Give Environment Greater Priority

The National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) has cleared 32 defence-related projects that will entail the diversion of land from protected areas and ecologically sensitive zones in Arunachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Ladakh, and Sikkim. The standing committee of the board, chaired by Union minister Bhupender Yadav, in charge of environment, forest, and climate change, took the decision last month. The projects involve the construction of strategic roads, helipads, border outposts, ammunition depots, and accommodation for, among others, artillery regiments. The ecologically fragile Karakoram (Nubra-Shyok) Wildlife Sanctuary and Changthang Cold Desert Wildlife Sanctuary in Ladakh will be affected. Land will also be diverted from the core area of the Namdapha Tiger Reserve in Arunachal Pradesh. The environment first became a focus of government attention during Indira Gandhi’s prime ministerial tenure. In 1985, the union ministry of environment and forests was created. Climate change became part of the ministry’s remit in 2014 when the current regime came to power. In other words, not only has concern about the environment and ecology increased over the decades, but the realisation that many aspects of these are interconnected has also permeated through to the government, thanks to the growth of a robust environmental and conservationist movement that looks at ecology as an indivisible entity. Alongside this, the understanding that environmental and ecological concerns are not hostile to the project of development has also been disseminated. It is now widely understood that development must be sustainable—that is, sensitive to and protective of the environment and ecology.

Karnataka High Court refuses to quash case against man who 'forced' anal sex on wife

However, the record of successive governments on keeping environmental and ecological concerns front and centre of the development agenda has been patchy, regardless of who has been in power. The encroachment of forest land for building defence-related infrastructure is, obviously, not a case of development versus environment since national security concerns come into play. But the broad argument about protecting the environment does not go away just because the question of defence requirements and concerns related to national security are factored in. There is a good basis for arguing that the idea of ‘security’ must be seen from a wider perspective—climate and food security are no less important than pure defence security. Unfortunately, by and large, the infrastructure ministries—relating to industries, mining, roads, power, housing, etc.—have greater heft than the environment-plus ministry. Their concerns are privileged. Environment ministers, who have in the past taken a stand against the diversion of forest land, for instance, have been given short shrift. A petition in the Supreme Court has shown that over 8,500 hectares of forests have been cleared for various projects just between February and mid-June this year. This trajectory is ecologically suicidal. All governments must give environmental and ecological concerns much greater priority.