This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS  BRATISLAVA 000042 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
BUDAPEST FOR POSNER-MULLEN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV LO
SUBJECT:  SLOVAK ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, 2004 
 
REF:  (A) 04 BRATISLAVA 727, (B) 04 BRATISLAVA 483, (C) 04 
BRATISLAVA 1064 
 
Sensitive but unclassified - handle accordingly 
 
¶1.  (U) Summary.  Slovakia's economic fortunes have had a sharp 
impact on both the country's environment and the policies that 
manage it.  Following independence in 1993, public interest in 
the environment waned as economic necessities took on a more 
dominant role.  Today, even though the economy is currently 
making rapid gains, most Slovaks still appear more concerned 
about their financial future than preserving the country's 
natural resources.  Nevertheless, Slovakia is proud of its 
natural assets and many environmental topics receive widespread 
attention.  There is reason for optimism that the GOS will 
support USG policies regarding genetically modified organisms 
(GMOs) and the GLOBE Program.  In addition, the GOS appears to be 
making progress on recycling plastics and water issues. 
Slovakia's future plans regarding nuclear energy and resource 
management remain uncertain and they will likely have a large 
impact on the environment.  End Summary. 
 
PAINTING A BLEAK PICTURE 
------------------------ 
¶2.  (SBU) In recent contacts with the Ministry of Environment 
(MOE), NGOs, and others, Econoffs have received ominous reports 
about environmental protection in Slovakia.  For instance, 
respondents in a recent public opinion poll only ranked 
environmental issues as the 12th most important category out of 
¶14.  This was a significant decline from similar polls conducted 
through previous decades when environmental protection ranked as 
high as number three.  In the past, the Green Party was active in 
the GOS, however today, due to internal strife and a lack of 
popular support, the party is all but disbanded.  Although there 
is an environmental committee in parliament, it meets 
infrequently and members of NGOs and the MOE commonly refer to 
membership in it as a "punishment" for MPs.  In addition, the 
Minister of Environment Laszlo Miklos, despite his scientific 
expertise, lacks sufficient political influence to attain large- 
scale financing from EU structural funds, the UN, or other 
sources. 
 
¶3.  (U) The GOS's emphasis on economic reform has also fostered 
public disengagement from the environment.  The Minister of 
Economy, Pavol Rusko, is well known for dismissing environmental 
concerns that negatively impact business ventures.  Rusko and the 
Ministry of Economy (MOEC) are frequently accused of omitting or 
performing insufficient environmental impact assessments on 
development projects.  In one case, construction of a highway 
vital to Slovakia's largest foreign investment ever, Kia's USD 
1.5 billion auto plant, had to be stopped because an 
environmental impact assessment had not been performed at all. 
Also, in a recent report on tourism the MOEC wrote 15 pages 
disparaging environmental protection policies as the only 
obstacles to large ski resorts and the income and jobs they would 
generate.  In another recent case, the Regional Environmental 
Center (REC) independently performed an assessment where it 
determined that over 1,000 trees would be needlessly destroyed in 
2004 MOEC urban renewal projects in Bratislava.  As a result of 
these and other examples, many NGOs and activists in Slovakia are 
concerned that environmental problems often do not receive the 
necessary political attention, or lose out to economic 
considerations. 
 
BUT IN REALITY 
-------------- 
¶4.  (U) Despite this negative appearance, people do care and much 
is being done to preserve the natural environment in Slovakia. 
Environmental issues are commonly addressed in public and in the 
media.  NGOs are using EU structural funds on projects such as 
sustainable development, agricultural modernization, cleaner 
energy sources, flood prevention, and forest management.  In 
November 2004 Slovaks anguished as a major windstorm hit the High 
Tatras mountain region and flattened trees in a 240 square 
kilometer area, which led to a surprisingly large number of 
donations to help restore Slovakia's "national treasure" (see 
reftel C).  Furthermore, the aforementioned highway project was 
in fact delayed because of the MOEC's negligence and eventually a 
thorough environmental impact report was completed.  Some of the 
major issues confronting Slovakia today are detailed below. 
 
