Rama Setu: what the apex court said -- by Sri Ram

Ram Sethu: What the apex court said

By Sri Ram (Organiser, June 22, 2008)

Even in the latest affidavit they have said: “No archaeological studies have been conducted. It is not possible to say or indicate the outcome in the event such investigations are carried out.” Thereby they tried to remove archaeological work at the site because of the humiliation they underwent due to their own anti-Hindu stance, but the court order has shown that it is a preliminary requisite to the issue.
The recent verdict of Supreme Court in Ram Sethu case is a landmark directive to the Government of India to have the site surveyed by Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and to declare the site as a national monument. The Congress-led government and the communists have been trying to project their report as scientific and the claim of the majority Hindus as unscientific and deserves to be rejected. The Congress-communist DMK combine in their own affidavit submitted that no archaeological exploration has been conducted in the site. What is science and where is science when the Congress Government did not carry out even a preliminary survey of the site through its own archaeological survey, not to speak of an underwhat archaeological survey for which it has a special wings under ASI.

The Supreme Court has rightly but firmly told the pseudo scientists first to conduct a survey of the site before coming to the court. According to their own submission in the affidavit, the pseudo scientists have shown that as early as 2002 the then Prime Minister of India Shri Atal Behari Vajpayee directed the Sethusamudram Project authorities to include an archaeologist in the Committee to oversee the progress. This sagacious noting was never implemented and at no point of time it was thought necessary. But when the court directed them to submit an affidavit, the ASI was hurriedly brought into the picture and an affidavit insulting the millions of Hindus was filed which was withdrawn the very next day. Even in the latest affidavit they have said: “No archaeological studies have been conducted. It is not possible to say or indicate the outcome in the event such investigations are carried out.” Thereby they tried to remove archaeological work at the site because of the humiliation they underwent due to their own anti-Hindu stance, but the court order has shown that it is a preliminary requisite to the issue.

The Committee of eminent persons constituted by the Congress government to receive objections and opinions from the public for and against the project, which it was expected to scrutinise and submit their report, also did not include any archaeologist but only had substandard yes men who also did not care to look into the public opinion and examine them but simply went ahead with what the Minister for Shipping wanted. We give below an extract of a petition given to the Committee, pointing out the ASI report was unscientific as it has done no work on the site. The Supreme Court has rightly shown the eminent persons have failed to take note of the basic scientific need. One may ask whether the so-called Committee or any in that Committee supposed to be an expert in archaeology or religious history whether they even had a cursory look at the petitions received by them and noted their views. One would also like to know whether there was any system of classification among the petitions received into various subjects and each subject given to the expert concerned for due consideration in such a sensitive matter? If this has not been done what was the purpose in constituting the Committee?

Unscientific nature of ASI’s approach
“The affidavit submitted by the Archaeological Survey of India in the Supreme Court suffers for want of even basic requirement of scientific study as no “on shore or under water archaeological exploration” seems to have been undertaken at the site in dispute. No report has ever been published by the ASI and no one from the ASI has visited this site and conducted any preliminary archaeological exploration. Therefore, any affidavit filed by this department has no scientific value, cannot stand scrutiny and deserves to be rejected. In the absence of any archaeological exploration, the presence or the absence of any human activity cannot be determined by the ASI. The conclusion that there was no human activity at the site is not valid. As the whole stand taken by the ASI is unscientific no proper pre-attention has been given to the historicity of the site when the project was floated and what has been now presented is a shabby, haphazard, patch work the whole deserves to be faulted.”

Human activity nearby archaeological position
It may be mentioned that a nearest archaeological site on the east coast that has been excavated has yielded human activity right from 3rd century BC and continued to be active till about 5th 6th century. The Pandyan Port of Korkai has yielded pottery said to be of the age of the Mauryas-3rd century BC. Archaeological evidences point to the fact that the coastal region around the site of Ram Sethu was very active and the suggestion that there was no human activity is not correct.

