasgreed that theywould estabiishand implement a
temporary water managementregimefor the Danube. This wasnet an
agreement tohdd endlessdiscussionsbut toestablishand gioe effect to
a timely and appropriate mgim for protection of the affected
environment in the period before the case can be heard by the
InternationalCourt of Justice.The issueof monitorirsg,tuwhich the
Slovak Republic'sletterrefersisimportanb ut entirely separte from
the issuof watermanagement.
Embassy of the SZovakRepublic
Buda~est The Ministry of Foreign Affairs wishes to emphasize that the
Governmnt ofHungury cannot accept as satisfying threquirementsof
Article4 of theSpecial Agreement a temporary water management
regime thafdoes not involve a substantial guaranteed increin water
to the Danube, The Gouernmentisready forthwith to enter into direct
discussionswith theSlouak Gouernmenton the impkmntation of such
a regime .t ccallson the Governmnt ofthe SlouakRepublic to enter into
immediate discussions forthispurpose, hauing regard tothe factthaf
the new uegetationseason isimminent. The Minist ofyForeignAffairs
would be grateful fora responseto thiNsote atthe Embassy's earliest
conuenience.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs ofthe Republic of Hungary
auails itself thi spportunity to renewto the Ernbassy of the Slouak
Republic the assurances ofithighest consideratio11
Budapest, March28, 1994. Annex 145
[TheParliament oftheHungarianPeople's Republic]
RECORDof theHOUSE
30thMeeting
7 October f988
pages2462-2464
[theSpeakerof the House speaking]
HonouredParliament!
The debate aboutthereporton the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System investment shalc lbnecluded
witha resolution. I wisto introducebasicatlytworesolutionproposais,but1must askfor your patience
sincethey arequitelong.
FirstlyParliamentacknowledgesthe report of theCounçilof Ministersincluding theverbal sripplement
on the condition thatthe irnpfementatiofthe tasksand conditionsconceming environment protection,
waterpurification and regional-development; encompasseideight pointsas recentlymodified,mustbe
unconditionally ensured and the installate'svironment-friendloperationalmodemust be applied.
The mith is, that in orderto achievethis, the eight pointsgivenby Comrade MinisterMarbthy,shallbe
reviewedverybriefly.
1. The barrage system mustbe constructed as it stands in the initconcep tncluding the
NagyrnarosBarrage; narnely, to enable peak capacityoperation. Withourfull implementation of the
Project the technical-economicand development goals forrning the basis of the decision on the
investmentcannot be attained. The modification of the conceptwould cause considerable damage.
2. Theecological riskshave tobe reducedto a minimum. Forthisreason,both in the course of
the investmentand the operation, ecologicailnterestsshall haveprioverytheeconornicones.
3. As a guidingprincipleof operationit mustbe declaredthat the quality of the DanubRiver
must not deteriorate. Peak-capacity operation shou bdcommencedonly after establishingthewater
treatmentplantsrequiredonbothsidesof the riverfor safeoperationof the system,freeof environmental
risks. Itis reasonableto determinethe environmenta1preconditionsneeded for the operation inan
intergovermental agreement tobe concludedwiththeCzechoslovakParty. Asto this,ComradeMarshy
gave someexplanatorynotes, which shall alsbetakeninto account.
4. The environmentimpact monitoring system sha le developed andoperatedin such a way as
to haveatour disposa!regularinformationonchangesin every essentialelementoftheenvironment.
5. The main directions andtasks of regional developmenton the impactarea of Gabcikovo
NagymarosBarrage SysternshaIlbe worked out. This shall coverthe fields of industry,agriculture,
tourism and regionaIdevelopment. Careshall lx ttakenin orderto have theeconomic benefitsof the
wholeProjectappearin the nationaleconomicplansas soon aspossible. Here atemarkwas made as to
theinterpretaiionoftheguarantee, which guaranteiea logicalcorollaryof the issue.
6. It is justified to form a publiccommitteefor the remainingpart of the constructionand for
monitoring and supervisingthe operation. The committee shall benorninatedand entrusted by the
Govemmenr. Here Comrade Mar6thynoted that if this committeewere fomed by Parliament, the
govemmentwouldrelinquishifs intentionas to thesame, Although,in our secondproposa11 want tomake üsuggestionpreciselyof concern to this;neverrheless1propose, thatthegovemment'sintention to
norninatethepubliccomrnitteeshallremainamongthesepoints. AS amatterof fact,a parliamentaryor a
public comrnitteeisnotthesame,theyshall beentrustedwithdifferenlassignmentsandfunctions.
7. Itisjustifiedto form aresearcand developmentcornmitteewhichis to assisttheEnviionment
and Water ManagemenM t inisterinco-ordinatingresearchinevaluatingresearchresults,
8. The infoming ofthe publicontheGabcikovo-Nagymaros Barragm eustbe continued,in order
to let ourpeoplesee its purpose,its way of operation, and social aeconomicbenefits. Hcnce,those
fewopeningsentences, which were enumerateb dyme,containal1ibis. Therefore,whaeves votes'Yes'on
this, willacceptthe introductoryIine- namely, that Parliament acknowledge tse reportof the Council
of Ministers,etc.-withthese,with aking these[points]intoconsideration.
- The problem is,chatihere were afew proposais to suspnd or postponethe investment on the barrage,
orto performfurtherresearch toit,andthelike.
These would beexcluded,if Parliamentreached apositivedecision on the issue. Therefore,we cm
returntothesequestions onlyafterParliamentreached itsdecisionon theoriginal issue.
Thosewho favourthe suspension and the like,shall expresstheir wilby takinga positionagainstthis
proposal.
The secondproposalis directed at the formationof a ParEiamentarCornmime. However,I will put this
to thevote onlyifthefirst proposa1endswitha positiveresult.
Honoured Parliament ! sthisal1right?(Yes.)
Then the passingof a resolution follows. 1beg theHonouredParliament,those who acknowledge the
proposalof the Councilof Ministers,withsupplernentsand as presented,please standup. The positive
votes mustalsobecountedfor the sakeofthe record.
(Thistakes place)
Thankyou.
Honoured Parliament! Please t, ose who are agains[the proposal],who are in favourof the stoppage,
andso on;pleasestandup.
(Thistakes place,)
Thankyou, please,takeyour seats.
Thosewho abstained from voting,pleasestandup.
(This takesplace.)
Honoured Parliament!Eam nowannouncingtheresolutionçoncemingthe firstmotion for resolution.
Parliament acknowledges thereportof theCouncilof Ministerson the Gabcikovo-Nagymarosinvesiment
withthe givenverbal supplementon thecondition thatthe fulfilrnentof tasand conditionsconceming
environmentalprotection, water purification anrdegionaldevelopment,enumeratedand determinedin
eightpoints, mustbe ensured;orin otherwords,theinstallation'esnvironment-friendlyoperationalmodes
must be unconditionallyapplied.
317Representatives were in favourofthe proposal, while19wereagainstand 31abstainedfrom voting.
(Applause.)1-lotiourParliament!
According to the secondproposa1Parliamentconsidersit necessaryto forman 'ahdw'committee,with
the intentiooffollowingcloselyand furthesupervisingthe commentsandproposalsput forwardin the
reportand duringthe debate.
Thereshall be four rnembers hm each of the Regional Developrnent andEnvironment Protection
Committee, theConsmetion and TransportCornmittee,thePlanningand BudgetaryCommitteeand also
fourfrom the AgriculturalandIndustriaiCornmittees.
Parliamentcommissions Dr.BélaBer~r , the Presidentof the RegionalDevelopmentand Environment
PtotectionCommittee,to headtheCommittee.
The 'a dw'Committee,in CO-operatiow niththe committeewhich istobe formedby thegovernment,
shall devisitswork-schedule,in whichif shall determinthe furtherwork concemingthe Gabcikovo-
Nagymarosinvestment and the supervisionof the elabarationand implementationof goals heardand
determined during Parliamentq debate, The 'adhm'committeemust give reportson its work, as
necessary,buton a regularbasis.
HonouredParliament!Thosewhoacceptthisproposal,please,standup.
(Thistakesplace.)
Thankyou. Please sit down.Thisis a visiblemajority,therefor,ere 1finitperrnissibletocountthe
'No' votesnd thenumkrabstainingftomvoting.
Whois against?Nobody.
Whoabstainedfromvoting?Nobody.
1 amannouncingthe resolution. The'adhm'Committeeon thebarrageis herebyfomed by a unanimous
decisionoftheParliament.
HonouredParliament!since the debateon thisitem of the agenda is finishwe,shall tum tothe next
one. Annex 146
TheCouncilofMinisters
ofthe HungarianRepublic
Secret!
Madein 56copies
Deliveredto:
-themembersof theCouncilofMinisters
-permanent participantofsessionsofthe CounciIof Ministers
- thesecretaryofthe governmentcornmittee
- Comrade Péter Havas
- Comrade Géza K6tai
ResoIution
No3004/1989
ofthe CouncilofMinisters
on furthertasksconcemingthe constructionof
the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem
The Councilof Ministersenactsthe following resolutionon furthertaskscancerningconstructionof the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem:
1. The Council of Ministers herebyorders the compulsory appIication of the Plan of Action
encompassedinthe appendixofthis resolution,
2. By way ofimplementingthe necessarymeasures ithasto beachieved,that theGabcikovoNagymaros
BarrageSystem becompletedfrom thebudgetenvisagedinthe approvedinvestmentproposal.Proposais
to çoverpossible additionalexpendituresshouldbe initiatedin appropriateprocedures,dependingon the
characteristicsofeach givenexpenditure.
3. Expenditusesfor tasksensuringthe prioriryof environmentalprotectionstandpointsand the earliest
possiblebenefitsto the nationaleconorny,shoulbe providecfor by planningbodiesin the yearly and
medium terrn plans, based on decisions adopted by appropriateproceduresa,nd also based an the
governrnentalprogramme as prescribedby the Plan ofAction.
4. The Minister for Environmental Rotection and Water Managementand the govemment
plenipotentiaryis hereby empowered,in comection with the environmentalimpacts of the barrage
systemandwith itsoperation inan environmental-friendmanner,to initiataHungarian-Czechoslovak
Agreement onthe environmentalaspeca tndanoperationalplan 'liason thoseaspects, tonominatethe
memkrs of the Hungariandelegationfor the negotiationsand toconduct negotiationson the condition
that after the cornpletionof the professionalnegotiationproposalbeasubmiwd to the Council of
Ministersforapproval.
Budapest,5 January 1989
Mikl6sNémeth
,Presidentofthe Councilof Ministers Appendixto the ResolutionNo 3004/1489
PLANOFACTION
basedon thebriefingacceptedon the
Parliarnents session helonOctober1988
ontheconstructionofthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrag Seystem
1. TheGevernrnentshouldberegularlybriefedas to the stageof constructionof thebarrage system,on
theirnplementationof theplannedschedule,onthemeasures takenand on thedecisionsreaçhed.
Deadline: accordingtothejointimplementation schedule.
Personincharge:
- The MinisterforEnvironment Protection andWater Management
- The MinistetforIndustry
- TheMinisterfor Transport
- theGabcikovo -NagymarosBarragePlenipotentiary
2. In order to minimisethe ecologicalriskp slans on the barrage systernand.its implementation and
operationalmodeshould be modified or extendedaccording to needsw , ithspecialregardto theDanube's
oldIlverbed and tothe necessityofforming a territoriand flood plain waterreplenishmentsystem.
Deadline:- continuous
-for theelaborationofthe concept ontheenvironmentalfriendlyoperationalmode:
June 1989
Person incharge:-the MinisterforEnvironmentProtectionandWaterManagement
-theMinisterfor Industry
-the MinisterforTransport
-the Gabcikovo - NagymarosBarrage Plenipotentiary
3. The basic operationalprinciple is that Danube'swaterquality cannot deteriorate. Peak-energy
production mode may only commenceafterthe establishmentof thenecessq waste waterpurification
plants on both sidesfor the operationof the system without environmentarlisks. The water quality
parametersaccordingto theabove principle shall beestablishedinsuch a rnanner,that thestateof the
quality of the water of the Danube be better than at present. The sewage water discharges in the
watershedarea of the joint sectionof theDanubeshall lxre-surveyed to this end. The sewage water
treament programmes shall be re-evaluatedand presentedin a cornprehensiveway, with deadlinesfor
theexecutionof these
Based on the insight thathe minimisationof ecologicalrisks related to the construction and
operationof the projectis inthemutualinterestof both the Hungarianand Czechoslovakside, and that
this can only be achieved by a joint obligation, it is necessary to initiate negotiations with the
Czechoslovaksideon the identificationof the environmental conditionasnd the ensurementthereof.Al1
this must be included in an intergovemmentaltreaty.Guidingprinciples for the negotiation shall be
determinedin mder topreparesuccessfullyfor thenegotiationsandtheintergovernmentalagreement.
Deadline:
-for the approvalof the guidingprinciplesof the negotiationsincludingconsultationwith the
interestedministriesandParliamentarycornmittee:January 1989 - forthe preparationofthetreaty:June 1989
Personincharge:
The MinisterofEnvironment Protection and Water Management
MinlsterofIndustry
MinisterofForeignAffairs
Gabcikovo -NagymarosBarrage Plenipotentiary
Presidentof theCouncilofGy&-Soproncounty
Presidentof the Councilof Kornhromcounty
President oftheCouncil of Pestcounty
4. The monitoring system must be further developedand operated in such a manner that
information concerning thechangesin al1determinantcomponentsof the environmentbe available for
the operatqrson a regular basis.For this sake the aspects relevantfor the operation mode and the
measuringand processing system must be hmonised. Provisionfor the evaluation of thedata, the
feedbackand theconditions formakingthe materialspublicmust be made.
Deadline:for theelaborationofthemonitoring system
- in theregionofDunakiliti:31December1989
- on theentireimpact area:31March1992
- fortheoperation ofthemonitoring systemc :ontinuous
Personincharge:
- The MinisterofEnvironmentProtection and WaterManagement
- Gabcikovo - NagymarosBarrageSystemPlenipotentiary
5. Maintrend and theagenda forregionaldevelopment shal l eelaboratedon the impact areaof
the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem. Thisshall inçlude perspectives from industry,agriculture,
transportation,tourism and municipalitydevelopment. It shallbe ensured that these perspectivesbe
implementedonthe basisofcomprehensive environment impact assessments.
Withintheframeworkof theabove:
- a governmentprogramme shall be developed -with the participationof al1affected- on the
conceptof the comprehensivesociaI and economicdevelopment and utilisation of the areaaffectedby
theBarrage Sy stem.
Deadline:
- for theelaborationofthepreliminaryprinciples:June 1989
- for public discussiand adjustmene:thirdquarterof 1989
- for theevolutionofthelong-tennconcept anditspublic discussion:June 1990
- forthe submissionofthe concept :the third quarterof 1999.
Fersonincharge:
Presidentof!heNational Planning Office
Ministerof Construction andUrbanDevelopment MinisterofCommerce
MinisterofTransportation
MinisteroftheInterior
Presidentofthecoiincil ofGy6r-Sopron County
Fresidentofthe Councilof Kombom County
Presidentof theCouncilofPestCounty
- an agenda shall be prepared for the impIementatiaof the govement programme for the period
between 1991-1995, which agenda shall includ he concretetasksof govement bodies, economic
organisations aswellas of county and local municipalities,the social knenefttsthereof with regard to
infrastnicture,indust,gricultureandtourism,andthe sourcesof developmentbelongingthereto.
Deadline:
- forelaboration:simultaneouslywith the planningworkon the ~111. ~ ive-YearPlan of the
national economy
- for submission:asa partofthegovernrnentprogrammethethirdquarterof 1990
Personincharge:al1affectedplanningbodies
-conceptsfor land use and standardsrelated thereto shall be revisedin accordance with the
goverment programme and the agenda, and thenecessarymodificationsand amendments shall be
elaboratedfor thelong-term, andforthe periodbetween1991-1995
Deadline: according ttheelaborationof theGovemrnentProgramme
Personincharge: MinisterforConstructionandUrbanDevelopment
6. A Research and DevelopmentCornmitteeshall be estnblishedadjoining the Minister for
EnvironmentProtection and WaterManagement, which shoulh delpthe CO-ordinationfresearchand the
utilisatiooftheresultsoftheresearches.
Deadline:31January1989
Personincharge: MinisterforEnvironment Protection and aterManagement
7. The society shallbe infotmedof the meritsof the Gaùcikovo-NagymmosBarrageSystern, so
thatournationshallknowtheobject,operation, social and economiecffecoftheprojecf.
Deadline:continuous
Persanincharge:
The MinisterforEnvironmentProtectionand Water Management
MinisterofIndustry
MinisterofTransportation
MinisterofAgricultureandFood
Presidentf thecouncilofGy&-Soproncounty
Presidenotf thecouncilof Kornbm county
&sident of thecouncilofPest county Annex 147
Council ofMinistersof
the People'sRepublicofHungary
Secret!
Prepmdin460copies
Copy no.17
SentCo:
Memks oftheCounciEof Ministers
Permanent participantsf the
meetingof theCM
T. IvanBerend
Dr. RekaNyitray
ResolutionNo. 312511989
of the
Council of Ministers
RegardingtheSuspension of WorkatNagymaros
Prmeeding from theresponsibilitiesundertakenbythe President of the Governmentbefme Parliament,
the Councilof Ministers ha- on thebasisofthe proposalof theaffectedMinistersconcemedandtaking
into considerationthesuggestionsof the Ad HocCommiiteeof the HungananAcademy of Sciences, the
Advisory Body ofthe Council of Ministers, and the Public Cornmitteeto Supervise the Investment
examined thepossibilitiesfororderinga referendum regardithe Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaros investment. In
relationto this, ithas examined theconsequencesof the constructionof the Nagymarospmjectas wellas
the cansequencesofthe eventualstoppingof such construction.
TheCouncilof Ministers haspassedthefollowingresolution:
1. The Council of Ministershereby suspends work at Nagyrnms as of thisday. Itorders the
Ministersconcemedto commissionfunher studiesin order toplace the Councilof Ministersin a
position where itcan make well-foundedsuggestions to theParliamentin connectionwith the
amendment of the internationaltreaty on the inveslmenIn theintereslsof the above,we must
examine theinternationaland Iegal consequences,the technicalconsiderations,the obligations
relatedto continuousnavigationon theDanube and the environmentaVecologica l nd seismic
impacts ofthe eventual stoppingof the Nagymaros investment.To be furtherexaminedare the
opportunitiesfor the replacementof the Iost electricenergy and the proceduresfor rninimising
claims forcompensation.
Deadline: for the completionoftheseinvestigations:31 Ju1989
Responsible: Ministerf Environmentai Protection and aterManagement,
MinisterforTransportation,Telecommunications andConstruction,
MinisterofIndustry
MinisterofJustice
2. The Council of Ministers requestsParliamentoauthoriseit to enter intoprelirninarynegotiations
with the Czechoslovak Part yegardingthe amendmentof the treaty. Ttproposes that ParIiarnent
authorisethe Government notto fulfil its dutassdefined in Octokr 1988with relation to the
continuationoftheinvestment.3. ThecompetentbodiesmustenterintodiscussionwithAustriancornpanieandfinancial institutions
regardingthepossibilitiesof redireçtionto otherHungarianinve,f resourceswhichrnaybe
freedasaresultoftheeventuatstoppingof theinvestment
Deadline:31July 1989
Responsible:futheCO-ordinatioofthediscussions:
the MinisteofEnvironmenta PlrotectiandWaterManagement
4. Theproposaisto lx submittedto Parliamenmustbe preparedin sucha manner thatParliament
rnay,on its own authority,arriveaa decisionon the basis of these or that it rnayordera
referendum.
Budapest,13 May 1989
Mikl6sNémeth
PresidentoftheCouncilof Ministers Annex 148
PARLIAMENTA RRESOLUTIO 91N1989(VI.13.)2 JUNE 1989
Regarding the Report of the CaunciofMinisters
on theSuspensionof Workin Progress aiNagymaros
onthe Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem
1. Parliament takes note thefactthat the Councilof Ministers
-has suspended the workin progressat Nagyrnaroson the Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaros Basrage System on
May 13, 1989
- finds it necessary to conduct further inquiries into the conditandsconsequences of invesment
therein.
Parliament hereby gants an exemption, from the obligation to complete the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Barragesystemprescribed in Point1 of its decision of October7, 1988.
2. Parliament calls upothe Council of Ministers to submit in the appropriate rnannera report detailing
the statementsand,conclusions of the aforementioned inquiries,as weasthe proposals of the Council
of Ministers concerningpossibleamenàrnents of the treaty, including the potential international, legal,
economic and technical consequencesthereof.
3. Parliament does hereby authorisetheCouncil of Ministerstoconduct preliminary negotiations with
the Czechoslovak party regarding the conditions fortheamendment of the interstta reety and the
possible consequences thereof,if inquiries conducteddurtheperiodof suspension makeit necessary. Annex 149
The Council of Ministers took noteof the report on the Hungarian - Czechoslovakprime ministem'
meetin heldon 20 July 1989,and ofthe deIiveryto the Czechoslovaksideofproposalsdescribedin the
appendix. TheCouncilof Ministersfiasadopted thefollowingresolution:
1)The suspensionof works atNagymaros mentionedin section1of the CounciEof Minister'sResolution
318S/1989 willbe exknded to 31October1989.
2) Preparatoryworks on theclosureof the riverbedat the Dunakilitimube suspendeduntil 31 October
1989.
3) Et is the dutyof the Minister for EnvironmentalProtection andWater Management to take the
necessarystepsto implementthe decisionsencompassedinsections1and2.
4) The technicaland economic consequences which would fallow from the possiblesuspensionof the
acdvity of Austriansupplierswhichshould be detemined. A proposa1shouldbe made concemingthe
wayin whichthesecasesshouldbe handled.
Personincharge:the Minister forEnvironmentProtection andWater Management
the GovemmentPlenipotentiary
the Ministerof Commerce
the MinisterforFinance,and
the Ministerof Justice,withtheparticipationof
the President the Hungarian
NationalBank
Deadline: IOAugust1989
5) A schedule should bepreparedfor the implementation of tasks establishedattheRime Ministers'
meeting.
Personin charge:theGovemmentPlenipotentiary
deadline31Julyf 489
Budapest,20July 1989
DeputyPresidentof the
Cauncilof Ministets
Dr. PeterMedgyessy
Initialstandpointonbatproposals:
Theclosuo rfetheDanube'sriverbedshouldnot
tdceplacein October1989
Firstproposal:The suspensionof works on theclosureof theDanube'stiverbedandof worksrelatedto dammingon the
barragesinHungary,inCzechosEovakia and at Nagymarosfora periodof 3-5years.
Tojointly cal1upon international scientific institutions, foreign scientifiatdsexperts,with the
contributionof whom theHungarianand Czechoslovak institutes anedxpertsCO-operatinthe
al assessrnentof the ecologically optimaloperationalmodof Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaros BarragS eysrem
and
bl developrnentandirnplernentatioofa technicalandoperationalwaterqualityguaranteesystem
In the Iighofthesetherearevariantsfordecisionin3-5 years:
1. The continuationof the constructionof the Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrageSystem with ecological
guarantees
2. Thecompleteabandonmentofthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarragS eystem'sçonsb.uction,
3. Abandonmentof the Nagymaros Barragea ,ccompanyingthe ¢laborationof an ecologically neutral
operationalmodeforthe barrage ixstarted.
Second proposal:
The suspension ofthe closureofDanube 'serbedfor 1year. The postponementof commencementof
operationsatGabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem fora periodof 1year. (The slowingdown of works
in Hungaryand Czechoslovakia.Thecommencementof theconstructionof the Nagymarosbarrage to be
alsopostponedfor 1 year).
To jointly cal1upan international scientific institutions, foreign scientific inxnpderts,with the
contributionofwhomtheHungarianandCzechoslovak institutes andexpertsCO-operatnthe
al development of a technicaland operational water quality guarantee systemnlaborationofa plan
for its irnplernentation
b/ operationof theGaixikovo-NagymarosbarrageSystemincontinuous modeor limitedpeakloadfor a
few (3-5)years. Scientificobservationandanalysis.
Amendment ofthe interstateTreatyreflectingthe contentofpoia/and bl Annex 150
OF THE COUNCI L FMTNISTERS
ONTHEMEASURES TOBE TAKEN ON THE BASIS OFEXPLORATORY RESEARCH ONTHE DOMESTICAND
INTERNATIONAL L,EGAL,ECONOMIÇ, ECOLOGICAL AND TECHNICAL CONSEQUENCES WHLCHWAS
PERFORMED DURiNGTHESUSPENSIONOF WORKS AT NAGYMARQS
1. The Council of Ministersconfirming its preliminarystandpoint encompassedin resolution number
326511989of 22 September,
a, States, that Hungaryand Czechoslovakiawould fa11into an ecologicalstatofemergency in the
event of a commencementin the operationof the water-barrageaccording tothe original plans, and
therefore, it finds icnecessatoeliminate the peak-operationmode of the barrage, and therefore the
abandonmentofconstnictionof theNagymarosBarrage.
The HungarianPartyfinds it necessasytorepeal the sectionof the Protocol,signed in February 1989, on
theaccelerationof construction worksat the water-barragerelated toNagymar.s
b, It findsit necessaryto concIudean agreementto minimise theenvironmentalrisks inherent in the
basic-operationmodeof the Dunakiliti-Hrusovo reservoir and theGabcikovowaterpowerplant;and to
establisha comprehensive water-quality protection, technical-operationand ecological system of
guarantees related to the Dunakiliti-Hrusovo reservoir,o the Dunakiliti weir, to the Gab~ikovo
waterpowerplant, tothe power-canalandto theDanuberiver sectionextendingto Nagymaros.
The condition for filling the Dunakiliti-Hrusovoresewoiris the conclusionof the inter-governmental
agreement. In the event thaa Czechoslovakstatementof willingntss to concludethe inter-governrnent
agreement is given,Be prepararory workson the relocation of thriverbedof the reservoir could be
continued;
Itfindsit necessary,on the basis of what was encornpassin points aand hl, to amend "The
c,
Treaty on the Implementationand Operationof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem Concluded
on the 16th Day of September 1977 Between the Hungarian People's Republic and theCzechoslovak
SocialistRepublic" andthe agreementssupplementingthe Treaty.
It proposes that Parliament authmise the Council of Ministers to propose Co the Czechoslovak
ContractingParty the amendmentof theInterstate Treaty.
2. If Parliamentgives authorityto the Council of Ministersto inittheeamendmentof the Interstate
Treaty,thefollowingmeasuresshallbe taken:
a, The Council of Ministersinstructhe Minisierfor the Protectionof theEnvironmentand Water
Managementin CO-operationwith EheinterestedMinisterçto devise the work-plan oal1the necessary
measures which have a connection with the amendment of the Interstate Treaty andagreements
connected tothe Treaty,aswellasthe plansand investment;
Personin charge: - theMinisterfor theProtectionof the Environmentand WaterManagement
-the MinisterofJustice
- the Ministerof Commerce
- the Foreign Minister
- theMinister forIndustry
- theMinisterof Finance - the Headof the National PlanningOffice
- theMinister of Transport, Communication andPublicConstnction
- the Pcesidentof the National Bank ofHungary
Dead-line: 7Novernber 1984
The detailed textual modification of the Interstate Treaty and of the connected agreements shall be
prepared in accordance withthe task plan approvedby the Corincilof Ministers.
Personin charge: - the Minister of Justice
- the Foreign Minister
- the Minister for the Protectionof the Environment andWater Management
-theMinister of Transport, Communication and PublicCons~uction
-theMinister of Commerce
Dead-line: 15Novernber 1989
The Treaty-amendment proposal approved by the Council of Ministers, shall be handed over to the
Czechoslovak Partyin a procedure as defined in the Treaty.
