Ram Sethu: Stuck between politics, faith and bad economics

The fate of the Rs 24,000 crore Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project, that was once touted to dramatically transform the coastal economy of Tamil Nadu, looks highly uncertain with the state chief minister J Jayalalithaa asking the Centre to toe her line in the Supreme Court that it’s a national monument.

Ever since the project was announced, Jayalalithaa’s stand has been that “Ram Sethu,” or Adam’s Bridge, through which the project was to be implemented is of “immeasurable, historical and archaeological heritage value.”

She had moved the Supreme Court in 2007 asking for the declaration of the structure as a national monument.

In her letter to the prime minister Manmohan Singh yesterday, she repeated her demand.

The Supreme Court in its hearing on the issue on Tuesday asked the Centre for its views by today. Jaya immediately wrote to the prime minister asking him to inform the Court that the government of India would take immediate steps to declare the site as a national monument. She also mentioned that the state government would file a separate counter in the Court in support of her plea.

The Sethusamudram project, sought to create a shipping channel linking the Palk Bay and the Gulf of Manner between India and Sri Lanka that would allow large ships to get to the eastern coast of the country from the western coast without having to navigate through Sri Lanka, as they do now. The proponents of the project said it would save considerable sailing time and bring big vessels close to the Indian shore. The project would dramatically transform the coastal economy of Tamil Nadu with Tuticorin as its nodal port and a string of 13 smaller ports across the state.

An old idea that translated into several project proposals through the British rule and in independent India, the Sethusamudram project had been aggressively pushed by the DMK despite opposition from several quarters. Finally, it was launched by Manmohan Singh at a high profile function in July 2005.

However, the project was jinxed right from the beginning and had met with several blocks including rocky parliamentary debates and court cases even as the DMK and the Congress continued to fiercely support it. The dredging in the Adam’s Bridge area was stopped in 2007 and by 2009, the project came to a halt. The Union Government asked a committee headed by RK Pachauri to study an alternative alignment. Since then, it has been pending in the Court.

In 2009, Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy had filed a petition in the Supreme Court asking for scrapping for the project since the National Institute of Oceanography had doubted its feasibility. He also said the project would land the union government in an embarrassing position.

Political parties in the state have been divided on the project. While the BJP and environmentalists were bitterly against it for exactly opposite reasons; the DMK, Congress and the CPM wanted the project to resume for its economic benefits.

While the BJP said the project would destroy “Ram Sethu,” environmentalists said it would seriously affect the fragile ecosystem and the biodiversity of the region. Experts also doubted the economic feasibility of the project in terms of the projected shipping, traffic and industrial gains.

Not surprisingly, the BJP’s reasons to protect the structure were sacred as they believed that it was built by Lord Rama as described in the epic “Ramaayana.” Jayalalithaa and her AIADMK highlighted the national heritage angle although both she and the BJP appeared to be on the same side.

Meanwhile, the CPM on Wednesday, has asked the Centre to immediately resume work on the project. The party state secretary G Ramakrishnan said the project has been derailed by the BJP. He said that the union government has used the pretext of the Pachauri committee report and faith of people. The delay has caused the project cost to escalate by Rs. 2,400 crores. Further delays will lead to the dredged areas being refilled with sand.

The main contention of the political opponents to the project is on “alignment 6” of the channel that would cut the “Ram Sethu.” The then UPA-1 government had looked at different alignments and decided in favour of the “alignment-6,” with DMK, then an influential coalition partner, putting considerable pressure.

When the BJP and its supporters across the country expressed outrage in the late 2000s, the DMK then scoffed at them. The DMK president and the then Tamil Nadu chief minister M Karunanidhi went to the extent of asking if Ram was trained in engineering and which engineering college he went to. The Congress covertly supported the sentiments of the DMK and even filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court doubting the “Ramayaana” legend.

Interesting to note that reports of some dredging machines getting damaged when they apparently hit the “Ram Sethu” and circulation of high resolution pictures of what appeared to be the legendary bridge fuelled the sentiments of section of people across the country since the project was launched.

For independent analysts, more than the reasons of faith, what works against the project is bad economics and the serious environmental damage it could cause.

The government has spent about Rs 800 crore so far and it’s likely to disappear in Indian ocean along with the mega grandiosity of a 150 year old idea.