Friday, September 14, 2007

An epic in the unmaking





Govt chants Ram, Ram - Times of India

UPA govt rediscovers lord Ram- DNA

U-turn in the name of lord- Hindustan Times

All good lead headlines from three leading newspapers in Mumbai on Friday (September 14, 2007). Forgive me, for once, sub editors, I give the credit to the government, which tried to put its foot down on the Sethusamudram conflict, but found its foot firmly in its mouth instead.

What, pray, was the need for the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to present as an affidavit, the scientifically untested hypothesis that the bridge-like formation between Dhanushkodi in Tamil Nadu and Thalaimannar in Sri Lanka is a natural formation? Worse, why did the government try to preside over the authenticity of Ramayana and its protagonist Ram? Mythology is not history, we all know, and Sonia Gandhi is a master of neither. We also know that Lal Krishna Advani is not Hanuman, though he tries to sound more knowledgable than the mythological monkey god, on matters of the Palk Straits.

I would love to see a scientific attempt to validate -- or invalidate -- the existence of Ram (and that has got nothing to do with my second name). The same with other mythological/ religious figures. But the arguments over the need and feasibility of the Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project (SSCP) is just not the lab for that. Let us be clear, the debate is whether SSCP will do good or bad. Or neither, at a cost of more than Rs 2,400 crore. If it does good, can the canal be dug without disturbing what was called the 'Ramar Sethu' till 1804 when the first surveyor general of East India Company James Rennell called it the Adam's Bridge?

The idea behind the canal is to cut down the sailing time of ships -- that now circumvent Sri Lanka -- between the east and west coasts of India by more than 30 hours and 450 km. It will also help us develop a string of ports. That makes sense. Till we consider that the original plan was made 147 years ago, by AD Taylor of the Indian Marines. Ships have changed and so have navigational methods. Since I am not an expert on this, I will but share some points raised by experts during my interviews with them for scores of stories on the vexed issue.

KRA Narasaiah, former chief mechanical engineer, Vizag Port and a World Bank consultant for port construction: "The project is no longer economically feasible. Modern ships are of more than 100,000 dwt (dead weight tonne) capacity, while the proposed canal can let only ships of 30,000 dwt to pass through."

KS Ramakrishnan, former deputy chairperson, Chennai Port Trust: "A 36,000-tonne coal ship calling at Chennai port through a 7-km channel has to pay approximately Rs 21.75 a tonne, or a total of Rs 7.83 lakhs, as pilotage charges averaging Rs 1.11 lakh per km. The same ship will have to pay more than Rs 60 lakh for passing through the SSCP. The saving of sailing time around Sri Lanka does not justify this cost."

Whenever I have spoken to shipping minister TR Baalu and former chairman of SSCP NK Raghupathi (he was working too hard that Baalu had to ask him to go on leave), there has been no counter to the points raised by Narasaiah and Ramakrishnan. Raghupathi always had the habit of saying "I will get back to you" (which he never did), while the minister's refrain has been "the project has the clearance of the concerned agencies and ministries."

Now, even if the canal is financially viable and useful, is it imperative that the bridge be damaged? Whether it was built by Ram's 'vanarsena' or the toiling men and women of the times; or it was a natural formation, should such a wonderful reef of corals and stones dating back to tens of thousands of years and guarding one of the most unique marine ecosystems in the world (the Gulf of Mannar is designated as a world biosphere reserve by UNESCO) be damaged?

According to Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy, one of the petitioners in the Supreme Court whom I interviewed soon after the ASI's submission on Wednesday, the probable route of the canal was studied 16 times since 1860 and 15 of them suggested that the bridge should not be touched. By experience, I take Swamy's words with a generous pinch of salt, but I am yet to hear anything from Baalu & Co against this argument.

I am waiting for the conflict to be resolved. Not that I am thrilled at the prospect of having a canal -- usable or not -- in my state's backyard. Just that we can get to the more interesting point: Was the bridge man-made or natural? ASI, mind you, has not based its submission on any scientific data. Micropaleantological studies, among others, can tell us the truth. A senior scientist friend claims to have done that, but the government has not taken it on record. I promise to get back with more of a scientific argument, once curtains come down on the present scene of the political drama. And, if the political players push me enough, a bit on a secret 'ledger' of payments at the SSCP site.

12 comments:

Unknown said...

gThree cheers to the post. Gimme more.

Pushpa said...

Why did it take so long for the blog bug to sting you? Anyways, it made a good reading. And yes, waiting to read more on those
"secret ledger of payments at the SSCP site." Cheers.

bhamsblog said...

hmmm. Interesting. Somehow thought you would also comment on L K Advani geeting a different lifeline-- from Ramjanbhoomi to Ram's janma, :-))

The Ugly One said...

well, ram can get votes. after all, he is more than the mahatma. the param atma! who gives a damn to corals or marine park or fisherfolk? what i want is my share. baalu wants his share (of rupees) and the bjp wants its share (of votes). do print the ledger, not here. in paper.

neeraja said...

Seriously couldnt follow head or tail of your post (i meant the ASI, Sethu issue, TR Baalu), but admire the way you write (as always). Now, I hope you would write more on basic stuff too.

Vani said...

Arun:
Rocking first post!! So glad you wrote about this. You know, what really amazes me about the whole SSCP thing is the way the scientific community has only been too willing to toe the line of the political masters.
Till date,there is no proper impartial scientific assessment of the
environmental impacts the project could cause--only a hastily-put-together rapid assessment by NEERI. When I asked Raghupathy why one should trust NEERI's credibility when it was so obvious their mandate had been to carry out a survey to facilitate the project, he asked me, "so, you think the country's best scientists would lie to us?"
Point is, the NEERI report is, at best, the worst gloss-over job possible.
A couple of months back, the chairman of the National Biodiversity Authority held a press meet to claim that a scientific study had been done and that there was no evidence of any bridge--Ram's or otherwise. He even had an ISRO scientist with him to back up the claim.
When I asked the ISRO guy what he made of the NASA images that had claimed a structure existed, the guy--beleive this--said he was not aware of their existence!!
This is turning out to be the proverbial Trojan's horse--benign on the outside but containing the seed of destruction within it. The nation, it seems, will never be tol the truth. Whatever it is, it looks
like Ram can never be kept out of the limelight! And even hardcore atheists will vouch for this.
Thanks for the promise of the SSCP ledger payments disclosure. The irony is delicious.
Another Bofors, eh?
Cheers for the good work!

Gireesh GV said...

well Mr ram....interesting thanks to share your thoughts
another cheers

Sreedevi aka Sree said...

Three cheers to Ram!!!

Ullekh said...

Guru,

I am no great fan of eco activism for the simple reason that most often they miss the bull's eye and charge at godforsaken spots for no use. But after reading what you've written I have this feeling that I may reluctantly share your concerns -- you are right on the button. SSCP be damned. This is definitely going to be a shot in the arm for our Vallarpadam container transshipment thingy. Well, now I want to see how the pound of 'development' flesh is going to be shared over there. Comrades-in-arms!!!

Sreedevi aka Sree said...

Three cheers to both the Rams!!

Nachiketa Desai said...

great piece of writing, arun. the first person account sounds more credible than the impersonal newspaper reporting. please also give some behind the scene account which do not get reported in newspaper.

Jothish said...

Ram Ram give me more.Very intresting