The Danube as a Platform for Cooperation

Bulgaria’s vision for stronger connectivity, shared prosperity, and EU integration

Smaranda Schiopu, Vladimir Mitev

Summary of the interview with Vyara Mincheva (National coordinator for the Danube Strategy)

Context and role of the presidency:

In 2026, Bulgaria will assume the presidency of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (Danube Strategy) for the second time. Over the past eight years, the strategy has evolved into a more influential and strategic macro-regional instrument for implementing European priorities.

Key Priorities of the Bulgarian Presidency:

• Reducing economic, social, and territorial disparities in the Danube Region under the motto “no region should be left behind.”
• Stronger alignment and integration of the Danube Strategy with EU cohesion policy and the future multiannual financial framework (post-2027).
• Support for European integration and the administrative capacity of the five EU candidate countries (out of a total of 14 in the strategy) through joint initiatives with other macroregions (e.g., the Adriatic-Ionian region).

Management and implementation:

The management structure is effective and operates at various levels—national coordinators, expert steering groups, and close cooperation with the European Commission (DG Regio). The exchange of experience with other macro-regional strategies (e.g., the Baltic Sea Strategy) has also been strengthened.

Funding:

Since the Danube Strategy does not have its own budget, projects rely on the “Interreg Danube Region” program (with a budget of approximately 215 million euros) and on the embedding of macro-regional priorities into national programs for greater competitiveness.

Differences between the Upper and Lower Danube: Challenges to connectivity and navigation along the Lower Danube (Bulgaria and Romania) have been identified. It is emphasized that while the strategic framework of the Danube Strategy can identify problems at the expert level, actual infrastructure solutions (such as the “Fast Danube” project to deepen the river) require greater political and financial commitment from the ministries of transportation and the EU.

Local Self-Government and Civic Participation: The Bulgarian Presidency is working in close cooperation with the Association of Danube Municipalities and Local Authorities. Initiatives are planned (including in Ruse around International Danube Day on June 29) aimed at raising public awareness of the strategy and promoting regional cohesion.

Interview

Smaranda Schiopu and Vladimir Mitev are realising their own journalist project, which aims to raise awareness of the Danube Strategy and the ongoing Bulgarian presidency of the Strategy, as well as the development and infrastructure issues facing Northern Bulgaria. As part of this project, they conducted an interview with Vyara Mincheva. She is the National Coordinator for Bulgaria of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR) at the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works. She is leading Bulgaria’s 2026 Presidency of the EUSDR, operating under the motto “Connected regions, more cohesion: A stronger Danube for all”.

Smaranda Schiopu: 

Mrs Mincheva, it seems to me Bulgaria is having something of a moment, it has joined the Eurozone at the start of the year, it has won the Eurovision, and also this year,  it also holds the presidency for the European Union Strategy for the Danube Region, I believe for a second time in 10 years.  How is this presidency different from the last time? 

Vyara Mincheva: 

After eight years, things are quite different from the point of view of the Presidency of this strategic instrument. It is different because, in my opinion, the strategy has become an instrument with a bigger influence and role, as all macro-regional strategies play a very important and focused role in the implementation of the different European priorities.

As you know, the strategy consists of different pillars which are related to connectivity, protecting the environment, building prosperity and strengthening the region, which include and encompass various priorities of the EU as a whole. So, the role of the macro-regional strategies is to put a focus on a specific region in Europe. In our case, this is the Danube region.

And having the possibility to cooperate within these strategic frameworks allows us to put a focus on the different challenges that we are facing now. So, it became more strategic in a way, compared to the beginning of its creation. 

We see this different way of working of the strategy also in the more active role of the EUSDR presidencies. Every year, each presidency is focusing on some specific priorities, political and more practical ones, which they consider that in this period of one calendar year, the strategy and the discussions within the strategy must focus on.

SS: 

And since you already mentioned priorities, what are the priorities for this year? And what would success look like at the end of it?

VM:  

I would say that this year we decided to put strong emphasis on reducing the economic, social and territorial disparities in the Danube region. This is a topic which is very relevant for our region. And what we as a presidency can do is to put the focus of the discussions this year on this specific topic.

