Clearance to POSCO Project in Odisha: Taking the Nation for a Ride

With the decision on 31st Jan 2011 to grant clearance to the POSCO project, against strong recommendations of its own committees, the Environment Ministry and its Minister stand exposed. Minister Jairam Ramesh has finally shed the last vestiges of any pretence to be a Minister who is serious about implementing environmental laws.

Ramesh had initially shown much enthusiasm for enforcing to some minimum level the environmental and forestry laws, but soon this was seen to be tapering off, raising questions about whether Ramesh really is different from any earlier Environment Ministers.

He has now shown that the only difference is that he initially huffs and puffs, and breathes fire, (where there is fire, there must be smoke, to rephrase a popular saying, and where there is smoke there must a smoke screen) only to then readily hand over the clearances. The earlier ministers did not even bother about the prior pyrotechnics.

The POSCO clearance can only be described as blatant, and its justifications as insults to the intelligence of Indian citizens. For example, the clearance note put up by the Ministry on the web site announces that clearances have been granted with large number of additional conditions. Such “significant” conditions include following the existing National Ambient Air Quality Standards and ensuring that no industrial activity is carried out in the CRZ area other than permissible under the notification. In other words, the project should follow the law of the land.

Another condition is carrying out the study of the sustainability of water requirement – something which should be done before the clearance, not after. And it requires the Project to “voluntarily sacrifice water” in case of a shortfall at the source. This is a rather touching belief in the Company.

In any case, where the MoEF has hardly any capacity to monitor conditions so that it is a case “impose conditionalities and forget them”, when everyone knows that once a project is given clearance, then even if violations of conditions are noted hardy any action is taken, then what is the sanctity of these conditions? And how can the conditions form the justification of the clearance?

As the POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti has stated in its statement “The decision today can be summarised in one sentence: "Repeat your lies, give us promises that we all know are false, and then loot at will."”

The Samiti has also stated that “We repeat: we will not give up our lands, our forests and our homes to this company. It is not the meaningless orders of a mercenary government that will decide this project's fate, but the tears and blood of our people. Through the road of peaceful demonstrations and people's resistance we have fought this project, in the face of torture, jail, firings and killings. If this project comes it will come over our dead bodies.

I express my full support and solidarity to their struggle, and wish them strength and success in this fight.

My latest article is now up on India Together. It talks about the dams that China is planning to build on the Brahmaputra, the likley impacts of these dams in India, how the Government of India views these and the views of the local communities.

http://indiatogether.org/2011/jan/env-brahm.htm

Serious Governance Issue Raised by MoEF Clearance to Jaitapur Nuclear Power Plant

The Ministry of Environment and Forests has today (28 nov 2010) accorded the environmental clearance to the 9900 MW Jaitapur Nuclear power plant in Ratnagiri district in coastal Maharashtra, against intense local and national opposition.

While declaring this decision, the Minister for Environment and Forests, Jairam Ramesh has stated “I tried to balance four objectives: the amount of energy required to sustain a growth rate of nine per cent; the proportion of fuel mix; strategic diplomacy, especially after the Civilian Nuclear Deal; and the environmental concerns raised by a large number of groups,” (The Hindu, 29 Nov 2010, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article919959.ece?homepage=true )

I find the decision to accord the clearance complete wrong, but I do agree with the above principle articulated by the Minister, that there is a need to balance several objectives. (I would add a few more to them including equity, displacement etc.). The issue is whether the MoEF is the competent authority to do this balancing. It is a serious problem with our project planning, regulation and governance systems that we do not have appropriate procedures and agencies to ensure such a balancing. The sector ministries (power, water, atomic energy etc.) look to only push their own sector’s growth – which they equate with national interests. Since they are the ministries deciding on the “need” and “desirability” of projects, the conflict of interest in balancing with regards environment, social impacts, equity etc are clear.

Ramesh, in his press note dated 28 Nov 2010 has stated at one point that he is “not the competent authority to pass judgment on matter related to the need, economics and safety of nuclear power plants.” Yet, he goes on to give strategic, economic and energy related objectives as the main justifications for according the clearance. In the absence of a mechanism to do the “balancing”, the MoEF cannot appropriate this process, though to be fair, so far it has been appropriated by the line / sector ministries, with disastrous environmental, social and equity impacts, and some pathetic shows on the performance front too. Unfortunately, the MoEF has ended up according clearance to an environmentally destructive project, for the reasons that it acknowledges it has no competence, nor the mandate to examine.

