Dear All,

Here's an article I wrote about seven years ago and published in Deccan Herald  
on the same subject. It has not been updated. However, I hope, it might 
interest you.

P.N.BENJAMIN


Of dams, development and displacement


By P.N.BENJAMIN




Displacement of people, loss of cultural or historic sites and submergence of 
forests or scenic landscapes due to dam construction is a small price to pay 
for development. These problems pale into insignificance when viewed in the 
broader context of the tangible and intangible benefits that the major dam 
projects in India would bring to millions of people when completed. However, 
the authorities concerned should address the concomitant environmental and 
human problems, specially the problem of resettlement of the displaced people 
immediately.




The most comprehensive and timely report, "Dams and Development" by the World 
Commission of dams, which was released by Nelson Mandela in London on Nov.16, 
2000, does not condemn the construction of dams outright. It reaffirms that 
there is often no alternative for developing countries in need of water and 
hydropower

.

Progress in Western Europe and North America was achieved at an enormous cost 
to the people and the environment but no one seems to remember it today. The 
media in our country and in the West focus almost daily on the negative social 
and environmental impact of development projects like Narmada and others in 
India. They do not remind the world that the US alone accounts for 25 per cent 
of the total emission of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and it is 
defying the world opinion by refusing to control it. The World Commission on 
Dams’ report claims that dams built in India since Independence have displaced 
56 million people involuntarily. It is not clear how this figure was arrived 
at. A vast number of people, no doubt, have been displaced but they are still 
alive! We must also ask ourselves: "How many people would have died in famines 
since Independence if we hadn’t taken up building the "modern temples of India?"




China is building the Three Gorges Dam, which has been aptly described as the 
"New Great Wall of China". The 6000 kilometre long Great Wall was built to 
protect the country from outside invasions and the 1.6 kilometre long Three 
Gorges Dam would protect millions of people from the scourge of floods that 
destroyed them and their lands in the past. It would offer them long-term food 
security, abundant energy (hydropower) and cheap inland transport.




The 180 metres high and 1.6 km long dam will create a gigantic lake or an 
"inland sea" with an area of over 600 square kilometer. It will control the 
catastrophic floods that regularly sweep down the river causing incalculable 
loss of human life and property. While the dam will control floods in the lower 
reaches of the river, the huge reservoir upstream will facilitate and extend 
water transport and shipping up to Chongking, a teeming industrial city in the 
Sichuan province. In terms of hydropower the dam will top the list of world’s 
hydropower schemes when completed. The dams 26 generators will transform the 
Yangtze’s power into 18,200 megawatts of electricity, equivalent to one-tenth 
of China’s energy output. This additional energy is indispensable to sustain 
that country’s booming economy in the new century




The new lake will stretch back some 400 km in the Sichuan province. It will 
inundate 140 towns and 320 villages in addition to several antiquities and 
celebrated scenic sites. About 1.2 million people will be displaced and they 
are being moved to new towns and villages built on higher ground or outside the 
reservoir area. Tens of thousand of people living close to the river have 
already been moved and they have been compensated for their houses, lands and 
other immovable assets.


China may be handling the displacement of people in an orderly manner but it is 
the flooding of hundreds of archaeological and cultural sites, some 6000 years 
old that has aroused international interest and concern. Some Chinese and 
international critics think that heavy silting of the reservoir may compromise 
the dam’s operation and increase the risk of a catastrophic collapse during a 
major flood.




The other critics think that the huge lake of ‘inland sea’ may turn into a 
cesspool if the pumping of raw sewage into the reservoir is not stopped. Water 
pollution from raw sewage would affect the water quality of the lake and render 
it unsuitable for irrigation and drinking. China is determined to complete it 
with its own resources and private foreign financing.