Considering that we are now in the middle of negotiations for the next multi-annual financial framework, ie, the future of the cohesion policy as a whole, we believe that this emphasis is very important. Our main principle that we would like to put in front of all the discussions is that no region should be left behind. 

The role of the macro-regional strategy is to put the focus on different themes that can be then developed also by the different priority areas, of course. And to give bigger visibility of the different challenges that we have in this region.

And hopefully, this will be heard by the policy makers and the responsible people in Brussels, especially in this period. Because we think that it is very important for us, specifically for the EUSDR, to be strongly aligned with the EU cohesion policy. Also, we would like to advocate for a better integration of the macro-regional strategies into the EU and into the national programs, including the future multi-annual financial framework.

For us as a presidency, the EUSDR should be a platform to find joint solutions for a more coherent policy and, of course, for knowledge exchange. You asked what would be considered as a success for our presidency. Well, as I said, one of our focuses is the stronger alignment of the macro-regional strategies and the EUSDR into the EU cohesion policy.

We are working with our colleagues from the other macro-regional strategies to find common messaging that will be presented to the EU decision makers in this negotiation process to emphasize the importance of these macro-regional strategies in applying the EU policies and priorities. This is something that we are focusing on very much. One other thematic focus that we have, of course, is related to the role of the Danube strategy in this process of enlargement.

What I mean here is that there have been different council conclusions and ministerial declarations in the previous years, focusing on the role of the macro-regional strategies and the EUSDR in supporting the EU perspective of the candidate countries. So, one of the main roles of the EUSDR is strengthening this cooperation with the candidate countries.

As you know, in the EUSDR, we have 14 member countries, five of which are candidate countries. So, through all these joint initiatives and work of the priority areas, the EUSDR is supporting the development of the administrative capacity of the candidate countries to support them in this process towards EU integration. Last week, we had a meeting together with the EU strategy for the Adriatic-Ionian Region, in Skopje, where we were discussing the activities that we have in common between the priority areas of the EUSDR and the thematic areas of the Adriatic-Ionian strategy, and where joint activities can be done in the future, supporting this EU perspective for the candidate countries. These are some of the main priorities we are working on as a presidency.

It was important to follow the principle of continuity, because these are topics and achievements from the previous EUSDR presidencies; it was important to develop this cooperation and this strategic alignment of the Danube strategy.

SS:

It sounds like within this strategic framework there is a lot of cooperation happening, a lot of coordination that has to happen with multiple regional, national, and supranational actors. 

How effective do you think this process is, or what are the main risks or constraints that you have experienced in this coordination role?

VM:

We have this coordination on different levels. As you know, first we have this coordination within our macro-regional strategy, within the Danube region, and I can say that we have a quite well-working governance structure; I would not say that we are facing any challenges here. We are always in the process of discussing how the different levels of communication and coordination can be improved.

We have the national coordinators, we have also the priority area coordinators, we have the steering groups, which is maybe the most important level of experts, those who are implementing the different projects. Because this is what we see from the Danube strategy, the result of the different cooperation and projects developed by the different actors. And what is important to say is that the Danube strategy cooperation enters into action, so to say, when we have a challenge or a problem which cannot be resolved by only one state, one country.

This is where we have this transnational cooperation entering into force, and when we unite forces, we can find a better solution to the problem. Then of course we have the coordination between the different macro-regional strategies which is something that we are, as a presidency, working on. There is a mechanism of the meeting of the 4 trio presidencies of the macro-regional strategies, which was initiated for the first time by Croatia.

This is a coordination structure that works very well, and this year Bulgaria will lead this mechanism as a representative of the presidency of the EUSDR. We are working very closely with the European Commission and concretely with the DG Regio in discussing all the different opportunities and challenges within our strategy.

So, this is not a one-person job. We have different levels and the main principle of work is cooperation and joint efforts.

SS:

You mentioned the steering groups who are in charge of implementing different projects. Are you aware of any projects that have throughout the years influenced national policy priorities in Bulgaria specifically? Do they remain regional or do they have an influence on national policies as well?

VM:

We have different projects.

For example, I have priority area 11 in my mind, which is dealing with security. There are a lot of joint activities within this priority area, on the topic of security, cooperation between police authorities, migration, and cross-border issues that are problematic not only for one country but for the entire region. 

