|
|
|
| Sunday, 21 August 2005 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Sethusamudram:
Challenges, opportunities and pitfalls by Thileni Wickremaratne
There was once a proposal from Sri Lanka to the BJP government of India to bridge this gap through a rail/road link connecting Talaimannar in Sri Lanka and Rameswaram in India. But the Indian government scuttled the idea on the ground that the LTTE would bring terrorism to India. Prime Minister Vajpayee favoured 'Sethusamudram' instead during his election campaign. 'Sethusamudram' is India's ship canal project, which will channel across the Palk Strait within Indian waters. This ship canal is India's long dreamt plan costing about 560 million US dollars. India waited long for this canal. After some 144 years since 1860, India tastes happy times in changing the geography of the Indian sub-continent by dredging the ship canal 'Sethusamudram' across the Palk Strait. This feat, even the British couldn't do, although the British commander A. D. Taylor of the Indian Marines had originally planned it in 1860.
The ship canal has already struck its first note. Sanjay Sudhir (first secretary - economic and commerce) of the Indian High Commission confirmed that dredging of the canal has begun linking the Gulf of Mannar with the Bay of Bengal through the narrow Palk Strait. The making of the canal is to offer vessels a navigable channel within Indian territorial waters to ply to and fro India's East and West coasts without circumnavigating Sri Lanka. The idea is to save about 36hrs and an extra 400km off the voyage round Sri Lankan coasts. India thinks that this canal would earn mainstream economy for the ports lining the Indian peninsula especially Tuticorin harbour through coastal shipping trade. So by all means India has reason to be jocund. But can the tiny neighbour Sri Lanka partake in these cheery times of India? The Indian High Commission said that Sethusamudram is a "win-win project for both Sri Lanka and India". India says that the canal will boost bilateral trade between the two countries in the context of the Indo-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. But Sri Lanka is anxious over the SSCP (Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project) especially on the adverse ecological blows Sri Lanka is bound to face with the rise of the project. Dr. Lareef Zubair, an expert from Sri Lanka who is the coordinator of Sri Lanka meteorology, oceanography and hydrology network is of the view, "even though the canal shall be in India, its impacts shall not be confined to its territory". Ms. Himali Arunathilake, the spokeswoman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said, "throughout, Sri Lanka has raised concerns on the SSCP to India from the highest political level, on the impacts Sri Lanka has to face." Ministry of Foreign Affairs has taken the initiative to get cabinet approval to establish an inter-ministerial committee to monitor SSCP and to set up a Task Force to carry out scientific work on the ecological implications of SSCP. What is most scary for Sri Lanka is that the ship canal has the potential to lure tsunamis, as the Palk Strait will be deepened. Dr. Lareef Zubair says that the canal is "a conduit for tsunamis generated from the Andaman to Burma seismic fault zone" affecting the western coasts of Sri Lanka. Dr. Zubair says " Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar are ecosystems that are not adapted to ship traffic." In the assessment of Dr. T. S. Murty, a leading tsunami expert (who advised the Indian government on tsunami warning systems), the SSCP could "cause a tsunami with drastic consequences for the entire shoreline extending from Dhanushkodi to Ernakulam, and from the Delft Island to Colombo." The area of SSCP has a record of tsunamis in the Bay of Bengal. December 1881, an earthquake had generated a tsunami in the Bay of Bengal. June 1941 a tsunami generated in the Andaman Islands had reached Chennai. The first underwater quake in the Bay of Bengal had been in 1679. Most recently Sri Lanka experienced the disastrous December tsunami. Experts like Dr. Zubair stress that it is essential to study the history of earth tremors in the Bay of Bengal before pursuing the SSCP. There is also the danger of islands along with the Jaffna peninsula being submerged due to SSCP. Manitham (environmental organisation in India) fears that "half of the Jaffna peninsula and nearly 85 islets in the western and north western coasts of Sri Lanka and half of Rameswaram in India will go under water". These areas will be inundated due to the rise of water levels and high tides and currents, which would rise with the dredging of the canal. Much scorn is aimed at the EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment of SSCP) for discounting these ecological odds of the project. Some like the Coastal Action Network (CAN) in India were even bold enough to call SSCP a "diabolical move" to destruct the biosphere of the Palk Bay affecting both Indian and Sri Lankan shores. The EIA was criticised as a "rapid" study overlooking the environmental changes. It is the conception of many ecologists that the EIA team was under forced influence. Dr. Zubair criticises that the "project review has only been in India and for India." More specifically environmental impact assessment has only been done in Sri Lanka. Institutes and organisations like Environmental Foundation Ltd. and the National Aquatic Research Agency (NARA) of Sri Lanka and Manitham and the Coastal Action Network of India have expressed concerns over not receiving the full EIA report, but just a summary. The chairman of NARA, Dr. Kapila Perera said that Sri Lanka did not get a full EIA report from diplomatic channels. Recently a press release issued by the Sri Lanka Foreign Ministry stated in the 'Agreed Note' that the detailed EIA report was made available at the second joint meeting between India and Sri Lanka on Aug. 1. But this is after the implementation of SSCP leaving no room for Sri Lanka to object. Ecologists analyse that as per the UN law of the Sea Convention 1982, the Indian government also should have obtained the 'no objection certificate' (NOC) from Sri Lanka, who will be directly affected by SSCP, and not only from the ministerial levels in India. The primary act of dredging the canal itself is the root cause ecologists see as the destruction. The initial excavations is estimated to produce about 80 million m3 of dredged silt. Since the sand based