Person incharge: -theGovernent Commissioner ofthe Gabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage System
Deadline: 15-20November 1989 ,
b, The Council of Ministers instructs the Minister for the Protection of the Environment and Water
Management inco-operation with the interested ministers to take the following rneasures in connection
with the dissolution ofagreements related tothe constniction ofthe NagymarosWater-barrage:
- The termination of foreign trade-related private Iaw contractconnected to the construction of
the Nagymaros Barrage shall beprepared, taking into accountthe financial consequences.
Fersonin charge: -the Ministerfor the PLotection.otheEnvironment and Water Management
-the Minister for Commerce
-the Minister forIndustry
-the Minister for Finance
-the President oftheNational Bank of Hungary
Dead-line: -forthe preparation of temination of contracts 7 November1989,
-forthe temination ofcontracts 15Novernber 1989.
Other contracts related to the Nagymms Barrage shall be supervised, and the contracts shallbe
terminateci apart hm the ones on the works on flood protection, on indispensable transportation and
directly ones for providing the living conditionsof the region.
Person incharge: -Minister forthe Protectionofthe Environment andWaterManagement
Dead-line: immediately,depending on the conditionsof the contracts
Theflood protection defence plan of the regionof Dunakiliti shallbe elaborated, and it shall irnmediately
be reconçiled withthecompetenC t zechoslovakwatermanagement organisations.
Person incharge: -MinisterfortheProtection of the Environment and WaterManagement
Dead-line: irnrnediately Theinvesment proposalfor the Gabcikovo Nagyrnms Barrage Systern shallbe reframed inaccordance
with the proposedmodification of the InterstateTreaty, andthe modifiedinvestmentproposa1 shall be
subrnittedintheorderof procedures forstateinvestrnents.
Personincharge: -Ministerforthe ProtectionoftheEnvironmentandWaterManagement
A new comprehensive regionaldevelopment concepa tndarrangementplanshallbeelaborated -withthe
participationf the localand regionalcouncils - forthe sectionof the Danube betweenthe statcborder
and Nagymaros,in orderto establishthebdanced developrnentofthe Danubeand theregion.
The infrastructuraldevelopmentsptanned and already being implemented, not directly reIated to the
projeçtatNagymarosshall be fullyexecuiedwithout increasingtheburderisofthe inhabitants.
Personin charge: -Ministerof theInrerior
-Ministerfor theProtectionof theEnvironment andWater Management
-MinisterofTransportation,CommunicationHousing and Public Construction
-MinisterofIndustq
-Ministerof AgrÎcultureand Alimentation
-Presidentof the National Planning Office
-MinisterofFinance
Dead-line: continuous
3. The Councilof Ministershereby extendsthe mandateof Dr UdvariLhszl6,Under-Secretary ofState
for Transportation, Communication, Housing and Public Construction,appointed by Resolution
1071/1989(VI. 15)of the Councilof Ministers,as GovernmentCarnrnissioner - with thesame scope of
activity-, in accordancewith the regulationon tasks and dutiesembodiedin the said tesolution. This
mandateshall be validuntilitswithdrawal.
The provisionsinArticles6-10of theResolutionof the Council ofMinisters1041/1989(VI.15)and the
annex rheretoshallcease tohave effectaftertheit implementation.
The ternporarycomrnittee fmed under ~esolution326511989of the CounciI of Ministers on the
organisationand directionof the tasks relatedto the modificationof the maty concluded betweenthe
Hungaria People'sRepublic and theCzechoslovakSocialistFederaIRepublic on theconstructionand
operationof the GabcikovoNagymarosBarrage Systemshall continueto operate. The comrnittee shdl
execute itsCO-ordinatingwork in CO-operation with the rninistersand leaders of bodies of national
authmitywithouttaking ove1theirtasks and authority.
The committeeis a workingcommitteecomprisingof the Deputy Ministers(Deputy Presidents)and
Under-Semetariesof Stateof theMinistryfor theProtectionof theEnvironmentandWaterManagement,
Ministry of Justice, Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Ministryof Industry, Ministry of Transportation,
Communication H,ousin and Public Construction,Ministry of Finance, NationalPlanning Office and
the HungarianNationalBank.
The Councilof MinisterscalIsuponthe Presidentofthe Hungarian Academyof Sciencesto delegatehis
representativesforthe committee.
Ttie activitiesothe cornmitteeshall be directedby the GavemmentCommissionerof the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage Systern. The activitiesof thecornmitteeshalbe supervisedby the DeputyPsesident
ofthe Councilof Ministers.
4. With this presentresolution,resoIution326511989of the Councilof Ministers shallçease to have
. effect.5. Point21a.-b. of thispresentresolutionshallenter intoforce uponPa~iiament giving authorisationfor
the initiatiof themodificationof theInterstateTreaty.
Budapest,27 October1989
Németh Miklos
PsesidentoftheCouncilof Ministers Annex E51
l
PARLIAMENTA RRESOLUTIO 2N11989(XI 1O.)3,1O~BER 1989
on the ReportoftheCouncilof Ministers
Regardingthe InquiriesConducted
Duringthe SuspensionofWorkat Nagyrnaros to
UncoverInternational Legal,Economic,
Ecological,and TechnicalConsequencesThereof
1. Parliament takes note of the results outlined in the report ofthe Councii of Ministers on the
inquiries conducted during the suspensionof work at Nagymaros to uncover international legal,
economic, wological, and technical consequences andthe inferences drawntherefrorn, as contained in
thePrimeMinister's exposé.
2. Parliamentapproves that theactivityof the Govemmentcontinueto beguided by the priority of
theecological approaches, scientific soundness, and representation of the national interest.It should
endeavourat the preventionandand repair ofenvironmentaidamage.
3. Parliamententitles the Councilof Ministetoinitiate negotiationswithe Czechoslovak party
regarding theamendmentof the "TreatyConcluded Between theHungarianPeople'sRepublic and the
Czechoslovak Socialist Republic Regardinge Completion and Operaiionof the Gabcikovo Nagymaros
BarrageSystem, Signedon 16September, 1977".
Parliamentdirects the Councilof Ministers totake the measuresmade necessbyythe initiationof the
saidnegotiations.
4. Parliamenttakesnote and approvesof the factthat the Councilof Ministers,in the interest of the
bdanceddevelopmencof the Danube andthe regionand withthe participationof the local and territorial
çouncils, prepares a new, complex regional development conceptioand land use plan for the area
extending along the Danube sectionfrom the state border toNagymaros. Parliamentfinds it neceçsary
that infrasmctural developments, both planned and in progress, not directly connected with the
Nagyrnaros installation shouldbe fully completedwithoutincreasingtheproporof thecosts borneby
thepopulation. 361
Annex152
Hungary'sNationalRenewal
The firstthree years(1990 - 1992)
of the Republic
Budzipest,September 1990. Protectionowaters:Inthe areasthatbelong10 thegwernrneni'ssphereofautbo-
rîty,it wili tsrepstastop thedeterioralionofthe Danubet, heTisza,and other
surtacmaten.Eycxintiauingthecornprehensivqeuality-regulatinseariieyearswe
wiilimprovethequalityofLake Balaton'swater.We planto tevisetheconceptionof
water-protection . alleviathe&mage thattheTransdanubia narsticandthermal-
karstisystemshave suffered,e willratrict t"use "fkaostiwatersand gradually
put an end totheharmful effect owater-liftidue to mining.We wiltconcentrate
stateeffortsonexpanding theapacity of thesewage-systemand sewage cleaninin
order to reducetheexpens asinhabitantforthepublicserviceinany Pen mmm-
uniîy.Toprotectthequalityof wateriniheelrisiiwater-wkrs, we wilcontinuethe
efforttoputan end tothoseaci~iieswhichendanger thewarersuppiyof hese works.
Wewill alçoernplcryhemeans of financiapolic(ta-reduetion,dvantageou credits,
charge fortheuse ofvater,conrnbuiions,tc.inthefieldofwater-protection.
Protectioof nature:IRacmrdanc e iththespiritof theaewlaw,we willprwent
theSunherdeterioratioof the protead naturaarea sndtheirwealih;7% of the
country'are asofthisnatureWe wildedare protectedthuseareasof naturalwealth
thatare notyet underprotectionTB ,he districtof LakeFertdwe are dweloping,
togethewithAustriaa,jointNaiionalParkzhisyear.A NationaPark istobe formed
intheBalatonhighlandsand in otheareasof thecountrydrdg, Békésmunty, etc.).
Areasthatfomeriy belongedtothe rnilitaryforcandthefrontierzone,and thatare
richin naturalwealth,shalnowbeprotected and placedin thevon of the
organizatioosfenvironmentaplrotectio.NationaPark ofKiskuwlg andHorîabdgy,
Bakony distna, etcIn 1991we pkn to mate andenforce aprovisionoflaw thatin
the intereof proteciinthecapaciiyof areas,or,if needed,restorinit, will toy
safeguarthe eoologicae, rinamiandaestheticpotentiaifnatumiareasthat arenot
asyet protectedWe aimider irveryimponant ihatthe damaged protectednatural
areas,ïegio nsd,temtoriesarerestored(marshhnb, grasss ,urfacmines, forests,
etc.)We wiiitakecare that the protecteareasareplad under theauthorityof
envimantenta pmteaioaagencies, wiihspecialregardto the exçeptionalyrotectedareasandsoareasunderthe puMw of international agreemenBy.puttinganend to
theruthlessexploitationoforestswe wilbe ableto protect the fores1operly.We
willaeate asysternof monitaringandinformationktween environmental protection
and forestry,The environmentalsupervisiontheproductionofmineralresourceswill
tK inzrduced. In the protwteareas,we willpromoternethods of management that
hannonizewith natureand willdevelopihegeneral operating sysiemof nature-friendiy
management (especialtyin thesphereof fieldfora&, and rusha.).
We wiHirnprov he financiaand organisationalconditiosfnaturerand landpr~
tection,andincreasits spherof auihoriiy. We planio promote textensionof tasks
derivingform the iniernaiional obligatiofnature protection (tradein liviwiid
animals,protectinthe restplaceol migratingspeciesbiaspherereservationetc.).
We willsubrnittothe Parliamenan up-iodatelaw about the protectionanirnals,
making use ofthe experiencesofsimilaEuropean lawsand their application.
We willpayspecialattentioto thme endangered plant andanimalspecies thaare
on the brink of extinctioand proiect iheir ierriiories and souraswell as our
geologicalwealtHanria: Finallywe must take intaccount thediçcwery ofhidden,
seriouenvironmental pollutiondevelopedmer a longperiod,and ab those grave
pollutionsihat appesuddenty(cg.thedischargeofdangerous substances). heorga-
nisalional and techniconditionsof avoidingan environmentalemergency willbe
takencareof bythe government.
2. The ProbIem of the Power Plant onthe Danube
21.Our Objectives
The plan of the Danube hydroelcctricpowerplantisa symbolof the executive
power'sinsensi tieaeures,ackingal1modem, technicaleconornical çonsiderations.
The solutionofa given situatiocan,also be syrnbolic.We wish to =Ive the open
international questions and the reconstructions that reveal new possibilitaeswith
double approach,Startinfrom the outercircle,on the basiiscmperarion withthe
environmenta lrotection instiruriofsthc EuropeanCnmmunity and ihe United
Nations,in the frameworof anew Danutxagreemen te wishtoçompenste forthe
damage thi faultyinvestmenhascauscd ,nd io strengthethesymbolicbindingrole
of theDanube. Slarfingfrom theinnerrircle,rioofieratingwith new lacagovern-
ments and ihe environmenialprotectionmovcrnenis,embmcing rheirinitiativesand
establishingthem scientific,elwouldlikcto dwelopthe Danube regionwiihspeeial
regard to ecologsportsand recrealion.his will k possibleavoidingan emlogical
emergenq throughthe resioration of the natenvironmentM. er due preparations,
we wishtodims once again theCzechmlwak-IIungariainternationaagreement.We
shalldo al1we caninorder to preventthe cantradictioarisingfromthe investment
plans,from kcominga clashof interests between ttwanations.The samerefer tos
the obligationsarisifrom thecountry'sivillawcontractO.ur aimisrogei asmuch
international, moral, and financiaas passibleforthe restoratioof theDanube
regionto itsoriginalstaas,thiisofiniernationalintereThis,Tm,can promote the
basic aim, which is asat finalresult, the quesofothehydroelecp towicrplantshouldnot butdenour brlaterlelationship,utrathelikratenew forcesforwpe-
ration.
The goverment wishes 10emphasizethe creatioof a Hungarian-Austrianxze-
choslwaknarionaplark,bmding theregionand obtaininghealthdrinking-waterom
thi sachofthe Danube,ïatherthan theforceenergyutilizatiof theriverIwishes
tomure the intemtionalnavigabiliyf theDanube withaslittlinterferencto the
natura invironmen aspdk. Thegmmment pursuesaims reflectiagnew,global
way oftûjnkjnganeculogi çattude,anditwishestomperate with theCzechand
Slovak Repubuc inthe correctioof ourjointeçologimlemr; thereshouldk no
damming atDunakiliti;jointAustriarpCzechoslmak-Hun nanureaanrkshould
be createdin theVieana-Bratislav ta-nglefrrthe EXPO1%; it considerthe
pmtsctionof subsurhce watersuppIiesnCsalldkbzandSzigelkOzand pwsibilitifor
waterwithdrawa t yfiltrationriverbaokofprimaryimportancienorder tosupplya
larg regioawithdrinkingatera,nditendeavourtu dwelop theregionktween Rajka
andBudapst inaharmonius andhumane way,withspeclalattentioio lm1inierests
representedythelocalgmeramentsd :rinlcing-waerppiytourism,reducingdamage
totheenvironmen tc.;restorintheDanube Bendwithsÿecia regardt thenatural,
histofic,nd culturalwealtandthe aqxcts ofrecreation,ourismand transportby
water;proteethgthe typicalgalleryforesand, ipible, replantingthem;and it
wishesto excludethe dMding aspectof frontierhelpingthe natwralrelationships
betweetnbe peopleIrvinon thetwosidesof the Danube bymeans of foreigaffairs
andregionaldeyelopment.
t3, ïhe Situatioat EbbMoment
After its decistonstopbuildinthe mr plant,theformergmrnment's actions
were indtent. For example :he presidcntof thHungarian NationalBank was
authorizeto incteastherefinancingrcditlimiofthe&I
by2 millionforin,n ordertoensurethecontinuivof theworkdone on Czechm-
lmakian territoacoordingtocontract.Theformer government made initiatimea-
surs tmrds theaechodiwakian gwernmeni,but none were broughthere a1home.
ConmrniagBü6,it made thedamming andthe diversioof thDanube atDunakiliii,
essentialforstartithepower pianidependent uponconditionsthatweredifficuto
denne.
Mer the Cimenimenc tame into ofliciiappointeda new commissioner ,hose
seaetariabe1ong 10 theorganisaiioofthePrime Ministerialffic e.e Cornmittee
forthe Rwehtion of Factspreparedaprogram for theGovernrnen and continueits
açt~ty.
The statemen tfcas& oftheUivwtmenp t rogramrndined h 1986(andcriticized
aithetirne, itha predicteiacreaseomis ofabout &5%, is54 billionforinUp.
totheend of lasyear,theinvestment thegeneralpurehas eax (Afa),andthe
refinaocicrediinter- were29,6billionforint.ie statemen tfmts forthis
yeakri6,9billionforiand the receivemntraa stockis2,Zbillioforint, fwhich
1billiowas paidup tothe endofJune. At present,Donaukrafîwerk AeG claimsalmmt 3 biiiioATS because the hydroe.
leçtrimer plant at Nagymara willnotbebuilt.The Huogarian partywouldrather
corneto anagreementout ofcuun.Weaim foropen andcorrecsettlement oaçcounts.
Afteralong periodleadingcMI servantsof thnew govemment of theHungarian,
&ch and Sluva kepublicssat dm once againto havetalksandto infom one
anotherof their points of view.The federalandHungaria n overnment areboth
of iheopinion thaithcornplexquestioof thebydroelectrpwr plantat Bü6isnot
a Slmk-Hungarian affairbuta Europeanone. The differencof opinionis notas
significanigeneralecologimtbasicprinciplasndprioritito t~made intheregion,
as itisin thewaluaiionofwhat isto becorneof the exktigroupof sitesai BC)s.
solution ihat pl- both partiecanbe roundifjoint rwrch isdone to rwealihe
damage,dangers, and risks.
U MainTasks and Metbadsd Sdution
In accordancewith the Czeçh and Slmk Republim,we planto preparefor the
long-lem flood preventionacontrolof the reacoftheDanube above Budapest.By
puttinan end tothetempraîy river bcat Nagymaros andthe filliof thework pit,
reconstructicank concluded:by ensuringa narrowedbut navigablroute,develo-
pingriverbanksuitable fowater sports,andthe liftiofriversidefiltratdrinking
water.
Publicserviceinvestments,ormcrlylinkedto the hydroelectricpowplantqstcm,
now mdified accordingzothenewseitlcment4evelop emvintnaen,tal,and waler
affairsstandpoinaregraduallyking realized.Accordingtour plans,thefintstage
of the rea1Uatiofthe internationalenvironmenialprotecparkwillstarbyputting
an end io the rough technical,agricultandsyhriculturinterferenm (niininthe
soi!,chernicab) aby endingthe industrial pressonetheenvironment inthe mat
endangeredregions.
Together withtheCzechand Slwak Republics, a cornplexregionadevelopment
conceptionand regianalconstnictiaplan shouldbemade, the firsstageof which
should containthe dwelopment or transport reiatioktween Mn communities
(Szalka-LetkksPArkAny-Esztergo mtc.), coordinated sewacontroland lechnical
and environmentalprotectiomeasures to reduceindustril ndnuclearplluiion and
risks.
An ecologicaemergency can only k avoidcd the Dunakiliti-KOrIdlyes cistisn
net filledwith water. Annex 153
GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION 35071 1990,2 DECEMBER 1990
TheGovemmentofthe RepublicofHungary
Governmentresolution number350711990
regarûingthe questionsof theGabcikovoNagyrnaros Barrage.
1. The Government acknowledges the reportsby both the presidentof the FaccFinding Cornmittee
and the GovernmentPlenipotenriaryof the DanubeBarrageandconsidersthe açtivity of the Gabcikovo
NagymarosFact FindingCornmittee tobeFinished.
2. In keeping with its programme, the Gavernment considers the decision to consmct the
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystemand the 1977 Treatyçoncluded for that purpose as ill-founded
because they neglected to consider ecological consequences.Thus the Government supports and
reaffims the contentsof theearlierdecisionsoftheGovemmenton thesuspensionof constructiwmk.
3. The responsibleministersand the GovernmentalPlenipotentiaryshoustarnegotiationswilh the
Government of the CzechoslovakFederaIRepublic on the termination ofthe 1977 Treaty by mutual
consentand on theconelusionof atreataddressingthe consequencesof thetemination.
Responsible:Dr. FerencMM, Minister Without Portfolio
ForeignMinister
The PlenipotentiaryoftheDanubeBarrage
4. The Plenipotentiary of the Danube Barrage with the participationof the authorised ministers
should examinethe impact
a) of theprocedurefor thecompleteabandonmentofthebarragesystem,
b) of the compromisealternativesolutionsproposedby the CzechandSlovakFederal Authority for
the ecological,economicand otherconsequences.
Responsible:The Government Plenipotentiaryf the DanubeBarrage
Deadline:30June 1991
5. An informativeannouncamentshouldbe prepared for the Govemrnentof short terrnmeasures in
regardto theDanube Barragewith specialemphasis onquestionsregardingsafetyand Finance.
Responsible:The GovemmentPIenipotentia ofytheDanubeBarrage
Deadline:3 1January 1991
6. A summaryreport should be prepared for the purposeof informingthe Governmentof points 4
and5.
Responsible: theGovernmentPlenipotentiaryoftheDanubeBarrage
Deadline:31July 1991.
7. The Govmment believesitisnecessary
a} to establishan intergovemrnentalmixedcornmitteeto dealwiththebarrage,
Responsible:The Foreign Minister
The Ministerof Environment ProtectioandLandDeyelopmentb) to organise an internationalspecialist cornmittee for promoting negotiations between
Plenipotentiaries.
Responsible:theGovernmenP tlenipotentiaroftheDanulxBarrage
TheGovernmenr tequeststhatthepresidentsof thStattAuditingOffice,theHungarianNational
8.
BankandtheCentralStatisticsoffificprovideafinancialoverviewof theentireinvestment,
9. The Gavernmentproposes thatthe EnvironmentalCornmitteeof the Parliamentcontinue to
observegovemmentaa l ctivity.
Responsible:TheGovernmenP tlenipotentiaryftheDanubeBarrage
Budapest, 20December 1990
Dr. J6zsefAntall
PrimeMinister Annex 154
PARLMMENTA REYOLUTION 2611991 (IV.23.)16 APRIL199 1
Regardingthe Govemment's Responsibility
InConnectionWiehtheGabcikovo-Nagyniaros Barrage System
1. Recognising thefactthatthe startoftheoperationof the barrage systeor any principal workswould
resultin seriousecological andeconomicdamagethroughoutthe affectedregion,the Parliamentasksthe
Govemment:
- to conductnegotiationswiththe Govemrnentof the CzechandSlovakFederalRepublicregardingthe
determination by joint agreementtif the Taeaty concluded on 16 September, 1977 regarding the
Cornpletion and Operation of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systemand any and al1 such
agreementswhich the StateParties to the treaty andlor theirauthorised-bodieshave concluded for the
purposeof theexecutionoftheaforernentionedTreaty;
- at the same tirne to initiate the conclusionof a new interstate treatto settle the issue ofthe
consequencesof the abandonmentof the barrage systemand associatedmainprojects,accordingto the
following priorities,intheorderlisted:
a) therestorationandpreservationof theregion'secologicaland natural valuesand,mostimportantly,the
protectionof thedrinkingwaterreserves;
b) flooddefence ;
c)developmentofshippingin accordance with the region'snaturalconditions;
- to drafta plan for the rehabilitationof the Hungarianterritoriesaffectedby the aforementioned Treaty,
takingintoconsiderationtheapplicableParliameniaryinstructions.
2, Parliamentfindsnecessarythe continuedsuspensionof the works aimed atthe completion of the
barrage systemandhereby approvesanya~tionstakenbythe Govemmenttclthis end.
Parliament requests the Governrnent, to endeavour to seek an agreement in the aforernentioned
negotiations,in accordance with the earlierHungarianproposais, on the suspensionof works on the
temtory of the CzechandSlovak Federal Republic.
3. Parliamentrequests theGovernment, to discontinue state investmentinthe Gabcikovo Nagyrnaros
barrage systernand insbuçtsthe SrateAuditingOffice tobegina full financialreview of worksalready
completed.
4. The Governmentshall reportmonthly to thEnvironment Protection Cornmitteeof the Parliamenton
the executionof theprovisions containeherein.
Thispresentdecisionshalltakeeffect on the dayof itsacceptance.
GyorgySzabad
Speakerofthe Parliament
Dr. JozsefHorvith
Clerkof the Parliamene
Zolthn~rombiths
Clerkof theParliament Annex 155
ResolutionNo. 2009/1991 (HT 9)ofthe Government
Regardingthe Dutiesofthe Government
Relatedto theImmediateHalt to State Invesrment in the
Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage S ystern
in theinterestofexecuting
ResolutionNo. 2611991 (IV.23.)of theParliament
1. In the interest of putting an immediate halt to State investment, the Governmentorders the
following:
1.1 On the basisof the budget rnemorandumforconstruction and investment,approvedin 1987 for
Stateinvestment, andin harrnonywiththe stateof technicalreadiness,the financialcostsof the operating
andinvestment item notyet finishedmustbe workedout and shown.
ClosingDeadline: 31December1991
Responsible: Danube Barrage Plenipotentiary Finance Minister(Managing Director of the State
Development Institute)
Deadline: 31Decemkr 1991
1.2 The hydraulic cons.tnictionor other projects which are finished, operable or inoperablon the
basis of their present technical conditi,ut rnaybe classifiedas nectssary deyelopmen$ even without
the barrage musthave their operationalrights handedover to the designatedor requested operator while
' at thesarnetimeextractingsuchitemsfrom theinventoryofunfinishedprojects.
The duties related to the maintenance,operations, and preservationcosts pertaining to the closing of
investmentsin 1992must beplannedout. Following the handing overof operators rights, the operators
are to planand submitsuchcosts.
ResponsibIe: as regards the projectswhichmaybehanded over,for suggestions asto operators and for
planningof costsduring1942:
theDanubeBarragePlenipotentiary.
Deadline: 31December 199 1
Responsible: on basis of the acceptance of operators rights, for the nominatioof operators and the
planningof furthercosts:
the MinisterofTransportation,Communication, andWaterManagement
the Ministerof Environmental protectionand Territorial Development
the Ministerof theIntenor
forthe submissionofa budgetrelatingtonecessq casts:
theMinisterofFinance
Deadline: çontinuous
1,9 During 1992,thedevelopment plansfor areservoir withouta barrageon the sectionof the Danube
extendingfromthe Rajkato Nagymaros, the designsfor those developments to be completedunchanged
and the general regulatoryplans which relate to the barrage system,must be reviewed and reworkedas
per the new rnorphological chërncteristics,takinintoaccount ResolutionsNo. 2811991(IV. 30.) of theParliament and 3129/1991 of theGovernment. The costs of such studies must be determinecland
submittedtothe 1492statebudget.
Responsible: Danube BarragePlenipotentiary
the MinisterofTransportation, Communication,andWater Management
'theMinisterof Environmentalprotection and Territorial Development
the Ministerofthe Interior
the MinisterofFinance
Deadline: 31October1991
for planningof the 1992budget request
2. The Governmentapproves,for the periodfollowing thecfosingof investment(1991), the work
programme for 1991fortasks directlyrelatedto the abandonmentof investrnents,a sumof 700 million
Forintsunderthe titleofbudgetfor theDanubeBarrage.
Responsible: hlinisteroFinance
DanubeBarrage Plenipotentiary
Deacüine: 31 October 1991.
3. The Governrnentordersa reviewof regulations which arein conflictwith the halto investment
and thepreparationof a subrnissioncalling fortheirbeingp1acedoutof effect.
Responsible: DanubeBarragePlenipotentiary
MinisterofJustice
Deadline: 31 October 1991
4. The dissolutionof the construction moratoriumin the affectedregion and the review of water
rightsperrnitsaccordingtothe situation which wouldbevalidifthebarragehadnotbeenundertaken.
Responsible: Ministerof EnvironmentalProtection and Territorial Development
MinisterofTransportation,Media andWater Management
DanubeBarragePlenipotentiary
Deadline: Continuous
S. The Governmentordersthe examinationof the international andotherlegal connectionsbetween
Law-DecreeNo. 17of 1978,declaringthe InterstateTreatysignedin 1977,andthe irnmediateand total
halttoinvestment,which examination shouldalsoextend tothe clarificationof rightsof ownershipof
itemswhichare inthejoint ownershipof thtwo nations.
Responsible: Ministerof Justice
Ministerof ForeignAffairs
MinisterWithoutPortfolio,Dr. FerencMAdI
Danub e arrage Plenipotentiary
Deadline: 3l Oclober 19916. The planningwork shall be orientedsuch thatthe cdculations servingas the basis for the 1992
budgetaryguidelines willplacethe totalcos&of the stepscontainedinPoints1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8
and1.9 withinthesumof 495millionForints,as providedbytheMinistry.
