Backpage

‘DEVELOPMENT with a human face’; ‘a caring government’ – the continued invocation of these well-meaning but empty phrases has now taken on an ominous tone. Many of us were so relieved by the ‘unanticipated’ exit of the NDA regime and, probably, so overwhelmed by the ‘sacrifice’ of Sonia Gandhi and the elevation of the ‘clean and unassuming’ Manmohan Singh to the top spot that we failed to realise that ‘the more things change, the more they remain the same.’

This may appear cynical or defeatist or both. But the inability of the current coalition to meaningfully engage with and respond to even gross tragedies must serve as a wake-up call to all those seeking a government with a difference. It is instructive that the fate of the now underwater towns of Harsud and Tehri has elicited such little public outcry.

Even the remarkable obituary of Harsud by Arunadhati Roy has failed to move our ostensibly vigilant civil society. Nor has the telling photograph of Sunderlal Bahuguna, leading Chipko activist and longtime environmental icon, sitting on a hillock and gazing pensively at the destruction of his karmabhoomi. It is almost as if these two towns, sites of vigorous protest against destructive development not too far back, have been decisively relegated to history.

Harsud, in 1989, was the site of an unusual gathering of environmental activists with close to 50,000 people coming together to pledge that they would not let the town submerge, promising to drown with the town if their demands went unheeded. And if the history of the previous fifteen years reflects one tale of official neglect and apathy, it equally shows up the limitations of and fissures within our activist community and imagination. Endless debates over the future of big dam projects, terms of rehabilitation for those displaced, confusion over the role of political parties and the media – all these and more created an ennui resulting from overexposure. Future historians may well recall the Harsud rally as the last big hurrah presaging the decline of India’s green politics.

This is not to trivialise the immense courage and sacrifice, much less the evidence advanced by the activist community questioning these mega projects. Just that, constructing an effective politics of ‘sustainable development’ is a long-drawn process, one often involving more defeats than victories.

The struggle over Tehri comes across more as an individual saga – of Sunderlalji against the state. Through many dharnas and fasts, he repeatedly managed to extract the promise of a comprehensive review. But despite a much stronger case against building a dam on the confluence of the Bhagirathi and Bilangana, Bahuguna’s efforts were to no avail, maybe because of his inability to draw in a wider ‘coalition of the unwilling’. If anything, subsequent efforts to foreground the holy nature of the site, even accepting help from the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, only served to further alienate potential ‘secular’ allies.

Do Harsud and Tehri represent a fait-accompli; heroic and noble but in the end losing battles? It is difficult to disregard that at the end the residents of both towns stand dislocated, their lives and relationships shattered. And despite promises to the contrary, the relocation and ‘rehabilitation’ process left few better off, barring the officialdom and middlemen who invariably profit from misery.

But why go as far as Harsud and Tehri? Do we not see the same apathetic and bureaucratic process in operation everyday, in our own neighbourhoods? Just visit or read accounts of resettlement sites in Delhi where slum and pavement dwellers were packed off after being evicted from where they were. Each action was defended on a public good criteria – the need to make parks and extend green cover, decongest busy streets, reduce crime, even ensure a brighter future for those evicted.

The reality does not even merit recounting. Resettlement sites remain refugee camps except that they are left to fend for themselves, distanced from earlier jobs and income earning possibilities. Evidently, the displaced do not count as citizens, though ironically displaced residents of Yamuna Pushta were ferried back, at public cost, to their old booths to exercise their franchise. If not they, their votes matter.

Harsud and Tehri are somewhat distant. But Delhi, where we even have the caring government of Sheila Dikshit, flush with having beaten back the anti-incumbency factor. She no longer has to deal with a hostile government at the Centre, and the Municipal Corporation too is under Congress control. Surely, it should now be possible to demonstrate the possibility of humane development. Or is it that we, both state and society, do not care enough despite assertions to the contrary.

Harsh Sethi