The reference to the historicity or otherwise of Ram is irrelevant, for the existence of no God can be proved by any religion in the world. The Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu M. Karunanidhi has observed that “Ram is as much a historic person as Jesus or Prophet Muhammad”. (published in all the newspapers). Even communist countries like Russia which declared “religion is the opium of man” have started welcoming the Pope and renovating their churches. Consider the percentage of people in the world who believe in God as against the pseudo non believers.

The colonial policy-Slavish mentality
The Colonial rulers of India in the 18th and 19th century applied two different sets of norms for evaluating historicity; one for their own white race and the other for the enslaved Indians in which case they denigrated all that was Indian as done by Vincent Smith. For them norm for “historicity” of Jesus was totally different from the historicity of Ram. This is clearly reflected in not awarding the Nobel Prize to Mahatma Gandhi which they admit now as a mistake. The slavish history thrusted on enslaved Indians for obvious reason by the colonialists continues to remain as a slavish legacy with the Congress and the communists to this day, as has been mentioned by Romila Thapar.

A proven history-International evidence
Sri Ram was not only a real historic person for all the people of India but also to all the South East Asian countries like Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia and Sri Lanka for over two thousand years in every sphere of their life in literature, music, dance, sculpture, religious belief, etc. Such a continued belief for over two thousand years is a living history then the view of one or two trying to refute it on subjective and questionable grounds.

Royal orders of 7th century-Epigraphical evidence
In a historic copper plate Royal record recently found it is mentioned by a 7th century Pandya speaking about his ancestors rebuilding the Sethu. (sethu bandham pala ceydu). The existence of the bridge is further corroborated by another copper plate charter of the Chola ruler Parantaka in the 10th century in which there is a pointed reference to the bridge constructed by the monkeys at the Ram thirtha (Ramye Sri Rama tirtte kavivara nikaraih baddha sethu prabandhe). Parantaka Chola specifically mentions that he performed tulabhara rite at the Ramatirtha where the monkeys built the bridge. And that is the reason for performing tulabhara rite at the site of the bridge. If any indisputable proof regarding the existence of Ram Sethu is required, this 10th century record is the factual indisputable historic evidence in which the Chola king refers to it.

On the other side of the ocean in Sri Lankan coast where Sri Ram is said to have landed there is a temple called Rameswaram even to this day which is under worship.

Further we have the reference to Adam’s bridge in later records attesting to “a bridge”. Thus there are continuous records that attest to the existence of Ram Sethu and the question of any doubt has no basis.

The Rulers of Sethuapti-Historic evidence
The bridge that Sri Ram built was Ram Sethu and the place was called “Sethu-pati” For five hundred years or more, from 15th century, the Ramanathapuram Marava rulers were the guardians of this tract and were called “the protectors of Sethu-pati”-(Sethupati-kaattha-devar). They were called so in all the records. The present name Sethupati Rulers is an abbreviated form. To say there was no Sethu is to wipe our history and the gallant sacrifice the Maravas rulers did for nearly 500 years. This presupposes the existence of Sethu.

Sethu coins as Sethupati coins
The Sethu has played such an important role in the region that several coins bearing the name Sethupati issued by the local rulers have been found both on the Indian side and on the Sri Lankan sides.

National monument of excellence
It is also not correct to say that Sri Ram is not a historic person. The very opening of the Ramayana by Valmiki starts with the statement “Who among the living person is most virtuous?” Thus it is a history of a living man Itihasa. Throughout it is Ram’s human nature and existence that remain the overwhelming factor appreciated by all the intellectuals of India, not the miracles. One who reads the original will know the very first opening verse of the epic begins with a historic person.

Literary
For over two thousand years Sri Ram building the Sethu has been consistently mentioned in the poems of all the great thinkers and poets of India. Century after century the poems mention the construction of the Ram Sethu. There is a separate early kavya name Sethu Bandha which has the construction of the bridge as its main theme.

The definition of “historical monument” is said to be “any relic, or place, that recall to the mind of the Indian people their associate acts of bygone ages”. For over two thousand years millions and millions of Indian people have believed and paid their respects to the bridge built by Sri Ram and that itself gives the claim to be preeminently suited to be the national monument. Declaration is only a formal action but it has remained a monument of unsurpassed beauty and remembrance for thousands of years. It is well known monumentality is not restricted only to “built up structures”, but “essentially to the place” that is associated with the memory of it as in the case of heritage towns. In the very capital of India, Delhi, there are many mosques of unknown personalities declared and preserved as national monument. The ASI should not be coerced to twist historic facts in the case of Ram Sethu to suit political gimmicks but allow the facts to speak for themselves.