Responsible:DanubeBarragePIenipotentiq
Dr. J6zsefAntall
PrimeMinister Annex 156
Regarding the Treaty Concluded in 1977
Between theHungarian People'sRepublic
And the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic
Conceming the Construction and Operation
of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systern
Recognising the fact that the continued construction or the commencement of the operation of the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros barragesystem or any ofthe major installations would resuinserious ecological
and economic consequences;
taking into consideration the fact chat the Government of the Czech and Slovak Eederal Republic have
accepted a resolution on the unilateral completionand commencement of operation of the Gabcikovo
barrage system and that this irnplies the unilateral diversion of Danube in direct violationaf he
relevant international treaties aadchange to the character of the state borderand that by these, the
Government ofthe Czech andSlovak Federal Republic havemade questionable the effect of the Treaty
concluded on 17 September, 1977 regarding the Construction and Operation of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage System;
taking into consideration that as a resuof the above,the Government ofthe Hungarian Republic has
beenplaced inthe situation which cornpelthe temination of the 1977 Interstate Treaty;
supporting the ambition that on behalfof the good neighbourly CO-operationof the two coiantries,
considering the triIateral professional-scientific inquiries organised with the incluofointernational
experts in the meeting of govemmental delegations on 2 December 1991 in order to reach a joint
agreement in the interstate dispute.
Parliament passes thefollowing resolution:
1. Parliament takes notice of the fact that thePrime Minister, in hisletter tothe President of the
Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, drafting the ecoIogica1,international legal, and
other important reasoning for compelling the situation of temination, once again called for the
immediate stopping of al1work in contraventionof the 1977 Interstate Treaty, and the commencement of
trilateral professional inquiries, by takingintoconsideration the recommendations offered as aresult
of the said inquiries, the two Governmentsmay amive at aresponsible joint resolutioof this interstate
dispute, declaring that in the absencof fulfilling the above, the Government will terminate the1977
Interstate Treaty.
2, Takes notice of the fact that the Government, presenting the Hungarian standpoint,
contemporaneously requests the heads of theGovernments ofthe Mernber States of the Conference on
Security and Co-operation in Europe and of the international organisations (United Nations, European
Community, Council of Europe, Danube Commission) to support the understanding and acceptance of
the Hungari paositionwiththe Governrnent of theCzechand SEovakFederal Republic.
3. Authonses the Government to terminate the 1977 Interstate Treaty and al1 agreements concluded
between the Partiesor theirbodies in the interest of executing the Interstate Treaty, if the Goverofent
the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic does not stop the works in contradiction with th1977 Interstate
Treaty before 30 April 1992, whereas continuing these works prevents the commencement of joint
inspections and makes questionable the significance ofthose.
4. When it cornes to the terminarionof the 1977 Interstate Treaty, the Hungarian Party is reqiiired to
sirnultaneously comrnunicate to the Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic the
Hungarian intention to cooperate in the elimination of the consequences of the temination and
complying with al1ofthe international senties defining the borders ktweethetwo States,to conclude anewinterstate treatyaccordingtothefollowingprioriciesi,ntheorderpresented:
a) the restorationand maintenanceof the region'secological and naturalvalues, andprirnarily the
preservationofthednnkingwaterresource;
b)flooddefence;
C)establishmentof navigationintegratedwiththeregion'snaturalconditions.
5. TheGovernment shouldreporttoParliamenton theexecutionof theresponsibilitieset forth herein
within30 daysfollowingtheacceptance of theParliamentarr yesolution.
6. This resolutiontakeseffectfeom the dayof theacceptance. Annex 157
TheGovanment ofthe RepubIic of Hungary
Prepared:in 55 copies
Receivers:Thernernbersof theGovemmentand
the permanentguestof theGovemmentsessions.
The GavemmentresoIution 3 190/1992
regardingthe terminationotheInterstateTreaty
signedon 16September1934in Budapest by the People'sRepubtiçofHungary
andthe CzechoslovakSociaIistRepublicwithregardtothe completionand
operationoftheGabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage.
1. The Governmentof the Republic of Hungaq, on thebasis of an authorisationin point 3 of the
Pnrliamentarryesolution1211992(IV. 4.)unilaterallyteminates effective 25 May 1992 the Interstate
Treat oyf 1977and al1the agreementswhichwerebroughtabout by the parties andtheir institutionsfor
the exesutionoftheInterstaTreaty.
2. In lightof the discussionsheldduringthe sessionof the ViseNd Threein Prague,negotiations
must be held wirhout deIaywith Jan Camogursky, the Prime Minister of Slovakia, and with the
participation of the Ambassadorsin Prague and Budapest regardingthe Czech and Slovak party's
acceptanceof a temporarysolutiofora sixmanth suspensionofwork an the C variation fthepurpose
of beginnin tilateral examinationsduringwhich the parties, on the basis of recomrnendatmays,
rendera decisioninjoint agreementwithregartothe Interstate dispute.
Responsible: FerencMgdl,MinisterWithoutPortfolio
Deadline: Immediately
3. If the negotiationsinitiatedin point 2 are not successful,the Governmentwill disclosein a Note
Verbale to theGovernment of the Cmh and Slovak Federal Republicby 20 May via diplomactic
channelsthe termination of the Interstate Treofy1977. The Note Verbale must be completed in
accordan wceththeinformationmentioneddusingthe Govemment'ssession.
Responsible:FerencMiidI,Minister Without Portfolio
Foreign Minister
Deadline:lmmediately
4. IntheNoteVerbalethe HungarianGovernmentinitiatesthat, withthe bringingabouof the
Interstate Treaty of 197we jointly setdethe consequencesemanating f& it in the following
orderof priori.y
1. Therestorationand maintenanceoftheregion'secologicalandnaturalvaluemost importantof
whichis thepreservationofthedrinkingwater.
2. Protectionagainstfloods
3. Theadaptationof navigationta thregion'snatliralcondition
4. A bill shouldbepreparedfortherepellingof Law -kee No. 17of 1978.
Responsible:Ferenc MAdl, MinisteWithoutPortfolioDeadline: Immediately
5. Simultaneouslywiththerevisionof GovemmenrResolution20 14/1992a subrnissionshouldbe
preparedfortheGovernmentwithregardtothetakingintoconsiderationanddivisionoftheassignments
behveen theconcemedrninisterssubsequentto theterminatofthecontract.
Responsible:FerencMadl,MinisterWiihout Partfolio
Ministerof TransportatiC,ommunicationandWaterIssues
Ministerof Environmental rotectionandLandDeyelopment
Foreig Mninister
Deadline:20May1992
Budapest,7May1992
PrimeMinister
Dr. J6zsef Antall Annex 159
PARLWMENTA RRSOLUT~ON 9/1993(111..),5 MARCH 1993
'REGARDINGPRCITES TFTHE UNILATERAL
DIVERSIONOF THE DANUBE
INCONTRAVENT OIOINTERNATIOL NAWL
Having regard to the faet that the Govemment of the Slovak Republiand its legal predecessor, the
Czech and Slovak Federal Republic on 24 October 2992 with a unilateral measure dammed up the
Danube bed;
establishing thatdidnot change its injurious decision despite the repeated protest of the Gofemment
the Hungarian Republic,Parliament has passthefollowing resolution:
1. The Parliament of the Hungarian Republic tums to the legislative bodies of al1rnembers of the United
Nations withan appeal. The:MungannnBarliamentcalls the attention of variouslegislativebodieto
the fa~t that the Slovak Republic and its predecessoCzecheand Slovak Federal Republic with the
unilateral diversion of the Danube onto its ownemitory, an unprecedented act in Europe, violates
Hungary'sterritorial integrity and an entire seriesof international treaties.
The Slovak Republic and its legal precedecessor, the Czand Slovak Federal Republic on its own
territory, approximately 1kilometre from the Hungarian border fromwhich point the Danube serves as a
boundary riverfor almost150kilometres, has closed upthe origibed which has caused the deviation
of the Danube from its previous bed intoan enormous reservoir and then conducted it ikmoalong
artificial canalbuilt on Slovakterritory.
As a result, in the original boundary riverbed,for about a 30 km long section rhe water quantity hasbeen
decreased by between one fifth, and one sixth of the previous level, causing the river to become
unmanagable, drying up on the right along the Hungarian bank, and irnpairments with grave ecological
and eçonomic impacts haveken commenced,
As a further consequence, the aforementioned interference significantly endangers the sub-surface
drinking water supply which is the water supply basisfor miIlions of people. Apart from the above,
irreversible destructive processes hken started in the conservation territory known as Szigetkoz,
which is unique in EastemtCentral Europe anaicornmonsesourcebelonging toall mankind.
The unilateral act in contraventiofInternational Law initiated by the Slovak Governrnent, the
Government of itspredecessor, the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic violates notonly the integrity of
the territory of the HungarianRepubIic and the international treaties regardjng the Danubalsout
results itheaforementioned extraordinaryecological andeconomic damage and risks.
The Hungarian Republic has theprecise intention to pursue the settlement of this seriaus problemby way
of lawful means and to prevent any further international conflict in the region. For the aforementioned
redsons, the Hungarian Republic shmakethe effortopetition, atthe same tirne, the competent bodies
of the European Communtiy and theDanube Commission and to submit the issue to the International
Court ofJustice in the interest of a full:and final resolutionto this conflict,
Significant progtess has been made in negotiations mediated by the Commission of the European
Gommunity towards thejoint submission of the issuethe International Court of Justice. Tthas, at the
same time, become apparent that the SIovakGovemment is endeavouring to make permanent the water
management situation unilaterally effectedto settlethe issue by way of its own dictates.
The Parliament of theHungarian Republictherefore turns to the legislative bdies of the Member States
of the United Nations and requests lheir support for the efforts of the Hunganan Republic theinst
violation of InternatioLaw and in its endeavours to settle this unlawful situatioasapossible,
taking into consideratitheinterests of bothparties.2. Parliamentrequestsits Speaker toforwardthe textof the requestcontainedin Point 1 hereinto the
legislativebodiesof theMember StateoftheUnitedNationswithoutdelay.
GytirgySzabad
Speakerof Parliament
BélaGlattfelder
ClerkofParliament
Dr.Lajos Szab6
andClerkof
Parliameni 379
HUNGARIANINTERNAL STATEMENTS
Annex 160
RE~RT OF MR %TER HAVAS, HUNGARIA GOVERNME PLTNIPOTENTIARY ,O THE HUNGARIAN
GOVERMEN TNNEGOTIATION S ELDON 27-29OCTOBE AND 2-3NOVEMBE CONCERNWG THE
GABCTKOVO-NAGYM BA RRASGSYSTEM 1,1NOVEMBER 1982
Inthenegotiations we followed an approinlinewith Ouguiding principles, namely that we prepared
to get closer on the disputed issues but the partners rigid attitudusdefining a reçonciling
proposal. The possibility of further negotiations on thihasebeen broken, as is stated in the
protocol.
The Czechoslovak Party-although during previous expert discussions shsome willingnes-has
now categorically refused to accept a bigger share in theDunakiliti closing dam works, at the same time,
they arereluctant to give up work on dredging theriverbed section under the Palicikovo. Concerning the
latter, their argumentthat the further utilisation of dredging equipment is inevitable if ihey have to
perfonn the dredging of the tail-race canal insteadof ourselves. Theexchange of the previously defined
work-share would be necessary for usbecause afterprecise calculations and getting acquainted with the
new work-schedule,it appears that:
-the difference between the two worksin tota-1.5thousand million Forints, but weshouId
performwork to anapproximate value of 3 thousand million Forints additionalto the initial 4 thousand
millionForints in the period prior to 1990,
- the completion of the Dunakiliti clodamgneeds to begin with substantial investment in
198516and itmuscbe completely finishedprior to 1990,
-the dredging of the riverbed underPalicikovo will commence later and substantial parts of it may
be performed nfter90;
there are some technical indications, that theriverkd dredging need onlybe partially performed,
sincethebalance wouldixrernovedby the flowing water.
Al1this is only a minor part of thedisagreements.
The difference of opinion is the widest on the determination of the electric-energy price that will
compensate for the worksrformed byOUTparty instead by the other partThe Czechoslovak garty
rigidly sticks to the following:
-It is willing to accept only a calculated "price" that basicala primecost-which is
considerablsrnalier thanthe actunl electric-energy price. They propose 23 haller on the basis of 1982
prices, as opposed to the 2.75 kopeck Soviet price, which accortenthe official Czechoslovak
exchange ratis33 heller, while the domestic price isabove that,weldo not have precise data as
to the latter.
The compensation should take place with this fixed "price". Compensation aavariable Rouble
based electric-energyce wouldbeacceptable to hem, if the price of works perbyrus instead of
by the other side were detemined according to the prices paidto Czechoslovaks for construction works
by Socialist countries other than the USSR. This would give us a-41Rouble exchange rate as
they previouslynformed us, thai is in the terms of the prelirninary agreement the value of works,viz.
3.6thousand million Korun woulix 900 million Rouble. The difference in magnitude is substantial,
sinceifusing the 12.06Korun/Roubl¢ official commercial exchangerate which is under the real, the
valueof works wouldbe300million Rouble.
To accept theCzechoslovak standpoint would mean that in a Komn calculated total (which would
encompass work perfomed by both parties including Nagymaros) investment cost'sof 13.4 percent
would be assumedby ourselves. In order to compensate this, we would needto renounce 25 percent of
the eIectric energy produced by Gabcikovo, equal to 18% of the elenergy produced, butthen
Gabcikovo would already produce talargerextent in peakmode with no interest,aperiod of23years, while with interest for a periodofmore than 44 years. Altematively from our point of view; 37
percent of the investment should stillbe performed by us in the event the taking by the other party of a
greater shareof the work,nevertheless, ourshare intheelectric-energy produced by Gabcikovo for 40
years will be onIy 25 percent (together with Nagymaros, 32percent of total energy production ),which
will increase to59 percent only after full reimbursement. This would be reduced only by the factthat
they have to invest much earlier than we do. Besides which, there is for us an unfavourable, relationship
ktween work and electric-energy guantity, the Czechoslovaks will enjoy a muchbigger share of the
benefits of the 'socalled',furtheradvantages.
This absurd and rigid standpoint of Czechoslovakia is motivated by the fact that they claim theregsa
breachof contract on our side; hence,
-they will provide us with credit to such anextent favourable tthem, or
-they will force us to stick to the initial work divisionin ofthe Treaty or
- they themselves will build up the Gakikovo power plant and reservoir, exclusively on
Czechoslovak territory.
This last possibility is already beivery seriously andofficicrllyconsidered.
During discussions thiswas 01-y1verbal1ymentioned, asan unofficial opinion,
In Bratislava, when finalising the protocol, the Czechoslovak plenipotentiary follwoing instructions from
Prague informed us that he had to announce thisas official opinion. He delivered a draftletter, which
wouldbe sent to Hungarian plenipotentiariesas official Czechoslovak informationvery shortly.
The draft letter touches upon thesubject of adherence to "further"basic principles of the interstattreaty
and the whole soIutionis regarded as provisional. Theywish to cornpensate the Hungarian party for the
use of hydro-energy potential and also they want to be cornpensatedbyus for extracosts arising because
of this solution. 1The drafr letter delivered by the Czechoslovak~Ienipotentiaryis attached.
On 10 Novernber Comrade UjhAziasked for modification of the protocol under subscription by
telephone, and announced, that he will consult Comrade Rohlicek again. Whether, they will decide to
send theofficial information on independent consmctionon Czechoslovak territory or not depends on
that constitution.. He said that Comrade Rohlicek would insist on this and they also discussed this
solution withthe competent party secretary. The head of the Hungarian consularein Bratislava informed
me that the Czechoslovak plenipotentiary returning frorn discussions in Budapest, joined rhe cocktail
party organised by the consulate. In front of severalSlovak leaders the plenipotentiary has stated that
there isno possibility treach an agreement on negotiations, therefore, their only possibility is to build
on theirown territory. Accordingto comrade Szapora,the friendly atrnospherethat evolved afterthefirst
meeting of the secretaries will go downhill.
Budapest, 11Novemkr 1982
PéterHavas Annex 16t
MEMORANDUM FROM MR PÉTER HAVASW , UNGARIA GOVERNMEN PTLEN~OTENTIP IR YR J~ZSEF
MAMAI ,tlNGARlANDEPUTYPRIME MINISTER JA,~NUAR Y 983
Deputy PrimeMinister
Budapest
Dear Comrade Marjai !
1consider it necessaryto inform you shortly concerning
- the reasons of removing from the agenda of the so calied, Czechoslovak independent
construction ofheGabcikovo Barrage,
- the exploratorytaiks withthe Austrian Donaukraftwerke AG
- the situaticoncerningthe EconornicCornmittee'sproposal.
The Joint Operational Group, which is continuously discussing technical questions had meeting
recentiy where the Czechoslovak participants privately gavthe following information. That the
Czechoslovak Governmentassigned the task ofproviding technical plans in two versions for independent
constructiontoan engineering institure. The quintesseofthe difference betweenthetwo variantis
thelocation of the weirThe results weredisçussed by the Czechoslovak Government and disapproved
of. The main reasonfor disapprovwere the worrieof the experts in hydrology since:
- The valid solution was preceded by experiments with models taking place over several years.
The Czechoslovak independent construction would also require 1-2 yeofsexperiments with models
therebydelayingthe actual construction
- The danger accompanying a flood with ice would increase to such a degree, that it would be
extremely threatening accorditothe evaluation of hydrologistexperts, including a risk to Bratislava,
- Thedykes on the leftbank of the Danube (foming the south-east side of the reservoir) would be
built underextremely unsuitabsoi!conditions and both of its sides wbelsubmergedunder water in
thecase of extensivfloodswhich would makethem almost indefensible.
- Constructionin this way, becausof the substantially diminished size of the reservoir would
result in Iosses during peak mode operation. If they woultolreduce the earlier mentioned dangers
and the unfavourable technical endowmentsby extendingthe reservoirin a northerIy direction, three
villages oughtobe destroyed.
-Extracostsin the rangof3.1 hundred million Korunwouldemerge.
Hence, the Czechoslovaks rejected the variantof independent construction because of the above
mentioned reasons, andnot in orderavoid thebreach of the international Treaty and other international
agreements; although,theoreticaIly,independentconstruction ispossible.
Budapest, 6January 1983
With comradely greetings
Havas Péter
the plenipotentiary of GNBLElTERFROM MR JANO SZENTAGOTH -II,NT OFTHE HUNGARIA ACADEM YF SCIENCE S, MU
J~ZSEM FARJAIH , UNGARID AENPW ~IME MINISTE2R 3,DE~EMBE1 R981
Dear Comrade Marjai!
In his letter No 43-31 1981 from Marchthis year comrade Borbhndi found it suitobsurvey the
research and planning perfomed up to now on the agnculturaland environmental impact ofthe
Gabcikovo NagymarosBarrageSystem/GNB/. He calledon the Academy, toforma working group for
the evaluation of things heretofore completed and to give an opas tothe direction of further
research andplanning.
Following Comrade Bwbhdi's writ we imrnediatelyformed a working group with Peirasovits Imre a
doctor of agriculturalsciences,as its president.tonacceleratethe work, the rnembsfthe said
gmupwerechosen from amongexperts thoroughly familiarwiththe case. The working groupprepaaed
study called "Reporton the agriculandenvironmentalimpactsof the Gabcikovo NagymarosBarrage
System" together with an appendix to itanaelement of the questions related to the comprehensive
utilisation,readydelirered by meto CornradeBorbbndi.
One Copy of the reporand appendix mentionedis herebyattached as information for Comrade Marjai.
However, 1cal1your attention to thefactthat questions touched uponin thiareaonly part of the
topic on the BanuWscomprehensivefuturebrnessingand probablycannot beregardecias the complete
solution whiIethe timesandtheeconomiccriteriaarechanging.
Regardingthe problemI want to informyou that the HungarAçademyof Scienc H'AS)Presidency
has already, at the beginning of this year, decided to handle the issue of the Danube's future
comprehensiveharnessingby the PresidentialInterdisciplinaryProblem Cornmitteeunder the leadership
of Sandor Szolar, a regular rnemberof the Hungarian Academyof Science. Onbasisof this an ad
hoc group was chargeci with the research on the topics of "Factors of influence on the Danube's
prospective,comprehensive harnessing andthe conditionsof anenhanced andmore efficient utilisation."
This ad hoc group'sassigrnent is rnuch more complex,since they are commissioned to overview each
aspectof the caseThe PresidentialInterdisciplinary- CPorobiteeatitssession on 27 November
has decidedtopreparean accumulatedproblemregisteof thçomplex harnessingwiîh thparticipation
of al1ministriesandnational agencies.
The Presidency ofthe Hungarian Academy of Sciencesfindsic important, that issues related to the
realisationof tgran drojecbe investigatedin a broadercontextin orderto becomplete.
To compare advantages with disadvantages is justified frompolitical, economic and also from
sociological and ecological pointsiew. It is indisputable that Hungaryutilises the water flowing
through the barrage system, however, the Hungarian nationalinterest is best served by reaching
comprehensive solution,whichexcludes or minimises impactsunfavourableto water quality or ecology.
Thejustification of thisis confirmedby the remarksof authorsof the attachedreport.
Budapest,23December 1981 With Comradelygreetings Annex 163
REPOR TFA MEETINGOFTHE HUWGARS M TATESECRETA RFTHE MINISTR OYFENYIRONME AN T
WAER MANAGEME NND THESLOVAK MINISTE ORFFORESTRW Y,ATER MANAGEME ANDTTMBER
INDuSTRY,SiGNED BY MRM~KL~ SARGA T, EHUNGARIAN STATE SECRETAR Y1,JANUAR 1990
ReportontheOfficialVisittotheSocinlistRepublicof Czechoslovakia
Basedonthe invitationof theMinisterofForestry,Water ManagemenTimberIndustry,Ivan
Vesely,IparticipatedafrontiermeetiatPalirikov6on 10January1990.
The prirnarypurposeof themeetingwas getcingacquainted withone another,as IvanVeselyhas
been holdinghis present functionfor abouttwomonths,and at his request,we mutuallyinformedone
anotheronthe social and economic transformation hadtakenplace previously,and theissuesaf
CO-operationomingunderourcompetence,inthefom ofan informaitalk.
In the course of the discussion,we surveyed thefwaterrelationsof thtwo countries,
separately touched upon the supplyproblems originatingfsom the Iimitationof the Danube grave1
productionof 1990, an-at therequestof the Slovak Mini-twe decidedon pIacingthe repeated
supervisionof this sphere of questions,and its referenceunder the competenceof the Danube Sub-
Cornmirtee.
We surveyed the situaofotheconstructiof the Gakikovo NagymarosBariageSystem,the
protocolofthelast weekof the JointOperativeGroup, and approvedthemeasurts containedthereinon
theissuesof flood prevention,comingunderourcornpetence.
The floodprevention secuof theUpperDanubereachwill be appropriatelyguaranteedby the
executionoftheabove,andthprotection againstthedegenerationof the waterbedwill alsobe solved.
We rnutuallyinfomed one anotherabout the positionsof our countrieson the issues connected
withthefurtherlotofthe waterbarragesystem.
Asthe Hungarianopinion,1emphasized thatin thepresentsititwouldbe practicalto Ileave
the final decistonthe would-bnew govemrnents,and untithatdecision,it mabe exarninedby
experts(international,ifnecessary).
As the Slovak position,Ivan Vesely statedthat acceptingthe end-of-Octoberdecision of the
HungarianParliament, containedtheNovemberMemorandurnof the HungarianGovernrnent, they
renounce themanagingothewater courseforpeakflow atGabcikovo,the pursuanceof the construction
at Nagymaros, andare willtoconcludeaseparateagreementin tmatterof theecologicsystem of
guarantees. The putting into operation of Gabcikovo power statias soon as possible is,
simultaoeoudy,in theit national interest. He infomed me about the scheduletowhich the
Slovak,anaor FederalGovernmentintendsttakeitspositionon the issue,and whenhe considersthe
re-establishmentofbilateral discussions possible.
In the courof the discussi1ninformecihim that the HungarianGovernmentempowerthe
Cornmissioner,Dr. LLiszl6Udvari, with the govemmentdirectiontheconstniction of the water
barrage.
Inthe furtherpartthediscussion, the Slovak Minrfomed me on the ideasconcemingthe
organizational solutionof the govemmentduties of environmentand water managementin Slovakia,
Bohemia,and atfederallevel,
Thewhole discussiowasconduckd inafiad andobjectivatrnosphere.
DatedinBudapest,11January1990.
Dr. MiklSsVarga Annex 164
LFTTERFROM MR G KSAMSOND HUNGARMN GOVERNMEN PTENTWTENTIARY,
TOMR GYORG SZAL~KI ,HEFCOUNSEL O R
THEPARL~AMENT CORMMITTEON ENVIRONMEN PROLE~ION,
17SEPTEMBE 1990
PrimeMinister's Ofice
DanubeBarragePlenipotentiary
ToDr Gyorgy Szaloki
ChiefCounsellor
ParliarnentaryCommîtteeon
EnvironmentalProtection
DearMY Chief Counselor:
As per your request,pleasefindattachectihe sevenversions whichwere includedin the negotiationsheld
betweenMr. VavrousekandMr. Kereszteson 5 September1990regardingthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
investment.
Budapest,17September1990
Respectfully
[signature]
Dr.GyorgySinisondiKiss
A. The completionof the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrageSystem(GNBS) accordingto the original
plan.
B. ProvisionalsoluttotheGabcikovo-NagyrnarosBarrage Systemclosurof the Danubed on
Czechoslovakterritin theCunovoarea(withouttheNagymarosBarrage.)
C. The completion of the Gabcikovo-NagyrnBarrage Systern accordtothe original plan
(withoutheNagymaros Barragand the operationthereofincontinuous omode.ion
D. The cornpletionof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage mithout the I-Irusovreservoir (and
withouttheNagymaro Bsarrage), with only the closureof the Datuthe Bratislava-Dunakiliti
sectioandthe instalmentofthe turbines at Dunakiliti.
E. The utilisatiotheGabcikovo head-race canal excllor navigationalpurposesof for flood
defence.
F. The suspensionof al1workon the Gabcikovo-Nagyrnaros Barrage Syteeconservationof
theentire systemapproximatelyinpresentcondition.
G. The progressivedernolitionof theGabcikovo-NagBarrageSystemand the restorationof the
environmenttotsoriginal condition. Annex 165
REPORT FROM MR. FERENCE MADLH , UNGARIM ANLNISTW ERITAOUP TORTFOLI OOTHE HUNGARIAN
GOVERNME RNEGAUDING THE NEGOTIATIO WNITATHECECHOSLOVA G OVERNMEND TALLEGATION,
15 JULY199l
The negotiations held on15 July1991 in Bratislava ktween Ferenc Madl, Minister Without Portfolio,
and Jan Camogursky, Slovak Prime Minister, concerning the resolution of disputed questions with regard
tu the GabcikovNagymaros Barrage.
The Hungarian delegation wasdirecteby Minister Without Portfolio Ferenc Madl, the representofive
the Governrnent of the Hungarian Republic;The Czecho-Slovak delegation was directed by Prime
Minister Jan Carnogursky, the representative the Governrnent of the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republic. The Appendix 1indicates the compositioof thedelegations. The directoof the Czecho-
SIovak delegation presided over the session. The directotheodelegations and the members unéer
their supervision expressed the positionproposaisof the parties.
A recording was made of the negotiation
The Hungarian Position
Thedirectorofthe delegation reiterated the essence ofthe position disclosed during the neg22iation on
April 191 in Budapest.
The delegation will undertake a serious historical assignment dthenegotiation. The Hungarian
delegation commences with the protection of two values:
1) In both counhes the standard of living, culture, financial
reqnirements, the environment
2) and the friendshibetween thetwo people is a special value.