There are many detailed and specific criticisms of the MoEF order, which will surely be brought out by others. I want to mention only one more point here, and that is: Even if one accepts the MoEF’s argument that India desperately needs more electricity, the mere requirement of electricity at the national level cannot automatically translate into a justification for specific power plant.

Moving on to some other issues emerging from this clearance order, one must, in spite of several disagreements on specific orders of the MoEF, put on record the appreciation for making public its logic and reasoning through detailed explanatory notes (even though the logic may be often flawed!). The Minister needs to be commended for this.

Secondly, the press note related to the Jaitapur clearance makes a statement “India must get used to the concept of carrying capacity and cumulative impact assessment studies.” This is really critical and is most welcome. We would expect and hope that the Ministry puts this in place as a pre-requisite to clearing individual projects. And not leave it to the states as a voluntary effort, as is indicated in the press note.

(Image: People Protesting against the Jaitapur Plant: Photo Courtesy Lokayat http://lokayatpune.wordpress.com/2009/12/29/people-rise-up-against-jaitapur-nuclear-power-plant-and-destructive-projects-in-konkan/)

Environmental Clearance to Navi Mumbai Airport – A Dangerous Precedent?

The Ministry of Environment and Forests finally accorded Environmental Clearance to the proposed International airport at Navi Mumbai on 22 November 2010. (Image from CIDCO website)

The MoEF press note of 22 Nov 2010, signed personally by the Minister Shri Jairam Ramesh, states that “a good agreement has been obtained to the optimal satisfaction of all sides concerned”. In principle, it is to be appreciated that optimality is the important goal in such matters, for any human action is certain to have an impact on the environment. As we cannot have zero human activity, we need to create a balance (optimality) between any developmental activity and the impacts on environment.

In this case, leaving aside for time being the question of whether all sides are really satisfied, it is important to note a serious problem with how this optimality has been achieved.

The MoEF press note states that “By August 2010, it was clear that, for various technical and non-technical reasons, the Navi Mumbai location has become a fait accompli.” With the Minister accepting the fait accompli “in good faith”, the clearance was as good as given. The only thing left was the matter of negotiating the conditions.

Considering a project for environmental and social clearance under the situation of fait accompli is nothing but pure arm twisting. It is a way of saying that no matter how high these impacts, the project has to go through because it is now irreversible. Unfortunately, this is a norm for many projects in India.

The MoEF press note implies the creation of the fait accompli in two ways. One, by arguing that there is absolutely no other alternative to the project. The MoEF press note describes how several other locations have been suggested but found unsuitable for the airport. Hence, the Navi Mumbai location is the only option left. However, this at best can make the location a fait accompli, but the location is conditional to the airport being established as necessary in the first place. Otherwise, this principle would necessarily make several projects like dams, mines fait accompli, as there are few alternatives regarding their locations. (You can have a mine only where there is a mineral or metal deposit!)

In other words, it is not sufficient for there to be no other alternative location, it is also necessary that the project itself is absolutely indispensable and that its overall benefits far outweigh any adverse impacts. The MoEF press note states that “With the constraints operating at the existing airport, the urgent need for a second airport for Mumbai, a public infrastructure, is obvious.” One hopes that this statement is figurative, for “obviousness” is subjective, and hardly evidence that something is necessary. The necessity of a project does not also automatically follow from the mere fact of it being a public infrastructure.

As I am not familiar with the studies assessing the need for the Navi Mumbai airport, I will accept that they would have been carried out in a comprehensive, transparent manner with ample opportunity for inputs from various stakeholders and stakelosers. However, it is a fact that many projects like dams and power projects are deemed as necessary on the basis of superficial studies, with the argument that the need for water and power is “obvious”, the “national interest” is “obvious”. Once the project is considered as indispensable, then the social and environmental clearances are considered as mere procedural hurdles. This is the case of a project being conceptually a fait accompli as it has to go ahead, no matter what.