Truly world heritage monument
In fact Ram Sethu goes beyond the concept of National Monument for it is virtually a monument of international faith. The whole of South East Asia like Thailand, Cambodia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Laos, Sri Lanka and neighbouring regions have literature that tell Ram’s exploit and there are several hundred versions of Ramayana in all these countries. There are references to building Ram’s bridge in all these works, and all these regions believed in the existence of the bridge for hundreds of centuries. Hanuman building the bridge is the subject matter of paintings, sculptures etc. Hanuman building the bridge is the fascinating theme in these countries in dance and their music. It therefore is truly an international monument par excellence and deserves to be declared as “World Heritage Monument”.

The UNESCO is now spending considerable money in preserving valuable oral traditions in the world as contribution to world thought. For example the Buddhist mode of reciting their texts is now in the world list.

Overwhelming evidences
There exist overwhelming evidences of historical, epigraphical, archaeological, numismatic, literary and international evidences for the existence of the bridge that is remembered throughout South East. No civilised nation in the world can think of wiping out such a monument by actually cutting it to pieces just to benefit self-seeking politicians who neither place nation’s ethos above their selfish interest nor trustworthy. Almost every country boasts of its heritage and cannot destroy it.

There are hundreds of monuments throughout India which have been declared as National Monuments by the ASI, which are not even known to the villagers nearby. There are hundreds of burial sites that have been protected. One may even challenge the protagonists to say how many monuments declared by the ASI as monuments of national importance have really played any historical, ethical, economical or religious role as Ram Sethu? The regional superintending archaeologist continues to submit proposal to protect such insignificant places as national monuments which are under active consideration. That being the situation the ASI cannot but immediately declare this site as a monument of national importance and take immediate simultaneous action to get this declared as world heritage site. Is there any other suitable site to be declared as world heritage site than Ram Sethu?

Last but not the least is the permanent irreparable damage this project is trying to impose is an irreversible destruction by cutting the beauty of Ram Sethu which is against the civilised opinion of the world as reflected in the World Charter of Nature adopted and proclaimed by the General Assembly of United Nations and adopted on October 28, 1982. The Preamble of the Charter reads: “Civilisation is rooted in Nature which has shaped human culture and influenced all artistic and scientific achievements and bring in harmony with nature gives man the best opportunities for the development of his creativity and for rest and recreation. Every form of life is unique warranting respect regardless of its worth to man.” The Charter of Nature by the United Nations enjoys the status of Human Rights charter.

There is no doubt cutting the nature at the Sethusamudram bridge that has inspired millions of people for thousands of years is going to be a permanent damage to the nature.

The Indian nation is beholden to the judges of the Supreme Court for gently reminding the Government of its primary duty.
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=242&page=27

Now, it is Kanimozhi’s turn to dream Setu channel

Now, it is Kanimozhi’s turn to dream Setu channel

The sentimental journey of rationalists continues, without deliberating on the issues flagged in the Supreme Court.

It is surprising that there is no reference by the rationalists, to the ongoing study announced by Tuticorin Port Trust Dy. Chairman, A. Subbiah, for an alternative freight corridor from Tuticorin to Erode-Nagpur, instead of the project disaster called Setu channel.

When in 1838 the British regime tried dredging and gave up the idea of a Setu channel, they chose the alternative of a railway link between Kolkata to Mumbai to transport and shipe the mineral ores from Mumbai port.

kalyanaraman

Kanimozhi bats for Karunanidhi on Sethu project

Cuddalore (PTI) (The Hindu, 15 June 2008): Taking the centrestage at the first DMK women's conference here, Kanimozhi, daughter of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi, on Sunday defended his offer to rename the stalled Sethusamudram project as 'Sethuram', saying the move was aimed at implementing his dream project.
In a veiled response to DMDK founder and actor-turned politician Vijaykant who had recently raised doubts about the DMK patriarch's atheist credentials in view of his offer to rename the project 'Sethuram', she said Karunanidhi only wanted the project for the development of the state and therefore even was ready to rename it.
"Karunanidhi is only concerned about the development of Tamil Nadu. The new party's chief should realise the history of Karunanidhi and his services to the people of the state before criticising him," she said without naming the leader.