We have projects related to environmental issues, for example, there are projects that are related to the protection of the sturgeon, which is a very specific fish in the Danube River; also, projects that are related to activities to prevent floods and many others.

There are a vast number of projects that have an important macro-regional impact.

SS:

In that respect, it sounds like the EUSDR is quite important within your institution’s work as well. Each country has the representatives of the EUSDR in different ministries and in Bulgaria it is the Ministry of Regional Development that you’re sitting with. It sounds like Bulgaria is taking it seriously that the EUSDR is helpful for regional development.

VM:

Sure. And every member, every state participating in the EUSDR takes this strategy as a very important tool. In Bulgaria, the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works is the responsible one for the coordination within Bulgaria of the EUSDR. In different countries, the situation varies. In some countries, this is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In others, it’s also the Ministry responsible for regional development, for cohesion policies. In some countries, there are two responsible ministries.

Considering the focus that we have for our presidency, related to the topic of reducing disparities – social, demographic, economic, during the Annual forum of the Danube Strategy, which is the main event for each presidency every year, we are planning to host a meeting of the Ministers responsible for regional development. We believe that we can bring a specific and relevant focus to the Ministerial Declaration that will be agreed upon by the ministers this year. This year, that focus will be regional development.

2026 is really a crucial year for Europe and for the Danube Strategy and region as well, considering the preparation for this next financial framework.

SS:

I know that the EUSDR is not a funding mechanism and it doesn’t have a funding mechanism of its own, so any proposed projects rely on other funding frameworks from the EU. Do you see this as a limiting factor at all? Is it difficult to align the priorities that the EUSDR has with the actual funding mechanisms at the EU? How do you see this relationship having evolved?

VM: 

When we speak about budget, it’s always a challenging and delicate question. Since the adoption of the Danube Strategy the main principle on which it was adopted is that no additional funding will be set up for it. So, what we are using, the Member States and the candidate countries as well, is the transnational cooperation through the Interreg Danube Region Program. 

This is one of the funding mechanisms that we have for implementing projects that have impact on the Danube region, and that implement the principles of the Danube Strategy. This is a program where all 14 member countries can take part in different projects, and the priorities of the program follow the priorities of the EUSDR. The budget for this programming period is around €215 million. This is the framework that we have, where the activities of the priority areas are funded by this program. Also, the Secretariat of the Danube Strategy is also part of this funding program. 

The program announces calls for different projects and it is up to the different partners to develop projects and to present them in order to get financing.

The other possibility to implement the priorities of the Danube Strategy and to achieve better results is the embedding of the macro-regional priorities within the national programs. Cooperation at this level as well is very important.

What does it mean? It means that if project can prove that it’s implementing some of the priorities of the Danube Strategy, that can deliver some results for the benefit of the Danube region, that project could receive some, for example, bonus points for this, by proving this impact for the Danube region; that could give them a possibility to be more competitive compared to other projects and to be granted funds for implementation. 

This is something that we within the EUSDR are working on. Most of the presidencies are preparing embedding papers, presenting them to the different managing authorities at national level. It is up to the different member states to decide how to embed and whether to embed these macro-regional priorities within their national programs. It is important to have the macro-regional strategies recognized and embedded at a higher level. 

This is one of the challenges that we are facing, and we, as a presidency, would like to promote a stronger alignment between the EUSDR and EU cohesion policy. This is what I meant when I said that we would like to be heard and recognized more at EU level as this will help the embedding at national level and give more opportunities to access more funds, not to rely only on the Danube program.

SS:

Is there any coordination or collaboration currently with other similar strategic instruments? For example, the EU strategy for the Baltic Sea region. Have you met with them or worked with them? Are there any opportunities for sharing learnings?

VM: 

Yes, of course. There’s always an exchange and there is one very interesting format which is hosted by the European Commission in Brussels every year, the Macro-Regional Strategies and Sea Basins Days.

This is the place for exchange of knowledge and experience between the different macro-regional strategies. We have more close relations with the EU strategy for the Adriatic-Ionian region. And with the other macro-regional strategies as well, we are discussing some joint messages related to the next multi-annual financial framework.

We have this joint format of the 4 macro-regional strategies trio presidencies that meet every year in Brussels, where we discuss common joint actions or challenges that we might face. So, there are different mechanisms where we can discuss our priorities, our challenges, and some future initiatives.

