Development through respect
The Sethusamudram Project that was a
bone of contention between India and Sri Lanka not very long ago
is again in the news, this time due to an agitation campaign
launched by hardline Hindus in the State of Tamil Nadu against
dislodging of a ‘holy bridge’ to get the project off the ground.
The bridge is said to be the one traversed by warrior god
Rama from Jumbudipa to rescue his wife Seetha from the demon
King Ravana in the celebrated Ramayana epic.
It may sound paradoxical that both modern day Sri Lanka and
India who were on the opposite sides, so to speak, in the
playing out of the epic several millennia ago has had their
roles reversed with Sri Lanka deriving support, at least among
some quarter from across the Palk Strait in its battle to halt
the project - albeit for different reasons.
There would be those who would want Sri Lanka to seize this
opportunity to reopen its dialogue with India to try and
persuade it to reconsider the project which according to experts
is going to subject the country to adverse environmental
consequences.
Sethusamudram envisages a new channel that will cut
travelling distance for larger ships by 424 nautical miles by
avoiding having to go around Sri Lanka and is part of India’s
plan to upgrade her maritime infrastructure.
The 167-kilometre waterway, to be completed by November 2008,
will connect the Gulf of Mannar and the Bay of Bengal through
the Palk Straits and enable ships to travel within India’s
territorial waters.
The project, which was first mooted under British rule, had
been left in abeyance due to lack of funds. Sri Lanka’s
objection to the project is solely grounded on environmental and
economic issues.
It will in no way lose its hub status since we already have
the Colombo South hub extension project as pointed out by
Additional Managing Director of the Sri Lanka Ports Authority
Nihal Keppitipola who was quoted in our lead story yesterday.
According to him the real danger will lie in regular dredging
that would have to be carried out resulting in a shift in the
ocean plates below that would damage natural marine resources
and deal a death blow to the livelihood of fishermen.
There can be no objection to India launching projects in
furtherance of its economic goals and asserting its
geo-political status.
It is also obvious that India’s race to be a world economic
power and be Asia’s economic powerhouse has to figure in
whatever our giant neighbour undertakes to achieve its long-term
objectives.
However what is pertinent is to assess the long term
consequences of any such undertaking that would have a bearing
not just on environment and economic stability but also on the
stability in the region particularly given the project’s
significance in the strategic maritime route.
For, any advancement or headway made by India in any field
will be viewed as a challenge by any super power actor which in
turn could impinge on regional peace - particularly at a time
India is embroiled in a nuclear debate.
Therefore it would be ideal if the issues could be taken up
at SAARC level and India persuaded to shelve the project until
such time all concerns are addressed and safety measures
devised.
Sri Lanka could play a prominent role in this respect as a
member country that would be directly affected by the project.
This way SAARC could also demonstrate that it has clout and
dispel criticism levelled at it.
Besides, given the simmering unrest on its own soil, India
cannot be oblivious to the fallout of its action in going ahead
with the project since what is being sought to destroy in the
process is a symbol of supremacy that lies at the core of the
Hindu faith.
Sethusamudram clearly calls for more time and patience. |