Congress leader Jairam Ramesh firmly countered Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav’s accusations of ‘negative politics’ regarding the Great Nicobar infrastructure project. Ramesh asserted that highlighting an impending ‘ecological and humanitarian disaster’ is not merely political opposition, but a genuine expression of serious concern for the nation.
Ramesh stated that the Minister has consistently failed to address fundamental questions repeatedly posed by the Congress party concerning this contentious project.
Taking to X (formerly Twitter), Mr. Ramesh reiterated that Minister Yadav’s labeling of their opposition as ‘negative politics’ was unfounded. He emphasized that bringing national attention to the project’s potential for an ‘ecological and humanitarian disaster’ stems from profound worry, not political maneuvering.
He challenged the Environment Minister, questioning whether the Great Nicobar Mega Infra Project, which involves clearing hundreds of thousands of trees, directly violates the National Forest Policy of 1988. This policy explicitly mandates the total safeguarding of tropical rain/moist forests, especially in regions like the Andaman & Nicobar Islands.
Ramesh dismissed the proposed compensatory afforestation as a ‘farcical’ and inadequate replacement for vital old-growth forests. He highlighted the absurdity of planting trees in Haryana, an ecosystem vastly different from Great Nicobar’s unique rainforests, and further questioned why 25% of the designated afforestation land in Haryana had already been allocated for mining, instead of its intended purpose.
He also probed the lack of consultation with the National Commission on Scheduled Tribes prior to the project’s approval.
Furthermore, Ramesh questioned why the valid concerns of the Great Nicobar Tribal Council are being ignored, and why the Shompen Policy of the Islands, which explicitly calls for the integrity of indigenous communities to be prioritised in all developmental projects, is being disregarded.
The Congress leader also pointed out that the Social Impact Assessment, mandated by the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act of 2013, shockingly fails to acknowledge the presence and existence of the Shompen and Nicobarese tribal communities.
Ramesh highlighted that the Forest Rights Act of 2006 legally designates the Shompen as the primary authority for protecting, preserving, regulating, and managing their tribal reserve. He questioned why the project’s approval process bypasses this crucial legal recognition.
He also drew attention to Great Nicobar’s role as a habitat for endangered species such as leatherback turtles, megapodes, saltwater crocodiles, and diverse coral systems, asking if the project would inevitably push these species closer to extinction.
Ramesh demanded transparency, specifically questioning why crucial documents related to the project, including ground-truthing reports for reclassifying the transshipment port’s location from a sensitive Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ1-A), have not been made public.
He raised concerns about the project’s long-term viability, citing the island’s vulnerability to severe subsidence during the 2004 tsunami and its location within a high-seismic zone, questioning how its sustainability could be guaranteed.
Ramesh made a poignant reference to a book on forest conservation co-authored over two decades ago by Ritwick Dutta and Bhupender Yadav himself. He noted the irony that while Dutta faced scrutiny for his environmental activism, Yadav, now the Environment Minister, seemed to have forgotten his earlier principles, urging him to ‘awake’.
In response to criticism, Minister Yadav had previously attacked the Congress for creating confusion and engaging in ‘negative politics’ regarding the Great Nicobar infrastructure project.
During an event in New Delhi, Yadav maintained that the ambitious project is vital for national security and enhancing strategic connectivity in the Indian Ocean Region. He claimed that the project would utilize only a small fraction, 1.78%, of Great Nicobar’s total forest area.
These statements followed an article by Congress Parliamentary Party chairperson Sonia Gandhi, who described the ₹72,000 crore project as a ‘planned misadventure.’ She warned that it imperils the survival of the Shompen and Nicobarese tribes, risks destroying one of the planet’s most unique ecosystems, and is dangerously vulnerable to natural disasters.
Gandhi further alleged that the project’s advancement was effectively ‘making a mockery of all legal and deliberative processes’.
She highlighted the plight of the Nicobarese tribals, whose ancestral villages are within the proposed project area. Having been displaced by the 2004 tsunami, this project, she argued, would lead to their permanent displacement, shattering their hope of ever returning to their ancestral lands.
Gandhi also stressed that the Shompen tribe faces an even more severe threat, as the project would de-notify a substantial portion of their reserve and inevitably lead to a massive influx of people and tourists onto the island. In a counter-argument, Mr. Yadav had penned an article in the same publication, asserting the project’s strategic importance for defense and national interests.
Yadav outlined the project’s vision: transforming Great Nicobar into a significant maritime and air connectivity hub in the Indian Ocean Region. This includes plans for an international container transshipment terminal, a new international airport, a 450 MVA gas and solar power plant, and a 16 sq km township.