Interview. Lazar Comanescu: “Peace is the essential precondition for developing the Danube as a space of prosperity, tourism and connectivity”

Lazar Comanescu, Secretary General of the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC), former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania, diplomat.

— Mr. Ambassador, you were directly involved in the process that led to the EU Strategy for the Danube Region. What was the main motivation behind it?

First of all, it was about recognizing the strategic importance of the Danube for Europe. After the enlargement of the European Union, the Danube region acquired a new geopolitical and economic meaning. There was a clear need to look at it not as a collection of separate national segments, but as a single macro-regional space for cooperation.

The core idea was to transform the Danube into a real axis of connectivity — in transport, economy, culture, and human interaction. It is not merely a river; it is a potential development corridor linking Central Europe, the Balkans, the Black Sea basin, and wider routes toward the Caucasus, Central Asia and the Middle East.

— Looking back since the Strategy was adopted in 2011, what would you describe as its main achievements?

A major achievement is the creation of a stable framework for cooperation. Over the years, annual forums, working meetings and thematic discussions have brought together politicians, local authorities, businesses, experts and other stakeholders.

That matters because it created a common platform for identifying priorities, building partnerships and shaping practical initiatives. At the same time, I believe the moment has come to move beyond discussion and toward the implementation of larger and more concrete joint projects.

— Which direction should be prioritized in this next phase?

In my view, the most important priority is to turn the Danube into a truly permanent, year-round transport route — a real European “blue highway.” Compared with road transport, inland waterway transport is both more cost-efficient and more environmentally sound.

But achieving this requires coordinated action by the Danube countries, port modernization, adequate dredging, fleet development, technical compatibility and strategic investment. This is not just a transport issue; it is part of a broader architecture of regional connectivity linking Western and Eastern Europe through the Black Sea to the wider Eurasian space.

— Does strengthening the Danube’s transport role conflict with environmental priorities?

I do not share the view that the development of navigation should automatically be treated as an environmental threat. On the contrary, if managed properly, waterborne transport can be part of an environmentally rational solution. If the same volume of goods is moved by barges rather than by trucks, the environmental footprint is lower and pressure on infrastructure is reduced.

So the question is not whether the Danube should be developed, but how to do so intelligently, in a balanced way and in line with modern environmental standards.

— In your reflections, the Danube appears not only as a transport artery but also as a cultural and tourism space. How important is that dimension?

It is extremely important. The Danube region has enormous cultural, historical and tourism potential. Along the river there are capitals, ports, small towns, natural landscapes and layers of heritage ranging from antiquity to the medieval and modern periods. It is one of the richest cultural spaces in Europe.

If one travels from the source of the Danube to the Black Sea, one can clearly see the remarkable combination of natural and human-made landscapes. That is why tourism cannot be treated as secondary. Yet unlocking this potential requires infrastructure, better promotion and much stronger involvement of local communities.

— Why, despite this uniqueness, is the Lower Danube still less visible on Europe’s tourism map?

Mainly because of infrastructure gaps and insufficient promotion. The Upper Danube has historically enjoyed stronger visibility, partly due to the “Blue Danube” brand associated above all with Vienna. But the Lower Danube is no less valuable — and in some respects it is even more diverse in terms of natural and cultural richness.

The problem is that cruise tourism alone does not automatically generate sufficient benefits for local communities. A ship arrives and departs, but without local infrastructure, services, tourism products and inter-municipal coordination, that potential is not converted into sustainable local development.

— You also spoke about another kind of connectivity, beyond infrastructure. What exactly do you mean?

I mean the “connectivity of minds” — bringing people, communities, local leaders, entrepreneurs, cultural actors and educational environments closer to one another. This type of connectivity often lays the foundation for more durable infrastructure integration.

When local actors meet in forums, working groups and professional platforms, they gain a better understanding of shared interests and are more capable of shaping projects that truly respond to the needs of their territories. Large European initiatives should build on this local quality of cooperation.

— What role can regional organizations and platforms play in this process?

A very significant one. In the wider Black Sea–Danube space, there are already a number of formats dealing with connectivity, infrastructure, development and cooperation. These include BSEC, the Central European Initiative, the South-East European Cooperation Process, the Regional Cooperation Council and other platforms.

The problem is not the lack of institutions, but insufficient coordination among them. Duplication, overlap and fragmented use of resources should be avoided. That is why the European Commission has an especially important role to play in helping shape a large-scale, coordinated and properly funded project for the Danube as a European axis of connectivity.

— The discussion also touched upon Odesa, security and the future of tourism. How are these issues linked?

They are directly linked. The economy is a precondition for successful tourism development, but peace is the precondition for the normal and healthy development of societies in general. Without peace, it is impossible to fully realize the tourism, cultural and infrastructure potential of the region.

I have repeatedly stressed that war in the Black Sea region runs counter to the very logic of organizations that were created for cooperation, development and rapprochement. Ending the conflict and returning to an atmosphere of stability is therefore essential for any long-term positive transformation.

— What would be your key concluding message?

Peace is essential. Competition can be an engine of progress only when it is fair and constructive. If it becomes a tool of domination, inequality or conflict, it no longer produces development — it generates new crises.

For the Danube and Black Sea regions, the future lies in combining infrastructure modernization, cultural rapprochement, genuine regional coordination and common efforts for peace. Only under such conditions can the Danube become a true space of sustainable prosperity, tourism, mobility and cooperation.