From the commencement (according to the decision rnechanism characteristic ofpartysystem) the ,
planning and consuuctionofthe GNVwas performed without professionaand social control. Ithe
period of policicalchanges the value of the enviroand therisks involved with the operationthe
,barrage became clear to the Hungarian society.The ecologicalrisks related tthe operation may
occasion irreversible and harrnful repercussionmosre seriousof which isthe threathening of the
drinkingwaterof millions of people, The Hungarian professional public opinion is convinofdthe
intolerabiljty of the probabthatthe risks witl become reality. This is the rforthe rejection of
the barrage. The Hungariandecisionis not poiitical, the past years the Hungariapeople and the
politicalcision makers agreed with the opinion of the experts whiwhyiit becamea politicaissue.
In lighof this, the authorization awarded to the delegbyithe Parliament concerns the negotiation
withregardto thecancellation of t1977Interstate Treaty andthe abandonmenoftheentirebarrage on
the basis of a joint agreement.necessity ofjoint resolutions is raised firstIy by the assessment of the
losses, rehabilitafion, flood prevention and the problerns surrounding navigation the resolutions of which
rnay be the basisaonew agreement.
During the previous negotiatioinApril the Hungarian party gave the Hungarirtn ScienAcademy's
ad hoc committee its assessment theecologicarisksof the Gabcikovo Barrage.On the dayspriorto
the present negotiation the Czecho-Sloparty replieto this. During the negotiation tHungarian
partyestablishewithregardto this reply that there is a difference in opinion with regard to the effects of
thebarrage. We are more concerned with theprinciple of preçaution and the intoconsiderationof long tem consequenceswhilethe Czecho-Slovak partyis not. The Hungarianexpertsare unawareof
Czecho-Slovakmaterialwhichprovethatifleversabitdamageswouldnot be oocasionedinthe longterm.
At the sametimethe Czecho-Slovakexpertsare awaitingnotificationof shorttem effectsso they may
refutethem. This reversedlogicapproachmustbe made flexiblein the nearfuture.
In summary:The Hungarian expert institutionssee big environmentalnsksin the futureand there is no
guaranteethat thesecan be evadedby technologicalmeasuresernphasizedby the Czecho-Slovakparty.
Thereforethe Hungarianexpertsconclude:
TheDanube shouldrernaininits originalbed.
For the substitutionof Iost electricityproducinconnectionwiththeabandonmentof the barrage the
Hungarianparty on thebasis of its ownexperience proposesthe establishmentof highly effecientgas-
steamcycle of small power plant blocks.The advantageof this solutionis that the replacementof the
Gabcikovo HydroelectricPlant'stotal lossof 250 MW production meansa minimal useof natural gas
which is 2.1% of the presentyearlyused amountof the Czechand SllovakRepublic. The Hungarian
party isreadyto providethebiggest assistancesincein Hungarythe elementsof sucha projectare inthe
construction phase antheexpertsinthis fieldhavesignificantexperience.
In additionto theproductionof electricityin the GNVplans the resolutionof the navigationaland flood
preventional problernsis of secondary importance. In the present situationthe protection against
floodingis guaranteedand the smallerworkaccasioned by the abandonment of the hydroelectric plant
can be completedby the expertsof the twocountnesin shorttime. A navigablewaterwayof 3.5 meters
in depthcan notbe assured,insteadthereis an opportunityto fulfthe proposalconsistentwith theUN
EGB IV for a navigationway-parameter. The solutionrequireswide rangingplanning for which the
Hungarian party proposedthe invitationof an international expert community.Prior negotiationsare
king held witha DutchCompanywhichwouldprepare a realisticstudyof the problemwiththe support
of theDutchState.
The abandonmentof the barrageraises the questionof rehabilitation. This can onIy be understoodin
relation to environmental protection and land developmentsince thereis a strongly urbanized zone
between Budapest andVienna where there are significantnatural values. The rehabilitationof the
Nagymaros regionis simplebecausehere thereis relativelylittleland destruction.The specificproblems
with regard tothe Dunakiliti-Gabcikovoregion canonly be construedsubsequentto the result of the
negotiation.
In the case of a total lack of understandingthe so-calledC variation or "theoretical opportunity"
suggestedby the Czeçho-Slovakparty as a unilateralsolution wouldbe sucha grave transgressionof
Hungarian territorialintegrityandInternationalLawfor whichthere is noprecedentevenin thepractices
of the fonnerly socialistcountriesfor the past 30 years. The internatIawaexpert ofthe Hungarian
delegationexpoundedthemeaningof the transgressions andthe possible Hungarianreponscsensuredby
International Law.
II.
The Czecho-Slo Posaiion
The two basic pointsof view alsoemphasizedby the Hungarian partyserve as thebasis of the Czecho-
Slovak position: the ecological-environmentalvalues and the preservation of traditional friendship
betweenthe two people. Specialemphasisis placed on thelatter since there is an oopportuforythe
. cooperationbetweenthe two nations. The problemof the GNV shouldbe handledviewingreality andthis reality is the almostfinished condition of the GNV
The Czecho-Slovak party insists on the commencement of operations of the Gabcikove Hydroelectric
plant, though in light of the new situation it suggeststhere-examination ofthe ecological risks.
During the course of the construction numerous ecological damages accured, 90% of which occured on
Czecho-Slovak territory (40 kilometers of territory) since the canal was built on the left shore of the
Danube. The maintenance of the present conditionis intolerability from the point of view of ecology.
Asolution pragmatic and acceptablefor bothparties must be reached.Asa method used in EC countries
you propose alegallyregulated impact studyforthe examination of the various technoiogicai variations.
According to the Czecho-Slovak position there is sufficient information for the examination of the
variations which enable theoperation of the Gabcikovo Hydroelectric Plant. The Czecho-Slovak party is
awareof the value of the water reserve under thesurface and is already usingitthough the water quality
is not detemined by the Danube. As a result of the complicated geological and hydrogeologiacl
conditions a difference can be detected with regard to the quality of the Danube water and the water
under the surface in times of high water level. In any case the drinking water on the territory requires
treatment. With the analysisof the information of the already expanded monitoring system a cornplex
solution isnecessary. Since the operation of the Gabcikovo Barrage causesthe same resutt as the high
water level (anexarnpleof this is the situation in 1975)it isnecessary to build waterfilters irrespoftive
the operation of the Gabcikovo Barrage. This fact is emphasized because during the negotiations ,iOUT
view, it was not handled according to its importance.
In the past years theGNV problem was thoroughly dealt with. In Czech and Slovakia 240 volumes of
documents attest to the same. Now the only thing missing isthe assessment. What can already be
ascertained is that the Gabcikovo Hydroelectric Plantcan not be demolished because the liquidation costs
morethan the construction and the present ecologicaldamage is greater now than if thebarrage would be
into operation. The effectsmaybe viewedduring the operation of the barrage. There isa opportunity for
additional technological solutions. Werequest the Hungarian party to understand this position.
TheGNVmust be evitluatedonthe basisof social, economic andecological pointsof view. The Czecho-
Slovak party sees theway out of it inthe establishment of a expert committee.
The Hungarian, Czech and Slovak trilateral committee established with the withdrawal of EC experts
would examine four variationsthe proposaisof which would be made to thegovemments.
The variations:
1) the fulfillment of the GNVaccording 15 the original plans,
2) the Nagymaros sectionwill be postponed and the Gabcikovo Hydroelectric Plant will be operated
with the original size of its filling. (theso-caDlvariation),
3) the Nagymarossection witlbe postponed,the Gabcikovo HydroelectricPlant will operate with the
so-calledcanal solution (thiis not identicatothe C variationemphasized in official forrnin the past).
4) The entire GNVwill be postponedandthey willrestore the original condition.
The Hungarian Party received notification of the questions regarding the EL experts and that persona1
contact was made with Mr. Brinkhorst andthe 1 lthdirector general of the European Council to delegate
the invitaiexpertsfor the examinationof the variations.
The Czecho-Slovak party may only contemplate a solution which supportsthe prospective operation of
the Gabcikovo Hydroelectric Plant. Since the Hungarianparty does not want this, a decisioncan onlybe
brought after the examinationof al1the variations.In Ouropinion al1the information is at our disposa1whichis why adecision may be brought about in a
few months. During this tirne the Interstate Treof 1977 will remainin force in order to preveatlegal
vacuum.
The Hungarian party wasgiven the following information with regard to the "canal solution" conceming
the question about the technological contents of the "intermediate variation": Without the Nagymartis
construction project (without peak operation)the Dunakiliti reservoir loses its purpose. This solution
rneans the construction oa dam suitabtefor the prese~ation of 2-3m3lsec of hydroelectric energy.The
present dams ensure flood protection.
Al1of the proposed variations require the cooperation of both parties: here at the negotthe Czecho-
Slovak party did not propose the expoundio nfthe technologica1 contents of the concrete variations
instead it thought it necessartodiscuss the procedurefor further stepand the possibilty to establisa
joint(trilateral) cornmirteAccording to your proposal,theInterstate Treaty may be amended after the
rnutual acceptance of variation recommendedby the committee. As apartof the amendment of thetreaty
you believe the examination of the damages is necessary. The Czecho-Slovak party will not delay
construction during the examinations for the purpose of preventing the further damage caused by the
Hungarian party'sviolationof contract.
After expounding their positions batpartiesrequested the establishment of comrnittees.
The Czecho-Slovak delegation requested the exarnination of theoperational variationsby the trilateral
international committee. The cornmittee consists of Czecho-Slovak, Hungarian and EC experts, A
reponse was requested on 31 July 1991 with regard to the establishment of the cornmittee. Since a
Parliamentary decision isnecessary for the HungarianPartythis may only occure on a laterdate due to
technicalreasons which iswhy you accepted 15 September asthe deadline. Until31 Julyany proposal
supporting the operation ofthe Gabcikovo HydroeIectric Plant rnay be made. Until then the Czeçho-
Slovak party will sendits specific proposais.
The Hungarian party proposed the establishment of a bilateral cornmittee in pariry consisting of
Hungarian and Czecho-Slovak experts todeal with the explorationof the nature of the ecological risks
with the simultaneous suspension ofwork by the Czecho-Slovak party.The Czecho-Slovak party made
no disclosure with regard to the establishment during the negotiation but promised to respond by 15
September.
The directorsof the delegations agreed that after this date other government meetrnaybe held,
At the end of the negotiation you agreed to a joint communique. This is the Appendix 2 of the
announcement.
Budapest 18 July1991
Dr. Ferenc MadlI
Appendix 1
'
The listofnarnesof theHungarian delegation
MinisterWithout Portfolio Ferenc Madl
MinisterSandmK. Keresates
Minister Csaba Sikl6s
Govemment Commissioner GyorgyKiss Simsondi
Deputy Under Seçretaryof StateArpidBakay
Deputy Under Secretaryof StateDénes Tomai
Secretary Generd ofMTAIstvhnL6ng
Counsellor to the Prime Minister Mikl6s Kiraly
Consul General JenoB"oros
Consul LajosVkadi
Minisierial CornmissioneGyorgyTa&
Academician ~rp8dBerczik
Counsellor tothe GovernmentCommissioner Adrienne Haj6sy
UniversitProfess Loa216 Valki
The lisofnamesofthe Czecho-Slovak delegation
Prime MinisterJ. Carnogursky
AmbassaclorR. Chmel
Presidentof theFederaEEnvironmental Committee J.Yavrousek
Minister J.Belcak
MinisterV. Oberhauser
Presidenof theSlovak EnvironmentalCommittee 1.Tirpak
Deputy Minister1.Vostatek
AssistanUnder SecretaryP. Krajhanzel
GovernmentCounsellorD. Kocinger Appendix 2
Communique
On 14 and 15July 1991a negotiationwas heldbetweenthegovernrnent delegationosf theCSFR and the
HungarianRepublicregardingthe questionsof the GabcikovoNagymarosBarrage. The government
delegalion of the CSFR was lead by Jan Carnogursky, presidentof the Governmentof the Slovak
Republic and the government delegationof the Governrnentof the HungarianRepublic was lead by
MiniaterFerencMadl.
The Czecho-Slovak delegation expresseid ts readiness for resolving the situation on the basis of a
multilateraljudgrnentof thevariousalternatives propby bothparties.
The Czecho-Slovak delegation recommendetd hat a joint committeebe estabIished consisting of
plenipotentiariesof the CSFRRH andtheEC whichwouldexamine the variations submittedby 31July
1991.Thecommittee would judge thevariafionsin a complex manner placingthe emphasis on the
resolutionofthe ecologicalproblems. Thecommitte wouldsubmitthe resultsof theexaminationsto the
governmentdelegations. The government delegations of the CSFR and the RH would decide on the
further procedure. The Czecho-Slovak partyernphasizedthat it could only accept a variationwhich
enablesthecommencementof operationsoftheGabcikovo Barrage.
The Hungarian Party,in accordancewith its mandate, urgethe abandonment and dernolitionofthe
barrage on the basis of the mutual agreement of the Interstate Treaty of 1977 and made a
secornmendationfor cooperation with regard to the resolution of the ecological,naviga flooonal,
preventionalandenergeticalproblems.
The Hungarian party made a proposa1for the establishmentof a two-sided professional-scientific
comrnittee for the joint expIoratio2of ecological risks binding the work of the comrnitttothe
simultaneoussuspensionof work an theCzecho-Slovakside.
The delegationsagreed to notlfyrheirgovernmentsandparliaments and inform each other, by 15
September,via diplornaticchannels,of their positionwith regard tu the establishmenacommittee.
New negotiations betweenthegovernrnentdelegationms aybeheld subsequentto this.
Bratislava, 15Jul1997
FerencMadl,theleaderof the Hungarian delegation.
Jan Carnogurskyt,he leaderof theCzechand Slo'vadelegation LET~ER FROMMUNICIPAL COMM~E OFS~VAK ENVRONMENTAL TQSTSOVERNME NFTHE
HUNGAR~A PNOPLER SEPUBLI C4, MAY 1989
SlovakUnion ofNatureand LandscapeProtectors
MunicipalCommittee,Bratislava
No. : 63-12/T
To the GovernmentoftheHungarianPeople'sRepublic
Budapest 1
For theinformationof: theGovemrnentofCSR, theGovernmentof SSR, the Czechoslovak News
Agency, the Hungarian News Agency, the Central Committee of the Association of Slovak
Environrnentalistsand others.
FileNo.:51 14/û9/H Bratislava,24 May 1989
Re.:Staternentinconnectionwiththestoppingofthe constructionofNagymaroswatenvorks.
DearHungarianCornrades,
BratislavaMunicipal Organisationof the Union of Slovak Natureand LandsçapeFrotector-
which has about 1200 memkrs at present, and a Eurther10000 citizens in the formof coIIective
membership - is the only official organisation of voluntary environmentalistsin the territwy of
Bratislava, and simuItaneouslythemosfactiveenvironmental organisatinSlovakia.
Themainspheresofactivityof our organisation incl-notonlytoday, but also inthe courseof
the past 12 year- themany- sided interestthe issuesconnectedwith the Danube, as well as the
preservationand the rational utilisationof the DanubelandscaOut organisatim has alreadyheId
severalhundred actionin a varietyof fonns (excursions, lectures, discs,xhibitions,on-the-spot
investigations, expressionof opinions,posais,petitions, publicationsin joumaIs and pendicals,
warnings,Ietteretc.).
Our organisationhas preparedmaterialsof such a natureas e.g. the detailedproposa1aimingat
the establishmentof rhe1)anuk-bank NationalPark;the planof the Danube-bank Park involvthree
countries; I May greeting10the senior leaders,in whithe participantsof a mass excursioncalled
attention to the destrucof the regionon the bank ofthDanube g;ivinga warningpmgnosisof the
Gabcikovo-Nagymaro BsarrageSystemsen fromthe environmentalistsp'oint ofview.
In autumn Iast year our organisationjoined thecitizen's initiative knownas the Danube
Declaration-signed by morerhan2000Czechoslovakcitizenssofar-arnongdhemtheleadingexpertsof
the givenprobIems. Wehavealways endeavoured to havc eonstnrçtivedialoguewiththosewho made
the decjsions about the fate of the Danubeand it was also appreciatedby the bighest Slovak
representatives,the formerSecretary-Generalof the CentralComrnitteeof the SlovakCommunistParty,
comradeJ. Lendrt,and theSlovakFrimeMinister,comradeIvanKnotek.
We consideredit necessaryto mentionthe abovefacts in order to makeit clear weaarenot
dealingwith the evaluationof the situationof the Nagymarosbarraand the whole barrage system
rashlyand withoriaknowledge oftheinter-connectio.s
Wehavenevermade a secretof our worriesçoncemingthe fateof theDanubeandthe ecological
system of the region othe bankof the Danube,as well asthe whole region. The decision-making
bodies, howeverdidnotpaymuchattention toourdoubts.Simplyna discussionswereconducted about
the constructionothejoint barrage syste-amongothers - becausethe conventionbetweenCSR and
Hungarian People'sepubIicmay -allegedly-notbe amended.
The situationstartedto change slowlyin the pastyears, in parallelwfulawarenessof theglobal ecologicalcrisis. The changes which havetaken place in the Soviet Union have considerably
affected theway of thinking in Eastern-Europe. At the end of theBOS he evaluationof the unique
values of the reach of the Danube between Viennn and Budapest was considerablyaffected by the
supportof Austrian public opinionin theinterestof rescuingthefloodplain nearHainburg. The sensitive
reacrion of Hungarian public opinion is also indisputablyjustified, athe Danube is of symbdic
significancein thehistoryofthe Hungarian nation.
We do not wanttatum a blind eye to the fact that the constructiontheGabcikovo waterworks
is in an advanced stage. Therefore in the pastwo years we have concentrated -in harnionywith our
proposa1 subrnitted to establish the Danube-area park, and in agreement with the opinion of the
Hungarian, Austrian,Soviet and other environrnentalists - on abandoning the construction of the
Nagymaros barrageand theamendment of the operationof the Gabcikovobarrage in a way that reduces
the scale of impact on the natural order of the Danube and riverside region. Thus, we regretfully
acknowledged that the former Hungariangovernent had agreed with the Austrian contractors on the
commencement of the constructionof Nagymaros barrage, disregarding the enormous protest of the
publicwhich -withoutexaggeration -assumedworld-wideproportions.
Despitethe fact thathe construction otheNagymaros waterworkshad neverthelesscommenced
we adhere to the viewthat takingthe longtem perspectiveit inot only moresaving from the ecological
and the economic point of view, but also more forward looking from the political poinof view to
abandon theconstructionof the NagymarosHydroelectricPowerPlant.
Though the losses which would becaused by such a decisioncan bemore exactlycalculated at
present,and aremore convincingthan the values saved, we areconvincedthat the values savedare more
important fromthe long-term pointofview .
For the reasons mentioned above, we support thedecision of the new Hungarian govemment
concerning the suspension of the construction of Nagymaros barrage. We offer our knowledge,
experience and capabilitiesduring the period of the cornprehensiveinvestigation of the problem, and
support theHungarian environmentalists andthe wholeofpublic opinion.
Yours sincerely,
Dr. HubaMikulas
Chaiman, Municipal Cornmittee
The above statement was approvedby the Municipal Cornmittee of Slovak Environmentalists and
Conservationistson 18 May 1989. Annex 167
POS~IID OFCZECHQSLOVAKIA ON MATERIAU PREPARED FORTHECOUNCIL OFMINISTER OSFTHE
HUMARIAN PEOPLE'R SEPUBLI ON THEDEÇISION OFTEMPORARILY STOPPING WORK ON THE
NAGYMAROS BARRAGE 2,JUNE lggg
The materials werehandedover attheCzechoslovakEmbassyin Budapeston 26June 1988as an Annex
tothe letterwrittenbthePrimeMinisterof the HungarianPeople'sRepublictoComradePave1Hrivnak,
PnmeMinisterofthe Czechoslovak Socialist Republic (Czech andlovakFederalRepublic).
The materials included the following:
1. A paper prepared by the Ad Hoc Comrnitteeof the Hunganan Academy of Sciences on the
environmental, ecological,waterqualitand seisrnologica1impacts in the event that the Nagyrnaros
Barragewereeitherimplementedor notimplemented.
2. A professionalsummaryof the risk factors and ecologicalhazards consideredby the CounciEof
Ministersof the HungarianPeople'sRepublicwhen makingitsdecisionon the suspensioof work atthe
Nagymaros Barrageof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System.
Arthe onset ofthe planning work for the comprehensive developmentof the riches ofw:ater of the
Danube with itsdeçisionof 26 August 1953theGovernmentof the Czech and SlovakFederal Republic
commissionedthe CzechosIovakAcademyof Sciences(CAS), the SlovakAcademy of Sciences (SAS),
and the Czechoslovak Acadernyof Agriculture (CAA)to monitar the developmentof the plans of the
barrageson the Danubeand roprovideefficient assistancefor the planne(For this purpose,the CAS
set up 12specialcornmitteesand the SAS set up 6 cornmittees.)The multidisçiplinaryapprotothe
preparation of the harnessing was of interest for various expert groups, and the CO-opof then
scientistsof the two counbies began as early as that timtwoTcouniriesconsidered theresults and
the elaborated engineering designse cornmon.
Ten years later in its decisionNo. 652163of 29 Ju1963,the CzechoslovakGovernmentcharged the
DeputyPrime Minister andthe Chairmanof the Cornmitteefor Technical and Scientific Development
and Co-ordinationto work out a comprehensivegovernmentstudy on the input data of research and
investment for the developmentpragram of the Gabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage System through co-
operation with the Ministers for Agriculture, ForeWater Management, Construction andEnergy.
The complextask was workedout atsix main workingplacesand twoto eight researchinstitutions were
involvedin it.
On 29 and 30 April 1965,a symposium washeld inBratislava onthe planof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros.
BarragSe ystem and the environment,led by AcademiciansBailus (ArchiteandUrban Planner),Duba
(Water Manager)and Mucha (Fhysician, Experton Public Health), One of the main presentations atthe
symposiumwas the one entitled"BiologicalProblemson the Landscape", workedout by the Landscape
Biology Insrituteof tSAS.
In May 1968, theSlovak Comrnittee for Water Managemeno tf the Czechoslovak Technical and
ScientificAssociationorganise$a symposium,where presentations wereagain given on the impacts of
the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System, including the agriculture, theiparian forests dong the
Danube, the protectionof the communities and the flood controI of the lowlands as well as on the
engineeringconsequences athe construction site.
OR22 October 1975,a symposium was heldfor the generalpublic,on whichthe impactsof the Barrage
on the environment were discussed,proposalswere made to improve the natural conditions andto
rnitigatthepossiblyadverseimpactsof the Gakikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem. In the meanwhile,
intensive CO-operatiowas under way with the Hangarian experts as well. Borh Parties kept in mind
constantly, that the tasks, interests, and prtalbe solved; thaOur generation inherited with the
Danube,arecornmon.This CO-operationcontinued with theevaluation ofthe proposalsof engineering designs, the approval of
thejoint development program and thedrafting of the Joint Conbactual Plan.
On 16 September 1977, the Treaty on the construction and the operation of theGabcikovo-Nagymaros
Barrage System was signed between the Hungarian People'sRepublic and the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republic. The basisfor this was a jointly drafted plan meaning that the impacts of this system on the
adjacent areas and the environment were considered, based on the materials devised by the research
institutions of the two countries.
For the impIementationof the proposed designs having an ecological character, the Biological Plathef
impact area of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage Systemwas amajor step, which was drafted between
1975and 1976by URBION.
The life of the local population, the developments of industry, agriculture, transport and socialservice as
well as the increase of the yield and reliability of the drinking water resources are rbyuDecision
No. 56 of the Govemment of the Slovak Socialist Republic (SSR) issued on 28 Febniary1978,on the
comprehensive regional plan of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros area. This area covers morethan 300,000 ha.
Numerous contemporanes live on both the Hungarian and the Czechoslovak sides, who have been
involved in the discussions on the environmental impacts heldbefore the preparation of the Biological
Plan. As a continuation and updating of the Development Plan mentioned already, a supplement was
worked out in 1986forthe areabetween the power canal and theDanuberiverbed.
Based on this comprehensive and long-standing CO-operation,the Hungarian and Czechoslovak
Cornmittee for Econornic, Technical and Scientific Co-operation çornmissioned the Slovak and
Hungarian Academy of Sciences to integrate the joint geological, hydroIogica1and biological research
into their program extending between 1981 and 1985,in order to obtain even more knowledge about
water quality, biology etc., in short, about ecology retothe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem.
It concerned the deepening of the knowledge on ecology or itspossible improvement in ordtomaintain
the environmental conditionsas much aspossible, or perhaps the development of proposals to minimise
the possibly adverse impactsof the Barrage.
The Academies of both countries determined the programs of research, collated the methods and
determined the avenues of CO-operation.The CO-operationand the common results were publishedby L.
Weismann, Açademician and T. Daubes, Corresponding Member of the SAS in the Annex of the
peridical entitled "NewWord" (6j sz6) (No. 23, 1989),thus these are nat discussed here. It cabe
ascertaineci, however, thattheCO-operationof the Czechoslovak and the Hungarian Academies was
hitful. Several recommendations were accepted, and several of them will be implemented during
construction or inthefuturein a way that realises the improvement othe environment. The protection
and preservation oftheenvironment arevery importanton both theCzechoslovak and the Hungarian side
of the Danube. The disagreementscannot be of sucha nature that they couldnot be reconciled.
It has to be noted, however, that during this jointly performed work, no new viewpoints or reports on
recent scientific findings were given to usup until 13May 1989,and as a matter of fact, up until today
either fromOurCO-operatingCzechoslovak and Hungarian scientists or in the negotiations of the Joint
Operative Task Forceof the Plenipotentiaries or in thenegotiations of the Plenipotentiaries of the Czech
and Slovak Federal Republic and the Hungarian People'sRepublic. In the same way, the session of the
Hungarian Parliament heldbetween 5 and 7 October 1988look upa position in favour of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Barrage System,when 317 Members of Parliament (MP)voted in favour of the continuation
of the construction,19MP's voted against it ,nd 31 MP's abstained from voting. Prior to this session,
the construction sites ofthe Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System were inspected in August and
Septernber 1988by almost a11the Members of the Hungarian Parliament, (On the visit te the sires,10
groups with 69mernberseach, totalling 600Hungarian MP's,pariicipated as well,asthe guestsinvited by
thern.)The requests of the Hungarian Partyhave always kn fulfilleby the Czechoslovak Party. In 1958,the
govemment delegations agreed on the conshvctionof the NagymarosBarrage. In 1983 we agreed on the
extension of the construction byfour years. On 6 Febt-uary1889,againat the requestof the Hungarian
Party, we agreed on shortening the constructiof theNagymaros Barrageby 15months.
We do not know what scientificknowledge the Council of Ministers of the Hungarian People's Republic
acquired to decide the suspension of the work on the Nagyrnaros Barrage on 13 May 1989 for two
rnonths,because it wanted to study newdataI.n the negotiationsof the PrimeMinisters of the Czech and
Slovak Federal Republic and the Hungarian People'sRepublic on 24 May 1989 in Prague, Comrade
Adamec, Prime Minister of the Federal Govemment, stated that the position of the Czechoslovak
Government declares unanimously that it is in its interestto have the Barragefully completed. He stated
thathe was ready to find a solution in the negotiations of expertsof the countries, which rnakes the
successful completion oftheBarrage possible.
