by Harish Gupta, National Editor, Lokmat Group
FOREST Vs COAL
Prime Minister Narendra Modi's fulmination at the "five-star NGOs" before a recent meeting of judges and law bureaucrats could well be due to the overdose of bile at the very thought of Teesta Setalvad, India's 'NGO queen' who has been harrying him in and out of courts for well over a decade now. But the issue is not personal. It is ideological in its essence. Nor is there any doubt that the bleeding-heart donors at home and abroad who have kept the Indian civil society on the job have shown very little perception of the country's dire need to move out of its centuries old poverty trap. And that requires millions of surplus agricultural workers to be relocated to new urban spaces, with jobs that pay, to build new roads, expand the railway network, and to dig up wherever energy resources may lie. It is obvious that the need of the nation surpasses that of the communities temporarily distressed by new constructions, but the NGO frame of mind is to pre-empt the short-term pain; if it eliminates the long-term gain as a result, so be it.
Having been elected as prime minister exactly a year ago, Modi was quick to assess the essentially political nature of the civil society's resistance to his developmental work. Since there is a provision in the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), the nodal law enacted during Indira Gandhi's Emergency, that the Intelligence Bureau should do spot verification of NGOs' accounts, sourcing of funds, and their end-use—a provision that was not followed during the UPA years—Modi put it to use in right earnest. The result was most embarrassing for the previous rulers as it transpired that of the 22,707 NGOs that were in business in 2011-12, as many as 10,343 did not care to file their annual return (mandatory under FCRA) for any year between 2009 and 2012. And yet, as the IB report highlighted, most of these recipients of foreign donation were indulging in protest acts over their traditional targets: nuclear power projects, mining, large dams and even construction work. The report ominously mentioned a "negative impact" of 2-3 per cent on GDP growth as a result, and darkly hinted at possible involvement of foreign powers competing to achieve their own goals in India.
However, Modi didn't need to tweak FCRA rules framed by the Congress governments. The only difference being that it winked at their violation. As expected, the Home Ministry began a crackdown on a scale that had happened only in 1976, the year that the law was given effect, in the midst of a perceived opposition by foreign powers to the Indira Gandhi government. However, the historical contexts between then and now are different. Forty years ago, neither did India abound with 'troublesome' non-profits organizations (with the exception of George Fernandez and his railway workers' union, perhaps) nor did donations from abroad flow like a river into Third World countries. But now the magnitude of donation is rising fast. It was Rs 11,544 crore in just one year, 2011-12.
Even more worrisome is the fact that many NGOs have been sharply politicised. The FCRA rules are liberal; they have provision for organisations having political objectives. They may even resort to political actions like 'rasta roko' and 'chakka jam', but the intentions and activities must be clearly stated before licence under FCRA is issued. But most NGOs' compliance level has been low. It also seems they are being prodded by their donors to take to the streets against projects of national importance, for example the Kudankulam nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu. The project had begun in 2002, but its first unit went on stream in 2013. The delay is largely due to the activities of a few NGOs who had inflamed passion of the local fishermen, making them believe a nuclear power plant in the area could result in abrupt depletion of the fishing stock. However, the motive of the NGOs themselves remains a mystery, with a speculation that the US could be the culprit as it was unhappy about Russia, supplier of the plant, gaining entry into the potentially large Indian energy market. Even former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, known for his avoidance of public venting of opinion, particularly on contentious issues, described the Kudankulam agitation as the handiwork of "foreign funded NGOs".
The new NGO battlefield is Mahan, a coal block on the edge of a forest in Madhya Pradesh. The coal mine was to be jointly developed by Hindalco and Essar, but UPA's former environment minister Jairam Ramesh put a spanner in the works, saying the forest could not be destroyed. When Ramesh was overruled by the then Group of Ministers chairman Pranab Mukherjee, Greenpeace, the largest NGO in the world, headquartered in Amsterdam, fielded its volunteers in a guerrilla-style operation. This face-off is continuing even after NDA coming to power. As Greenpeace India executive Priya Pillai was ready to board an aircraft on her way to London, where she was scheduled to make a presentation on Mahan to a group of British MPs, she was pulled back under executive order. Since then Greenpeace’s accounts have been frozen, along with those of 34 other NGOs. The licences of over ten thousand others have been kept in abeyance and those of 165 are under scrutiny. Under scanner is the licence of Ford Foundation, which has funded many cutting-edge research projects, in India and around the world.
Modi is perfectly justified in telling the NGOs (and their donors) that they must act within the law. But it is also a clash between two world views. The one that nationalist governments like that of Modi cherish obviously has very little space for environment. But Greenpeace was founded “to ensure the ability of the Earth to nurture life in all its diversity”. Ford Foundation was founded in the 1940’s by the original owners of the Ford Motors with the objective to make the world free from wars. If the Earth cannot nurture life, or aggressive nationalism fuels a war, can economic growth sustain? Thus it is necessary to have a voice of dissent, but the civil society too must not take running NGO as a profession. Besides, they must give up a forest or two to get in exchange electricity that can light homes and hospitals and schools.
(The author is National Editor, Lokmat group)
