The Narmada Issue

The controversy over large dams on the River Narmada has come to symbolise the struggle for a
just and equitable society in India. The story is long and complicated and will take a long time to
tell. In brief, the Government's plan is to build 30 large, 135 medium and 3000 small dams to
harness the waters of the Narmada and its tributaries. The proponents of the dam claim that this
plan would provide large amounts of water and electricity which are desperately required for the
purposes of development.

Opponents of the dam question the basic assumptions of the Narmada Valley Development Plan
and believe that its planning is unjust and inequitous and the cost-benefit analysis is grossly
inflated in favour of building the dams. It is well established that the plans rest on untrue and
unfounded assumptions of hydrology and seismicity of the area and the construction is causing
large scale abuse of human rights and displacement of many poor and underprivileged
communities. They also believe that water and energy can be provided to the people of the
Narmada Valley, Gujarat and other regions through alternative technologies and planning
processes which can be socially just and economically and environmentally sustainable.

The complexity of the issues involved is acknowledged. However, once one cuts through all the
rhetoric, lies and subterfuge of the vested interests, the gross inequities are clear. Large numbers
of poor and underprivileged communities (mostly tribals and dalits) are being dispossessed of
their livelihood and even their ways of living to make way for dams being built on the basis of
incredibly dubious claims of common benefit and "national interest". For us, this is simply
immoral and therefore unacceptable. No purported benefits can be used to justify the denial of
the fundamental rights of individuals in a democratic society. And given the evidence of past
megadam schemes in India and elsewhere and what has already happened in the Narmada
Valley, the promised benefits might never be realised.

A quick look at the ground reality would disabuse anyone of the real nature of the dam-builder's
enterprise. Large dams imply large budgets for related projects leading to large profits for a small
group of people. A mass of research shows that even on purely technical grounds, large dams
have been colossal failures. While they have delivered only a fraction of their purported benefits,
they have had an extremely devastating effect on the riverine ecosystem and have rendered
destitute large numbers of people (whose entire sustenance and modes of living are centered
around the river). For no large dam in India has it been shown that the resettled people have been
provided with just compensation and rehabilitation. At a more abstract level, the questions that
arise in the Narmada Struggle challenge the dominant model of development (of which Sardar
Sarovar dam is a prime example) that holds out the chimerical promise of material wealth
through modernisation but perpetuates an inequitous distribution of resources and wreaks social
and environmental havoc.

Though the water problems of drought-prone areas of Gujarat, like Kutch, Saurashtra and North
Gujarat (the Government's raison d'etre for the dam) are admittedly real. However given the
nature of the plans for Sardar Sarovar, it will never solve these problems. On the contrary, in the
shadow of the costliest project ever undertaken in India, it is unlikely that alternative schemes
that would genuinely address these problems would be implemented. Sardar Sarovar takes up
over 80% of Gujarat's irrigation budget but has only 1.6% of cultivable land in Kutch, 9% of
cultivable land in Saurashtra and 20% cultivable land in North Gujarat in its command area.
Moreover, these areas are at the tail-end of the command and would get water only after all the
area along the canal path get their share of the water, and that too after 2020 AD. In summary, all
available indicators suggest that these needy areas are never going to benefit from the Sardar
Sarovar Project.

In simple terms, the struggle over the river Narmada holds a mirror to our national face and
challenges our commitment to professed ideals of justice, equality and democracy.

NARMADA BACHAO ANDOLAN

Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) is a non-governmental organisation (NGO) that mobilised

tribal people, adivasis, farmers, environmentalists and human rights activists against the Sardar
Sarovar Dam being built across the Narmada river, Gujarat.

FORMATION:

There were groups such as Gujarat-based Arch-Vahini (Action Research in Community Health
and Development) and Narmada Asargrastha Samiti (Committee for people affected by the
Narmada dam), Madhya Pradesh-based Narmada Ghati Nav Nirman Samiti (Committee for a
new life in the Narmada Valley) and Maharashtra-based Narmada Dharangrastha Samiti
(Committee for Narmada dam-affected people) who either believed in the need for fair
rehabilitation plans for the people or who vehemently opposed dam construction despite a
resettlement policy.