In the Protocol of the negotiation of the Plenipotentiarïesof theCzech and Slovak FederaI Republic and
the Hungarian People's Republic on 6 June 1989 in Budapest, the Czechoslovak Plenipotentiary
announced, arnong others, that it was pudown in the information package prepared on the Session of 3
June 1989 of the Parliament of the Hungarian People'sRepublic that the Government discussed the
various information of the government agencies,theAcademies of Sciences, the Advisory Board of the
council of Ministers, the Committee fomed for the joint supervision of the work and other societal
agencies. Furthemore, theGovernment was informedby severalinternational institutions, renowned and
prominent scientists etc., based on which the Govemment decided to temporanly suspend the work on
the Nagymaros Barrage.
The Czechoslovak Party made efforts toreceive tangible and grounded primary materials, othebasis of
which theCouncil of Ministers of the Hungarian People'sRepublic decided to ternporarily suspend the
work on the Nagymaros Barrageon 13May 1989.
Enthe Frotocol made on handing overthe materials andthe letter writtby the DeputyPrime Minister of
the Council of Ministers of the Hungarian People'sRepublic to the Prime Minister of the Czech and
Slovak Federal RepubIic, which took place at the Czechoslovak Embassy in Budapest on 26 June 1989,
the Plenipotentiary of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic stated thateHungarian Party informed
the Czechoslovak Party aboutthe temporary suspensionthe construction work on the Nagymaros Barrage
on 13May 1989,and handed over the materials on 26 June 1989,i.e. 44 days later,,which formed the
basis for theecision making of the Governmentof the Hungari People's Republicon 13May 1989.
TheHungarian Partyrecommendsthat the Czechoslovakexpert cornmitteeshand over the documentation
on each issue forthe Hungarian WorkingGroups, while recommending that thePrime Ministers of the
Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and the Hungarian People'sRepublic review the results of the
scientific negotiations in thefirst half of Ju1489. Such a proposal seems to be out of proportion
following a delay of 44days to hand over the materials.
Having translated and studiethe materials, the Czechoslovak Plenipotentiary proposed ovthephone to
Cornrade Udvardi, SpecialGovernment Comrnissioner of the Governmentof the Hungarian People's
Republic on 7 July 1984 that the Czechoslovak Partyreçornmended the experts' negotiationstobe held
on July 11 and 12in order to meet the two-monihdeadline of the unilateral temporary suspension of the
consmction of the Nagymaros Barrage. We regiettedto notice that on the part of the Hungarian Party,
only thetime ktween July 17and 19, 1989could be accepted.
Subsequent to their studybythe expertsofthe WorkingGroups, it is considered necessnry tostate briefly
the following about the materials presentedfor negotiation by the HungarianParty:
Having studieû thematetials,al1scientistsand experts agreedthat the materials did not contain scientific
justification or documents thwere recent and unknown to date, that would havenot been considered in
the earlier plan documentation and thatwould havenot been included inro rhesuccessive amendments tothe Joint ContractuaPlan, The primary materials do not containew aspects not even for suca radicat
intervention like stoppintheconsMuctionof the Nagymaros Barrage. The common planning done and
the common decisions made so fartook a more complex interpretationof the scientific preparations as
their starting-point.
Such a conclusion was also drawn based on the material handed over by the Hungarian Academy of
Sciences, which stressed that Hungarian scientists had no chance to study the scientific, the professional
and the planning d~umentation, based on which the joint development program and the Joint
Contractual Plan were worked out. We do not know, on what basis they exarnined the possible impacts
and on what bais they expressed their concern.
The Slovak and the Hungarian Academies of Sciences have been working as per a joint scientific
program since 1982,thus
- How is it possible that u1982 and even after1982 the scientishad no chance to get acquainttd in
detailwith the plans and the relevant studies?
- Why did the Hungarian Party not present the remarks put down in the materials to the negotiations
during this period?
- It can be assumed that, while working out the materials presented, the appropriate experts,knew
the problems of resolving the ecological issues in the plan, did not cooperage. We would be reliofed
numetous incorrect statements,
To add to the general rernarks1mention that based on the CO-operationofthe Czechoslovak-Hungarian
Boundary Water Commission, it has been known for several decades what monitoring and measuring
results wehavehad together with the Hungarian water management professionals and what dathas been
available.
We do not understand why theHungarian materials referto the lacof data.We can hardly imagine that
data on thefield of water quality, groundwater, hydrogtaphy and health are inaccestobthe Hungarian
scientists.
The conclusionsof theWorkin Ggroup on Ecology ofthe Czechoslovak experts can be summarised by
statingthat by not completing the Barrage System, the whole affected area cannot be restored to its
original state.In fact,itisexpected that the negative impactsmay even increase from the aspectof
ecology without any economic effect. The construction required sacrifiinnature and in the landscape.
Itisunnecessary io enhance these even more by stopping the construction.
According tothe statement made by the scientists CO-operatingin the fields of hydrology and ecology,
the materials presented do not contajn anfactsthat would have not been known and considered in the
engineering designof the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem and they do not put down concrete and
provable arguments that would challengetheimplementation of the Nagymaros Barrage.
The chapteron "Ecological Impacts" drawn up in general ends with the following statement in the first
document: "The vaIueofthe produce obtained directlyfrom thenatural living systecanbe estimatedas
US $ 220 thousand million annually", which can be considered rather a non-scientific pieceof data
without g~ing into details and providinsupport. In the relatioofthe two countries, similar numerical
expressions areusuallymade jointly with the involvement of the responsible experts of both counrries.
Re the desired preservation of biodiversity, oui reservoir built on tVig River ("Slnava") cm be
mentioned as an example that was buiitas a natural mode1 for the reservodownstrearn of Bratislava,
where tich biodiversity developed unexpectedly on the tiny islands in the reservoir.
The recommendation in the materials:"...by opening up the closed systems of the old branches, suah
connection should be created, which is the most suitabletherecological function of living organisms", according to our experts, gives evidence ththeauthor is not aware of the problerns of the shallow reach
of the Danube.
In the chapter on "Water Quality", it istatedthatthe amount of plankton has increased ten fold in the
water of the Danube since the 1960's and that the chIorophyl1levis 100rng/m3at Rajka and 240 mg/
m3 at Baja. No reservoirs have been built on the reach of the Danube betweenRajka and Baja, yet the
chlorophyll content increases there significantly. ispointed out in the document that therehas been
more plankton at Baja than atRajkaso faras well. Ceasing the construction of the Nagymaros Barrage
will not stop this unfavourable situation
and development which has prevailed so far.
In the chapteon "Sewage Treatrnent", the maximum requirements are known in general, and they were
also known to the builders ofthe reservoirs on the river on the Austrian and German reaches of the
Danube.
The deterioration of the water quality of the Danube on the reach betweNagymaros and Budapest is
impossibleas a result of the construction of the Nagymaros Barrage, and indeed, baondCzechoslovak
.and foreign experience, the water quality will improve on this reach.
The points that the Danube riverbed isbeing scoured and that the yieIdof the bank-filtered wellfor
1
drinking water decreasesas well asthat ironand manganese showed up in sorne wells in the town of
Szentendre prove that this phenornenon cannot be linked to the construction of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros BarrageSystem,
In the çhapter on "Drinking Water", the general remarks made need no commentary. We stopped over
the contradiction otwo statements: "in the processof bank-filtering, the key the living layer at the
bottom of the riverbed..As a result of damming up the river, this function will deterioIfthis layer
ceases functioning with the higher discharge, however, the underlying stratum with coarse grains will
becorne bare, and its filtering effecdecrease.The water will flow into the wells along tbanksin a
less filtered state and will be more polluted. Consequently, it will havbetchlorinated, otherwise it
cannot be used. On the darnmed reaches ofthe river,however, the filtering layer remainfora longer
periodthan on the reaches that have not been dammed up."
As amatter offact,this statement diratîy supporthe consmiction of the Nagymaros Reservoir!
1
For the chapter on "Tectonics", weput it down thatwe obtained the clearest picture on the geological
substratswhile dredging the trench mainly in the Danube riverbover an area o46 ha. (In comparison,
thetrenchof the Gabcikovo Power Plant covers 8 ha andthatof the locks is another8 ha.Itis necesgary
ihat the open tsench be examinedby the experts at Nagymaros, but the Czechoslovak experts also found
that the exposed geological profile corresponds to those geological input data that were used in
caIcularions in LheJoint Conlractual Plan. Inthsame way, it cannotbe assumed the Austrian experts
frornDokW would not have given warning about the:discrepancy between the reality and the plan.
1do not mention the cIearIyprovable geotectonic research that was çarried out at the GabciBarrage.
The geological composition wasproven ta the greatest extent oncbetween 1965 and 1963 and again in
1974.
Based on the available seismological datbe following remarks can be made to theexpert judgement of
theHAS stating that the expected seismic activity can be classified between 9 and 10:
AI1information so far (up until the Octobe1988 Session of the Hungarian Parliament) started frorn the
fact that the Nagymaros Barrage is located ia seismically calm area, The given seismicitywas 1 (?)
degree. Everyone knew that, according ro the 1-lungariangeologist, Mr. Réty,a seismotectonic Iine
extends across the area of the Nagymaros Barrage. It is apparent frorn his work and data that no
earthquak etronger than3 to 6OMCS has ken detected either here, orthe wider vicinity of the area.(1) TheMapof Maximum Earthquake Intensity of Hungary(455 - 1971)by D. Csomor,Department
of Seismologyof ttieGeodeticandGeophysicsResearchInstituteof the HAS,on which the areas with
3= 5OMSK aredelineated (Annex1).
2j"Map of MaximumObserved Intensity of Hungar ynd Southem Slovakia, in Contribution of the
lnstitute of Geophysics of the Slovak Academyof Sciences 11/198Iw by D. Csomos (Institute of
Geophysics,HAS, Budapest), 1.Brucek(Instituteof Geophysics,SAS, Bratislava)and D. ProçhizkovG
(Instituteof Geophysics,CAS,Prague),onwhichNagymaros isclassifiedas having 5 OMSK (see Table
1).
(3)"Atlas of Isoseismal Maps - Central and Eastern Europe"by theCommission of Academies of
Sciences of SocialistCounmiesfor PlanetaryGeophysicalResearch,publishedin 1978in Prague bythe
GeophysicalInstituteof the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences.
In the materialsrnentioned,thereis not evensignof higherseismic intensitiesin the given areas over the
historicallyknownperiod.
The assertion inthe Hungarianmaterials thatseisrnic intensitieswill increata9 to 10OMSK is not
supported by anythingand is nocjustified. We cannot imagine theeffats and consequencesof such a
highintensityto the architectural activitiesinthe citiesof BudapestorEsztergom.
The procedures of foming expertjudgementon the seismichazardsto the BarrageSystem were carried
out jointlyover the period of 1960through 1455,based on the scientificknowledge of the time. An
independent expert judgement justified these in 1981. None of the seismologicalobservations made
between 1965 and 1989has proven otherwisethan what was claimed by the already deveIopedexpert
judgements,basedon whichthe implementationof the Barrage System wasdesigned.
The hazard of 9 to 10 OMSK to the Nagymaros Barragefrom seismic impacts as claimed in the
Hungarian materials is not grounded scientificallyand is probably derived from the inappropriate
interpretationoftheMCS scaleroMSKscalein 1964.
A redistic base for the scientific seismicityis the issue of induced seismicityafter the completion and
duringthe operationofthe Bamages. Inthe interestof operational safety, theextensivemonitoringof the
seismi activitisfully justifiedandwas discussedatthe 10thmeetino gf thePresidency of the CAS held
on September14, 1988underthe title"A plan forsettingup a regionaland local seisrnic networkforthe
area of theCzech andSlovakFederalRepublic". To providefor theseobjectives,the NationalPlanning
Board of the Czech and Slovak Eederal Republicis continuously making foreign currency reserves
available.
Forthe topicsofthe WorkingGroupson Soi1Science, Agriculture and Hydrogeology:
The impactof the Barrage system on the soils is taken frothepaperentitIed "The developmentof the
soih in Zitny Ostrovuntil 1990 -A prognosis". However, it focuses only on the negative impacts, in
spite of the fact that the Czechaslovak analysis takes into account nonly the negative impacts,but
mainlythe positivechanges(theincreasingyieldsof the soils, further pedogenesis).
The soils wilI be affecied mostlyin Czechoslovakterritwy. The impacts of the Nagymaros Reservoir
will be detectedalmostexclusivelyonCzechoslovakterritory. The predictionon the pedogenesisin the
Zitny Ostrovwe worked out in agreement withHungarian scientists is known to both Parties. The
present topsoilisa result of humaninterventioninto the water balanceof the area andhas not been the
originalstate foa longtime. The predictiontakesinto account theresultsof pedogenesis.
The area was splitintotwo: one of them is the area upstrearnof the Dunakiliti-HrusovReservoir, where
the productive capacity of the soils will temain unchanged. The water surface of the Reservoir is
assumed,however, tohavea positive impact,as itwill increasethe relative humidityof Be air. A drop in
the water table in the vicinityof the headrace and tailrace canalswill result in positive changes in theaeration ofthe soiIs. A negative phenamenon will be a greater dependence on climatic precipitation
before the campletionof the irrigation sysiem.
A drop in the water table exceeding th1.0m is expected on an areaof 19,000 ha. The drop of the water
table willtake effecon areas, where the largest and densest drainage canal network has been developed
by now. These will beused for supplying water in the future, which will make it possible to regulate the
water balance on an area of abou40,900 ha. In this area, the further development of soils will take place
in the central upperpart ofZitny Ostrov, but there too the development of irrigation systems wilI take
place in accordance withtheplans, and in fact, these have alreben partially developed.
In the area upstream of the Nagymaros Reservoir with the darnmed-up water Eevelof the Danube, no
negative impacts of an increasing hydromorphisrn are expected in the area of the Pleistocene core, only at
the depressions of Zitny Osirov and the left side of Vig River. Substantial soakjng is expected only
in the northern pari of this area. An improvement in the rnoisture content, i.e. an enhanced
hydromorphic state is expectedinlarge areas,which may result in the soaking of the soil the increase
of the secondary salt content. It should be known, however, that prtorthe constructionof the Barrage
system, the water balanceprevailing so far has resulted in saline soinextensive aseas that onehas to
fight with considerabIe irrigation.
The predicted positive and negative impacts were projected into the ponnamelioration measures of the
State Amelioration Directorate, where the areas showing improving tendencies the water balanceof the
soil were excluded from the irrigation plans. A temporarydeep drainage system isking developed ta
remove the present and future salt conteof the soil.
When evaluating theGabcikovo-Nagymaros BarrageSystem, we startedfrom the fact unanimously with
the Hungarian Party that theHmsov-Dunakiliti Reservoir and the Nagymaros Reservoir forrn a uniform
groundwater basin. Inour country, this unity foms the basis for achieving the optimum efficiency of the
valuable water withdrawal sites hm the aspect of flood controlof the area, and depending on water
regulation and ecological conditions.
In this unity, the HungarianParty sees now (over the period of afew months ktween the sessions of
Parliament) an adverse impact on the ecosystem of the Czechoslovak and Hungarian reach of the
Danube, This adverse impact is not locally guantified and justified.
The requirement that Gabcikovo should generate "through-flow" energy isunreasonable. Everyone, who
knows only the basic pinciples of hydroelectric power development, shouldbe clear on the facthat an
unfavourable hydrologic ralime has resulted in the present riverbecifrom the abandonment of the
Nagymaros Barrage, as opposeéto the full functioning of the Nagymaros Reservoir. The opinion that the
adverse impacts get reduced in the areby abandoning the Nagymaro seservoir isaconceptual mistake.
An additional question, to which great significance is attributed in the materials of the Hungarian Party, is
the impact of the Nagymaros Barrageon the yields of the soils in the imparea.Irrespectiveof the fact
that the bilateral protective measures will eliminate the adverse impact on both riversidesdamming
up of the water level in the Nagymaros Reservoir will havea beneficial impact in an extensive area on
the Hungarian side. In every case,the stabilisationof the level of the Danube with a one-metre
fluctuation will be enhanced due to the peak-operation, thus favoiirable conditions will be created for the
regulationof the goundwater level.
The impacts ofgroundwater on sailequilibrium and crop yieldhave been determined based on detailed
studies. They have been studied in (and documented in a great nurnber of publications by)the
Hydrological and I-ïydraulicInstitute the SAS since 1954. In afew papersthe dependency of yieldon
the occurrence of pmipitation andthe moisture content ofthe soilaswell as thedepth of the water table
were determined. The reports not only determined the beneficial depths for the variouscrops, but also
studied the effects of groundwateron the pedogenicprocesses. Someof these results were presented at
the 5thCongsess ofthe International Cornmittee for Irrigation and Drainage convened Tokyo in 1963.It is apparent from the results rhat the present natural regisinadequate with respect to the optimum
situationduring the whole growing season.
It has to be pointed out that through the stabilisation of the groundwater levels, more favourable
conditions willbe çreatedfor theregulationof the groundwater than presenrly.
The impact of theNagymaros Barrage on the other pedogenic processes, e.g., migratioofmaterials, the
regimes of sali and microbes,maybe interpreted in an analogue way.
In the view of the Czechoslovak scientists, the enclosedbibliography contains publications selected
through bias. Ttdoes not contain renowned and internationally acknowledged scientistand experts from
the Hungarian People'sRepublic, and with thiswe get the impression that the conclusionof these people
rnay run counter zothe ideas put down in thematerial. It is hard to accustom ourselves to the idea that
between October 1484 and May 1989 knowledge was enhanced so rnuch, or the seisrnic conditions
changed, which, according to the Hungarian expert acknowledged in the world, Mr. Réty, had already
become stabIe about 1000years ago in theNagymaros area. Our situation was made even more difficult
by the fact that none of the publications or the bibliography in the materials of the Hungarian Paris
cited inthemateriaI, thusthe claims presented cannobe confirmed.
In conclusion, wiih regard to the ecological issues, 1mention that the material presented is very general
and does not have unambiguously defined issues. Among the ecological functions, it emphasises the
biological self-purification of the watand the linkof thebottom of the riverbed with the provision for
the drinking water supply and nature conservationAfurtherweak point ofthe material is that it does not
perfectly separate the subject of providing expert judgement (not implementing Nagymaros) from the
other problems, while it also mentions the issues of the GabcikoBarrage. This does not make possible
the çoncrete and unambiguous evaluation of the pmblems in question. The rnaterial is written in the
conditional rnanner and does not contain conclusions or a starting-point from the given situation. It does
not contain the additional important functions of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System either, e.g.
the functions of flood contra], shipping, energy and society.
The assumptions mentioned on three or four pages are generally known and have been wtitten up in the
Biological Plan of theSAS. Resolving them is made a subjectof the joint goal plaof the SAS and the
HAS. In our opinion, thisis a scientific argumentat the sarne time for the construction of sewage
treatment plants along the river and its tributane-included also in the BIOPROJECT and taken into
account inthe engineering design of the facility as well. Furthemore, the issues of siltation in the
Reservoir presented in the material are debatable; the Czechoslovak Part yakes into account such an
eventualityin the engineering design and recommended thenecessary measures and solutions.
With respect to the living organisms and the fear of their extinction, baondthe ongoing research and
several years of experience, thspeciescomposition will become richer foIIowing the construction of the
Barrages. In order to protect the valuable plant and animal species,we recommended a system of
biocenters and biocorridors that rnay be established on the Hungarian sidas welI. These surfaces will
serve as cores for regenerating the biotypes disturbed or elirninated by the conskuction.None of the
conservation areas ofthe Slovak Socialist Republic is affected by the constructofntheBarrage System
and only two will be located in the area ktween the power canal and the old riverbed of theDanube.
This wiIl be the planneclconservatioma,
We do know that wirh the present construction the environment has ken disturbed, but this area cannot
be restored to its original state by stopping the constructitheoNagyrnaros Barrage. On the contrary,
it can be assumed thar from the aspect of ecology, the conditions will keep deteriorating without
ecologicaEimpacts.
The original construction conceptionvalid to date took into account the Barrage System inthe form of
two interconnected Barrages, Açcording to this inierpretationthe ecological measures designed for the
Hungarian side would be taken in order to eliminate the negative impacts of the peak-operation of theGabcikovo Barrage. The impact of the Barrageon fish production (10 pages) isknown and is currently
being studied within the framework of CO-operationamong engineers, ecologists and ichthyologists. The
adopted designs do not onIy assume the preservation of the species composition, but on the contrary,the
improvement cïfthe present situation and yields.
The rernarks put down in the Hungarian material are known and were made the subject of the
BIOPROJECTas wellas thegoal plan being jointly studiby the SAS and the HAS. Our experts rnay
respond to thecited remarks. Justtoadd to the enclosed bibliography, it represents ansrna11partof
the workdone. To mention an example, the zoological bibliograpof Csal16kbzhas 1979 citations, If
necessary, Ourposition maybe extended and supported by documents.
Finally, some words on the issues ofenergy, which is tauched upan only partially by the material in
question.
The material has to be corrected which claims that the Hungarian share covers only 3 % from the energy
generated by the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System. In our view, this is5 % ofthe dernand of the
Hungarian People" Republic (in 1987:36,186GWh}.
Similarly, the hydropotential of the affected reach of the Danube is negligible for Czechoslovakia. The
Czechoslovak sharefrorn the power generated annuallby the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System is
1881 GWh. lz represents95 % of the primary power generation of the cascade on the VAgRiver
annuaIEy, and with the 20 barrages built over 53 years, it represents one quarter ofthe prirnary
hydropotentialof theSlovak SocialisRepublic.
The claim that the energy generated in a hydroelectric power station is the most expendve and the least
reliable is totally wrong. ThkWh generated in hydroelectric power stations is the cheapest because of
the low operation costs. Furthemore, due te itsdynamic capacities (the regulation of the output
frequency, reserves for accidents), it increases the reliability and the economic effofithe whole
and the linked energy system.
The "reactor accident" that wasmentioned took place on22 February 1977. The International Atomic
Energy Agency(IAEA) in Vienna was informed asio whathappened on the JA A-1 on 22 February
1977. This information was given by the Czechoslovak Atomic Energy Board. Subsequently, we also
provided detailed information in Vienna. A prototype nuclear power plant was involved with a heavy,
gas-cooled reactor havingan output of150 mW. No such kind of nuclear power plants areor have been
built inCzechoslovakia ,herefore, what tookplaceinitdces not have any effecon and isnot connected
to the nuclear power plants.
We provided the informationon energy only because in the fourth Working Croup, according to our
agreement, economic issues wjll alslxdealt with, without which the problems cannotberesolved and
the final cornmittee cannot have negotiations.
Ing. Vladimir Lokvenc
Plenipotentiarof the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic ,
and the Slovak Socialist Republic for the construction
and operation of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros BarrageSystern Annex 168
NOTEOFTHE SLOYAK ENVIRONMEN CTOAMLMI'ITEE5,JUNE 1991
SlovenskaKomisia Pre Zivotné
Prostredie
(SlovakEnvironmenta1ProtectionCornmittee)
Hlboka2, 81235Bratislava
Vodohospodarska vystavba
sthtnypodnik
Nom. SNP 13 Bratislava25June 1991
Bratislava Ref. No.:356191-OSS II.
SUBJECTT : he provisional solutionfor putting the GabcikovoBarrageinto operation in the territory of
the CzechandSlovakRepublics. Declarationbasedon sec, 14ofthe statuteon waters,
Vodohospodarska vystavba spBratislava submitted tothe SlovakEnvironmentalProtection Committee
on 29 March 1991 proposal no. 1912-730/1991for the project entitled "The provisional solution for
puttingthe GabcikoveBarrageinto operationin the territofthe Czech andSlavak Republics", order
number: 156 752-12-10116, archive number:25173, including "The çomplete solution for flood
protection" project,order number: 156752-51-00699,archive number:25872and in referenctothese
requestedthedeclarationin accordancewithsec. 14of thLaw on Waters, no. 13811973.The proposa1
submittedwas successivelysupplementedon thebasisof therequirementsspecifiedbythe investoThe
econornicassessmentof theproject was submittedon 17June 1991.
Three versions for the completion of the project were presentedin the proposal concerning the
provisional solutionfortiingthe GabcikovoBarrageinto operation. The Firstand secondversions are
identical in concept, thearturelies onlyin the placementof the weir projects andin the fathethat
constructionis to be completedin two phases. The third version calls for theentire constructionto be
completedin onephase.
Theconceptualsolutionoriginatesfromthecircumstancespresentedbytheprojects completedduringthe
construction oftheGabcikovo-NagymarosBarrage system. The construction ofthe new psojects is
proposed to k cat~iedout in connectionwith these already cornpletedprojecand thenew projects
shouldbe plannedexclusivelyin theterritoryof the CzandSlovak Republics. The section closing the
Danube river-bed is planned a1,81.750river kilometres(hereinaftrkrn). Thisclosing section shall
be joined tothenghtdyke of the reservoiron the Danube'sleft bwhich willbe directed downstream
alongthe bank oftheDanube to theconnectingdykein the Hrusovterritory. The other mainprojects are
the navigational passage,the weir with the auxiliarynavigationlock and hydroelectricpower plant, the
dyke with overfill weir, projects for the extraction of water at. MosoniDuna connected with the
hydroelectricowerplant,tight reservoir dykeon the rightbank ofDanube and accessreads, bridges
and arrangementsinthe reservoir attheendof the we.r
TheSlovakEnvironmentalProtection Committeeintheir letterdated 3 April 19no. 35611991-0SS II.
requested the ProvideDunaja sp BratislavaCompanyto state its position regarding the planned solution
from the perspectiveof regional watermanagementplanning. Asthe Companydid not comply with the
procedure as outlined in thMLVH SSR (Minisq of Forestry and Water Management) decreeno.
5423/240-4901197 n draftingitspositiotheSlovak EnvironmentalProtectionCommittee requestedan
addendum from an SVP perspectivehm the BratislavaResearchInstituteof Water Management. The
Institute sentits expertiseto the Slovak Environmental ProtCornmitteeon 31 May 1991andthen
senttheaddendum in a Ietter dated 19June 1991. The submitted documentationwas made subjectto
government commentary. The Economic Ministry of the Slovak Republic, in the minutes no.
, 7466144011991dated 14May 1991 regardingthe completion of the governmentcommentary, consentedto the preparation of the construction plan in accordance with the terrns set down in the government
commentary.
Both the governments of the Czech and the Slovak Republics have studied the problem of the completion
of the Gabcikovo Basrageconstruction. Provisions were approved at the 35th session of the government
of the Slovak Republic held on 19 January 1991 at which the alternative solution on the Czech-Slovak
part of the Gabcikovo Barrage was studied. The intention of these provisions wasto create possible
projects for the possible implernentation of the "C" version. The Forestry and Water Management
Minister was insü-uctedby the government of the Siovak Republic in its resolution no237 dated 21 May
1991to provide the investment and implementation conditions necessary for the provisional solution for
puttingthe Gabcikovo Barrage into operation, without the Hungarian partner'sparticipation or consent.
The international legal aspects of theoject entitle"The provisional solution for putting the Gabcikovo
Barrage into operation in theterritory of the Czech and Slovak Republics" were assessed by an expert
panel. The international legal experts cameta the conclusion as siared in their report of 3199n1that
the provisional solution for the conservation of the collectively constructed projecc as welas forthe
reduction of damages did not constitute a breach of the 1977 Interstate Treaty, nor of custornary
international law. The putting into operation of the Gabcikove Barrage by the provisional solution in the
territoryof the Czech and Slovak Republics compIies with the Iegal obligations ernanating from the
Trianon Treaty as welI as those from the Paris Peace Treaty. The construction of the projects does not
affect thematerial and localeffect of the 1975 agreement concerning the issues of border waters and
water management. As the construction wilI be carried ouonly on Czech-Slovak territory, neither the
consent of the Hungarian partner nor theparticipationof Hungarian water management authorities are
necessary in the process of granting water rights authorisation.
