|
.
Interlinking of rivers - Opening the floodgate of contradictions
By Sudhirendar Sharma
|
Not learning lessons from past experience, the
Rs 5,60,000-crore interlinking of rivers project is packed with
several inherent contradictions. Since scientific database on climate
variations and discharge pattern in the Himalayas is not yet
available, the euphoria on inter-linking of rivers may be short-lived.
|
MUCH
before the appointment of the former Cabinet Minister, Mr Suresh Prabhu, as
Chairman of the Task Force on Interlinking of Rivers, his task was cut out
by the conflicting statements issued by two Chief Ministers, Mr Amarinder
Singh of Punjab and Mr Chandrababu Naidu of Andhra Pradesh. While Mr Singh
is opposed to the idea, as it will not be in the interest of what he calls a
"water-deficit Punjab'', Mr Naidu sees it as an opportunity to overcome
the drought-like situation in his State.
In
calling for an all-party meeting to hammer a political consensus, Mr Naidu
has sensed an engineering solution in the project to end his political woes,
aggravated by the continuing suicides by debt-driven farmers in drought-hit
districts of the State. But for Mr Singh, any more diversion of water from
Punjab will trigger a spate of uncomfortable responses, including a possible
re-emergence of terrorist movement in the State.
While
not opposed to the idea of sharing waters with the neighbouring states, Mr
Singh is in favour of deciding the inter-state water disputes on the
internationally-accepted Riparian principle. With long-pending dispute on
the Sutlej-Yamuna link canal still to be settled, despite the Supreme Court
deadline of January 26, 2003, the Punjab Chief Minister is instead moving
the apex court to revise all issues related to re-organisation of the State,
including distribution of river waters.
A
State that has either dried its groundwater aquifers or has salinised the
same beyond any redemption relies on surface water as the only resource to
sustain farming in the water-stressed zones. Trifurcated in the last three
decades, Punjab is not ready for any more division of its water resources.
According to Mr Singh: "Would anybody expect a farmer to accept the
proposal of linking of rivers, with a potential of taking away more water
from Punjab, at the cost of his own crops?''
But
when do farmers get consulted in planning such projects? One such project
that has triggered large-scale unrest by farmers is in Bihar. The project to
divert water from the Falge river to irrigate faraway lands has left over
five lakh farmers high and dry in Patna, Jehanabad, Gaya and Nalanda
districts. Rabri Government's decision has dried up Muhane, a tributary of
the Falge, throwing life out of gear for the large farmers who were earlier
benefiting from it.
However,
the brewing farmer unrest in Bihar offers a political opportunity to the
opposition in the State. For the opposing BJP in the Bihar Assembly,
farmer's interests are supreme and it will go to any extreme to restore flow
in the dried Muhane river. In contrast, the BJP Government at the Centre is
seriously pursuing river-linking proposal all across the country. Clearly,
electoral gains transcend all other considerations.
Political
implications of river water diversion and inter-linking projects can throw
all technical and environmental calculations aside. In the recent past,
Andhra Pradesh had rejected the National Water Development Agency's proposal
to link Mahanadi, Godavri, Krishna and Cauvery on the ground that there was
no surplus water in Godavri. However, the same government makes a political
turnabout when it comes to drawing water from rivers in other States.
Notwithstanding
serious technical and environmental flaws, political contradictions alone
are enough to mar the most ambitious project in post-Independence India.
However, given the short and long-term political gains, Mr Suresh Prabhu may
indeed be able to engineer a political consensus — politicians are known
to be strange bedfellows afterall. But any such consensus is sure to
compromise on community's interests and on technical and ecological grounds.
River
diversion and inter-linking projects often run into rough weather as demand
for water outpaces what these projects promise to supply. Not long ago, the
Sutlej river was recharged with the waters of River Beas through a 7 km long
tunnel to maintain water level in the Bhakra reservoir on the assumption
that River Beas will have sustained flow. With the assumption failing on all
accounts, plans are to create another reservoir to supplement supply in
Bhakra.
Not
learning lessons from past experiences, the Rs 5,60,000-crore inter-linking
of rivers project is packed with several inherent contradictions. Since
scientific database on climate variations and discharge pattern in the
Himalayas is not yet available, the euphoria on inter-linking of rivers may
be short-lived. Glacial mass studies indicate a negative trend since the
middle of last century, signalling sharp reduction in flow in the Himalayan
rivers in the next 30 years.
Glaciologists
wonder if the project will ever meet its intended objective of reducing
water scarcity across the country. But one wonders if a politically-buoyant
government will give any ear to such scientific observations. It is clear
though that through this project the ruling alliance will open the
floodgates of economic, environmental and political contradictions that Mr
Suresh Prabhu will find hard to plug.
(The
author is a development analyst attached to the Delhi-based Ecological
Foundation. He can be reached at sudhirendar@vsnl.net)
Courtesy http://www.thehindubusinessline.com
| 