While Patkar established Narmada Bachao Andolan in 1989, all these groups joined this national
coalition of environmental and human rights activists, scientists, academics and project-affected
people with a non-violent approach.

AFTERMATH:

Within the focus of Narmada Bachao Andolan towards the stoppage of the Sardar Sarovar dam,
she advised addition of World Bank to their propaganda. Using the right to fasting, she
undertook a 22 day fast that almost took her life. In 1991, her actions led to an unprecedented
independent review by the World Bank. The Morse Commission, appointed in June 1991 at the
recommendation of The World Bank President Barber Coinable, conducted its first independent
review of a World Bank project. This independent review stated that "performance under these
projects has fallen short of what is called for under Bank policies and guidelines and the policies
of the Government of India.” This resulted in the Indian Government pulling out of its loan
agreement with the World Bank. In response, Patkar said "It is very clear and obvious that they
used this as a face-saving device", suggesting that if this were not to happen; the World Bank
would eventually would have withdrawn the loan. The World Bank's participation in these
projects was eventually cancelled in 1995.

She further undertook a similar fast in 1993 and resisted evacuation from the dam site. In 1994,
the Bachao Andolan office was attacked reportedly by a couple of political parties, where Patkar
and other activists were physically assaulted and verbally abused. In protest, a few NBA activists
and she began a fast and 20 days later, they were arrested and forcibly fed intravenously.

SUPREME COURT’S DECISION

Patkar led Narmada Bachao Andolan had filed a written petition with the Supreme Court of
India, the nation's apex court, seeking stoppage of construction on the Sardar Sarovar dam. The
court initially ruled the decision in the Andolan's favor thereby effecting an immediate stoppage
of work at the dam and directing the concerned states to first complete the rehabilitation and
replacement process.

The Supreme Court also deliberated on this issue further for several years but finally upheld the
Tribunal Award and allowed the construction to proceed, subject to conditions. The court
introduced a mechanism to monitor the progress of resettlement pari passu with the raising of the
height of the dam through the Grievance Redressal Authorities (GRA) in each of the party states.
The court’s decision referred in this document, given in the year 2000 after seven years of
deliberations, has paved the way for completing the project to attain full envisaged benefits. The
court's final line of the order states, "Every endeavour shall be made to see that the project is
completed as expeditiously as possible".

Subsequent to the court’s verdict, Press Information Bureau (PIB) featured an article which
states that:

"The Narmada Bachao Andolan has rendered a yeoman's service to the country by creating a
high-level of awareness about the environmental and rehabilitation and relief aspects of Sardar
Sarovar and other projects on the Narmada. But, after the court verdict it is incumbent on it to
adopt a new role. Instead of 'damning the dam' any longer, it could assume the role of vigilant
observer to see that the resettlement work is as humane and painless as possible and that the
environmental aspects are taken due care of."
PEOPLE INVOLVED

Amongst the major celebrities who have shown their support for Narmada Bachao Andolan are
Booker Prize winner, Arundhati Roy and Aamir Khan.1994 saw the launch of Narmada: A
valley Rises, by filmmaker Ali Kazimi.This film documents the five week long Sangharsh Yatra
of 1991. The film went on to win several awards and is considered by many to be a classic film
on the issue. In 1996, veteran documentary film maker, Anand Patwardhan, made an award-
winning documentary on this issue, titled: 'A Narmada Diary'.

CRITICISM

The Narmada dam's benefits include provision of drinking water, power generation and irrigation
facilities. However, the campaign led by the NBA activists has held up the project's completion,
and the NBA supporters have indulged in physical attacks on local people who accepted
compensation for moving. Others have argued that the Narmada Dam protesters are little more
than environmental extremists who use pseudoscientific agitprop to scuttle the development of
the region, and that the dam will provide agricultural benefits to millions of poor in India.