The Slovak Environmental Protection Cornmittee studied the proposal entitled"The provisional solution
for putting the Gabcikovo Barrage into operation in the territoof the Czech and Slovak Republics" as
well as its amendments and correspondingly assessed the proposed solution from the comprehensive
water management perspective. The Cornmittee dealt separately with the possibilities for utilisation of
the water suppliesof the Csall6kGzfrom the perspective of the functioning of the ecological system and
the danger to thegentticbase taking into consideration environmental protection requirernents.
The Slovak Environmental Protection Cornmittee assessed the submitted documentation in view of the
fact that the Danube'shydrology has a significant effect on the water qualitofthe Zitny Ostrov. This
fact also applies to the groundwater system of the given area without the existence of the Gabcikovo
Barrage. This can be documented by the example of the pollution of the water extraction sitin1975
when high water levels were constant on theDanube. It was at this time chat the micro biological
pollution at KaIinkovo-Hamuliakovo waterworks was detected. It may be deduced from the above
rnentioned that at certain water levels of the Danube (increased hydraulic gradients) the level of
groundwater is significantiy changing, which might cause possible danger to, and pollution of the
groundwaters. As a similar situation (aEteredhydraulic conditions) may occur in the aforementioried
area, it will be necessary to document the self-cleaning processes andrnechanism following the putting
into operation of the barrage or where groundwater continuously increases for the purposes of extracring
drinking water (17.8m31s-1approved by KKZ), as well as their capacity during surface water infiltration
in the territorof thebank and rivewide. Inorder to fulftl this condition a water rights authorisation wiIl
be required, among other requiremenrs, for the construction of the projects which will predeterminethe
ultimate solution.
The partial results othe scientific research must bemadeavailable before the end of June 1991, the
purpose of which wrts to gauge the effect of the construction and operation the barrage on the naturd
environment, The cornprehensive evaluation of these findings wibe available by approximately the end
of October1991. The generaI contractormust include these resuIts in the draft documentation.Thus, in accordance with the agreement acçepted at the negotiations held at the office of the Prime
Minister of the Slovak Republic on 23 May 1991, the irnplementation of the projects may commence
between July and October of 1991,the construction ofwhich will not cause ecologicalrisksand does not
presuppose the ultimate solution for the consmction. Should the research findings not prove satisfactory
for the ruling of the Slovak Environrnental Protection Committee, or should the completion of
implementation of neçessary intervention not be in accord with putting the Gabcikovo Barrage into
operation, thentherelevant authoriiies wiil not grant permits for further construction.
Based on the guidelines no. 5423/1978 set down on 17 July 1978 by the Slovak Forestry and Water
Management Ministry, the Slovak Environmental Protection Comrnittee received the srared position of
Povodie Dunaja sp Bratislava as well as thatof VUVH Bratidava which, due ro rheir significance, were
taken intaconsideration by the SIovak Environrnental Committee in its assessmentof thedocumentation
submitted for the purposes of declaration in accordance with sec. 14 of the Statute on Waters, no.
138/1973.
The position of the VUVH states that water quality research was not carried out for the provisional
solution of the Gabcikovo Barrage. Inthe period between 1989-199 1 studies were gathered regarding the
impact ofthe reservoir in accordance with the "A" and "B" versions. According to these findings the
constant inundation of the flood plain andof a segment of the branches would simultaneously inci-ease
the concentration ofspecific organic and non-organic materials in the Danube waters and it is probable
that these concentrations would infiltrate into the water extraction sites as well. Advanced molecular
organic materials would in various degreesbe absorbed into pure materials whichwould then sink to the
bottom ofthe reservoir. The identification of these materials corresponds with the reoflthe analyses
of the Danube water.
From the results ofthe analytical chernical samples takehm the sediment of the Danube and from the
branch system in the reservoir tecritoand its sediment, thVUVH confirmed the existence oforganic
micro pollutants, among them potychlorinated biphenyl polycyclic aromatjc carbondioxides, chlorinated
pesticides, chlorinated benzines, dichloride benzines and hexachloride benzines. The aforementioned
elements accumulate in the sedimentary materials and in the processof infiltration, in varying degrees,
impact on the qualityof the groundwater. Itisfor this reason that it is necessary to account of these
fjndings in thewater management proposal.
On the ba~is of al1 the deciding factors as wellas on the assessment of the expert opinion, prepared
according to the requirements of the ares'swatar anagement plan, the Slovak Environrnental Protection
Comrnittee as the relevant central water management authority, is hereby pubiishina declaration based
on sec. 14 of theLaw on Waters, no. 138/19T3regarding the project for "The provisional solution for
putting the Gabcikovo Barrage into operation in the territofytheCzechand Slovak Republics."
The proposed technical solution may be carried out from the perspective of the statute on protected
waters and of wider interests protected by special regulations on environmental issues. This
implementation does not affect cornpliance with international obligations provided that certain specified
conditions arefulfilled.
The following are the liabilities prescribed for the investor, Vodohospodarska vystavba sp Bratislava, in
correspondence wirh sec. 14of theLaw on Waters:
1. To document the selfcleaning processes and rnechanisms aswell as heir capacity in the course of the
infiltratioof the surface waters into the terriofrthe shoreand the areaby the riverbank.
2. To document the pollution of the soi1 and of the groundwater of the branch system in the upper
segment ofZitny Ostrov,bozh horizontally and vertiçaily, to specify the compositand character of the
pollutants, how they are transported in tgroundwater in thepresent hydraulic conditions andas aresult
of increasedpressure caused by distension.With the constniction of disproportionately large volume cross-causeways, the road on the flood plain
and on the crown embankment as well as with theformation of underwater weirs (the so-calledcassettes),
the cross-flowcapability of the branches willbe disturbed and an unnatural fluctuation of the surande
groundwater levels will occur with the creation of isolated stagnant water tenitories the oxygen
maintenance and nutrient content of which does not meet the requiremenis of the forest ecosystems.
Thus an unwanted inundation of the forest flood plain would occur which would lead to complete and
fundamental change. Withthe constniction of cross lock systems the difference between the actual and
the required quantity of water will increase,necessary for the branch system'sbansrnitta1çapability.
CorrespondingIy a solution shall be subrnitted to the Slovak Environmental Protection Cornmittee to
pepare the flood plain atthe section of the power canal in such a way that tbranch system, includàng
the simulated floods, wilbereplenished fromthe old Danube river-bed. The periodical replenishment of
the area with the rivewater along individual inundation sections would last from5 to 7 days, however
not to exceed 14 days, corçesponding to the present Danube system and taking into consideration the
natural level Bucruation during certain seasons,primarily ithe months of May and June, followed by
August and September.
12. The draft plan must guarantee the construction of permanent projeçts to prevent shipping damage
which together with mobile equipmentto prevent damage to the water quality of the Danubee ,specially
damageresulting hm fossil fuels.
13. The Moson-Dunube water supply musa beensured based on the water scale outlined in the
Agreement of 1947between Czechoslovakiaand Hungaryand on the basis of the Paris Peace Treaty.
14. In view of the fact that the construction will not take place in the protected Danube river-bed, the
investor proposes that the work lxcarriedout during a time period which is advantageous froma
hydrology standpoint. However, proposais shall stillbe submitted which wouldaddressthe prevention or
limiting of darnage which would be caused by the Danube'sincreased water output during the course of
the work. Theproposa1must be submittedfor waterrights authorisation.
15. Considering the reservoird'secreased territory and the affected area'sdyke alignrnent, the draining of
the flood water output and icemust be assessed as well ascomplete flood protection during construction
and duringthe process of implementingthe provisional solutionof the GabcikovoBarrage.
16.Critical continuous survey projects shall be guaranteed in addition to the registration of levand
water output at a11the primary projects of the Gahikovo Barrage and in the old Danube river-kd in
order tosurvey the circurnstancesof outflowin theaffected territories.
17. The srnall section of protected territory must be considered within the frameworkthe preparation
of the draftplan documentation entitled "The surnrnary of flood protection provisions", including the
planned "Istragov" national reserve, the "Ostrov orliaka morkého"national reserve as well as protected
natural formations ("Kralovskf luka") and the poplars along the forest rangeh lodge. To this purpose
contactshall be maintained withthe office of the USOPKornho.
18. Lo maintain the present state of the vegetation of the flood plain region it is necessary to secure an
approximate 1300-1500 m3lsec. water flow in the old Danube riverbed during the growing season
especially Mach and September. It will be further absolutely necessary to guarantee suca constant
water Flow in the old river-bedwhich would make possible grbundwater level contact with the soi1
horizon and which would preventthe separation of the groundwater level fromthe soi1horizon as welI as
the occurrence of the drain effect of the old riverbed at lower levIt must be assessed whether or not
the plannedminimum water flow, 609rn3s1 atisfiesthe abovelisted conditions. The old river-lied water
flows , which satisfy the above mentioned conditions, must be guaranteed düring the period of
construction as well as inthe winter and gmwing seasons (III-IX). In view of the unsatisfactory data
conceming the thickness of the topleveland thebiotic sterile pebbles, in order for the optimal wflow
in the growing season to be determined and for the groundwater dynarnics to be maintained, il isabsolutely necessary to work out the prognosis for the old river-bed level in connection with the relevant
levelsof thegroundwater at the1300-1500m3/ s ater flow rate.
19. The guarantee of flood protection provisions shall be secured in areaof the rightdrainage canal
(Bodiky) to 0.1% of the Danube'swater output.
The Slovak Environmental Protection upholds the righttomodify its declaration in accordance wisec.
14 of the Statute on Waters shoulnew factorsoccur or should research findings becorneavailablwhich
would havesignificanteffectson theconditionsbased upon which this decIaration was published.
This declaration according to sec. 14 of the statute on waters does nor constitutea permit for the
consmiction of a water management projectnor does it constitute the substitutofsuch a permit. The
declaration of the water management authority,which is required to define the tems regarding
implementation of a water management project, is not a ruling according to the prescriptionsof the
directorial procedure and it is subjwt to nppedl.
JUDr. Imrich Debnir
DirectorII.of Public Administration
cc: 1. MLVI-ISR
2. DistrictEnvironmental Protection Authority-Bratislava region
3. Povodie Dunaja sp Bratislava
4. VUVH Annex 169
I%DERA PLARLIAME NETSOLUTION NO. 200,3 OCTOBER 1991
A proposal of theEnvironmentalCornmittees'of the People's and NationalChamber.
The People'sand National Chamber of the FederalParliamenron the 17thsession held on 3 October 1991
discussed the present stageof the building of the Gabcikovo- NagymarosBasrage and the notification of
the Environmental Cornmittee'ssession. The People's and Nadonal Chamber of the Federal Parliament
accepted the followingresolution:
The Federal Parliament
1. Acknowledges the notification regarding the present stage of the building of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Hydroelectric Plant and the negotiationof the Environmental Cornmittee.
2. Approves the positionof the Govemment of the Czech and SlovakFederal Republic with regard
to the building of the Gabcikovo- Nagymaros Hydroelectric PowerPlant (resolution no.383 and 484 of
the Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic).
3. Requests that the Govemmentof the Çzech and Slovak Federal Republic,
a. during the course of negotiations with the Hungarianparty as the other contracting party regarding
the professional problems in connection with the building of the Gabcikovo- Nagymaros Hydroelectric
System, make use of the resolutions which were ratified as a result of the negotiarions of the three
cornmittees of the Hungarian Parliameni subsequent to the visit by Vavrousek, the Environmental
Minister, and with which the Parliament of the Hungarian Republic furnishes theGovernment of the
Hungarian Republic.
b. achieve an unequivocal position with regard to the continuation of doubts about thequality of the
building workof theGabcikovo- Nagymaros HydroelectricSystem.
c. enrmst the Federal Supervision Ministry in co~peration with the Supervision Ministry of the
Slovak Republic to supervise the use of the federal budget funds for the building of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros Hydroelectric System in 1991 and on the utilization of themin connection with the new
variations relatedobuilding.
initiatthe establishment ofa professional cornmittee in c~operation with the Govemment of the
d.
Slovak Republic whiçh will assess the ecological, econornic, social and the international Iegal
consequences occasioned by the completion of the Gabcikovo- Nagymaros Hydroelectric System and
assume a position on the ownershipand compensation claims of the owners of theterritories reserved for
the purpose of building.
e. work out the financial effects of different variations in connection with the building of the
Gabcikovo-NagymarosHydroeIectric
System which during the negotiationswillbe offeredto the other contracting Party,the Hungarian
Republic, and prepare from the Federal andSlovak budget the schedule of funds tlx offered frorn other
possible sources.
f. nominate one rnember from the Federal Govemment who wiH,continuously notify, in a detailed
manner, the Peoples and National Chamber of the Federal Parliamenonce a month andboth
chambersof the Federal Parliament every six months about the building of the Gabcikovo-
Nagymaros HydroelectricSystem.
g. subsequent to the assessrnent of ecological, economic, social and the international legal effeçts
cooperate inthe selection of building variations whichareacceptable fbothcontracting Partiesfrom an
ecologyand economic point of view. 409
h. complete the continuous formulationof requirements enumerated in a)andg) by 31 March 1992
and, by 30 April 1992, on the basisof the examination results of thprofessionalteams bring about an
unequivocal decision on the completion of the most suitable variations in tems of ecolagy and
economics,
4. Emphasizes itsreadiness ta continue the negotiations with rhe Parliament of the Hungadan
Republic on the Gabcikovo- Nagymaros Nydroelectric.System.
As certification of tpublication
J. Zlocha The Speakerof the Federal Parliament Annex 170
Regarding the
ReportonthePresenS tituationoftheGabcikovo-Nagymar BosrrageSystem
and thhocedureto beFollowed by theSlovakRepublii:
WithConsiderationfor theEcologicalQuestions
The SlovakNationalCowncil
A) Takesnote of the
Reportconsidenngthe solution to the presentsituationregardingthconstructionof the Gabcikovo-
Nagyrnaro s arrageSystem andtheproceduresfollowedby the Govemmeno tf the SlovaR kepublic,
with considerationfortheecologicalquestionwiththefollowing note:
a) the report viewsthe possibilityto eliminatethe negative effecton the naturalandlife
environmenw t iiexaggerabd optimism,whik theshidyregardingtheenvironmentiam l pactof Variant
"C" hasnotyetbeen workedout to thiveryday,
b)in the cdculation of damages,they do not provide properly proven figureson the full
potentialenergyproduction,andgivenoconsideration eitheto the claimbythe HungarianPartfy ora
partof the energy productioorany considerationfothe dequate waterflow quantitrequiredbythe
eco-system; and additionallyrnakesitscalculationat @ energy production levels, which is
unrealistic.
al1effortswwhicwhill lead tthe closingof theCzechoslovf andHungkan positionsregarding the
futur oetheGabcikovo-Nagymar Bomge System ;
C)determines that
l
the actionsofthe Governent of the SlovakRepublicduringnegotiationsare in accordancewith the
IntesnationalTreaty,butthatalpossibilitiand oppsminitiesddg negotiationswiththe Hungarian
party have not ken exhausted,and thata joint solutiwould be incomparablybemr than efforts
towardsa unilaterasolution.
TheSlovak Govemment did notproperly usethe proposalmade by the Environmenta lrotection
Cornmitteeof theNational Council,number 4.116, dated22 h4arch 1991,especiallyasregards the
evaluationand judgmenr of thefinadecision,orthe proposalmadeby the Cornmitteeduringthe fmt
quarterof 1990 and theproposalmade by cornmittees110.1-w,orkingas a cornmitteeevaluatinthe
conclusionsof apanelof independentexpertsduringthemond halfof 1990.
D) requeststheGovernment of theSlovakRepublicto
1. deaiurgentlywith the alternatisolutiontothe Hnisov remvoir @y no Jate han29 February
19921,on the basiof thestudyentitle"Study on theeffectofthenarrowed Hnisov Resenioiron the
NaturalEnvironment"which the collective of theWa~rManagementResearchIdtute prepared
(Szenod community.led byEngineer Szolgayin 1991-92).
2. work çiua coinparisonoffinancia.1cos&htween tbe provisionaisolutionpro@ to&teand the
narrowed alternativesolution tothe Hnrsov Reservoir, with regard for the economic. sial,
environmentaieffects and internationallaconsiderationsof bothvarhts andto make specifithe
financialbackground forthecompletionofthe Gahikovo plant,includingincidentalinvestroents,
3. Incoopemtion withthe HungarianParty,createa cornmitteiencludingindependentexperthm the
EC whichwould evahate theenvironmental,economic,socialandinternationallaw standpointofthe
provisionalsolutioproposai,andthe narrowedreservoirvariant.4. guaranteduringthe coursof the"C" variantha onlysuchworksshdl be undertakeon the
puwerplantwhichwould notobstnicthecornpletionftheHNSOV Reservoionthebasisof theabove
studyin theiventhattheHungarianFktyacceptsthealternatisolutitooheHnisov Reservoir.
5. re-examinetheplm forsewagewaterpurifiersatBratislavwi?h-id attentiotoLigetfalva
(Petnalka)andthe area sffect bydthebarragwhose sewageflows directlintotheDanube and
malcethecommencemen ofoperationsftheGabcikovohydroe1eclxpwer plantcontingenupon the
compIetionof theconstructofthepurifiers.
6. togirea dtten report.otheSlovakNationalCouncilby30 March 1992 regardingthstateof
readinessf theinvestotosatisfythe19conditionsforfiriancialandtmhniguaranteescontained
withinletteNo. 354/91-osiidated5July1991 of thSlovakNationalCounciE'snvbnmental and
Nam ProtectionCornmittee,
E)requestthePresidiuoftheSlovakNationalCouncilto
proposeta thHungarianFWty thaameetingbetweenParliamentaryelegarionsshoutak pelacethe
purposeof whichmeetingwouldlx bedidiusstheGabcikovoNagymarosBarrageSystemand inform
thePlenumof the SlovakNationaCounciby 30 April1991oftheresultsothenegotiationswiththe
HungarianParty.The SlovakGovernmentwill submithematerialnecessarforthemeetingsof the
Parliarnentayelegations.
Franrisek osko
Vice-Chairman
OftheSlovakNationalCouncil Annex 17 1
DECLARATIO OFNTHENATIONAL COUNCIL OFTHE SLOVAK REPUBLI TO THE PARLIAMEN ANSD TOTHE
NATION SFTHE WORI~, 1JANUARY 1 993
The SlovakRepublic frorn 1January 1993as one of the successor states theCzech and Slovak
Federal Republicbecornesan independent, sovereign andseparate state.
The Slovak Republic as an independent, fully authorisedmernber of the international cornrnunity
of states regulates itself in its domestic and foreign policies to the same values such as respecting human
rights and basic liberties without reservation, to the pinciples of plural democracy and to the rule of law,
the achievement of which is a basis for freedom, justice and peaca similar way to the democratic
countnes.
The Government of the Slovak Republic adjustsitself to the regulaofinternational lawand to
the aimsand principles whichare laidwn in the UN Charter andin the final act of the Helsinki Prwess
and inrelateédocuments such as the Paris Charter.
The Slovak Republic as the successor othefounding member of theUN,reveals its wiIlingness
and readiness tbe a regular rnemkr of this universal, international organisation. The SlovakRepublic
confirms the obligarionstoward the UNthe bearer of which obligation wasthe Czwhand SlovakFederal
Republjc before 31 December, 1992. It declares its decision to fully and efficiently join in the activity of
the professional organisatioof the UN in order to contribute to the accomp~jshmentof its alms and
principles, to strengthenpeace and security andto the fulfilment of everyduty of the UN.
The Slovak Republic will assistwith the development of co-operation in Europe with the aim of
the establishment oan effective, all-European security system and it will contribute to the devetoprnent
of theprocess of European integration.
Ttis in the interest of the Slovak Republic to become a Mernber theCouncil of Europe, the
Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Fseedoms,and the supplementary documents, and to
follow the Czechand Slovak FederalRepublic in its respect of the right of individuals to lay a cornplaint
before the European Commission or the European Court of Human Rights. The Governrnent of the
Slovak Republic consistentlyulfils the obligation whiwere undertaken in the fields of disarmament,
non-proliferation and the reduction of rnilitaq forces andmilitarjrstores to the levelrequired for defence,
and rnakeseffortstostrengthentmstandstabilityon the basiofrnulti-lateraland bilateral relations.
The Slovak Republic in harmony with its undertakings towards, international noms and the
security of the Central EuropeanStates will observe the rights of national randethnic groups.
The Slovak Republic will establish the political, economic, legislative and contractual conditions
for the gradua1affiliation in the European economic, political and defence organisations and for future
membership. It confims the obligations whichwere undertaken by the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republic in ordertojoin in the Council of Europe, and confirms that its rapid implementation is in its
interest.
The Slovak Republic will make effortsto join in international commercial relations, in the would
economy, and to obtainmembership in the organisations of GATT,inthe International Monetary Fund,
in the EuropeanBank of Development and tofurther CO-operatewiththern.
In accordance with the valid basic principles of International Law, to the exteshare,the
Slovak Republic as a successor statefr~EJanuary, 1943,namely since the date of the separaiofthe
Czech and Slovak Fderation considers itself bound by the bilateral or multilateral treaties where, until
this tirne, one of the pawasethe Czechand SlovakFederal Republic.
On thebasis ofthe authorised constitutional law and on the Treaty betweenthe Slovak Republic
and the Czech Republicon the Division of Federal Property,the Slovak Republic undertakes the financial~spansibilities of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic assigned to it towards third countries and
international organizations.
The SlovakRepublic wiIl attempt [Osettle the issues of legal succession with the Czech Republic
by ajoint agreement.
The Slovak Republil: is prepared to establish and develop diplornatic relations on the basis ofthe:
rulesof independent equality, non-intervention in domestic poticy,territorial and political sovereignfy
and the inviolabilityof borders.
The Slovak Republic pays special attention toitsrelations with the Czech Republic. It is making
efforts to establish such peaceful CO-operation and co-ordination of relations which will ensure the
connection of the twoçountries and whicharedesignedforthe good of the citizens.
The national Councilof the Slovak Republicturn to the parliaments and the nations of the World
in the hope that they will supportthejoining of the Slovak Republic inthe international comrnunity as an
equal partner and that they will contribute to the establishment of al1conditions so thatthe Slovak
Republic will be able to fulfil its aims and undertakingsto rheifuHextent.under supervision, as weIl as the appraisal themeasurement of the flood srate of the Danube should be
elaborated. These terms will be satisfiby the year's end.
Term No. 2:
This iem concems the documentation of the pollution of the ground surface in addition to the assessrnent
of the quantity of the pollutants impacting on the graundwaters. The problem was resolved in three
research projects which deaIt with the determination of the composition of the potlutants in the territory
of the branch system, in the area providing water for the Kalinkovo-Sarnorlni waterextraction sites and
in the sediment ofthe Danube. A cornprehensive study was drafted in conjunction with the land survey
results which studiedthe assessrnent of the lransportation possibilities of the defined pollutants into the
groundwaters and the subsequent impact on the quality of the:waterThe conclusions ofthe study show
that the presençe of the pollutants is indigenous andthe preconditiis absent forthe poIlutantstohave
an impact on the groundwaters in either extreme degreesor in degrees exceeding lirnits. Al1 of the
studies wereexamined, the conclusions were teviewed by the examiners and the examination board and
thus this term maybe considered satisfied.
Ternis No. 3 and No. 5:
I
The requirernents outlined in these paragraphs are directly related to each other which is why the
questions regarding the change in the grwndwater system were addressed jointly along with the re-
evaluation of the ZitnyOstrov water supplies in use. The problem was resolved within the framework of
two research projects. A report dated June of1991 was prepared conceming the tems for putting the
Gabcikovo Barrage into operation, however this was prepared for the Hrusov-Dunakiliti version(th"B"
version). In addition to drafting the prognosis for the Zitny Ostrov water levels, the studies pointed to a
decrease in the usable groundwater supply caused by the deepening of the river-bed and of the water
level in the Danube and surrounding terrirory, which made uncertain the usable supplies approveby the
groundwater supply classification cornmittee to the amount of17.8m31s. In the October I992 study the
groundwater Ievel isometrics were worked out according to the terms of the provisional solution version.
The temporal prognosis for the changes of levels was also prepared dependent on the reservoir'ssiltation
processes. These precondirions demonstrate that approximately 8 yeats following the operation of the
Gabcikovo Barrage infiltrationwould decrease to about half of the original value and for maintenancof
the present rate owater extraction effective provisiomust be approved for an increase in the supply of
water.
In order to satisfy temsNo. 3 and No. 5the usable supplies of Zitny Ostrov shouldbe re-evaluatedfor
the Gabcikovo Barrage operation withthe proposa1 for the locationof the water extraction sites which
were not provided within the framework of the listed obligations. Thisobiigation shallbe fulfilledby
1993. Further thearetical proposais need tbe drafted conceming theelimination of the negative impact
of the reservoir'ssiltation on the quantity of the groundwater. These will be submitted by the ydsend
along with the draft schedule for the resolution of the assjgnment for the fulfilment of the above
mentioned tems.
TermNo. 4
This critical term of the declaration of the SlovakEnvironmental Protection Committee addresses the
draft of the prognosis for thechange in the groundwater quality at the present and prospective water
extraction sites. Within the framework of theresearch project, prognoses onthechange in water quality
were drafted first for the "B" version (June 1991) and later for the provisional solution version
(November 1991) in correspondence with the assignrnent fortheoptimalization of theoperation of the
GabcikovoBarrage. In addition,with the implementation of the provisions forthe modification of the
structure of the reservoir (diversiodyke, thesettlement of the areas providing the watersupply of the
water extraction sites),the prognosiwas prepared for the change in water quality at the water extraction
sitesin useat Rusovce-Ostrovne Lucky, Kalinkovo and Sarnorini.In order to satisfy this term the final external review for the assignments to be compieted shall be
executed, the prognosis for the change in quality at the Gabcikovo waterworks shall be drafted, and
certain contradictory deductions must beavoided in various assignments. In addition the guarantee for
the protection of the Rusovce-Ostrovne Lucky and Kalinkovo water extraction sites shall be drafted as
well as the schedule of their implerneniationwhere the deterioration in the quality of the groundwater is
anticipated, particularly in concentrations of iron,manganese and organic materials above the accepted
limit (Kalinkovo). The investor gavethe end of the year for the completion of rhese assignments. The
prognosis of the change in the groundwater quality at the perspective water extraction sites will be
drafted withinthe framework of the projectreassessing the usable supplies of groundwater, which project
will be completed in 1993.
Tems No. 6and No. 7:
These terms address theprocesses of sediment deposir in thereservoir and theresearch concerning the
manifestarions of the siltati.nThe reports on the submittedresearch projects were prepared for th"B"
version (the Hrusov-DunakiIiti reservoir). The results were reassessed using the standardised elements
for the provisional solution version which were ensured withitheframework of the trtsconcerning the
prognosis of the change inthe qualityand quantity of the groundwater system. The results obtained are
included inthese reports.
Terms No. 6and No. 7 were satisfied.
TermNo. 8:
The requirement concems the assessment of the drainage impact of the old Danube river-bed in the
aftemath of the closure of the river-bed at Cunovo as opposed to the originally planned river-bed closure
at Dunakiliti. A separatereport was not issuedregardingthefulfilment of this requirement. The problem
was resolved within the framework of the research pmject c~ncerningthe prognosis of the groundwater
system.
From the abovementioned it is evident that for the protection of the groundwater the terms outlined in
paragraphs No. 1,No. 3, No. 4 and No. 5 were not satisfactorily fulfilled while atthe same time the
major deficiency was the inadquate guarantee of measures in the case of possible deterioration in the
qualityof thegroundwater osf the water extraction sites in use.