The second way in which a project is rendered fait accompli is when work has been done, land has been acquired, money has been spent, or commitments have been made so that it is not possible to go back on the project. In case of Navi Mumbai airport, this factor also seems to be operating. The Government of India had even amended the CRZ Notification 1991 to allow for an airport at Navi Mumbai. The TORs for the Environment Impact Assessment were issued only after this amendment. Many projects in India fall in this category. In the state of Arunachal Pradesh, for example, the state government is taking huge sums of money from private hydropower developers as advances to “allot” projects to them. With such advances, it is difficult for the projects to be later rejected. Another important case is when projects are cleared piecemeal. For example, consider a coal based thermal power project. If the plant is given clearance without the coal mine being cleared, the work on the plant can go ahead, money can be spent and this creates tremendous pressure to accord clearance to the mine. It is learnt that MoEF has just brought out a circular saying that a thermal power plant or steel plant will not be cleared unless the mine is given clearance first. This is a welcome initiative, but needs to be extended to all such projects. Most notorious recent cases have been the Vedanta case where the refinery was functioning but the mine (Niyamgiri) had not been accorded the clearance, and the case of POSCO Steel Plant where the port and steel plant have been given clearance but it is not sure if the other components like the iron ore mines have been given clearances.

In sum, it is clear that while any developmental activity needs a balance between human intervention and environmental impact, such a balance cannot be reached under the condition of fait accompli. Unfortunately, forcing social and environmental clearances under the pressure of fait accompli has been the practice rather than exception in India.

As the processes related to the Navi Mumbai airport had been underway much before Shri Jairam Ramesh became the Minister for Environment and Forest, we can take his acceptance of fait accompli as an honest admission. We only hope that it does not set a dangerous precedent, but rather, the open admission signifies the recognition of a problem and leads to measures to root out such practises.

My New Article on Hydropower Industry's Sustainability Protocol

See my latest article, on the on the International Hydropower Association's Hydropower Sustainability Protocol...

http://www.indiatogether.org/2010/nov/opi-protocol.htm

Peter Bosshard too has a great blog piece on this topic at:

http://www.internationalrivers.org/en/blog/peter-bosshard/2010-11-19/putting-hydro-industry%E2%80%99s-fox-charge-henhouse

Putting the Hydro Industry’s Fox in Charge of the Henhouse?

Program to Mark 25 Years of NBA - A Missed Opportunity

The program to mark 25 years of the Narmada Bachao Andolan starts today (22 Oct 2010) with a rally and public meeting at Dhadgaon. Several thousand people in the valley are expected to assemble at Dhadgaon and on 23 Oct at Badwani. And several hundred are likely to reach there from rest of the country. In the last 10 days or so, anyone that one talks to or emails generally has been asking one another - are you going?

25 Years of the Narmada struggle! It is on one hand a very proud moment for all of us that the struggle has gone on for this long with determination and tenacity; at the same time, it is immensely sad that people have had to struggle so long. It is an important occasion for all those who have been involved to meet and share. However such an occasion cannot be a mere celebration. Therefore, it is was good to see that NBA had decided to call the program "Reflections from the Narmada: 25 Years and Beyond." Undoubtedly, the occasion of the struggle completing 25 years is the right occasion to come together, share, celebrate and also reflect.

However, the actual program came as a disappointment to me. The way the program is structured, there will be little time for any reflections, and little energy - physical as well as mental - as people get tired from the rallies, public meetings, travel from Dhadgaon to Badwani, and various other programs. These two days packed with event after event are certainly not conducive for reflections, though they will surely be exciting and stimulating in their own way. Of course, there will be opportunities for people to speak from the stage, but that is not really the best way to reflect and share the highs and the lows of the struggle.

In terms of meeting people and spending time together too, days packed with travel, rallies and public meetings are the least appropriate occasions. A more relaxed event where people come together and spend 2 or more days together would have been much more useful for this purpose.

Therefore, this will be one more occasion of an opportunity missed. It is a chance lost for all of us involved in the Narmada struggle to come together and recollect the joyous and the difficult times, and do some honest reflections, so that the struggle can become stronger and even more of an inspiration for others.

May be there is a feeling that the NAPM meeting that is to immediately follow will serve as a platform for some reflections. If this is the case (and I am not saying it is), it would be unfair to both NBA and NAPM. For all their common threads and people, NBA and NAPM are distinct entities, with different processes and identities. The NAPM meeting would certainly have its own agenda and its priorities, so it cannot be a forum for NBA's reflections. The agenda of the NAPM meeting also reflects this. Also, there are many people who have been intensely involved with NBA but not with NAPM. So a process of reflection around the 25 years of Narmada struggle needs its own platform, of the NBA.

