Evaluating the BSEC

By Leonidas Chrysanthopoulos [1]

"With reference to the article of Panagiota Manoli entitled "The BSEC as a Regional Organization: A Performance Audit", I would like to make the following observations: While the article points out correctly many shortcomings that BSEC may still have, I would like to make the list of shortcomings shorter than what is described in the article since BSEC has made significant progress in the last few years.

The article mentions about a lack of flagship projects within which the BSEC is identified. But BSEC is in the phase of implementing the Black Sea Ring Highway project, the completion of which will ameliorate the living standards of the BSEC people. It will facilitate intra-BSEC trade and it will link the European road network to that of Asia.

The same applies to the Motorways of the Sea in the BSEC region which is also in its implementation stage. Then we have the Black Sea Trade and Investment Program (BSTIP), a joint project financed by Greece, Turkey, the UNDP and BSEC that aims to increase intra-BSEC trade and investments. In the two years that this program has been implemented, intra-BSEC trade has significantly increased. BSEC we think has success stories. But it is not for BSEC to determine the success or not, it is for the BSEC people to do so.

Mention is also made of limited participation of the private sector that has not lobbied the Organization to acquire sectoral dialogue partnership. This is also not correct since we have recently received applications from UBCCE and other business oriented organizations.

The article also makes reference to a lack of visibility, coordination and cooperation with other regional initiatives, which is not correct. On the contrary, BSEC initiated the coordination of such activities by convening a meeting in March 2008 of Regional Organizations in which the Adriatic and Ionian Initiative, the Central European Initiative, the Danube Co-operation Process, the Regional Cooperation Council and the South East European Cooperation Process participated. Follow up meetings have been held since then in Sarajevo, Chisinau, Athens and Trieste with positive results. Furthermore close cooperation has been established between BSEC and the CEI and both Secretary Generals meet twice a year for consultations to avoid overlapping. The CEI has participated in many of our working groups and steering committees and has provided useful inputs.

Of course BSEC has organizational inefficiencies, but which regional organization does not have? However through a process of constant reform, BSEC has simplified its decision making process by adopting a system of silent procedure, similar to the “procedure ecrite” of the EU. This allows BSEC to adopt Resolutions and Decisions by written consultation between the Member States. This system has proved to be efficient as it simplifies the work of the CMFA by reducing its agenda items. I cannot of course agree to mention made of inefficiencies of the Permanent Secretariat that is due to the fact that the Secretariat is staffed purely by diplomats that lack executive or expert capacity.

While it is true that the Secretariat is staffed by a majority of diplomats, all of them possess excellent executive capacities and have acquired expert knowledge in their fields of competence. It should also be mentioned that some of the progress achieved within BSEC in the last few years is the result of initiatives undertaken by the Secretariat(for example the Black Sea Ring Highway Caravan, the issuing of BSEC transit permits, etc.)

I do hope that with these observations I have shortened the list of shortcomings mentioned in Panagiota Manoli’s paper. However I agree with her that there is still room for improvement of the BSEC Organization.

===================

[1] Ambassador Leonidas Chrysanthopoulos is the Secretary General of the Organisation of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Permanent Secretariat (BSEC PERMIS), Istanbul.