While Ukrainian and Russian diplomats are trying to solve the Tuzla crisis through negotiations that can last for years, the worst predictions of the environmentalists are beginning to come true. The swift current in the Kerch Strait is washing out the shore of Tuzla Island.
Although none of the environmentalists has forecast the flooding of Tuzla, it is becoming obvious that what the Russians purportedly aimed to achieve in constructing the dam is having a totally opposite effect. The Krasnodar authorities have been trying to persuade everybody that the embankment is necessary out of environmental considerations, that is, to prevent Russia’s Taman Peninsula from being washed out. In reality, the dam only caused a twofold increase in the current speed, which has reached ten kilometers per hour. Thus, now Ukraine is facing an environmental because of Russia’s unilateral actions. Incidentally, the swift current washes out not only Ukraine’s shore, but also the dam itself. According to Russian media reports, recently around forty meters of the dam were washed out in a storm. Apparently, the current can do greater harm to the island than to the dam, since the latter has been built of hard rock. Previously Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry promised to study the possible consequences of the construction as soon as possible. It remains unknown how this can help, since Moscow will hardly admit its guilt.
The cost of the Russian dam will be too high for Ukraine. “The only thing that can save Tuzla is building a coastal fortification or raising the island by 180 cm. This will cost between ten and twenty million hryvnias,” People’s Deputy Ihor Ostash, chairman of the ad hoc committee that visited the island the week before last, opined.
On November 18, two-day negotiations on the demarcation of the Azov Sea water area and the Kerch Strait between Russian and Ukrainian experts ended in Moscow. Thus far no information on their results has been released, probably because such meetings usually are of a provisional nature. Thus, it is quite probable that the Moscow negotiations have brought no crucial results. However, Ukrainian diplomats had a chance to bring to their Russian colleagues’ view the results of the Krasnodar authorities’ actions. Incidentally, the Russians have never admitted that Moscow authorized the construction of the dam. Simultaneously, Ukrainian lawmakers claim that the dam carries a price tag of six to seven million dollars, which is quite a sum for regional authorities.
The conclusion is far from pleasing: while the sides are trying to solve one issue (delimitation of the water area), another problem has come up, whose outcome is unpredictable. Delaying the negotiations can lead to further complications, and there is no telling what new problems might arise. One can hardly expect that any of the sides will make any concessions. Both countries’ stands are a matter of principle, and no compromise is possible: Kyiv insists on delimiting definitive borders in the Azov-Kerch water area, while Moscow considers it borderless. Precisely Tuzla can play the decisive role in delimiting the Kerch Strait. This is why the Russians, while insisting that they are not making territorial claims on Ukraine, so far have not stated in public that they do not question the fact that island belongs to Ukraine.
Meanwhile, last Wednesday BBC reported that the EU published a special statement on the Ukrainian-Russian conflict over Tuzla. The EU welcomed the Ukrainian and Russian governments’ decision to hold negotiations in order to settle the issue in a diplomatic way. However, the statement reads that the EU expects the negotiations to be held with respect for territorial integrity and without unilateral actions. If reaching an agreement proves too complicated, the case could be forwarded to the Hague International Court, the statement reads. The EU statement was made also on behalf of the prospective EU members: the Baltic States, Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania. Only a few politicians in Ukraine have so far supported the idea of the two countries turning to the Hague International Court to solve the issue. Apparently, this option has not been discussed in Russia at all. In late October, in the heat of the Tuzla crisis, Anatoly Kolodkin, member of the International Maritime Law Tribunal, admitted in his interview with Izvestiya: “The UN International Court decides territorial disputes and has extensive experience in this field... Perhaps in this case its decision would hardly be in Russia’s favor.” Kyiv can feel more confident turning to the International Court, since all bilateral documents are evidence that the island belongs to it.
This is not the first time third countries showed interest in this issue (not to mention somewhat abstract statements by numerous foreign diplomats on “settling the issue on the bilateral level”). The week before last a resolution was registered by US Congress, initiated by Republican Congressman Kurt Weldon. Incidentally, previously he had repeatedly visited Kyiv and met with Ukraine’s leadership. It was during his February’s visit that the US note was passed asking Ukraine to send its military to help eliminate the consequences of the Iraq War. However, the congressman had always paid more attention to developing the Russo-American relationship: he has visited Russia over thirty times. All this suggests that his stand could be more pro- Russian. However, Mr. Weldon along with thirty other congressmen sided with Ukraine in view of the evidence and documents. In particular, the draft resolution reads that the US has always recognized and will always recognize its commitment to guarantee Ukraine’s independence. “The Russian Federation must refrain from any actions threatening to violate Ukraine’s territorial and border integrity,” the draft reads. It also mentions the fact that the US has committed to guarantee Ukraine’s safety in connection with Ukraine’s decision to scrap its nuclear arsenal.
