Author: Editorial
Publication: The Times of India
Date: February 2, 2008
URL: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Editorial/A_Bridge_Too_Far/articleshow/2749721.cms
Introduction: Government should rethink the
Sethusamudram project
The Coast Guard chief has added a new twist
to the Sethusamudram controversy. He thinks that the proposed shipping canal
is vulnerable to terror strikes from non-state actors in the region. Recently,
the naval chief was quoted as saying that the canal may be too small for large
ships. The project has already attracted undue opposition from political parties,
religious groups and environmentalists. So, is the canal project worth pursuing?
Pro-project parties claim that Sethusamudram
will boost shipping activities in the region. It can trigger an economic boom
in coastal Tamil Nadu, they say. Experts have questioned these claims. The
security threat may have come at a politically opportune moment for the UPA
government that is under pressure from the DMK, an ally and the party in office
in Tamil Nadu, to implement the project while the AIADMK, the main opposition
party in TN, and the BJP, are opposed to the project for different reasons.
But they have raised the security angle to push their case.
The UPA government should ask itself if it
is worth its while to push the Rs 2,600-crore project in the absence of a
consensus on its viability. What is the project worth if large vessels can't
cruise through the channel? The security concerns are real; the LTTE operates
along the route and can be a threat to trade in the region.
These can be overcome but the added expenses
of surveillance and patrolling will increase the cost of maintaining the channel.
Environmentalists argue that massive dredging operations are necessary to
prevent the natural formation of sand banks and to maintain the depth of the
channel. The shipping canal, according to environmentalists, might affect
the Gulf of Mannar biosphere reserve. The livelihood of hundreds of fishermen
is also under threat.
These issues merit consideration and detailed
study. Instead, the project has snowballed into a confrontation between scientific
logic and religious faith. The issue here is not whether Lord Ram built a
bridge. Many scientific bodies have concluded that the Ram Setu or Adam's
Bridge is a natural structure formed of sand banks. But the economic gains
from the project do not seem sufficient to merit so much investment in capital
and time from the government. The Archaeological Survey of India can determine
the origins of the setu to satisfy the curiosity of interested parties, but
it amounts only to a wastage of public funds. A better option is to abandon
the project and move on.