GMO PLANTS, SEEDS, AND PRODUCTS 
------------------------------- 
¶5.  (SBU) The use of GMOs has been portrayed by NGOs and the 
local media as an imperative environmental safety issue.  In 
response, the MOE has worked with NGOs to clarify information and 
create a clear and fact-based GOS position on GMOs.  Before 
accession to the EU in May 2004, there was only one GMO approved 
for usage in Slovakia, but upon accession, all food, feed, and 
 
seed items already accepted by the EU also became legal in 
Slovakia.  However, according to Dr. Igor Ferencik from the 
Biosafety Department of the MOE, there still exists confusion 
over the use of genetically modified seeds.  The debate consists 
of whether seeds may or must be approved by each individual 
country in addition to EU processes.  In Slovakia, it is the 
responsibility of the Ministries of Health and Agriculture, which 
have not yet formulated a position, to provide this 
authorization.  The MOE is expected to ensure that Slovak law is 
aligned with EU and other international regulations, as well as 
provide expert counsel to the GOS.  In September 2004, the MOE 
drafted a GMO favorable recommendation to parliament, though 
acceptance and implementation remain in question.  According to 
Ferencik, conservatives in parliament are consistently anti-GMO, 
while many others have yet to express an opinion.  As a result, 
although the Slovak MOE is far more amenable to GMOs than its 
counterparts in other countries of the region, it is still not 
certain whether the GOS will actively lobby for such a position 
in the EU or other international organizations. 
 
¶6.  (SBU) The Slovak public remains largely ignorant or 
uninterested in the GMO debate.  According to a 2003 poll by the 
MOE, only 25 percent of Slovaks could define the term GMO.  Of 
those polled, 58 percent were accepting of the general use of 
GMOs, though only 34 percent favored them for human consumption. 
Anecdotally, individuals from both the MOE and NGOs have 
indicated that Slovaks do not care so much about the safety of 
GMO products as much as the prices in grocery stores.  They 
further opined that it is easy for Austrians to decry GMOs and be 
overly environmentally friendly when their wages and pensions are 
so high.  According to Ferencik, there are a few food products 
currently sold in Slovak grocery stores as well as several 
clandestine GOS approved field trials where GMO products are 
grown.  Many Slovak farmers have expressed a desire to use GMOs 
in order to increase yields and save money. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) However, the media and some NGOs, like Greenpeace, are 
running alarmist campaigns aimed at frightening Slovaks of the 
perceived dangers of GMOs.  Greenpeace recently trumpeted finding 
a GMO product in a local grocery store, which local journalists 
vilified even though the product in question is legal under EU 
regulations and was clearly labeled.  In addition, Greenpeace has 
made high-profile protests at local grocery stores for simply not 
guaranteeing that they would not offer GMO products for sale. 
(According to Greenpeace, large grocery chains have made such 
assurances in Western European nations but not in Central 
European nations like Slovakia, the Czech Republic, or Hungary.) 
The MOE is critical of Greenpeace's methods, indicating that 
trial GMO fields must remain hidden in order to protect them from 
vandalism or outright destruction.  Other environmental NGOs are 
also drastically anti-GMO, and claim that decades of testing 
would be required before such products could be considered safe 
for human consumption.  As a result, it is not yet known in what 
direction public opinion or the GOS will ultimately swing, but 
for now, the USG has a GMO ally in the MOE and should capitalize 
on it while the outlook remains favorable. 
 
PLASTIC BOTTLE RECYCLING 
------------------------ 
¶8.  (U) Currently in Slovakia, almost all plastic (PET) bottles 
end up in landfills instead of being recycled.  For years the MOE 
has planned to introduce a new PET recycling initiative based on 
a German model where individuals are tasked with returning PET 
products to retailers who are then responsible for recycling.  To 
ensure participation, a deposit on PET bottles is added to the 
purchase price.  The Slovak public favors the program and the 
fully refundable deposit price has been set at four Slovak Crowns 
(USD 0.12). 
 
¶9.  (SBU) The project has not moved forward, however, due largely 
to opposition from the MOEC, which many believe is under the 
influence of industrial lobbyists.  According to the Head of the 
Waste Management Department of the MOE, Peter Gallovic, however, 
it remains unclear who the lobbyists are.  Bottlers such as Coke 
or Pepsi stand to save money by purchasing cheaper recycled 
bottles. Large grocery chains, even though they must bear the 
additional logistical costs, have publicly encouraged the new 
system in public relations promotions.  According to Gallovic, 
plastics and chemical supply sources are the most plausible 
source for the strong lobby against the new system. 
 