The Slovak Environmental CornmitteeDeclaraiion based on sec. 14 of the Law on Waters regarding the
fulfilrnenof terms No. Il, No. 13,No. 17 and No. 18 from theenvironmental protectionperspective
Tems No. Il and No. 18:
From an environmental protection perspectivethe goalof theselems wasto maintain the ecosystem and
genetic basis of the forested flood plain of the area on the Danube shore which is linked to the
hydrological system of the Danube, withthe gunranteeof regular flooding asweHas branch system cross
flow, linkage to the Danube'sold river-bed and the detemination of minimal water output which makes
possible theoperadon of self-regulatingprocessesin this level territory.
Corresponding to the fulfilrnent of the critical terms outlined in paragraphs No. Il and No. fil the
investor subrnitteaseparate study entitled "TheAssessrnenotfPossibilitieto Guarantee Water ftomthe
old Danube,River-bed to the Hood plain" with a modification of the given assigrnent which was not
approved by the Department for the Protection of Natural Resources of the Slovak Environmental
Protection Cornmittee.in view of the guarantee of the required mode of solution. At the same eime
futtherprocedures concerning the solution were established. Theinvestor drafted the physical mode1of
the flood plain branch system of the left side of the Danube in accordance with the fulfilment of the
above mentioned terms and prepared a study entitled"The Study of the Branch system and System of
Levels of the left side of the Danubona Physical Madelof 1820-1840rkm'" nis study was subrnitted
to natural resourceand regional protectionexpertsfor review. Following the composition of the reviewthe investor will draft a management sequence concerning the operatofthe Gabcikovo Barrage forthe
period following March 31, 1993.
Ttrnay be established based on the submitted provisionai draft management sequence in effect uniil
March 31, 1941 that the tems outlined in paragraph No. 18 were satisfied in part by the fact that a
constant minimal water output o600 m3/s was ensuredduring the growing season. The investor did not,
however, satisfytherequirement that the assignment be completed from the commencement of the fiIling
of the reservoirnor wasthe prognosis and objectivization of the required water output subrnitted in
accordance with the aforementioned term.
In reference tothe above mentioned, termNo. 1 1 and No. 18were nor cornpletely satisfiand the co-
operation with the investor isbeocontinued in the interofthe completion of the given tems.
Tem No. 13:
The provision of the Moson-Danube water supply isproceeding based on the 1948 Agreement between
Czechoslavakia and Hungary and on the ParisPeace Treaty. The water extraction into the Mosoni-
Danube comrnenced on 30 October 1992. The outflow of water wasprovided for by two pipes at the
water extraction projectThe planned water extraction figuis25mJ/s, ai presenttheagreed upon figure
of 20m3/s is king provided. Repairs must be made tocorrect the damage left in the aftermath of the
flood of November1992.
The ierm has ken satisfied.
Term No. 17:
This term isbeing satisfied oacontinual basis.The publicationof the water management decisions and
the negotiations for supervision tems is continuing with the participation and CO-operationof SOP
Nyitra Kornho Centre.
The State of the Fultilrnentthe Remaining Terms:
Tem No. 9:
- toresolve the problemof theDanube's navigation below Falkovicovo.The issue of navigability may be
resolved only with the CO-operationof the Hungarian partner. A separate study will be prepared
addressing the problem of the possible deformation of the Danube river-bed from Palkovicovo to the
lpoly estuary. The study wasordered by the investorfrom HYCO with a deadline for deliveryof
1992rnI.i.
Term No. 10:
- theproblem of depositionof sediment. The task was addressed in the study entitled "TRernoval and
Deposition of sediment fromthe Hrusov reservoiratthe Provisional SolutioinCzech-Slovak Territory".
Implementation will becorne necessary in2-3 years following the filliof the reservoir. The term has
beensatisfied.
Term No. 12:
- the guarantee of the projects in thcase of a worsening in the quality ofthewater in the Danube.
Povodie Dunaja obtained the necessary machinery (cleaning equipment, ship, containerThe tem has
ken satisfied.
Term No. 14:
- the guarantee of flood protection. A "Fiood ProtectionPlan" was prepared for Ihe prevention of
damage which would be caused by the increased water levin the projects to be constructed. The plan
with application for water nghtsuthorisation wassubmitted to the FloodProtection Central Authority.
Theterni has been satisfied.Tem No. 15:
- the transportof flood wateroutput and ice. The VUVHaddressedthis issue in theframework on the
"B" version research project. Technical interventionis not neceçsaryfor the "Cu version, only the
managementneedbe modified.
The rem hasken satisfied.
Terni No. 16:
- the guarantee of the measuringof thewater flow and levelsat the Gabcikovo Barrügeprojects.
Continualmeasiirementof waterlevelsand ourputs was ensuredaral1criticalprojectsof the Gabcikovo
Barrage, includingthe waterfiow measurementro be carriedout below the dam atHamuliakovo, the
measwrementatthe Moson-Danube, attheestuaryof the head-racecanal as wellas at thestuary ofthe
oldDanube river-bed.
The term haçken satisfied.
TermNo. 19:
- the provisionof measuresfor flood protection. Withinthe frarneworkof the proposalentitled "Flood
Protection Measures "the planned lock was placed in the right drainage canalat the Ciliza channel
estuary andarrangementsweremade for the placementof a mobile pumpat the right drainage canalfor
thetransferof theintemalwaters. Thegroundpreparationoperations have been completed at the outfiow
section.
Theternihasbeen satisfied. Annex 173
GabEtkovo - Nagymaros
Project
publlir contacladdresrVodohospod6r-4MrLilMSc(Eng),PhD[EnNam SNP1381263Bratrsa.l 071520, 535,fa 071'847
Lay-out of the Reservoir in the Original and Temporary Solutions
-mr
TEMPORARV SOCUTIDH OF GABCIKOVO ON THE &-- 1' Reasonçfor the Necessity to Complete Gabtikove PossibilirofReachinga ComrnonSolulionAccepiabletu BoIhSides:Jhe
DamageCauseâby Posipriningof Opention: In the initialphaseof iniple- olferof acornmoncornpletionof GabTikovoo , fîiciallysubrnibytheHun-
meniaiionof theinvestrnencthe ment of its abandunmentnieaosonty the garians~dern December F984,wasprornptlywitlidrawn in January1990.
105sof thewasid tinancialresourcese, speçiallyif thereexiststhe posribilitaftcrthe studynork on the ternporay solut~onin thCSF Rasstopped In
to =cure the aimol the investmen n anothersuitableway.At anadvanced an atternptto preservegood neighbourlyrelations.the CSFR usedevery
stageofconstniction,ihenstionaleconomycountsonihegainofappropriate opporiunih/for negotlatiunswith the aim Io rvorkand reviewedon ils side
capacitiesandbenclits,whilethepossibiliryofimplemeniaiionofappropriale the poieniialenvironmenialimpactsot ihe GNP On ihe oiher hand.the
quivalent aliernatiuesolutionsir notonlypracticallyIimitedbytechnicaland partyuiolatingthe Treatv(thevalrdityof whichit didnot dispute)interrupted
bmeconsiderauonsb,ut is:isal50economicallyhandicappedb , ecauseof the the aciivityin the JorntExpcrtCroup,soihat communicationon the profer-
cosü alreadyspcnt in the implerneniionof the original solution sronalLwelwascornpleielystoppedand ihcre wasno possibiliiyof iointl\
nie efiecrivenesçofcompletingthePrujectincreasesin thecourseof con- checkingunfoundedaccusations andiolvingthedisputedproblemsTheoffer
struction,andjust beforri1s: ut into operataonir manytirnerhigher.than of a loint requeskto ihe EuropeanCommunityfor help in the frameof the
theoriginallydeterminedeffcctivenessof thewholeinvestmentnie damage PHAREprogramme.Io study the mort serrousof the possibleirnpacison
from sioppingconstructionat this stageis thereforegivenby the valueof stc~ksof undergroundwater,wasfe~ectedbyiheHungariansidernOctober.
the lmt profit.increasedby the resultingexira costs:ln the givencase,the 1990 On thebaris ofal1the evaluationscarriedout SDFARand takinginto
valueof theelectrinwnoi g;iined,inthequaniityof about2,000 millronkWh accounial1possibilitiesi,ncluding theproporedabandonmentcf ihc Project.
peryearlfrom this,ahallisof peak-qualit, lonereprescntsa lorsof aboui the govcrnments ofthe CÇFKandthe SlovakUepublicdrcrdedto continue
6,000millionKfs peryear ThisdamagecanbereducedIo abouta rhirdol the ptepsrationof the temporarysoiutionwithanthe ierritury of tfSFR
theamountrnentionedb , ybringingaileasttheGabEiliworiageintoo~ration rnlanuary1991
Thetotaleconnmrcdamagerin the caseof abandonment ofthe CNPand ThegorernmenidelegationsmetafterlongdelayinApril 1991,nearly IWO
implementaiionof alternalivesoluliona would reachover 100000 million yearsafterthe unilateralabandonmentofwork.Afterviolatingthe obligation
dustrianschillinp tthatrepresents1O.OODmillioUSD) on the rrdeof CSFR Zonotifyand 10consultbeforeeveryunilaieralstcp,the Hungarranride alsc
alone Thisdamageiscstirnateda5the presentvalue alihe streamof costs Nice brokethe .obligationio negoiidtewrth thedimof reachinga salurian
involveded by [bisdecision,but praciicallyno benehtsit is Unquestionable. to the dispute".ivhicirpreacribedtiythe internaiionalcustomarylaw
thatsucha sduiion is absolutelyunacceptablefor CzechoSlwakia - 6ya rerolutionof1st arliameritt.he Hungariangowernrnci asauthorizer
only io negotiatethe abrogationof ihe Treaty,and [he rertorationof the characterof pvnishment,ie ihey rnusrnot causesignificantharmio Ihe
,originalststeof thetenirov*, partner'scitizensor environmeni,or violatethe princrplesof humanity
- bybrndingngotiatingexpensto cornpletely predetermrneudltimatumlike Evaluaizonof the AdrntrribiE&ofthe Ternporav Solution.The Hungarian
condition,tosiopworkson fulfillmeniol theTreabalsoontheride of the sidedid noi allow theusol ihe Ounakilitiweir andthcperipheralreservoir
rSFR aswell.
damson the terntoryol Hungary,andwasnot rnllingto cornpleierisshare
Undertherelimitations.thesecondnegotiationbetweengovernmentde ofworkonthecabtikovopart ofProjeciThebasirofihc temporaryalternatiue
legationsin fuk 1991 couldcontnbute nothrngand inded it did contribute solutionis,to realisestructuresentirelyon the ierritoryof CSFR which
nothingfo the solvrngof ihc dispute Therefore, atthe end of July,the go would reduce ihesurfaceof the reservoir by one thirdand Iimit it ia the
rernrnentsof the SlovakRepublicand the CSFRdecidedio irnplementthe territoryof ihCSFK a,dreplacethefunctionof the Dunakilrti eir,allowing
ternporaryrolution,the constructionof which startedin November1991
the filling of the reservoirand the powercanalconstruçted.ihus enabling
Possibilitiesof DefenceAgainstNon-fulfillmenoftheTreaiy byOneParty: cornpletionand operationol ihe Gabfikovo pari of iPrqeci.
The parb fulfill~ngan internationaltreab has the followingpossibiliiiesof TheCzechoSlovakrrdewaswillingta abandontheimplementaiionof the
defence temporary solution, ifthe Hungarransadeappearedwilling to iultiüloblr
- to alsointerruptfultillmentof the Treatyitself,but thiswould only fulfill
gationr.at leasi for the Cabtkovo part and securethe damrnrngof fhe
the aimof the partner, Danubechannelin sulurnn 1991. At presentwith ihe tïrstsrageof wonis
- toappealtointernationaal rbifration,whichisinthegrvencaseimpossrble, on the temwrary mlutionpraciicallycompleted,theternporary solutioncan
withoutthe crwperationof the partner,while the partnergaveabundani bewithdrawnfromoperaiion.assoonasthe partnerreturnrto hlfillmen\of
ewidenceof its unmllingn~sto cooperate, the TreaiyconditronsFullcompensation fordamageswould - rnihe given
- retaliatolyprovisionorher ecenomicor politicalarear,whichwuuldnnly case-require fulfillmentof theaimsofrtieTreaty.whichcannotbeachieved
rwer good neighbwriy rdauons,withoui lowering ibedamage$ in anotherway
- 10 undenakedefensrvecountermeasutes,which canalsooverreachihe Environmental Effeds of theTernpurarySolutionto the Operationof Cab
frameworkof ihevalidTreaty,iftheirpurpos1thereductionoftheresulhng Gkwo. Theenvironnientalehectsof the original solutionof Gabbkovoin
damap, by at leastparliaffulfillmentof the aimsof he Treaiy Sincethe fluericthe Czcch~Slovaksideio anesseriiiallyhigher degreethanthe Wun
counterrneasurcshave also IO pedormpressureon the partnerto fuifiif
garianridc, sincetwo thirdsof the areaof the reservoirareon the territory
risobligations.ota providefull compensatiool thedamagesthcymust ot ihe ~SFRa, ndespecrallybecauw the wholecanal issrtuatedon the prr,
have a ternporarycharacter. Atihe sarnettme,they mustnot have the tected,agnculturallyexploitedland Theterritoryoccupiedby theGWPcanno longer bereturnedto itnrrginalproductivestate Thercis no place,to erurion of the bed of the Dan& and deeperiingol the surfacebt ihe
disposeol millionsof cubic meirer of constructionurasIewithout furfher undergroundwaier will bedefinitweivstopped
damageto theenvrronmentt,henaturalmaierialto Fi1u1pthecanalislacking, - At ihesame time.11mll sccurethe supplyof waterto theMorony branch
andalro top soi1neededio iertilizethe reclaimedlandisno longeravailable of theDanube,improving 3ignificantlythe presentstate of natureon Hun-
nie ride effectrof the temporawsolutionwilbe eitherequslto thosein garianierrrtory.
the oripinalTreawsoluiionandin ihiscase11isnecessaryio considerihem - The irnpoundmeri~ of waier in the reservolrwill increarethe keding of
as mutuallyagreed-onin the frameworkof the 1977 Treaty,or theyhave undergroundwater by reepagefrom the resewoir.Takinginio account
moremoderateeRcts on the Hungarianside,so thai they cannotbe con the hydrogmlogicalconfigurationof the undergroundlayers,the deeper
sidered a5a srgnificai arrn.in the senreol internarionallawaviolation aquikrr will beied !zuseepagelrom the more distantuprtreampart of
of humanitarianprinciplerrn anyway the reservoirnear Bratisbvaw, hile seepagelrom the lower pan of ihe
Sinceihe Hunyrian unilateralact declaringthe annulment of the1977 resewoirwill feedand dilutethe upper,at presentwry polluiedlayerof
Treatyhasnot beenacreptedbythe CSFR it.5legallyinactiveandtheTreaty undegmundwater
1977 ir $11i1u1llyvalid. - Theconsrruciedintakestructureswill enableihe opiimaldistributionof
Theenvironmenialeifectsol the temporarysolutionmaythereforeberc- water totheoldchanneiandthesystemofdeadbranches,and-ifnecessary
capitulaicdasblloivr - alsothe creation ofartificialfloodr
- nie dwersionof thenavigationalchanneoll the Danubeonta theterritory - Beloreandduringoperations , ysternaticmonitonngisbeingdonebymeans
ol theCSF s rn harmonywith the Treaiy,and in the senseof itr arricle of a5ofistic~iedSystemof observationstruciuresIoevdluatetheleveland
22,doesnot changethe stateboundary,neiiherdoes IIintetferewith the the qualiryof the underground waierand manyolher valuesare being
territorialiniegrityol Hungaryin anyway measuredand waluatedaround 311structures.Anyaberrationwill bede
- Thetiansferof water(romtheDanubeir agreedin he Treaty,it iscarried teciedin tirne,andif necersary,appropriatemeasureswill betaken.
outio mutualadvant~gea,lthoughtheshareof thecorisandof theenergy Ar a resultof ihelactsmentioned,puitingGabtikovointooperationnotonly
producedhavechangedas a resultoi the decisionof he Hungarianride securesthe fulfillmentoi the aimr OCthe invcstment,to the advaniagol
- All provisionscf the Treatyfor theoperationof the Prolectand lor the boih sides.but theside effcctswrll havemainly positive influenceon the
allocalionofdieDanube flowwillberespected.oreven exceeded inIavour environment ofboihÇzecho.SlovakandHungarianterritoryTherelore.these
of the naiuralenuronment counter-measureshaveto beconsideredas appropriateand at the same
- Bythc impoundmentof ihewater-level,the harmtulproces$of systernatic timealro environmeniallydesirable.
Section of the Bypass Weir
Lis1of Structures
of the Temporary Solution:
1 - Leteraldam. length: Il km
2 - Bypassweir 4 bays 18.0x 5 1 m
3 - Oamrnedchannel olihe Danube
Temporaryprotection for additional
- structuresof the 2nd stage:
4 - ' Dam - 3 bays
5 - ' Auxilliaryship-dock
6 - ' Hydro eleciric power station
7 - Dam in the inundation: 20 bayz 24.0 x 3 h m
8 - lntake siruciure to the Mozony branch
9 - Conneciing dam
10 - Navigationalcanal(rom the Danube
intothe pcwer canalView of the Structures
of the Temporary Solution
Sedion of the weir
in the inundation
Quantily of the main slrudural warb:
11,2 mil. m1
Excavation (inci, soil)
Compacted fifi 9,5 mil. m' . -
Foild and geotektiles 3,l mil. ml
Concreie. incl. reiiiiorced 0,17 mil. m'
0,19 mil. m3
Underground \va115
Dates:
Beginningof rvork Nov. 1991
Nov. 1992
Diversion of channel Ilst stage1
Operation at maxinium level Dec. 1993
End oi construction 1395
Costs - benefits (billions of KCs):
Cost of the 1st stage
COL ^f the 2nd sidge
Value of annual prciduction nl energy
Propoîalfor aDefinitiveSolution of the OldChannel of the Danubc: Situation
The1477Trearysuppmedihedischargcei abiologicailloiiiOm's 'inioiheoldc-hsnnel
The emptv,rironglydwppenedchannc(lalmmi? mdetperthanin 1377)ivould pro dur^. LCXR*L OIW AL7 C
aharniiul rainaeliectDurin8periodroflowfloniniheDanubetheundergrounrdaier
lcvdiniherurrwndingarearwouldbeunfavourabIliviiveredThcieioRike porsibiii.~.
studiedotreducingthiretteliconiuuciionof loivdamsliveirirn ihcoldchinnelwhidi
would maintainlevelcorrerpondino thenaiurailloii ulatiout1350'.byabiolo~c,il
flw raid forexamoleto 350m's .kcordinatorecornrnendai~o otbsioloairtrihewcir.
rvu~d~ecùmpeird'i,h~ ~ypasse~lor-n.fiinrrnigrrlio.oiîrh rlheac.n ine ncre,rc(l
>vaterne *(.~Iii siil norieacn[ne nieriaczoeineihrrndrrl>inl:piaiei2nd ines;i .. *Ela
ber ofihemeadowiorsaT . hereiorI.previewdihaiiviihp+riodic;lr&rkgoiihebiologic~l 4ïNGARY
flowto aboui1300in's-',iheaccurnulaiedredimcnrron thebottomwould bc washed lndcp~ndanalreasoirlic iIi~iirl\.iiiidjurtablewa1t.r-ll.ithiualer-
awayi,heroorryrternsnlrreerwoulbe reacheda,ndihewater-levdin thechannel ~uld, rupplylrom iheyrerervnirthiuu& theintake-rlructureDobrohoJt'
beloinedwithIhesqrternoiinterconnectedaier-levdsoi thedeadOranches
Thelatcrirerul&of rercarchc,arriedoutin cooperwithDanishandDuichcornpanier
lin iheNameol thePHARE program)r,hou,stheconriderabliemportanof apulsationof
ihpwater-leu4in Iheoldchannell,avourablyinfluencihequaliiyof ihe neighbauring
undergtounwdatrr.In rurh a wlutiunihenumbfrui danirir loiver,theyarecornpleted
viihweim.whileiheheadscreaid maybeused {OFihe produciinieleciricenergy.
Theconiiruciiniioi lodams in theold channdir desirableiiheintererlofcreaiing
optimalrondilionsforlheecorysteoi thernlanddeliaonbuh rider01theDanuk and
it5houlLe carripdoutonlyonIhebasisoihilateraal greementsO.neolihcporsihle,olutions
conriderithe use01the DunahEiiweir and prwiei>,srhecunriruciionof rro lurihrr
darnrWein,abuurin riverkilomelrn1821and1831 nieiinpuundedsaicr~levelsould
wure ihewaieringuiilie rootryrt~rnoriherneadmviorestsandconnectmnof theoltl
channerlvithiherysiemofdeadbrancherV.ariatioiiheivater-levcpl.orribleintheperiotl
utloivfloivrandiheIirriodicalwashingoui maybesecurhi occarionarleleaseutihcre&E I .*Y -
smallrejenmoirs ie.: 380 >911 D: Annex 174
PROÇLAHATION
Againse the general opposition of the population, the Hungar'ian government in
coqperation with the Czechoslovakian and Austrian gouerhrnentç, has decided to
build a hydroelectric cornplex on the Danube. IC vil1 create a 25 square mile
lake behind 60 feet wal.1~ at Dunakiliti.The Danube will be çtepped vhile the
reservoir iç being filled. A second dam near Budapest is needed 50 prevent
the riverbed from drying out during this 'IillingU phase.
~reseni?~ the Danube is a border river between Hungary and
Czechoslovakia. If this project goes tlirough, the Danube vil1 be diverted to
Czechoslovakian territory in a 16 mile long cernent canal, vith 60 feet ta11
walls, a structute larger than the Suez Canal. Uhen eleetric power is needed,
the enormouç amaunts of water collected in the reservoirwill be released
through the Gabcikovo plant, !ike in a water cloçet. When the release of
water is started £rom the Gabcikovo plant a '2 feet tall.flood vave vil1
travel through the eernenced waeerbed and the Danube itself dAm to Nagymaros
(near auaapestj.
To review theçe plans, a special commitceeof Hungarian experts vas
set up. The follawingorganizationsvere represented an thiç committee: The
Hungarian dcaderny of Science,Office of Environment and Nature Presesvatian,
Lnstitute of Urbanizstion and the Union of Hungarian krchitects. Tne
committee sharply criticized the proposed project. Tt pointed out that
environmental damage due to v?riations of up CO 20 fert in giound vater
levels were not properly evaluated. It also noted, that damage to the 60 feet
tall dams couldcause the worst flood in Hungarian history and the stagnation
of the Danube vil1 darnage the drinking water supply. agricultureand the
unique faunaand flora of the Danube valley.
The Hungarian Govesnment disrnissed al1 of the-seconcerns and asked
Austria for finnncial assistance to complete this project. Auscrla agreed
under the following terms: Austria will pay for about 702 of the Nagymaros
project and in retvrn vil1 get practically al1 of Hungary's çhare of
electricity for 26 years, This iç worst then ir sounds, because Hungary muçt
provide Austria with a uniform amount of power, while the water levels in the
Danube drap off in the vinter. Therefore Hungar will have ro burn oil to pay
off the Ausrrians until 2015 and âfrer 2015 Hvgary vil1 be lefr virh a uorn
out, obsolete plant capable of generating only 22 of Fts electricity needs.
This energy drain (nor gain) vil1 be achieved at enormous costs and at the
expense of irreverçible damage to :he Danube valley environment.
The European Parlament asked the Hungarisn and Auçtrfan governments
not to proceedwith this project, but the Hungarian Governnent considers it a
matter of preçtigue and is not about to be stopped by public opinion. We ask
for the çolidarity of al1 conç~ientious citizens and environmentally
responçible people to protect the Blue Danube frorn being turned into an open
sewer, Please send your protest to:
A Magyar Nepkoztarsaçag Elnoki Tanacsa, 1055 Budapest, Kesçuth ter 1/3,
HUNGARY
Okoinstitue, 1060Wien, Heui-lugaççe 64-65, AUSTRXA
Sir David Attcnborough Michael McCloskey
. C.B.E. ,F.R.S* USA National Chairman,Sierra Club
Reply Co: ~oundaiion for the Protection of the HungarianEnvironment
84 Old 3. SramFord Road, Starnford, CT. 06905 USAPrcsidiurnortheHungarianPwplc'sRcpublic
Kossulh hjos Ttr 1/3
H- 1055Budapi
WC h undcrsignc dddrçsLhcfollowingpctititoihehsidium rcgardintheplanncdconsmiction olhc
GaGikovc-NagymmsHydrolecmc Projet (GNH):
-whcras !lplanncdoption ofheCNHas apxk-shcddi pog uplantrcquk thithc floworLhcDanu&
k zioppcd~dicdly Torsevcraihours,tuminthcrivct lxiwecGy& and Nagymarw inr astagnan cinal;
-whuem hc unmatcdsewagcoi thcciticof~~8r. Kornhrn, ~lrn~sf~tid,Tambdnya,hmg, Esziugom.
and oi17villagenowflowsdirmly intihtDanuk. and,wkrw ihccornpleuon obioIogicdandchernicalmbneni
plantsisnocvcn conternplatcduntil tumof Lhçccnrury:
-whcrtasthevolumeoi raw scwagcenteringshcDanulxhm theCtechosIovakiansidistcnhcs the
arnolmcornifn mgm Hlingary, nthcrcrorelargquantitiersludge wouldseuieat theboltoofhe practicalIy
swEmnt river;
-whcreasLhcdrinking-waiesupplieofhis regiooT Hungaryareobtainedfmmwells carthehuk and
ihesewcIkwouïd k poisonac ndplu@ byriiesludge;
- wherus drinking-watcr supplies oî thc ofSzigctkazwouldbe iosi aloa suerch013VjrElomctcrs
(16 mires) theriver;
-whcrcasthesiagmt and polIutcdstongcbasi31Dumhliri wouldendmgcr the undcrgoundaquifcbcnç3Lh
Szigctkbzthatconsututcs ihehgcsrcscrv01purcground-waicr inEuropcwih a capcityof onebilliocubicmctcrs
(35 billion cubic feei):
-whcrwsthcdmpin theriver IcvoriheDanulx nwr Bud3pcs~cauxd by thdam atNagrnaros. wodd
rcducehc yieldofthewcUs hatsuppl Byuhpç
-whertas grouild-waicrlcvcls w&op,dby6 rnerc(r2sfcet)inihSzigelkllt rcgircsulrinin drought
conditions andihreaten giculiud pducuon on ovcr 15,0hcctarcs(37.00a0rcs);
-wherm LhegrojcctwouldtcsuIin larglosscofwdlmds, whichisanespecia llvc kea~ toacounq
wilh fewforcstsoeesinthefi& plainwouldbe cut along'aswaof20 kilornctcrs (rniIcsbecaux:ofihc
consmictionofdikes.and4,000hccmcç (10,000acres)of forewoulddie kause of rheloweringoftheground-watcr
table, whilc thercplaccmwithdrough~-rcsismi spicswould rak30 yws;
-whcras thcwatcrinIhcDunakiliUsrongb casiwnouldh slor atancIcvauonof 18 metcrs(60fwt)abovc
ground. anwherm thpcrmmcnl wicrlcvel kiwcen GonyüandNagymaros would ixraiscdL abve ht prescrfld
trncrgcncyZinc,anwhcrcashc amount ofwatcr süircd inbsins wouldex& 10billioncubiIec(~vcd hundrcd
millionor cubic me~rs)Budapt i&clCcouldk cndangercd iadm failbuse ocan cythquakt.fld. orsabougc;
- whcrcasevcrytimcthc~nk opcntionisSE@, the lcvofwatcrhlow ihc ~agikovo dam wouIdsuddenly
riw:by5 mcws (16kt). ausinga flood wavtotrnvcl rroGakikovo m Nagyrnaros,endangeringbolhnvcrtrarfic
md Ihcinlcgitofihedikes;
- whercasHungary wuuIdIOY:not only trivelhat dcmxcalpri~ nationbundary but almwring
facilit icwscll, alo30kiIorncicrs(20 rnioftheDanuk;
- Wem thcinitial invcsvnent of 54 billion(oncbillion doIbrquired forhc GNH wodd chi
thcavaihbiliiofcapitaIfor ulhcr.morturgcnr invcsmenis;
- wherm bis invameni un k funded onlybyfunhcr incrcasing thc nationaldebc
-wherws thcpmjccicdinitiai invcstrnenihcGNH does not coveIheprotecuwiofsciiluncntç a01 ihc
cnvironmen~which'willmst addition30 billion fori5s7a miIIion);
- wherm, in additiotolhesinvestmenrrt.econsmiciionoftheGNHalsorequires a loanhm Auseia in
ihcarnountof 7biiiionSchillings(billion dollars):
- whereasHungaryhas, cpay this1mnby supplyineIccuicpowertoAuscriaforsevd d~dcs:
- wherearIhepower ,vidcd toAushia hm he GNHw , oulhave ~obesqplemmtcdby tlehcity prriduccd
b; conventionalhcrmalpwer planrswhtncverihc Iev!oftheDanubcis low;
- whcrcaïihtrelortheBW wwld constirukan addcdburdcniristwof rclicofthepowu budgctof
Hungary unljLhcyear2015;
- wh~.~&aItti uirnpIctiorihcrepayrncntfihcloan.i.cdter2015,ihcGNH wwld pmvidc onty2% of
thc projecd powernetd sfnunpw at haLime;
- whereas thpowcrpbni wouldnoi beabletoproducecven lhiamount in2015,becaurethemhhw
would hvc tobc repU dtcr25 ywrsoropcnrion; -whucas it woulk fcaribltornake'tDanulicnavigableTorlarshipsbydrcdgingal castofonIy
fhir+ hai oftheGNH;
-whercaïLtpla~cd sluicwcsld stw riverdlic andttiminatehydmtohaffi;
-whcras rcquircddrcdgioftheDc :akilitiandNagymmssioragebasiwouid peum milIionofionsof
pltutcdandioxicsludgt,whinds to bcdisposcdof;
-whcrcac,lwwagc lincsandal1souhm tnbulvicsofthcDanubewouldhavctok lild by purnpsacms
thetlcvarrddits;
-whcre~~LhIossoftheforestintheff dplainsandthelowcringolhcwatu Ieveiinthe otbd olthe
Danuk toIes sana fmt woulcnhngcr ihtuniqueraunaandfloraoltharts:
- whcrcaçthestagnaand potluicdDunakilitismragcbasinwitlbeuscfor~rcational purposcs.and
whcrcasIhpresentrccrcationdamatPilismarbt,wibiacapazof20,00 0rsonswiilatm b lestunlesancwlakc
icrcaia cndTdlewithfilterwatcr;
- whcteacvcna minimalrk inhe watertableiwuldendangeihcunexcavalehisrwic'ruinoslLhcold
capid cityofEsztergomasweias ohcr archeologid sim. aTinaIly.