SS: 

Where do you see the EUSDR evolving in the next five to ten years, or what are your own hopes for it?

VM:

I hope that our region, with the help of this strategy, will develop more. I hope that the activities of the Danube strategy will have a bigger and more positive impact, and that it will bring higher visibility of our regions and of the challenges that we are facing.

And of course, the common line that we have is related to reducing the disparities in the regions, because as you know, in the Danube region we have the richest countries, and unfortunately also those with the biggest challenges in Europe. If we can reduce these differences, I’m not saying that they will disappear, but to work towards their disappearance, that would be really good for the region and for the people. I’m sure that the Danube strategy is one of the instruments that can and should be used by the EU and by the countries, to work towards that.

Vladimir Mitev: 

You mentioned that the richest countries in the EU and the ones with challenges are in the Danube region. And it is also seen maybe in the way that the attitude towards the Danube seems to be different, because in the Upper Danube region, there are more things related to the Danube. It’s somehow more owned by the countries and by the people there. 

In the case of Bulgaria and Romania, on the Lower Danube, traditionally there has been much weaker connection to the Danube. You are aware that the dredging of the Danube was problematic for some years.

There is no river transport as far as I know in Bulgaria. It used to be in socialist times but not in recent years. I haven’t heard of any Danube transport, I mean between Bulgarian cities. What could be the concrete projects or actions that can overcome this disparity between Upper and Lower Danube in appropriation of the Danube?

VM:

Indeed. This connectivity issue is one of the main challenges that we are facing here in our part of the Danube region. This is a question that is asked a lot, what can the Danube Strategy do for navigability, for example.

As I said, the Danube strategy is a strategic instrument, a strategic framework, we don’t own our budget, and you know that these connectivity challenges can be overcome by very good projects with enough financing. What can be done by the Danube strategy is the work of the experts in identifying the problems and proposing solutions. These are the measures that can be financed through the Danube program.

These are projects and problems that can be resolved with higher political support, from the relevant ministries of transport, and of course with the participation of the EU institutions, as the navigability of the entire Danube river is an EU issue. As far as it comes from the Bulgarian presidency, and especially from the Danube Strategy mechanisms, that question can be put in the focus, can be discussed at an expert level, but the solution for this type of problems and challenges should come at a different level. It’s not the EUSDR that could solve this problem.

V Mitev: 

Okay, it’s important to build a little bit on that. If Lower Danube is to increase its role in the Danube strategy or is to increase its cohesion if you wish, overcoming the disparities. To what extent the level of cooperation with Romania is sufficient for that at this moment?

Is there sufficient trust? Is there sufficient community between Bulgarian experts and politicians and the Romanian ones?

VM:

Within our ministry, we are working with Romania in the framework of the Interreg program Bulgaria-Romania, where there are different projects being developed. There is also a project developed by our Ministry of Transport related to the dredging of the Danube River called Fast Danube.

But it is true that there are differences between Lower and Upper Danube regions.

V Mitev:

Yes, I can imagine that the level of trust between countries of the Upper level is better too. You know Bulgaria is a country very much focused on and run by its capital, but the Danube passes through other areas, not where Sofia is.

I was wondering to what extent the plans for this Bulgarian presidency are also enriched by input coming from municipalities or regional authorities or other entities which are along the Danube or the region between Bulgaria and Romania?

VM: 

On the EUSDR website there is a calendar with different initiatives, including in Ruse. One of the aims of each presidency is to make the Danube Strategy more visible for the citizens. 

We are also working very well with the Association of the Danube Municipalities as they also participate in different projects and are also planning different initiatives. At the end of June, we are celebrating the International Danube Day. The official date is the 29^th and on this occasion there will be different initiatives organized by the local authorities – events in Ruse, also some planned by the Association of the Municipalities, aiming at celebrating cooperation, unity, joint community. All these – connecting people together, is also one of the aims of the Danube Strategy.

Photo: Vyara Mincheva (source: Vyara Mincheva)

Subscribe to the channel of the blog “The Bridge of Friendship” in YouTube, where a number of video and audio interviews are published! The blog can also be followed in Facebook and Twitter. Its Telegram channel is here. And here is its Substack account.

About Author