This was also a time for inclusiveness. It was an important occasion to bring together (literally and metaphorically) all those who have been involved in NBA in the last two and half decades, leaving out those few who have lost the way and gone on to indulge in corrupt practices. Therefore, it would have been nice if senior activists of the Andolan who are still active in the valley in struggles around Narmada dams - like Alok, Silvi, Bhagwanbhai - who have also worked for many years in the struggle around Sardar Sarovar, the Bargi activists etc. had also been involved in the planning and organization of the program and they were also among those inviting people to the valley.

While I am not going for the program due to some work here that cannot be adjusted, there is no hiding the fact that these two things had already affected my enthusiasm for the program. However, it was worse when I saw that some senior local activists of Gujarat had not even been informed about the program. Nandini's email of 19th Oct about it is self-explanatory and I am giving it below. This is simply not done when emails and phones were being made far and wide. Nandini's email:

One disturbing incident concerning the 23rd 24th NBA program at Dhadaon and Badwani has prompted me to say something of immediate importance concerning the program.

While I was booking my tickets for the program today (19th Oct 2010), I wanted to coordinate my visit with the local senior leaders/activists of Gujarat, who have worked in most adverse of circumstances to build the struggle in an extremely hostile State, around the SSP Empire, in and around the very dam itself. I therefore called today two of the senior most local leaders and activists of Gujarat and in whose house the NBA karayalaya functioned and whose entire family has withstood incomprehensible State pressure on a daily basis for years (I need not dwell more on their contribution because that would be an embarrassment) Prabhubhai Tadvi and Kapilaben of Waghadia. I called them just to know when they were reaching for the program. I was shocked when Prabhubhai asked me "What program? Where? When?" Even Kapilaben did not know anything about the program. These key activists/local leaders whom I am sure everyone, even those remotely concerned with NBA would know, had no idea of the program at all, till I called them today! I was disturbed all the more because they are not an exception. Rasikbhai Gajanan and Bhima Tadvi, other senior activists who had been NBA full timers for a very long period in Gujarat also had no idea of the program till last night when I called them up to know of their travel plans for the program.

This is a serious matter since it is not the question of these 4 senior oustee activists/leaders alone. Since these senior local people of NBA in Gujarat do not know of the program, it is likely that the second line of local leadership, activists and Andolan karies of Kevadia colony and many R&R sites have also been left out. This is painful because while NBA invites people from far and wide, it has chosen to ignore those very oustees of Gujarat who not only built this Sangathan, but whose Sangathan it actually is! And these are people who built the andolan against an extremely hostile state and in the times when NBA was being beaten and bruised. Once again I need not dwell on the significance of the Sangathan in Gujarat that they lead collectively, with many others.

And let us not forget that Narmada has been a witness to a struggle by its communities right from the year 1961 when the lands for Kevdia Colony were first acquired and many tribals who fought their dispossession then were jailed. Few of them like Muljikaka still survive to tell the story of how they fought against all odds 50 years ago and still continue to struggle.

See you all in Badwani. - Nandini

My Article on Water as a Human Right

My article on UN recognising water as a human right is now up on India Together. You can read it at

http://indiatogether.org/2010/oct/hrt-water.htm

My article on India's energy policy, raising the issues of energy for what and whom, and the issue of sustainabililty - and whether there will be any limits to how much energy we can consume, has appeared in the July-August issue of the Movement of India. You can access it at:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/36657717

See my latest article in the appointment of Rakesh Nath as Chair of the Expert Appraisal Committee of the Ministry of Environment and Forest.

REGULATION Appointment without perspective The Chair of the EAC should necessarily have an overarching environmental perspective, as s/he is supposed to ensure the environmental sustainability of projects that come to the committee. Shripad Dharmadhikary reports.

http://indiatogether.org/2010/aug/env-eac.htm

Lomborg – Right Analysis, Wrong Conclusions

Economic Times carried an article by Bjorn Lomborg on 3rd August 2010. This is my response to it, sent to ET, but I am not sure if they will carry it or not.
-------------------------------------------------

Bjorn Lomborg’s Affordable Green Energy (Guest Column, ET 2 August 2010 http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/6246302.cms) correctly brings out the seriousness of the climate change problem and the enormous difficulty of tackling it. He points out how we would have to build many nuclear plants, several hydro power plants the size of Three Gorges and a vast array of other generating stations every year to replace the carbon emitting power generation by “clean” power.

