EDITORIALS
Rendering the Perennial Lifeless
To hear the call of the Ganga, both political will and ethical responsibility are required.
T
o be a river, is to flow. It is the flow of a river that has been then
put to “use,” to rationalise that it is thus, prevented from
going “waste.” However, now this use has increased to such
an extent that we are unable to decide if a river is “living.” In fact, it
is difficult to find a living river, as its flow is diverted into tunnels to
produce electricity; or it consists of only filth and toxic wastes; or it is
assumed that it can be cut and twisted like a water pipe for purposes
of interlinking. And all of this can be done in the name of worshipping
a river, “rejuvenating” it when the “development” instead is scut-
tling its flow. It is difficult to decide if a being is living, if it is entirely
on the mercy of life support. It is difficult to call a river living if its
flow is manipulated to such an extent that its naturalness itself is in
doubt, and when it is not allowed to carry out the geological and
ecological functions inherent to its being. It is difficult to call a river
living, if it is living only in fragments, violated in parts in a way that
denies it an ecological integrity, and an ability to self-rejuvenate.
While other rivers are equally in danger and are no doubt equally
significant, the Ganga has been in a precarious condition despite
and because of the government’s added attention towards it. A “call
from the Ganga” drew Prime Minister Narendra Modi to contest
from Varanasi. However, on the lines of Hindutva, Gangatva has
been used to promote crass emotions, when the real association
with the Ganga’s well-being is missing. Environmental-engineer-
turned-sadhu G D Agarwal passed away unheard, continuing a
fast for 112 days in the belief that the Ganga’s call continues to be
audible to the Prime Minister. Agarwal’s demand, as indeed has
been a consistent demand in Uttarakhand, was to address seri-
ously the phenomena of sand mining and hydropower develop-
ment in the Ganga that has reduced its flow to a trickle at most
places. The source of the Ganga’s perenniality, the Himalayas,
are increasingly becoming dry, hollowed out, and made fragile.
How can an aviral (unhindered) and thus a nirmal (free from
impurities) flow be maintained, as was the promise of the `20,000
crore Namami Gange programme, when the entire flow has
been diverted away from the riverbeds? Namami Gange envis-
aged the restoration of the “wholesomeness” of the river, and
thus, seemed to have an understanding of the essence of aviralta
and nirmalta. However, in reality, a bare minimum condition of
maintaining an ecological flow (minimum flow that allows the
river mimic being a river) is not abided by the project owners,
and its compliance not made mandatory; while its stipulated
magnitude keeps shifting.
8 decEMBER 1, 2018
Instead of addressing the ground realities and taking concrete
steps, the Prime Minister goes in a reverse direction, either trivi-
alising the matter by engaging in mere symbolism or announcing
tall projects to alter and tamper with the flows further, staying
true to his commitment to corporate interests. Instead of freeing
the flow of the river, maintaining its flow regime, monitoring
sewage disposal, checking the excess withdrawal of water, saving
and increasing the forest cover, and revitalising the waterbodies
feeding into the rivers, river rejuvenation in most cases has been
equated with riverfront development. Thus, it involves concreti-
sation and encroachment of riverbanks and floodplains for
commercial activities, and water diverted from other sources
to create an impression that the river is still alive.
While in its upper reaches the flow of the Ganga has been killed, in
the 1,600 kilometres of the Haldia–Varanasi stretch, the `5,369 crore
Jal Marg Vikas Project is underway, involving significant invest-
ment from the World Bank. Prime Minister Modi recently stood
welcoming a PepsiCo consignment in Varanasi, ignoring the
damages borne by and in store for the river. Since the Ganga
does not have the carrying capacity for the navigation of 1,500
tonne vessels, the project involves channelising the braided river,
massive dredging, frequent desilting, and barraging to increase its
depth artificially. There are commercial interests feeding into
each other; for instance, the silt recovered is expected to be used in
the construction sector. Dredging contracts have been handed
over to multinationals, including the Adani Group. Significant
pollution risks are being ignored. Also ignored is the destruc-
tion of the habitats of the aquatic life and livelihoods of the
fisherfolk and boatmen. The turtle sanctuary in Varanasi is
planned to be denotified. Endangered species like the Ganges
river dolphins are being pushed towards extinction.
The health and aliveness of a river is no longer seen in its ability
to support the beings living in harmony with it, but it has come to
mean how much it can be used for commercial purposes, as a
waterway, as energy, as sludge flush, and for religious tourism. As
long as the river continues to be seen merely as an entity for
extraction, its further concretisation and pollution will continue
unabated. Making these violations cognisable offences and bring-
ing in an armed Ganga Protection Corps under the National River
Ganga (Rejuvenation, Protection and Management) Bill, to be
tabled soon, will not be able to put a stop to offences that the
government itself is exemplifying on a much larger scale.
vol lIii no 47 EPW Economic & Political Weekly