Recalling remarks by rationalist leader and Dravidar Kazhagam founder E V R Periyar, Kanimozhi, at the forefront of organising the conference, said one can even smear ash on the forehaad for the benefit of society, though it was against Dravidian principles.

Karunanidhi, reacting to the opposition to the dredging of the Ramsethu, a mythical bridge believed to have been built by Lord Ram, had remarked whether Ram was an engineer.

But in his recent birthday message, he appealed to the opponents of the project, saying he was even ready to rename it as Sethuram, but only wanted its implementation.
Hindu outfits like the VHP and RSS, political parties BJP and AIADMK and Janata Party are opposed to dredging of Ramsethu.

The Supreme Court had asked the Centre to consider the possibilities of an alternate route for the implementation of the SSCP.

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/004200806151653.htm

Hon’ble PM, now scrap Setu Project for ever. Setusamudram hey kaarasthaan.

Hon’ble PM, now scrap Setu Project for ever

-- Declare Rama Setu sacred monument, Rameshwaram divya kshetram
-- Setusamudram hey kaarasthaan (Meaning: Setusamudram is a conspiratorial place). Dredging contractors’ delight.

Mr. A. Subbiah, Dy Chairman, Tuticorin Port Trust (TPT), has announced that a project is being studied to prepare a ‘Detailed Project Report’ for the establishment of a ‘backbone freight corridor’ through rail, from Erode to Nagpur with the assistance of Rail India Technical and Economic Services (RITES) Limited, a Government of India enterprise. While this is a welcome development as an alternative to Setu channel project, Govt. of India should forthwith recognize it as such and make an announcement that the Setu Channel Project has been scrapped for ever.

This is comparable to the decision of the British colonial regime to go for a rail corridor between Kolkata and Mumbai instead of attempting a costly enterprise of building a channel or canal through Setusamudram (an attempt at dredging which was tried and given up in 1838 because of exhorbitant costs involved).

Unfortunately, another extraordinary decision announced in such apparent haste – that is, to dredge the inner harbour of TPT to a depth of 12.8 m. Why does the Govt. of India want to continue piling up illegalities in the kaarasthaan of Setusamudram?

Swamy attacks Centre for failing to curb inflation

Chennai, June 14: Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy on Saturday alleged that the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs' (CCEA) approval for deepening the channel and basin at Tuticorin port at a cost of Rs 538 crore was "unnecessary as the whole project was mooted just to compensate commission agents, who would be affected if the Sethusamudram Shipping Channel Project (SSCP) was shelved".

Swamy also said he was in favour of setting up a separate railway corridor for faster container movement from Tuticorin port than the SSCP.

Bureau Report

http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?aid=448847&sid=BUS&ssid=50
It turns out that the proposed dredged depth beyond 10.7 m in TPT inner harbour would involve blasting of hard rock and also dredging upto 15 m. depth in the outer harbour (costs of which have been hidden). Such blasting will be illegal since the Van Teevu (one of the 24 islands declared by UNESCO as Marine Bio-reserve of South Asia) would be destroyed with devastating effects on the fragile eco-sphere. See the detailed article by V. Sundaram in NewsToday of 14 June 2008 (appended).
If this depth was necessitated by the dredging of a Setu channel to a depth of 12 m., the costs related to dredging in Tuticorin harbour should ALSO have become a part of the Setusamudram shipping channel cost. Is this a way to understate the channel cost (just as the social cost, security costs, were excluded and maintenance dredging costs were understated), apart from NOT bringing out all the components of a channel project in one Detailed Project Report (DPR)? It turns out that the actual dredging depth achieved in Palk Straits has only been 10.73 m. even though the DPR called for 12 m. draft for the channel.
Here is the update in the Project Status provided in the Setusamudram Corpn. website based on an announcement made by Suresh, Chairman, Chennai Port who is looking after the Tuticorin Port/Sethusamudram Corpn also on 10 April 2008:

SETHUSAMUDRAM SHIP CHANNEL WORK PROGRESSING WELL AT PALK BAY - 10.73M ACHIEVED IN APRIL, 2008
Maritime London in association with the Institute of Chartered Ship Brokers (Madras Branch) organized a seminar at Chennai on 14.04.2008 on the topic "Realizing Maritime India's Growth Potential". During the course of interaction with the press after the Seminar, Shri K. Suresh, I.A.S., Chairman, Chennai port Trust who is also holding additional charge as Chairman Cum Managing Director, Sethusamudram Corporation Limited spoke at length on the project. He explained that the Sethu Project which would provide a direct link between the east and west coast of the country without circumnavigating Srilanka envisages a channel of 300 M width and 12 M depth for a total length of 167 km comprising three segments.
• Initial portion in the Palk Bay of length 54 km in which dredging was in progress.
• A further length of 78 km where dredging was not required due to available depths in excess of 12 M.
• Adam's Bridge portion of length 35 KM where dredging had been suspended since September 2007 due to the injunction of the Supreme Court.
Regarding the dredging operations in Palk Bay stretch, he mentioned that DCI engaged a survey launch m.v. TAURUS of M/s. Geo Star Surveys India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, for conducting a seabed survey from 04.04.08 to ascertain the depth of the channel in this 54 km stretch where at present six Trailing Suction Hopper Dredgers are at work viz.
• DCI DR – XVI
• DR – TRILOKI PREM
• DR – PACIFIQUE
• DR. BANWARI PREM
• DR. DARYAMANTHAN
• PROF. GORJUNOV
The initial report for the stretch of 54 km above that as against the planned channel depth of – 12 mtrs Chart Datum and 300 m width, the depths are varying from – 10 mtrs to – 11 mtrs with an average of 10.73 mtrs for the initial 18 kms stretch. For the remaining 36 km of Palk Bay portion the depth varies from – 10.75 mtrs to – 11.30 mtrs from Chart Datum. This indicates that the dredging has been successfully carried out by DCI and the percentage in respect of depth achieved averages around 93%. Hence it will be possible for a vessel with 10M draft requirement to navigate from Chennai upto the coast of Rameswaram.
Tuticorin port plans Rs 5,200-cr expansion

T E Narasimhan / Chennai June 9, 2008, 5:33 IST
Tuticorin Port Trust (TPT) is planning to invest Rs 5,200 crore to create additional capacity and infrastructure. The port had recently received in-principle approval from the Centre for two major projects involving the inner harbour and outer harbour. The projects, which will be executed through the public-private partnership (PPP) mode, are expected to be completed by 2012.
According to a senior TPT official, Rs 4,350 crore would be spent on the outer harbour development project, which would include two or three container terminals, one oil terminal, two coal terminal and a general cargo terminal. This part of the project would be executed in the PPP mode.
The inner harbour project, which will cost Rs 936 crore, will involve building of a coal berth and a general berth, and deepening of the draft from 10.7 metres to 12.8 metres to allow higher-capacity ships at the east cost port in Tamil Nadu.
With this expansion in place, the capacity of the port would double from the existing 20.55 million tonne to 40.60 million tonne of cargo, the official said.
Of the total investment in the inner harbour, a major portion will be towards dredging, which is estimated to cost Rs 538 crore. Of this, Rs 350 crore will be funded by the port through its internal fund and the Centre will bear the balance. Dredging work is likely to be completed in 18 months, the official said.
Once dredging is completed, the port will be able to handle fourth generation container vessels with a capacity of 3,000 twenty equivalent units (TEUs) to 4,000 TEUs. Currently, the port can handle container vessels up to 2,000 TEUs capacity.
The port will also be able to accommodate vessels with a capacity of 70,000 DWT (dead weight tonne) from the current 50,000 DWT. The increase in capacity will also reduce per tonne cost by 10-15 per cent for a shipper, the official said.
The expansion project would create an additional capacity of 40 million tonnes by the end of 2012 and an additional four million tonnes would be added by 2017.
Though the current outlay for this project was estimated at Rs 4,350 crore, it might increase to Rs 6,000 crore, if it was delayed by four to five years, the official said.
Tuticorin Port handled 21.48 million tonnes of cargo during 2006-07, registering 14 per cent growth over 2005-06 when the port handled 18.70 million tonnes. While the traffic volume for 2007-08 is yet to be tabulated, the target for 2008-09 is set at 24.06 million tonnes.
http://www.business-standard.com/common/news_article.php?leftnm=3&subLeft=1&chklogin=N&autono=325530&tab=r
CCEA approves deepening channel and basin at Tuticorin Port
5 Jun, 2008, 1622 hrs IST, AGENCIES (Economic Times)
NEW DELHI: The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) has given its approval for deepening the channel and basin to cater to 12.80 m draught vessels at Tuticorin Port.
The approval includes dredging the channel to a depth of upto (-) 14.70 m below chart datum and to a width of 230 m and to a length of 3.40 km from the Port entrance.