While his analysis is correct, his prescription is widely off the mark. His advocacy of investing money to bring down prices of solar and other renewables is by itself faultless. However, the underlying assumption that is that this (ultra) cheap solar energy will allow us to replace the coal based electricity and maintain the same level of energy consumption. This is the fatal flaw in his prescription. The reality is that any energy source has an ecological (and livelihood) footprint. Any energy source – over its life cycle – will have an impact on the environment. In some cases this will be terribly destructive, and in other cases, it would be more benign. However, the cumulative impact of millions of benign cases can itself add up to be terrible. A small hydro plant is far less impacting than a massive dam, but if one builds a thousand small hydro in a single basin, the ecology of the basin and livelihoods of the people there would be severely impacted.

The same will hold at the global level for energy sources like solar. For example, a huge solar array say in the desert (a typical scenario often advanced) could suck up the energy in that locality, creating an “energy vaccum” or a “energy depression”. This could lead to changes in the atmospheric pressures, wind directions, speeds etc. We don’t know the consequences yet of large scale disruptions to the global solar energy flux.

So even if Lomborg’s idea of making solar ultra cheap is realised, we may escape the impact of climate changing carbon emissions, but are sure to end up with other, hitherto unforeseen impacts. The simple logic is that while the planet’s environment - a complex and till a few centuries back, a balanced system – can take relatively small interventions without losing the equilibrium, interventions on a massive scale can destabilise it.

This is not to argue against making solar and other sources cheap. This is indispensable in any case. But the real – and only solution is to cut down on the total consumption of energy – and then also have cheap and more benign sources like solar. If we want that countries like the US continue with electricity consumption of 13,000 KWH per capita per year (India is 550) and 7800 kg oil equivalent of total energy per capita per year (India 439) – already the burden on the environment is unbearable. If we want others (India, Asia, Africa) to have a chance to better their levels of energy consumption, then we can only imagine the huge amounts of generation that will be required. Even if these were to come from solar, it would still cause massive disturbances to the environment. In sum, we cannot move towards a solution to the climate crisis until the countries like US and others cut down their consumption (remember, billions of their fellow human beings are living with much lesser consumption of energy, minerals, metals etc), in the process creating space for others to move a little higher up on the scale, but still keeping in mind that they too would have to set limits to how much energy they can consume. Only when this fundamental restructuring is in place will other solutions like cheap solar be meaningful.

Bhopal Judgement A Slap in the Face of Victims

The judgement of the Chief judicial Magistrate, Bhopal, in the gas tragedy-mass murder case comes more as a reminder of the abject helplessness, timidity and lack of political will at best - and collusion at worst - of the Indian state in its readiness and ability to make Corporates accountable, than any sense of justice rendered.

Victims have rightly called it a "slap in our face".

It is one more indication of how Corporates can get away with the worst environmental crimes, especially if they come from the great land of US of A, which particularly makes the Government of India **** in the *****

Maoists Deny Involvement

It is now emerging that the Maoists are not behind the gruesome incident of the Gyaneshwari Expresss. Both the CPI(Maoist) and the PCAPA have denied any involvement. Apparently, on Friday night, the following statement was issued on behalf of the CPI(Maoist) WB State Committee. “We are in no way involved in this incident. We did not carry out any explosion in the railway line. Killing innocent people by sabotaging railway line is not our agenda. When we carry out any action, there are always some specific reasons behind. We also acknowledge responsibility for that. Whenever we commit mistakes we admit it. However, responsibility is being placed on us now for an incident in which we are in no way involved”.

The Hindustan Times of 29 May 2010 also carried a small mention of the denial by PCAPA (http://www.hindustantimes.com/special-news-report/News-Feed/78-die-in-train-crash-Naxals-blamed/Article1-549604.aspx) but the denial has been mostly unreported in the media.

While officials continued to blame the CPI (Maoists) and the PCAPA ( See Hindustan Times of 30^th May 2010 http://www.hindustantimes.com/Victims-kin-hunt-for-bodies-Mamata-for-votes/H1-Article3-550507.aspx) the FIR registered on this incident does not mention the involvement of the Maoist.

