Opinion A primitive approach

He seemed to be giving Jairam Ramesh a belated rap on the knuckles but within hours,Soniaji,in a rare public statement,said she did not agree with the Prime Minister. In a speech that sounded more political than environmental,she banged on about how fertile land and forests must not be destroyed in the cause of development. This was so obviously a repudiation of what the Prime Minister said,that political pundits have spent long hours trying to decipher Madame’s message and concluded that she would like India to remain primitive and poor.

If she were seriously concerned about the environment,she would have noticed that the main cause of environmental degradation in India is extreme poverty. It reduces people like the Dongria Kondhs of Niyamgiri to living conditions that are not much better than if they were still living in hunter-gatherer times. In adivasi areas where development has failed to reach,often the only means of survival is what they call ‘slash and burn agriculture’. This method involves burning down forests for fuel and food. Only when development brings schools,hospitals,roads and public services,does this horrible practice stop.

If Rahul Gandhi wants to be a real ‘sipahi’ for the adivasi tribes,whom he recently deprived of development,what he needs to do is give them a real stake in the mineral reserves that exist under their land. In the United States,if oil or gold or bauxite is discovered on someone’s land,it usually belongs to them. Why should something like this not be considered in India? Why should the state usurp all rights to what lies beneath the ground? If the adivasis who live in the Niyamgiri hills were to discover that the bauxite that lies buried under their ‘sacred’ mountain could help them become rich and prosperous,they might not want Vedanta to leave.

Similarly,the farmers in Uttar Pradesh who have been protesting against their land being taken away for a new highway might be more amenable if they could see real benefits. There is no question that they should be given what they consider a fair price for their land. Why is this so hard? And,why does nobody try to make them understand that highways usually bring prosperity and new opportunities.

Instead of banning projects left right and centre,Jairam Ramesh should spend more time giving us an environmental policy that would allow development and improve the environment. If Vedanta,for instance,needs to cut down trees to mine the bauxite reserves under the Niyamgiri hills,then it must take responsibility for reforestation. If corporations want to acquire land to build roads and factories,then they must be made responsible for ensuring that local communities benefit from what they do. Once there are clear rules in place,perhaps,the Minister of Environment will find time to notice that what he really needs to do is clean our rivers and find out why thousands of crore rupees have washed down the Ganga and the Yamuna with no improvement at all.

As for our supreme leader,Soniaji,she must spend a little time trying to understand what the Prime Minister meant when he said that development and environmental concerns are not necessarily in conflict. Perhaps,Rahulji should plan his next field trip to a Dongria Kondh village in the Niyamgiri hills and take Mummy with him so that she can see for herself the primitive conditions in which people live. There is no ‘lifestyle’ worth preserving only extreme poverty. From all accounts,less than 10,000 people are being affected by the project and none of them are being displaced and for this an extremely poor region of India is being deprived of its one chance to dream of a better future. It’s hard not to believe that our political leaders have a vested interest in perpetuating poverty.

Follow Tavleen Singh on Twitter@ tavleens_singh