Author:
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: February 2, 2008
Adding fuel to the Ram Setu controversy, Director-General
of Indian Coast Guard has cautioned that the Sethusamudram project poses a
national security hazard and also conveyed his concern over the project to
the Government.
"We have already mounted a strong vigil
on the country's southern coastal waters. Projects like the Sethusamudram
could bring in more security problems," said Coast Guard chief Vice Admiral
RF Contractor.
The candid admission by the DG came on the
sidelines of a media interaction on the occasion of the 31st anniversary of
ICG. However, he added that security measures would be put in place once the
channel becomes operational.
His view follows the comment made by Naval
Chief Vice-Admiral Sureesh Mehta who said the project could hamper the movement
of bigger vessels, including those employed by the Indian Navy.
When asked whether the Coast Guard had conveyed
its concerns to the Government, Contractor said that both the Navy and Coast
Guard were asked to give their views prior to the project being cleared.
Contractor hinted at the close proximity of
India-Sri Lanka maritime border as the cause of worry. The Coast Guard had
mounted a round-the-clock aerial and sea vigil in the Palk Bay as well as
Gulf of Mannar to guard against infiltration of Sri Lankan armed militants
into India. Though the number of Tamil migrants from Sri Lanka had dropped
this year, after almost touching a high of 16,619 last year, "security
centres are active in all places where antecedents of refugees coming from
Sri Lanka are being checked," he added.
The statement by the DG gave a good handle
to the leading Opposition party BJP that decried the Government's attempts
to override such a serious concern. On Thursday, the BJP upped the ante against
the Government on the viability of the project. "We are not against the
Sethusamudram project. But if the senior-most official of the Coast Guard
is talking about security concerns, it is a big thing," said BJP spokesman
Ravi Shankar Prasad.
Speaking to reporters, Prasad hoped the concerns
of the Coast Guard would be reflected in the affidavit to be filed in the
Supreme Court.
The VHP has also reacted to the security concerns
raised by the Coast Guard and said no one should be allowed to play with the
national security.
"As, experts of different fields have
already expressed concerns over the project, the Government should file an
affidavit immediately before the Supreme Court to save Ram Setu," said
Vinod Bansal, media chief of the Rameswaram Ram Setu Raksha Manch, Delhi.
Pointing out that the Navy Chief and Coast
Guard chief are the two final authorities, entrusted with the task of national
security, Bansal said the Government should scrap the project to ensure safety
and security of the region and save the tax payer's money.
The Centre, meanwhile, seems tied up with
political compulsions from within and outside to give a response to the Supreme
Court, which is hearing a batch of petitions relating to the continuation
of the project. Already the Supreme Court has stayed dredging activities in
or around Ram Setu.
Appearing before a Bench headed by Chief Justice
KG Balakrishnan, Additional Solicitor-General (ASG) R Mohan informed the Court
on Thursday that the Centre is yet to finalise the affidavit to be filed in
relation to the matter. On January 16, the Court directed the Centre to file
its affidavit within two weeks following which hearing in the matter was to
take place.
The Bench comprising of Justices RV Raveendran
and JM Panchal allowed four weeks time to the Centre posting the matter in
the first week of March. Janata Party president Subramanium Swamy, who has
filed two petitions challenging the Government's decision to destroy the natural
bridge, urged the Court to direct the Centre to file separate affidavits on
the aspects of alignment of the project and on the investigations conducted
by the Government to determine the historicity of the Ram Setu.
The Government had incurred a loss of face
following its affidavit filed in Apex Court in September 2007. In its bid
to rubbish the petitioner's claims of declaring Ram Setu an ancient monument,
the Government declared that the mythological text of Ramayan could not be
considered a "historical record" for lack of any scientific study
or proof. It thus refuted the "existence or the occurrence of events
depicted therein".
Courting controversy for its alleged denial
of Lord Ram, the Centre withdrew the Ministry of Culture's affidavit from
court promising to file a better one after conducting a detailed study of
the objections raised by the petitioners. An expert committee constituted
for this purpose submitted its report to the Government, which is to finalise
its response to be given to Court.