So what’s the truth? The country needs to know the real perpetrators of this incident. Can we hope for an honest, quick and competent enquiry into this incident?

Support Naxals and Face Punishment says PC

Our dear HM has recently issued dire threats to civil society for "supporting" the Maoists. To him, anyone who even hints at the gross injustice, years of exploitation and complete abdication of its duty by the state in the tribals areas as being the underlying cause for the growth of the Maoist movement is a supporter of the Naxals. The Times of India wrote recently (7th May 2010 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Support-Naxals-face-punishment/articleshow/5900678.cms)

"NEW DELHI: Toughening its stance against Naxalites, the Centre on Thursday warned Maoist sympathizers — including members of civil society and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) — found supporting the ultras by propagating their ideology or by any other means to be ready to face severe punishment. "

Of course, this is utter nonsense. If one reads what the Home Affairs Ministry has to say, one would think that the civil society is more of a threat than the Maoists themselves.

Wonder what PC would say to those who said this:

"... the Naxalite movement has to be recognised as a political movement with a strong base among the landless and poor peasantry and adivasis. ....Though its professed long term ideology is capturing state power by force, in its day to day manifestation it is to be looked upon as basically a fight for social justice, equality, protection and local development. The two have to be seen together without overplaying the former..."

Would he arrest them under the UAPA?

It is a quote from the report of the Expert Committee set up by the Planning Commission of India on Development Challenges in Extremist Affected Areas, published by the Government of India in April 2008.

Ugly occupations cannot produce beautiful resistances

"The US is now learning that ugly occupations cannot produce beautiful resistances." Raza Naeem, reviewing Fareed Zakaria's book The Post-American World, in Frontline.
When will the Indian establishment realise that the same holds for structural violence, gross injustice and extreme inequity?

Shri Shekhar Gupta’s Drought Proofing India (Indian Express, 15 August 2009 http://www.indianexpress.com/news/droughtproofing-india/502292/) betrays an ignorance of the ground realities in Punjab and Haryana and the reasons behind the “success” of its agriculture. Gupta attributes the drought-proofing of these states to the big dams built in the 1950s and 1960s when the reality is quiet different. Our study of the Bhakra Nangal project and agriculture in the two states (Unravelling Bhakra, Manthan Adhyayan Kendra, 2005) clearly showed that a huge part of the agricultural production of the two states, 43% in Punjab and 34% in Haryana, was due to the mining of groundwater – that is, unsustainably drawing out more water than is being recharged. This, and several other agricultural practices that resulted in a burst in the agricultural production are the very factors that have now pushed the agriculture of the two states in a serious crisis.

Gupta also makes explicit what he thinks of people who raise questions about such large dams when he says that the dams in the Indus basin like Bhakra were built “when the most retrograde environmental and jholawala movements in the history of mankind had not yet arrived on the scene.” But his ignorance of studies which document the reality of such projects raises the question of who really is retrograde and has a closed mind. Further, Gupta may not know it, but due to the very absence of such movements, the oustees of Bhakra and Pong dams are still crying for their proper rehabilitation more than 50 years after being displaced.

However, even if we disregard Gupta's lack of knowledge about irrigation, agriculture and water, what is appalling is his take on the situation in Gujarat. His article talks about how the Patels of Gujarat sold the idea of Narmada to the people of Gujarat and that “The dam got built because the Gujaratis won’t brook any obstruction to it.” It is difficult to believe that Gupta is unaware of what this “not brooking any obstruction” involved. It was the foretaste of the same intolerance and state supported violence that was later to manifest itself in full force in the post-Godhra riots in Gujarat. The Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) office and activists were repeatedly attacked, meetings routinely disrupted and organizers of meetings threatened. Many of the attacks were in the presence of the police who stood by silently and watched. The attackers were mostly local and sometimes even state level politicians, and hooligans. They were never brought to book, even though in many cases they were photographed or videoed in action. The use of violence and intimidation to suppress the rights of the people of the Narmada valley, to suppress their freedom of speech and to suppress the right of the people of Gujarat to know all the aspects of the project was the hallmark of the “brooking no obstruction”. The most publicized of the cases in later years was that of Aamir Khan, whose film Faana was not allowed to be released in Gujarat by mobs threatening violence just because he articulated the right of the affected people to a proper rehabilitation.

