Balkans

Monsanto, the world’s largest seed producer and one of the most well-known promoters of genetically modified crops worldwide, is in line to receive USD 40 million of public financial support from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the bank disclosed last month.

On November 30, the same day as the national government was under fire in the most heated protests Slovenia has seen in years, Slovenia's ministers of finance and infrastructure added fuel to the flames by signing contracts with Simon Tot, director of the Sostanj lignite power plant for the controversial EUR 1.3 billion Sostanj Unit 6. These contracts prepare the ground for the signing of a state guarantee contract for a EUR 440 million loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB) for the project.

Europe’s neighbouring countries, from the Western Balkans to Ukraine, are intent on pursuing unsustainable energy futures that rely heavily on coal and nuclear. The draft energy strategy of the European Energy Community, recently open for public comments, is no big departure from the national plans, as Bankwatch found out when compiling comments to the draft – and, moreover, this reliance on coal and nuclear energy could end up receiving EU support and financing.

Since the news broke in early November that the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is considering supporting Monsanto, one of the most controversial agricultural corporations, with up to USD 40 million, we have heard voices of protest from across Europe. Last Thursday, Serbian NGOs and anti-GMO activists took their protest to the Belgrade offices of the EBRD

Signed by more than 150 organisations, the letter calls on the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development to not further consider USD 40 million unfunded risk participation in Monsanto's portfolio in Bulgaria, Hungary, Russia, Serbia, Turkey, and Ukraine. The letter explains Monsanto's long and controversial history of transferring its risks onto other people and the environment. It argues that support for this company and the agricultural model it represents is highly inappropriate for a multilateral development bank committed in its statute to promoting “environmentally sound and sustainable development”.