islands in the Palk Bay would continuously collect sand in the channel, some 100,000m3 of silt needs to be removed yearly. Vinod Munasinghe, spokesman of the Sri Lanka Environmental Foundation Ltd, told the Indian press, that the Sethusamudram project, "involving the digging of a canal, could create major imbalances in the marine environment, and have an adverse impact on the pattern of coastal erosion in Mannar and Jaffna in north Sri Lanka." The erosion is expected due to the rise in currents that would short circuit through the Palk Bay as a result of dredging. It is interesting to remember that Sethusamudram is different to other canals in the world. Canals like the Suez and Du Midi, (which was the first canal in the world to link two seas-the Atlantic and the Mediterranean) were dredged on land and not on sea beds studded with coral reefs as in the case of SSCP. So the damage caused to the biosphere by SSCP is estimated higher. Dr. Zubair wrote in the 'Daily News' that the SSCP would disturb the marine life in the Palk Strait "gravely". The Palk Bay area and the Gulf of Mannar where the canal will be cut through have a complex eco-system harbouring about some 3,600 species of plants and animals. This area is India's richest biological coastal region. The Indian territorial waters itself has some 117 species of corals. Valued species like dolphins, sea turtles, dugongs, sea cows, whales, sacred sharks and thorny seahorses inhabit this area. With ship traffic, and the alterations of the sea temperature there is no saying of the preservation of these species. Dr. Zubair says, "Palk Bay and Gulf of Mannar are ecosystems that are not adapted to ship traffic." The Gulf of Mannar is the first 'marine biosphere reserve' not only in India but also in South Asia, internationally recognised by UNESCO. Conserving these protected areas are the challenges that rise with SSCP. There is also the National Marine Park declared by the Tamil Nadu forest department. Consisting of 21 islands, which ecologists say will be affected. The Indian High commission expressed that SSCP is a "safe distance away from theses marine parks" which would be a maximum of 20 km as stated in the EIA. But the CAN says that the Indian law requires a buffer zone of 25km around all national parks. This threat to the marine biosphere and its ecological imbalance would take away the livelihoods of a large community of fishermen, especially in shores off north in Sri Lanka and southern coasts in India. Manitham estimates that 20 million such fisherfolk will be left unemployed due to the falling fish catch. The Sethu canal has to be dredged to a width of 300m and a depth allowing ships with a draught of up to 12.8m at the Adam's Bridge and the Palk Strait. The shallow waters beside this narrow channel have only a depth of some 4m. So ecologists say that if vessels when transiting the canal happen to drift a few hundred metres to these shallow waters, the ships would collide with the treacherous coral reefs causing severe oil spills. Oil spills would travel to Sri Lankan shores with the sea currents littering the entire coasts off north. Oil spills are of course the least wanted in the area of the canal as it houses a very fragile biosphere. Already the area is reported to be under stress due to the effluents released by the Tuticorin Thermal Power station and the Dhrangadhara chemical and Tuticorin salt marine chemicals. More, the EIA mentions that there will be development along the coasts of India in the form of industries, minor ports and workshops causing further impact to the area as spoil from these industries would travel as far as Sri Lankan shores through tides and currents. Nuclear risks arise not from the project itself, but after the canal is operated from ships carrying nuclear material that pass through, and missiles that target the Canal. The EIA report is seen as inadequate in providing solutions or mitigating measures to prevent these complications Sri Lanka faces. Dr. Lareef Zubair criticises that the "project review has only been in India and for India". It is discerned by many that the SSCP is in violation of the international law of the sea, pollution, bio-diversity and also not parallel with Indian laws regarding environment, wildlife, water and air. The Indian High Commission however pledged that India would never pursue SSCP at the cost of any law including international laws to which India is a signatory. Sri Lankan Foreign Ministry said that whether Sri Lanka is to take international legal action against Sethusamudram "is somewhat premature and remains in the realm of possibility" as India has pledged their support to assess jointly with Sri Lanka any complications of SSCP. Engineers analyse the economic benefits of SSCP as so-so. Retired engineers of the Tuticorin port were reported saying that SSCP would not gain much in revenue terms, as hardly 2 or 3 ships won't be crossing the canal daily. But India estimates that in the first year of operation of the project some 3055 ships will transit through the channel. There is also growing concern over Sri Lankan harbours losing their established stature as the centre hub in international sea navigation routes with the rise of SSCP. The Sri Lanka Ministry of Ports and Aviation stated that SSCP would be "treated both as a challenge and an opportunity" for Sri Lankan harbours. Whatever the consequences maybe the SSCP is to be open for traffic in late 2008. But discussions would continue between India and Sri Lanka to share and exchange the particulars and proceedings of the project. Given the situation so far, there is growing doubt whether these discussions would make a sizeable impact on the implementation of Sethusamudram. Discussions on SSCP are too "discreet" as expressed by Professor Willie Mendis of the University of Moratuwa. The Coastal Action Network of India filed a writ petition on December 17 to dismiss the SSCP and it is interesting to note what the Chennai High Court ruled causing much controversy: "In the name of environmental protection, scientific and technological progress of the country should not be obstructed. No doubt, the environment must be protected, but at the same time we must never overlook the basic aim of our country, which is to make India powerful..." |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
| Produced by Lake House |
Sri Lanka and India lie so close. The only gap in the Indian Ocean that
splits the two countries is the narrow Palk Strait. 