It is difficult to believe that Shri Shekhar Gupta does not know the real nature of how the dam was pushed ahead in Gujarat. If he doesn't, this is of serious concern as he is a senior journalist of high standing. If he does know of this reality, then his implied praise of the Gujaratis not brooking any obstruction is even more a cause of worry.

17 August 2009

It is 48 oC Now

The temparature reached 48 oC on 28th April and has been hovering around that mark since then. Even a small round outside is enough to roast one! It is better inside, and Badwani has been given a special status due to it being possibly the hottest inhabited place at least in M.P. There are no power cuts during the summer months. This at least makes the temparatures a little bearable, though the searing heat makes one so restless, and all hopes of a solid working day are lost in fighting the discomfort of the heat.

Climat Change is Upon Us
Climate Change is surely upon us. It is not just the big things that we read in the press - the melting Himalayan glaciers, the increasing hurricanes and storms - but also many small things in our own neighbourhoods that show that climate change is definitely here.

Badwani, the place I live in, is possibly one of the hottest inhabited town in India. Every summer, the maximum temperatures go up to 49 oC. Yet, this summer, till day before yesterday (till 12th April) it was still pleasant, and we could sit without a fan even in the afternoon. In a day the temperatures have suddenly touched 47 oC.

On the other hand, in December last year (2008), we had a stretch of 15 days when it was so warm that one thought that summer had almost begun. Wonders of wonders, the glorious palash – also called the flame of forests for obvious reasons, that blooms just about a week before holi, heralding the approach of spring / summer – could be seen in all its splendour, albeit in isolated patches. (See the photo of a palash in resplendence). I was travelling to Indore for a marriage on 12 December, and I remember my great surprise on seeing isolated palash trees in full bloom. I have never seen such a phenomenon before.

Tarnished Gold - Dow Chemicals at IIT Bombay Golden Jubilee Gala

Later this week, from 18-20th July 2008, the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay’s Golden Jubilee Gala Event takes off in New York. As an alumnus of this august institution, I am proud that it has completed 50 years. Yet, its showcase celebrations in New York leave one with mixed feelings as one of the Gold Sponsors is Dow Chemicals.

On 6th February 2001, Union Carbide Corporation became a fully owned subsidiary of Dow chemicals. UCC was the owner of Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL), whose factory in Bhopal in December 1984 was responsible for one of worst cases of industrial disasters in history, a reprehensible act resulting from several grossly criminal omissions and commissions. The Bhopal gas leak tragedy killed thousands on 3rd December 1984, and in the 23 years following, has killed thousands more, and has dammed thousands of others to a life of disability and disease. The victims have received neither full compensation nor justice and Bhopal continues to be blot on India’s record of human rights. UCC remains accountable for Bhopal, and as its 100% owners, so does Dow.

As the people of Bhopal continue to suffer, how can IIT Bombay associate with, and lend its credibility to Dow? This is a question that has marred the Golden Jubilee celebrations for me and for many other alumni. Earlier this week, 43 faculty members of IIT Bombay wrote an Open Letter to the organisers of the New York event, urging them to “reject any offer of a relationship with Dow Chemical or any of its Subsidiaries” and in particular “strongly urg[ing] … to refuse sponsorship from Dow Chemical for the 2008 Golden Jubilee Conference, planned for 18-20 July 2008.” The letter notes that UCC is a key accused in a criminal case related to Bhopal disaster, and is a declared absconder as it has not responded to the summons. It mentions several other environmental and legal liabilities of Dow in support of the call. Around 500 others, mainly alumni of IIT Bombay, have signed a Petition which makes a similar call. The organisers of the event have not yet responded to this.

UCC (and by implication Dow), tries to disassociate itself from the Bhopal tragedy by saying that “In 1994, Union Carbide sold its entire stake in UCIL to MacLeod Russell (India) Limited of Calcutta, and UCIL was renamed Eveready Industries India, Limited (Eveready Industries). As a result of the sale of its shares in UCIL, Union Carbide retained no interest in — or liability for — the Bhopal site.” (http://www.bhopal.com/ucs.htm ) This is a specious argument at best, and legally untenable. Sale of UCIL does not relieve UCC of the criminal liability, and it is UCC which is named in the criminal cases, and it is UCC that is the declared absconder. Dow, as 100% owner, is fully accountable for the liabilities of UCC. As recently as February 2008, the Union law ministry of India has underscored that Dow Chemical would have to face all the pending legal liabilities of Union Carbide.