It is well-known that the environmental groups by and large oppose development 
projects without basing their opinions on science and technology. Most of the 
environmentalists and human rights warriors claim to be specialists and experts 
on any subjects. Nicholas Murray Butler had defined an expert as one "who knows 
more and more about less and less". But experts are multiplying in number and 
barging into new pastures where their presence was not thought necessary 
earlier. Interminable debates and hair-splitting go on, and various ‘experts’ 
offer solutions many of which stink of biases. "Trust one who has proved it", 
said Francois Villion, but in the environmental and human rights fields such 
people are in short supply, and second-rate ‘experts’ seize the chance to jump 
a rung or two when no one is looking!




"It is one thing to find fault with an existing system…It is a more difficult 
task to replace it with an approach that is better", Nelson Mandela had quite 
aptly remarked while releasing the aforesaid report.




Norman Borlaug, who had helped create the hybrid technology that brought about 
our Green Revolution, wrote a letter on April 12, 2002 and addressed 
M.S.Swaminathan, B.G.Verghese, M.V.Rao and R.S.Paroda. I quote from this letter 
as it shows how environmentalists and babus are also undermining our farmers’ 
future.




"Approval of Bt. Cotton has been a long, slow, painful process, effectively 
delayed, I assume, by the lobbying of Vandana Shiva and her crowd. Now that the 
door has been opened for the use of transgenic biotechnology on one crop. I 
hope it’ll soon be approved for other crops. The recent tactics in the use of 
the ‘precautionary principle’ is a dangerous game plan, especially when a 
country is under heavy population pressure. As an enthusiastic friend of India, 
I have been dismayed to see it lagging behind in the approval of transgenic 
crops while China forges ahead.




"I was very supportive of the environmental movement when it began in the 
1960s. However, in recent years, the movement has evolved more and more towards 
an anti-science, anti-technology reactionary force. Too many of its leaders are 
opposed to high-yield crop production technology. Let us remember the 
courageous decision made by C. Subramaniam ignited the Green Revolution in 
1966. Thank God, Subramaniam was not paralysed by the ‘precautionary 
principle’. Look at the results – a six-fold increase in wheat production and a 
three-fold increase in rice production over the past 40 years. How would 500 
million additional Indians have been fed without this great transformation?"




This letter teaches that by employing new technology sensibly and vigourously, 
we can create a second Green revolution, and bring freedom from monsoon’s 
bondage. His ‘precautionary principle’ is a polite word for bureaucratic 
cowardliness. And Bt. Cotton is the miracle seed that resists bollworm, which 
destroys a third of our cotton crop. Those who postponed Bt. Cotton year after 
year for six years have their hands covered in blood from the suicides of 
cotton farmers.



If the anti-Narmada project ''activists`` devoted half as much time to devising 
viable strategies to resettle the displaced people as they do to meaningless 
displays of public concern, the problem would have ceased to exist. Indeed, 
there is a good case for luring the displaced to the plains, teaching them 
modern technologies and bringing them gradually into the new society that the 
nation is trying to build, even if not brilliantly. (If this happens, the 
activists will be rendered jobless and they won’t be able to use the tribals as 
cannon fodder for their selfish ends).


The NBA, while guilty of projecting a skewed picture of the Narmada project, is 
doubly wrong when it has failed to provide concrete alternatives. Smaller 
projects under local administration, given the caste structure, will ultimately 
work against the same people whom the NBA has been trying to protect.


When the professional dissidents/activists argue with the state, when dissent 
challenges wisdom, it is a moral/ethical position, a rejoinder that defies easy 
answers. As Vaclav Havel has argued, the power of dissent is the power of 
''living within the truth``. The professional dissidents in India today are 
still happy with the remains of historically repudiated social causes. Human 
rights and environmentalism have thus become the new text of the post-communist 
utopia. ''Unhappy the land that has need of heroes,`` cried out Brecht`s 
Galileo. We are certainly not in a happy land, but heroes are marching out of 
the dam site or the seminar halls, waving the flag (any flag except national 
flag) of salvation!



P.N.BENJAMIN







To create your page on Jharkhand Network visit at http://network.jharkhandi.com

Reply via email to