It also includes dredging a part of the existing Harbour Basin area including the turning circle to a depth upto (-) 14.10 m below chart datum. The estimated cost of the project is Rs.538.00 crore of which Rs.349.70 crore (65 per cent) is to be borne by Tuticorin Port Trust either from its internal resources or borrowings and Rs.188.30 crores (35 per cent) will be given by GOI as grant.

With the implementation of this project, Tuticorin Port will be able to handle main line - fourth generation container vessels of 56000 DWT (3000-4000 TEU's) with LOA of 290 m; beam of 32.50m, bulk carrier upto 75000 DWT with maximum draught of 12.80 m, reduce the sea freight for bulk cargo and boost the EXIM Trade to save time and Transhipment cost of vessels.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/News_By_Industry/Transportation/Shipping__Transport/CCEA_approves_deepening_channel_and_basin_at_Tuticorin_Port_/articleshow/3103003.cms

Date:12/06/2008 URL:
MoU for faster container movement
R. Vimal Kumar

TUTICORIN: The Tuticorin Port Trust (TPT) plans to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Container Corporation of India (CCI) shortly to facilitate faster container movement between port and Bangalore by rail, according to A Subbiah, Deputy Chairman, TPT.

Speaking to The Hindu, he said that as part of the project, the port would provide two acres of land within the port estate to CCI for stacking inbound and outbound containers, whenever required. The yard would then be developed by CCI with state-of-the-art facilities to provide efficient and reliable multi-modal logistical support to port users. “We have suggested a weekly train service initially under the scheme, which is expected to boost the exim trade substantially,” he added. For easy loading of containers, TPT would provide a railway siding up to Berths 7 and 8 from the Harbour Terminus.

Mr. Subbiah said that the port administration planned to prepare a ‘Detailed Project Report’ for the establishment of a ‘backbone freight corridor’ through rail, from Erode to Nagpur, as planned in the business plan (2007-08 to 2011-2012) of TPT, with the assistance of Rail India Technical and Economic Services (RITES) Limited, a Government of India enterprise, very soon.
http://www.thehindu.com/2008/06/12/stories/2008061257650100.htm

Dastardly dredging for `Gold' forever and ever

Sat, 14 Jun, 2008 , 08:20 PM (NewsToday)
No mask like open truth to cover lies
Just to go naked is the best disguise'

On the eve of Indian independence, Winston Churchill thundered in the House of Commons: `Liberty is man's birthright. However to give the reins of government to the Congress at this juncture is to hand over the destiny of hungry millions into the hands of rascals, rogues, and freebooters. Not a bottle of water or a loaf of bread shall escape taxation. Only the air will be free and the blood of the hungry millions will be on the head of Atlee (the then Prime Minister of UK). India will be lost in the political squabbles'. The final stage of this tragic drama was enacted at a Cabinet Meeting in New Delhi on June 5, 2008, when the most corrupt, inefficient, inept, immoral and impotent UPA Government, under a surrogate jubilantly `participating' de jure Prime Minister, gave a final clearance for the spending of Rs.5286 crores for the Tuticorin Harbour Development Project over a period of four years from 2008 to 2012. In short, the Union Cabinet gave a cubic content to the corrupt, behind the curtain, political mandates of a de facto super-Prime Minister—a Catholic woman imposter from distant Italy who is under the illusion that she is the Hitler/Stalin of India today!

