Tuesday, August 31st 2010 - 05:10 UTC

Uruguay/Argentina implement the end of the pulp mill dispute

Argentina and Uruguay signed Monday in Montevideo the agreement which puts an end to an ongoing years-long litigation over the construction of a pulp mill along a shared river.

Almagro and Timerman during the signing of the agreement

The agreement basically establishes the joint environmental monitoring of the river Uruguay which acts as a natural border between the neighbouring countries and was at the core of the dispute.

The agreement was signed by Uruguayan Foreign Affairs minister Luis Almagro and his Argentine counterpart Hector Timerman.

The first step is the implementation next Thursday of the scientific team (two for each side) which will be responsible for taking samples from a “regionalized” river Uruguay, starting at the UPM/Botnia plant on the Uruguayan side (the core of the dispute) and the Gualeguaychú river along the Argentine coast.

The monitoring missions will then continue in Argentina in a spot that will be chosen by Uruguay's government and will then follow alternately in either country. This means controlling the Uruguay River and all industrial, agricultural and urban centres that transfer their waste into the river's waters.

The timetable agreed states that the scientific team will have 60 days to establish a road map and agenda, and 90 days later must be presenting its first full report. The team will report to the Administrative Commission of the River Uruguay (CARU) whose newly nominated members recently took office. CARU a long created office is responsible for ensuring the compliance of the 1975 River Uruguay joint administration treaty.

According to the document the scientific team will be allowed into the UPM/Botnia pulp mill twelve times a year, accompanied by Uruguayan officials to take samples of the water and effluents.

On the Argentine side, the scientific committee includes Juan Carlos Colombo, who has a doctorate in chemistry, and engineer William Stephen Lyons, both of whom were appointed by the Foreign Ministry last week.

The members of the Uruguayan side are Eduardo Lorenzo, hydraulics engineer and former CARU president and Alberto Nieto a former dean of the Uruguayan School of Chemistry.

Timerman praised the agreement reached, “I’m most pleased, because it will also be a model for similar situations in other parts of the world”. In a clear message to pickets that for years blocked a river linking both countries, Timerman emphasized that Monday marked the end “to any kind or need for protests regarding the issue”.

Almagro said that Uruguay was satisfied with the agreement which ends a long standing dispute in a friendly fraternal way, but also said that Uruguay expects to address other issues of the pending bilateral agenda: dredging the access canals to the River Plate and a decision allowing Bolivian natural gas, which must cross Argentine territory, to be delivered to Uruguay.

The dispute took off in 2006 when Finland’s Botnia begun the construction of a large pulp mill on the Uruguayan side, involving an investment of 1.8 billion US dollars. Across the river in Gualeguaychú, residents and environmentalists protested the plant would be contaminating and demanded its relocation.

They supported their protests with pickets blocking the international bridge linking Gualeguaychú with Fray Bentos on the Uruguayan side. Pickets were originally sponsored by President Nestor Kirchner’s administration that was not on good terms with his then Uruguayan counterpart Tabare Vazquez.

In 2004 before the Uruguayan presidential election Vazquez asked for support from Kirchner to block the pulp mill project. However on winning the election Vazquez immediately gave the green light, something which Mr. Kirchner never forgave his “left wing” colleague, and sponsored the pickets which were formalized in 2006 following several frustrated attempts to reach an agreement.

Both sides said they were willing to address the issue but Uruguay demanded the lifting of the pickets before sitting to the table.

The dispute was then presented to Mercosur and the International Court of Justice. Mercosur under the auspices of Brazil said it was a “bilateral issue”, but the Court in April 2010 ruled that Uruguay had not fully complied with treaties which demanded it had to inform the counterpart about the use of the water course for a pulp mill. But the Court also said the plant did not contaminate and there was no need to relocate.

In the meantime Jose Mujica was elected president of Uruguay and in 2007 Cristina Kirchner took over from her husband. Chemistry between Mujica and the Kirchner couple proved repeatedly positive enabling the current solution to the dispute, although Uruguay would like to include other bilateral issues, basically the dredging of the River Plate access canals.

Uruguay has a growing port in Nueva Palmira, which is seen by Argentina as a viable alternative to Buenos Aires, and the Argentines (the Kirchners and previous governments) have been dragging their feet about clearing the canal leading to the Uruguayan coast.

5 comments Feed

Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.

1 harrier61 (#) Aug 31st, 2010 - 04:20 pm Report abuse
So now, if it's going to be honest, Argentina will have to ensure that there is no blocking the international bridge linking Gualeguaychú with Fray Bentos.

Let's wait and see!
2 avargas2001 (#) Aug 31st, 2010 - 05:23 pm Report abuse
I believe there is no way to change the illegal acts done in Uruguay, and as an Argentine I belive we should close the bridge or turn it into a walking throught bridge, as british have right to prevent Argentine's from living in Malvinas we have the same right to stop any traffic going from Argentina into Uruguay, we have roads in Salta leading into Bolivia that can be used by trucker to go north as an alternative, as an Argentine I support the blocking and/or taking down of this problem bridge..
3 harrier61 (#) Aug 31st, 2010 - 08:25 pm Report abuse
Thought so. Argentina is about to breach/tear up another agreement.

Message to all Uruguayans: Remember 1828. The Treaty of Montevideo. Fostered by Britain and gave birth to your country. After Argentina and Brazil had fought over your land for 500 days. Because they both wanted to own it.
4 jerry (#) Aug 31st, 2010 - 09:23 pm Report abuse
gas - “we have the same right to stop any traffic going from Argentina into Uruguay” ?? How about the constitution of Argentina, Section 14. - “All the inhabitants of the Nation are entitled to the following rights, in
accordance with the laws that regulate their exercise, namely: ... to enter, remain in, travel through, and leave the Argentine territory..”
5 avargas2001 (#) Sep 01st, 2010 - 03:37 am Report abuse
agreement ?? as I recall there was no agreement and this is why we should not let this bridge stay open for the good of our nation, how will we ever get any respect if our own roads are dictated from UK, I never heard UK asking USA to let Mexicans in from Mexico, I think this bridge is giving us a lot of problems and it should be changed into a walking bridge, not for cars or trucks, in any I am sure Uruguay wouldn't want an Argentine with my attitude inside their land, and as I said they can walk over like people do everywhere in the planet walk.

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!


Get Email News Reports!

Get our news right on your inbox.
Subscribe Now!