¶10.  (SBU) Gallovic also noted that the MOE hopes that an 
American company, Plastipak, will lobby on behalf of the plan to 
the MOEC.  Plastipak plans to build a multi-faceted plant in 
eastern Slovakia that might also include a recycling operation 
that could service the Central European region and make the 
process cheaper, encourage industrial development, and create 
jobs.  However, Plastipak is not actively lobbying the GOS on 
this contentious subject and has chosen to take a "hands-off" 
 
approach. 
 
¶11.  (SBU) Regardless, the MOE is building as much evidence and 
support as possible before confronting the MOEC openly in 
parliament.  Success or failure of the system could have a region- 
wide impact as, according to Gallovic, Poland, Hungary, and the 
Czech Republic are all considering similar projects if it 
succeeds in Slovakia.  Despite the patient approach, Gallovic 
indicated that the MOE had planned to present the project in 
parliament by March of 2005. 
 
WATER ISSUES AND FLOOD CONTROL 
------------------------------ 
¶12. (U) The GOS considers river and watershed management to be a 
priority environmental and safety project.  After years of 
neglect and abuse under previous governments, the MOE is looking 
for responsible methods to keep waters clean and economically 
viable.  As a part of the International Commission for the 
Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) a concerted effort has 
been made to clean up and monitor the Danube as it flows through 
Slovakia.  The MOE participated in and helped to organize the 
first International Danube Day in June 2004.  At the event, 
people of all ages had an opportunity to learn more about water 
issues, get hands-on experience with environmental technology and 
celebrate the famous river.  Other rivers have also become 
subject to studies and clean-up efforts and many water resources 
are now protected in national parks and forests. 
 
¶13. (U) Unfortunately, significant increases in industrial 
production have led to increased pollution and damaged 
watersheds.  NGOs claim that monitoring of companies is 
insufficient and toxins flow into Slovak rivers at alarming 
rates.  For example, twice in the past four years pharmaceutical 
producer Biotika leaked large amounts of ammonia into the river 
Hron in central Slovakia.  The spill in 2003 resulted in massive 
loss of animal and plant life and all but eliminated the local 
fishing industry.  In addition, thousands of pounds of communist 
era pesticides have been found stored in the agricultural regions 
of southern Slovakia and are feared to be seeping into the local 
watersheds (see reftel A). 
 
¶14.  (U) Nearly every year, floods take lives and cause 
significant property damage in Slovakia.  In the west, floods 
occur frequently in the region where the Morava River enters the 
Danube, while eastern Slovakia often experiences summer flash 
flooding.  In 2002, both regions experienced their worst flooding 
in hundreds of years and damages reached USD 54.5 million.  In 
2004, normal flooding still resulted in over USD 12 million of 
damage to over 300 villages in eastern Slovakia and forced 
thousands to flee their homes.  The traditional approach to 
containing the deluges has been to construct dams, dykes, and 
levees.  The GOS would like to continue with that methodology, 
and recently passed a law requiring local landowners and 
governments to fund these measures.  Environmental groups, on the 
other hand, are concerned that these methods, in fact, have 
detrimental effects on the land and health of watersheds.  The 
NGO Daphne has twice experimented with a new, more natural way to 
combat the problem.  In both cases, strategic farmland that had 
originally been grassland was returned to its original ecological 
state.  The results showed that far more water was retained in 
the soil and average annual floods ceased to occur.  Daphne, 
though, did admit that the approach needs more data and must be 
tested on larger tracts of land.  Methodology aside, the GOS 
appears, at least vocally, to be taking water issues seriously. 
 
ENERGY AND THE KYOTO PROTOCOL 
----------------------------- 
¶15.  (U) Currently, Slovakia generates a large portion of its 
electrical power from two nuclear plants.  Upon accession to the 
EU the GOS agreed to close two aging Soviet-era reactors at the 
Bohunice power plant that produce 22 percent of the country's 
electricity, one by the end of 2006 and the other by 2008. 
Recently, however, Minister Rusko claimed that a closure in two 
parts would not be cost-effective and could threaten public 
safety.  He proposed that both plants close simultaneously at the 
end of 2008.  This plan, however, would require the approval of 
each EU-15 member and is unlikely to be received positively by 
neighboring Austria.  Rusko and others in the GOS have proposed 
completing two unfinished nuclear reactors at the Mochovce power 
plant to make up for the lost production at Bohunice.  While not 
requiring EU consent, this move has also been heavily criticized 
by the Austrians and other anti-nuclear lobbies.  However, once 
the Bohunice reactors have been decommissioned, Slovakia would 
change from an electricity exporter to an importer unless new 
sources were developed.  Potential options include hydroelectric 
plants or, most likely, increased coal-burning facilities. 
 