Given all this, it would be unfortunate if IIT Bombay still continues with Dow’s sponsorship of the event. It would certainly taint the Golden Jubilee functions. Lest it be said that this is all last minute, it should be pointed out that many alumni and faculty have been raising this issue for months now.


What about others?

Moreover, this whole discussion also raises the need to go beyond Dow. IIT Bombay, its faculty and its alumni, by their very nature are required to have interactions with the corporate sector. Indeed, there is a need to increase and deepen the relationship between IITs and the corporate sector. Given this, it is very important which corporations IIT Bombay chooses to associate itself with, and chooses not to associate with. This would go also for the alumni associations. This is really critical as the IITs, its various Alumni bodies, and their activities have become very high profile in the recent years. They send strong signals to society, and IITs and its alumni are among the key opinion makers. If this is so, then it is essential that this role be played in a responsible manner. This means that IIT Bombay does not associate itself with corporations (and others) that are at least blatantly guilty of serious violations of environmental, human rights and legal norms.

There are some arguments presented against taking such stands. Sometime back, when there was similar controversy over IITs accepting some funding from Dow chemicals, an alumnus said that “Instead of trying to be holier than thou, and becoming judge, jury and executioner all at once, IITians should let the courts and the legal system take their course, and IITs should be open to taking funds for ethical projects and fellowships from any corporation that abides by the laws of India.”

Leaving aside the Dow case, where UCC is not abiding by Indian law and has been declared absconder, this argument would be useful in a perfect world, where the law, ‘taking its own course’ reaches justice. But the world is not perfect, and India particularly far from it. If one goes by what the law has decided, India would be one of the most corruption free country in the world. Indeed, history (and current events) shows that more often than not, the law and the legal system side with and protect the interests of the powerful and the elite, and tend to neglect or even push aside those of the weaker sections. In any case, issues of environment and human rights go much beyond the mere legal framework.

That is why it is incumbent on society – and its leaders - to take stands (and actions, and extend support) on such matters, if we ultimately want a society based on the principles of justice and fairness. That is why it is important for IIT Bombay and alumni to show that they are not ready to bestow credibility on those responsible for serious social and environmental wrong-doings. We need to show that we are not isolated from larger societal questions in this context.

It is also argued that this is a very difficult thing to do. How do we determine who is blemished and who is not? It is not easy to establish the responsibility of any specific entity in such matters. There are claims and counter claims. The risk of ending up being holier than thou, and playing judge and jury is real. But this should not be a reason for not taking stands - for then we will end up taking stands on virtually nothing - which is in itself a stand! Moreover, if IIT Bombay and its alumni do not want to deal with a problem because it is tough to handle and involves difficult choices – then we should stop patting ourselves on the back.

However, the very fact that many of the alumni and faculty have raised the issue of Dow and have initiated processes making people think indicates that there is willingness to grapple with the issue. The need is to do this in more formal ways, and institutionalise them. May be IIT Bombay, and its various Alumni associations can set up a committee to draw out criteria for accepting sponsorships. There could be a process of wider alumni consultation in this. May be the various alumni gatherings and some of the Golden Jubilee celebration get-togethers could discuss this. I am confident that IITs can set up processes that would help in identifying at least the most blatant offenders.

If sponsorships, funding and support from blatant offenders are refused, it will be an important support to people all over the world struggling against such abuses. It will also send strong signals to society that IIT Bombay and its alumni are concerned about their social responsibility and take it seriously.

Till then, the logo of the likes of Dow will sit at the top of the Golden Jubilee Gala website, (http://gj2008.iitbombay.org/) giving an entirely different meaning to its slogan “Looking Ahead – the Next 50 Years”.

Shripad Dharmadhikary
Shripad Dharmadhikary is an alumnus of IIT Bombay.

Welcome to My Blog

Hi! Welcome to my blog. My name is Shripad Dharmadhikary, and I like writing and reading. I am just starting this blog, and so this message is brief. I will be back soon, with more.

Watch this space....

Shripad