-whereasIheGNHwould convenLhcDmuk Md atViscgdd in@a stagnanpolluteopn çcwcr.unsuitcd
formmtional us,
wt Lhcundeniped respccllulpeution Ihehidium tocomnlywilhthemiution uf thEmpan
Parhamcniand 10initiaicopenplibIidiscussioftheBNHproject, with-taim ofsharinthercsponsibiflority
L~I pve historicawiston wiVi Lnccntnuriganarnauon.
S A V E THE BLUE DAKUZF!
(PLEASE PRINT)
Return IoFoundationfor~hcProtecliof theHungarianEnvironmcnt
84Old N.StarnfordRoadS~mlord.CT 06905 USA Annex 175
Resolution of the Parliament of the Furopean Communitieson the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Power StationConstructionProject,29Oçtober 1992.
18, Bti4a, righte
A. prefaundly alsraed rit the growing tensionin CentralEuropewhieh eould
threa ken democraéi eenewal in this region,
naving regard to the 1977 Traatybetws8n Hungaryand Cze¢hoslovakio an the
8.
@stablishmen et?a and hydrcielectrlc Wwer station on the Danube,
C. havine regard ta Hungary's decisionta Withdrawfrom this .Treaty wi.theffect
froa 25 nay 1992,
ü. sware of!the lprtar.ce attachd ta thi~ projet: by the Slovak G4vernnsnt
and their preperaesize to revive the SIovak ecdncrny,
E, awareof the state of the enerçy indcstry in Slovakia wh:& cecessiLataç the
eiosuce ef cbsalete and enviromentally ha=&-deus ira tallatiocs EZC a change
ot direction towards recevable fo-ns of en&-gy, and cotiriç tha: energ-
savinq neasuras could mke a siqnlficnnt coetr!b~tict. to resc:ving the
regioh'senerçy scmly probleÿü,
P, whereas the ccnskruc:icw nork roldc,zn~ k: the y-der S:iiticrs 4s t~r-ertly
atfectieg whcle tractsof cztirrkryslde, tkcs Fctt.z:ial!y 63~9~:.7~ tl.e
enviramen: .md endangerrnç ink kir,^uatcz sc~plics,
G. comciocs tbt if irravarsibls eteps are cake: the ~~,-~5Lbleil! effsc=si:.
terss"of ecvircmcrital iapct vil1 cxtxd :sr kuycr.d Slovnk:a,
H. havinq regard to the seriafis ecoleçica? dE,d ic:e:xaia:iccal yc?~ticaL
implications cf thi~pr$fe¢t wkich hs ber: L-dsrtaker. wi?.'..CGa:-:$ericu$
envi:onmentai ln~act açsessaent ar.d nie-eut tke ~opultaiccs ccrce:=.d bez-g
adequatelry consuit&,
I. ~leased by the reçults of the sgctiaticcs ke:;iee-.the Fe,~~ilsç:cn,:42 CS13
and'Hunçary ir? t0nd~~ cri 21Octcber 1997,
1. Expressesi ts hupe that tbe teçctiz tiocs in Lcndcn or.25 Qcicke: 7FSZ viil
lead to the çolutian OC tke csr.Lllfct a:? exyects tte jud~e9er.z ky ec
indepsnden tedy of the results cf Lke Pacc-:ir?dfnç nissler. to be bi.?C:r.ç
for hth parties;
2. Cells upon the Çdmiseion vigorausly ta sÿewrt initiative5 t= seek a
diplematis colution tu this conflict;
3, calla on the Cemmfsaio to carry out a camprehemfve environmenta i!pact
ciskessment on the pwer station constm~tion projeet, ko b &aur. up by
independent environnant alperts apprevedby bath the 8lovak ecd the
Hungarian goverman ts;
4, Instmcts Ats ~rasikt ta famard thisreaolutioa to the Coami~~ion and
Ccuncil, the gevewts cifCxecho~lova La and Hungary, the mverr.ner.k of
Slovakta, the Unitad*&tions and the Coitference on Securf tyand cooperation
in Eurape.
- Annex 176
E~P- PflRtX-nT
by Hra IiaTF+BEHREiiDT,on &&if of Che GocihfLet G,POU~
Mr rn~SBm+ on kSalT of +be Group of the PurWeari FeepleJ8Party
HP P~~J~FTI ~SAIS, Kr De mZEs, F? v0- and Eir PZMENTA, on bhaY of the
LLberaL and Ba.mcratf e %fa,dsk Grade
ta vm. DL=, na MaIf of the Gram3 Gtaup Sr.the Buopan Parlinment
HP nbmmr, on behalf CI the Wu Groc? in the Europsan PurlLament
erra mo&$ng to roplscathn mtiona for iesolutions byi
- ~r MORETTI, an behnlf ef the ~ainbow Group in the Eurapsan Pbrliment
(e3-3so/s~)
- Mr rrABSPURC, on Whelf cf Wo Grcriipof the Europan !?mpl6'8 Party
{B3-3~2/93)
- Kr mhlsz~ 5 CASZLS 2nd oaaro, on of the Liberal ~n< Domu~tFc
neiard~t oroup (83-3Q2/933
- *e vn~ Dra and PZ ~AHNDPE~ on bahslf ai ttie Green Oroup Ln the Atrapen
Parli arnenk,(B3-392/93)
- Hr= BQTR-CEERENUT, on bhàlf OE the GociaLLst Drow (~3-428/33),
n. Laking note of thci deciatation of Che ftzropar. Ccmüasion of F@~YU&EY L6th
$995 uith regard Co fts acdLstFng ectfvitieain relation ta bha probletie of
Lho cnbclkavo/h'&mrmx dam,
n. taking noteof the proposais of Chc Ccmdisalon with ragsrd te the outstanding
prob3emB be~uee~ ch& ç1uvbk dd nungarian govQrm~nk,
CF Ln vlow of the rEsultn of the negotiatiane an the pro~&~l~ Qf the
Cmleaion, 8, bearLns in min& the consaqueneos for naturc and the aaviromnt ';hW
~abcUt~a Conatructiaa warkm,
F, 13 viw 05 the s~reeraent Ln pr5ncl~le, rewhod meen Hcngeina and o1mnk
~omrnmantë kd subit fho cnee of th0 oonflLaC ko the Interdb&nal
3uatlce in the ilagile,
1, Ia nlsrmed 4% the Btegnat;Lon that kae oceurrodne- ne prama e~ b m*
in fiiîûfnp 861utiona for a Çeaprary wabr raFinapa&nt xagima, and the
~reuentiun of.the 81;WL of We prw9dure at the X,zt&rn~ti-l ~k-
SrtdfiCg end caligi UPi3 khs E~$4rL&ri ad Gleuak ~8rmnba tn iame&a+elp
rnntinue wiCh the prmedu++r
2. Eleauest6the ~iïisfon kaprovida furthcr iafomalfon or..thep-eaq of the
diB&u&~icna et the hlghert palltieal levol, RB srrnnw on Fobmnry 16,
3. Raitaratee itsworriss ahut ths ga6sLbI.agmwfng toneFane h tue as
a catieeptienm of the aonflL&)
4. Endorses tha CmnJ eeloiia wil!ingness to conLinue Lt5 rs~dFakFng ral~,
1 1
6, Culls on the parkle~ to Che diaputa to &ide ty the ~cmzcnity'r fs-alg 05
16 Febraa2y 19931
I
G. DrpanLly eppedla to the SLcvek .savu-me~t :O be eare Eledbie and to
coop~irate in findinp solutl~noto the ~~tn~arlding p~oLilmasj I
7. Requeete the izmiLe8ion to m&Lite in firidin~ at sho~t neLee ae the
gr~wlng soaacn In ragidiy apriroaclfingen"= ther on~trgnnenba k dar;age shouid
b pr~VBated - te pe-te urgenklyr a t~-ipo,-ary %.ab* sü~1~ r~gim
eantfolledLy &th the Erinpazfan and tho SLovak dé~j
8. Requamta the cemdesien ta f urthor&verLiqat6 the poeslSFYitiea a2 finanein1
nid ko Slav&kia Lu eewensato any redcction In CS enezgy p-=odubtienl
9. R8qUeSkJ the ~ro~an ChrmLs~ian to Bavaiftpl~m~nted, by indepsndant -etr
a tbozough envkrixaent.ai. jlP2a~tn~se~mrnont O$ the prcject, Lntluding the
ps* Of the cM8tr'uckion -P~P c0tiCOtip~&tod date and alao equeni-n tbe
COnmai d on to bave a cwrnplekontudy mde oc the eireatr gn naviga-em, energy
praduokion and ather selrrvanksipscte of the pt'~j9~t~
10. HilquQsti the Edro2oal.i codssinn to 3YeQont p;*o~saln for a Lntecnationa!
tU%t~r9 ~PQ~QC'A~C hrea in the uniquo wetiendn araund the Derubo in thf
Iluflg~'iAn-SIovak brder 8~ria invcL~Ln~ netional and internatianal
goveimental and no:~-qaverr~eri~ argat~aationa,
21. Xn8tructs Lb Ptestdnnt ta forurird t3ls rasorution ta the c&seion, the
cOuncil the g4vornmerr;kaef iSov~kFri, Hungaq, the Czee.canpiiLiIFc,the CSC&
and tha ÇduncL1 of Rwxap. Annex 177
Resolution of the Parliament of the European Communitiesonthe Gabci kovo-N;ip~rn~~ro~
Barrage,25June1993.
Zr. Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Dam
Elesolution on the Gahikovo-Nagymaros 'Dam
The EuroueanParliament,
- havingregard to the Commission statement on the Gabcikovo-~ag~mar oamand
its resolutions on this tapic,
A. in view of the lack of results in the consu~takions of the Slovak and
Hungarian partieson solutions for the outstandingproblems with regard to
a temporarywater regime,
B. havingregard to thenegativeeffects of the Gabcikovoproject onnatureand
the envizonmnnt ;onsidexiiig in particularthat these effects are aggravated
by the failure to seach an aqreementon the dynamic operation of water
flows, divided between the Daiiiiiirivertiad and the power canal,
1. Rciterates ita concern akioul Trie possible incsea~e irlpolitical terision in
thiç region as a result of Chis co[iZlict;
2. Expresses its concern that a solution trithe question of a temporary water
regime, which is acceptable tciboth Slovaks arid Hungarianç, haç stillnet
been found;
3. Criticizes the Slovak Governmerit Pot its cmt iriuiiigunuil lingness to agrec
ta the compromise proposais forn~ulaterlin the coiisultations of 16 February
and the failure to implemerit meastires su that the proced~ires at the
Xntornational Court of Justico in TlieHague may be started;
4. Calls on the 5:rivak Goveriiment to abandon its delayirig tactics and to
present its case to the InternationalÇourt of Justice at the earlieçt
possibledate;
5. Urges al1 parties'involved to increasetlieir efforts to-reach a compromise
along the lines of the proposal fornulateù hy the EC experts in January
1993;
6. Expects the Commission and EPC to make immediate representationsin
Bratislava and Budapest ço t1iatno unilateralmeasuresare taken that might
have unforeseeableconsequences;
7. Considers t1iat the EC and its Nember. SLates ;houle tsk~ into account the
positions adopted on 'this questiori by Hungary and Slovakia in the
development of their ecorionlicand polI tical relations with both colintries;
8. Instructs its President to i'orward ttiis resolutionto the Commission,the
Council,the governnients ol tlieHember Çtates, Slovakia, Hungary, the Czech
Republic, the CSCE and the Council of Europe. Annex 178
COUNCIL * * CONSE1 L
OF EUROPE * + * DE L'EUROPE
Committee of Ministers
Comitédes Ministres
Strasbourg, 32January 1994 Restricted
Misc(94)6
Memorandum on Council'of Europe practice
with regard to State succesaion in the matter of treaties
1. This mernorandun reviews the Cornmitteeof Ministers practice
in the matter since 1991 following the questioning of that
practice in the letter of 18 October 1993 £rom the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Ukraine.
2. The question arose for the fisst time in early 1992,
following the dissolution of the WSSR in December 1991 (Alma Ata
Declaration, 21 December 19911, and initially with regard to the
CommonwealthofatIndependent tStatesc(CIÇ)isel upeon that occasione
"guarantee, in confomity with their legislative procedures,
respect for the international comitments resulting £rom
agreements signed by the formerUSSR".
The USSR had acceded to seven Councilof Europe conventions
between 1989 and 1991, having been invited by the Committee of
Ministers so to do in responseto requests submitt,ed by the USSR
Goverment. On 7 January 1992 the Consul General of Russia
transmittedto the Secretary General a letter from Mr Kozyrev,
the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation,
declaring his country's "£lm intention to conform to al1 the
internationalobligations of the former USSR, as well as its
decisionto be the successor State to the USSR in international
affairs as a wholen.
After discussion and in the light a£ information obtained
on United Nations pxa-Lice and of the opiniona& the cAE~DI,the
Committee of Ministers noted at its 472nd meeting (March 19921
"that the Russian Federation is a Contracting Party to the
Conventions of the Council of Europe to which the Soviet Union
had accededn . 3. IR this context, the problem of the other former Soviet
Republics, includingUkraine,was considered. It should be noted
that in its discussion paper (Misc192)9 dated 20 January 1992)
the Seçretariatmade the following points:
"B. As regards the other Republics of the former Soviet
Union, the following considerations might guide the
deliberationsof the Ministers'Deputieç.
In the previous contactswith the authorities of the Soviet
Union, particularlyduring 1991, the latter encouraged the
Council of Europe to develop contacts and cooperation with
the authorities of the Republicç. The letter £rom the
Minister for Foreign Affâirs of the RussianFederation also
refers poçitively to the opportunities for a dialogue
between the Council a£ Europe and the other Republics . The
Cornittee of Ministers instructed the Çecretariat to
initiate contactswith the authoritiesof certain Republics
with a view to their partlcipating in the programmes of
cooperationand assistance with countries of Central and
Eastern Europe (while nevertheless specifying that such
contacts should be conducted with the knowledge and help of
the Soviet authorities). There has not, however, been time
to pursue these contacts beyond initial meetings with
certain representativeçof Russia and Ukraine.
It may be expected that the new Republics (besides Russia)
will wish to avail themselves of the possibilities of
succession to the former Soviet Union in accordance with
the relevant rules of international law. This question
might also arise in futurewith regard to Council of Europe
Conventions (for example, and, in particular, the European
Cultural Convention) ."
The Enlarged Rapporteur Group (GREL) at its meeting on 27
January 1992 (Annex to the Addendum to Notes No. 8882) considered
this paper and the Director of Political Affairs concluded as
follows :
"On the other hand, the succession regime which it was
proposed should apply to the Republics of the former Soviet
Union other than the Russian Federation would be based, in
the case of Council of Europe conventions,on the principle
of a "clean break": nothing would be automatic for the
Republics, when it came tr, suGcerslosi to the Ccunçil af
Europe conventions to which the Soviet Union had acceded,
At most, considerationcould be given to the possibility a£
the Republics declaring, in initiatives for which they were
individually responsible, that they would like to be
accepted as Contraçting Parties to one or other of those
conventions. In that case, however, the Committee of Ministers might maintain that accession to the
conventionswas effected at the invitation of the Comittee
of Ministers, such invitationsbeing decided in the light
of the applicant country; it would be up to the Committee
of Ministers, therefore, to dec-ïdein each case whether the
sequesé £rom one or other of the Republics could be
satïçfied or not This would be a return to a system
sirnilar to that of [prior] invitation. "
At a meeting with a deleqation of seniorUkrainian officiais
in Strasbourg on 15 and 16 April 1992, the Foreign Ministry's
point of view was expressed by the Head of the Legal Department
as follsws:
rn
"As for the succession questions that had arisen as a
result of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the ~kraine
considered that there was no continuator Çtate but only
successor States. The Alma Ata agreement covered only the
allocation of the permanent seat on the United Nations
Security Council. The Ukraine had açcepted this solution
for the sake of stability, in order te reassure the
international community. As far as al1 the other aspects
of the succession to the former Soviet Union were
concerned, the rights of a11 the Republics making up the
Union needed to be safeguarded.
The Ukraine did, however, apply this principle with great
flexibility. With regard to the Council of Europe
conventions to which the Soviet Union had been a
Contsacting Party, the Ukraine was prepared, in so far as
it was specifisally interested in them, to accept either of
the following solutions:
- lo be recognised as a Contracting Party in its
capacity as a successor to the Soviet Union;
- to be invited $y the Cornmitteeof Ministers to lodge
the instruments enabling it to accede to these
conventions."
4. Having regard, inter alia, to this position, the Cornittee
of Ministers decided at its 476th meeting:
- tu invite the Republic of Ukraine Po açcede to the European
Convention on Information on Foreign Law (ETS No. 62) and
the Protocol thereto (ET5 No. 97), subject to consultation
with the non-member States which were Parties to the
Convention;
- to invite the Republic of Ukraine to accede to the European
ûutline Convention on Transfsontier Cooperatiqn between
Territorial Comunities or Authorities (ETS No. 106).
This decision implies that the Comittee of Ministers does
not accept Ukraine's position of principle on the question of
succession in the rights and obligations of the former WSSR. Conçerning the first of these Conventions, the Secretariat
notified the decision ta the Ministry of Foreign àffairs of
Ukraine on 4 August 1992. In its reply of 28 July 1993 to a
letter dated 23 July 1993 it explained the arrangements for
depositing the formal instrument of accession.
5. At a meeting in Strasbourg on 30 September and 1 October
1992 on the Cultural Convention, the same senior officia1 from
the Ministry of Foreign Affairsof Ukraine further explained his
authorities' point of view:
"Ùkraine was already prepared to complete the formalities
for accession to this internationallegal instrument. It
wiçhed, however, to reserve its rights In the highly
complex mattes of succession ta the former Soviet Union.
The treaty in questlon was one to which the Soviet Union
had formerly been Party, and Ukraine w~uld accordingly wish
to express and preserve its position regardinq the rights
of succeçsion to the former Soviet Union. This was why the
Ukrainian Parliament might, when required to decide on a
possible Council of Europe invitation to accede to the
European CulturalConvention, adopt a declaration acçepting
this invitation and agseeing to apply the Convention but
also indicating that it waç doing so ln accordancewith itç
rights as successor to the formes Soviet Union."
6. At its 482nd meeting (October 1902) the Commi.ttee of
MiniçLers decided:
- to invite the Republic of Ukraine to accede to the European
Cultural Convention, to which the Çoviet Union was formerly
a Party, taking into consideralion that Ukraine may become
a rnember State of the Council of Europe when al1 the
statutoryrequirements have been met.
The Cornietee of Ministers, notwithstanding this further
statement of its position by Ukraine, thüs confirmed the practice
established by itç earlier decisions Isee 4. above).
7. A similar decision was adopted at the 484 bis meeting
(December 1992 1concerning Belarus . In depos iting its instrument
of accession to the CulturalConvention on 18 October 1993,
Belaruç followed Council of Europe practice in the matter of
succession.
8. The general principle of succession waç discussed and the
Council of Europe's policy in the matter decided in respect of
the new States içsuing from the former Yvgoslavia at the 480th
meeting (Septemer 19921, ie after the first invitation,
mentionedabove, to Ukraine. At this meeting the Cornmittee of
Ministers: "i. decided, notinq the reauest submitted by the
Government of the Re~ublic of Çlovenia and without
prejudice to the seneralauestionsof State succession, ts
invite Slovenia to become a Contracting Party to each of
the fallowing treaties, in accordance with the relevant
provisions of these conventions: ...
ii, instructed the Secretariatto inforrn the Government of
Slovenia that it could become a Contracting Party to.the
above Treaties by notificationaddressed to the Secretary
General for each of these Conventions;".
Since then similar decisions have been made in respect of
Croatia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
9. Ukraine's position, as presented orally and in writing, is
set out in detail in doc. MiçcI93)70. In short, Ukraine
considers that, following the dissolution of the USSR, there is
no continuâtor State but only successor Çtates, with the
exception of the allocationof the permanent seat on the United
Nations Security Council to Russia. As far as al1 the other
aspects of the succession to the former Soviet Union are
concerned, the righes of a11 the Republics making up the Union
need to be safeguasded.
In the lighL of the letters of 10 August and 18 October
1993, the solution adopted by the Committee of Ministers and
whieh had been accepted orally by the Ukrainian autharities in
1992 (see poin~ 3. above) therefore appears to be no longer
acceptable to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine.
10. This being ça, three solutions might, at least in theory,
be envisagea:
1. acceptance of the rheory of automatic succession, ie
the theory currently advocated by the Ukrainian
authorities; it is cleas from the debates in the
Cornittee of ~inisters that severâl delegations object
to this theory;
2. continuation of the practice of refusing automatic
succession and making accession conditional on the
prior submiçsionof a request by the country concerned
and a specific invitation £rom the Cornmittee of
Ministers; 3. retention of the practice detailed in 2. but
acceptance of a simplified procedure for notification
of ,accession by the State çoncerned (as for the new
States issuing £rom former ~ugoslavia)'.
Erik HARREMOES
Disector of Legal Affairs
Wifhregmd tUkrainecaidtheÇonventim onInfannuiion Foreign ïaand the
~otoooltheto. theCoumA ofhirope mightw,hiie thalthe Wttee of
MIJ&&T Soesnot endomthethewy ommsion put fomad byUïmhe, mpt theletters
of10AugustlW3açmtifi~dcxcuessionefl~efrwnfhcrt*. Annex 179
~
Resolution of the Parliamentof the European Communities on the GabcikovwNagymaros
Barrage, 12 Febniary 1994.
The European Parliamenf,
A. having regard tta the findings of the trilater31 croup of experts ilho
submittedtheïr pre~eçals to the Govermerits of Elcvakia 2nd h'ungary on
1 December 1993,
B. ,having regard ta its man? preïiocs resalutions en thLs subject, most
r~centlyof 25 Jme 1991 , whichçtressedParliament's ccncern at the
sarious eeolcglcal effeets and trie eocsequences fordci~king water suppligg,
C. wkezeasthe objective of the dom ia: flocd protection;protectio,? of the
riverbed a~ainst erosion: eoccervâtion of delta and wetlscd ucçd;
lmpravement of grcmduatt condi tlc~ (fallovarig technical measares on hoth
sidecl; erivlrcmentàlly clear. electzicity ~rcduetlon,
c whereas wikh khi o~sct of s2ri5ç it 13 al1 Che mare crqtat ta ec'akiish a
temporazy vater rnn=a~e=er.t cycte7 xnich wi1L linit si fir rs pocs:ble 2.e
dan;çe the ef.vi:crmer,: .sd ;c t:-.cc;ily of tri3k;nc kr3tf:,
. 3e:terateç lt+ ccr.ter::ni the 2~~2;; the ~zolect aây c'c t~ r.;t-2-e ;riathe
2nv;rn;Lner.t i:: :ne :aclc::, espec~zil:l: n Ei?.cary;
2 .:5ks ths Con,;;ii:zic:c rzscrt cr.t:e res;;ltç ci Zk,ever: cf the ;ncn=:ur<nç:
grcup ar,C t;ie exFsr::roc- th:: rtz:;zi z3ei: vork ir. :c~t=+er 159: 2-5
hopas tklt the re:ozr wi!l sertrê cc 2 5asis for f---tKer r.eco:iat~~r. oz
r.ecescz7 toc.h~c3i ~~~~~~~s ar.5F uats: m&q;gcr;ierit ~~913~ fur :te river;
3. F i out t:-iaC, 12 vlow CE 1:s wlcpe fc3loq:ca: cltuntlon, t:re
cosservztico nf t:is n~:~31 Pzez lai cukueiçbf t.4.eit:erEstS of Sicvckia
and limgary zlone;
4.
KO~PS th~t tkere haç nct been suff-cient pzcçress la the d:sccss:ons 02 rke
temperary uatar ~;:aeenentregise, x?.lch is tc tke de::lzenr ef the
populzticn Lri khi:?art of the Can&e region;
5. calls for tkc ri;t:scf citizs>s I* t:-.~rcçicn to be ~lfoyd~sced Dy meu.2
of a drmccrâ::c cezscltzt~cn ~:cceCn:s;
7. ExpectS the Cc.mic~i~n tc sko~ c? ~ts activitiec withn the Trilate~~l
Gsoup;
volume IV, annexes