¶16.  (U) If the GOS decides to produce electricity via coal- 
burning plants, it raises further environmental questions, 
 
including Slovakia's ability to meet its requirements under the 
Kyoto Protocol.  Slovakia is currently well under its Kyoto 
target based upon 1990 production levels, but large increases in 
manufacturing, steel production, and other industries are rapidly 
producing more climate changing gases.  If coal burning is added 
to the equation, it may eventually impede Slovakia's ability to 
trade its emission allotments and alter effective measures to 
control global warming (see Reftel B).  (Slovakia's travails with 
the Commission over its National Action Plan will be reported 
Septel.) 
 
¶17.  (U) Slovakia has numerous potential sources for renewable 
energy, including hydroelectric, geothermal, wind, and solar 
power, but currently lacks an actionable plan to implement them 
on a large scale.  Instead, the MOEC maintains vague, long-term, 
and difficult to measure goals to increase the usage of 
renewables.  In 1997, 3.33 percent of energy produced in Slovakia 
came from renewable resources.  The GOS seeks to equal the EU 
average for renewable energy usage by 2010, which equates to a 63 
percent increase in Slovakia. 
 
PUBLIC AWARENESS 
---------------- 
¶18.  (U) Many representatives from both the MOE and NGOs are 
concerned that the largest environmental problem in Slovakia is 
simply the lack of awareness and education.  Actions are being 
taken, however, to make sure that future generations are more 
environmentally savvy.  The REC is implementing a program to 
distribute "greenpacks" to every school in Slovakia.  The 
greenpack is an educational supplement that assists teachers in 
instructing about the environment and includes books, lesson 
plans, videos, and a CD-ROM.  According to Vladimir Hudek, 
Director of the REC, the program will help to raise Slovaks' 
consciousness of the environmental impact of their actions. 
 
¶19.  (U) Many NGOs have long sought to participate in the GLOBE 
program in order to raise public awareness and knowledge of 
environmental topics.  Currently, Slovakia remains one of the few 
countries in Europe that have not signed onto the project with 
the U.S., citing costs and inadequate infrastructure as reasons. 
In the summer of 2004, however, emboffs and Ambassador made 
special attempts with both the MOE and Ministry of Education 
(MOED) to initiate the program, and emphasized that the NGO 
Daphne is completely prepared to administer the program.  The MOE 
is convinced that GLOBE can be a valuable resource, but insists 
that the agreement must be signed by the MOED.  For now, the MOED 
has tentatively agreed to enter the program in March 2005, once 
wording in the contract is agreed upon and the MOE has agreed to 
co-finance the program at some level.  Gary Randolph, 
International Program Specialist with GLOBE, has also tentatively 
agreed to schedule a regional "train the trainers" activity next 
summer in Slovakia that will also provide the local organization 
with some USD 6,000 worth of scientific equipment. 
 
RUMOURS & HEARSAY 
----------------- 
¶20.  (SBU) Many other environmental problems in Slovakia are 
frequently mentioned but generally only anecdotally.  For 
example, in eastern Slovakia, many claim that forests are being 
illegally "clear-cut" either by needy individuals or corrupt 
organizations.  In addition, others state that Slovnaft (oil 
refinery) and other companies in the region around Bratislava are 
illicitly polluting the air at night under the cover of darkness. 
Officially, the region does not have air pollution levels that 
are considered dangerous, but many, including embassy staff and 
families, experience an unusual number of skin and breathing 
problems while in the region.  Nevertheless, scientific evidence 
about these topics remains elusive. 
 
IN CONCLUSION 
------------- 
¶21.  (U) The recent wind disaster in the High Tatras is a 
microcosm of Slovakia's tug-of-war between environmental 
problems, economic necessities, and public opinion.  The incident 
emotionally projected natural resource issues into the headlines 
and Slovaks showed their deep concern by their generous 
donations.  Then, within days, the GOS announced plans to restore 
the area via new resorts and tourist attractions in order to 
boost the economy.  How Slovakia strikes a balance between ski 
slopes and national forests will be an important sign regarding 
its environmental future.  There are reasons to be optimistic as 
educational programs like GLOBE begin, the PET recycling project 
becomes reality, and the GOS formulates a scientific based policy 
toward GMOs.  In addition, post will continue to make more 
contacts and reach out on more environmental issues while 
continuing to monitor and engage in the areas outlined above. 
 
Thayer 
 
 
NNNN