Affidavit approved, UPA to go ahead with Setu project

Thu, Feb 28 04:30 PM

New Delhi: The Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs has approved a new affidavit on Ram Setu. The Government is seeking to lift the stay on the construction of the controversial project off the Tamil Nadu coastline.

The affidavit will be filed in Supreme Court on March 5. Sources have told CNN-IBN that the Government wants the project to go ahead, something which the DMK - a key ally of the Government - has been demanding for some time now.

However, the UPA has been more cautious this time around. It says there is no available scientific evidence to prove that Ram Setu is a man-made structure, but adds that the Archaeological Survey of India doesn't have the expertise to either support to contradict this conclusion.

The affidavit also says that the legend of Lord Ram in literature, philosophy and religious sentiment occupies a significant place in the psyche of a large segment of Indian society.

Significantly, the Government is also ready to consider an alternate alignment that would not affect the structure. The Government wants work on the project to start in November should the Supreme Court give its go ahead.

The views of the Culture Ministry and the Archaeological Survey of India on the historical and cultural aspects of the case also have been taken note of.

In the first affidavit which was filed by the centre on the sethusamundram project (and later withdrawn) the Centre had made the following controversial statements:

Ram Setu is not a manmade structure, but a natural formation made up of shoals

Valmiki's Ramayan and Ramcharitmanas are mythological texts and they cannot be reiled upon

Ram Setu is at best a case of disputed mythology and not a matter of historical importance Sethusamudram Project

The Sethusamudram Project was originally conceived by a British commander of the Indian Marine, A D Taylor, in 1860. And while he may have been inspired by the Suez Canal at that time, nearly one and a half centuries later, India's decision to revive his abandoned dream project will have very little similarity to the vastly profitable Suez Canal or Panama Canal.

At least that's what this study done by a group of researchers led by Jacob John and Sudarshan Rodriguez claims.

"What we find is that the project has based its economic rationale only on distance saved for coastal shipping which is the highest which is 22 hours and the time saved is 22 hours," said senior research associate Sudarshan Rodriguez from Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment.

But Rodriguez says for ships coming from Europe and Africa, the time saved is only 30 per cent of what is claimed by the project. From Aden time saved is just 8-12 hours. From Mauritius ships will actually lose time.

"The tariff for this project is based on the savings from," said Rodriguez.

Coastal shipping saying that 50 per cent of time saved will be the tariff charged. So for a vessel which is around 20,000 Dead Weight Tons (DWT) we find that the savings by using the canal will be around $18,000.

"So ideally tariff then would be $9000. However the savings for a ship coming from Aden is only $4000. So if a ship from Aden is using the canal they are losing $5000," said Rodriguez.

This study also found that 70 per cent of shipping traffic in the Indian Ocean are big shipping vessels like oil tankers and bulk carriers. So it becomes next to impossible for them to navigate this narrow channel.

Captain Balakrishnan, a retired Indian Navy frigate commander who's done a parallel study says that ships would go around Sri Lanka rather than have to go through a canal with draught restrictions and with a need for a pilot to embark and disembark from the ship.

RECOMMEND THIS STORY