When the Supreme Court has imposed a judicial ban on further expenditure on the SSCP, the anti-people and criminal UPA Government has announced a consolation prize for the politically corrupt trio of Sonia Gandhi, Karunanidhi and T R Baalu. By presiding over a Cabinet meeting on June 5, 2008 and according sanction for Rs.5286 crores, the Prime Minister has also willingly participated in this game of corruption. Out of this total amount of Rs. 5286 crores, Rs.4350 crores have been allocated for the Tuticorin Outer Harbour Development Project which will include two or three container terminals, two coal terminals and one general cargo terminal. In addition, an amount of Rs.936 crores has been sanctioned for the Tuticorin Inner Harbour Development Project. The inner harbor project, will involve building of a coal berth and a general berth and deepening of the draft from 10.7m to 12.8m to allow higher capacity ships to operate in Tuticorin Port. Out of a total allocation of Rs.538 crores proposed for dredging, Tuticorin Port Trust will fund Rs.350 crores and the Centre will be meeting the balance cost. The dredging work is expected to be completed in 18 months. All the other major works are expected to be completed by 2012.

Extensive and intensive Bathymetry and geo-environmental/oceanographic studies that have been done so far to determine the nature of the seabed and ocean currents in Tuticorin harbour show that the surface is granite rock below 10.7m to indefinite levels. T R Baalu's game is to start the dredging work by letting loose his favorite contractor and then he would give him the freedom to come back to the Government stating that the surface below 10.8m is very rocky and therefore it is going to cost twice the estimated amount or even more. Then, as a part and parcel of a pre-meditated programme, the Government of India would appoint an Arbitrator to settle the dispute and care will be taken to see that the Arbitration Committee gets loaded with committed `chamchas' of Sonia Gandhi, Karunanidhi and T R Baalu. Thus I view the recent Cabinet decision of the Government of India as a subterfuge relating to a massive Corruption Operation in order to politically compensate the DMK Party on the eve of Parliamentary Elections in 2009. The whole thing has been politically masterminded by Sonia Gandhi who has a political infatuation for the DMK Party in Tamil Nadu. As the Supreme Court has imposed an injunction on SSCP, it has become absolutely unavoidable for the shaky UPA Government to give an alternative viable compensation package to the DMK!

Marine Experts have said that in order to obtain a Draft Level of 12.8 m inside the harbour, it is necessary to achieve a level of at least 15m outside the harbour in the Approach Channel. This will push up the cost to four to five times the current estimated amount. If the outer channel is not dredged to this level of 15m, it will be infructuous to incur an expenditure of Rs.538 Crores on dredging inside the harbour.
Massive kickbacks have already been collected in advance from a Belgium Dredging Company under SSCP. The dredgers, which have already arrived for the temporarily stalled SSCP, are going to be diverted for the proposed Tuticorin Port Dredging work. Thus this allocation of Rs.538 crores can be viewed as a political `mobilization advance' for the new Tuticorin Project. This will inaugurate a new stream of vicious cycle of planned kickbacks (I mean for the Congress-DMK!) for the next four years!
Dredging in Tuticorin Port cannot be viewed as a separate entity, apart from the SSCP. Dredging must be viewed as an integrated operation on the east coast and not viewed as a hotchpotch operation of fragmented entities, relevant only for setting in motion a `malignant system of integrated and continuous kickbacks' for the criminal duo already referred to above.

When the whole matter relating to SSCP is subjudice, government of India is committing contempt of Supreme Court by treating one portion of the dredging work in Tuticorin Port Area as a distinct entity, quite apart from the SSCP. In short, the Cabinet sanction of total expenditure of Rs.5286 crores for the Tuticorin Harbour Project, can be viewed as a wicked subterranean operation, designed only to bypass the injunction Orders of the Supreme Court in regard to SSCP.

Dr. Subramanian Swamy has sought the permission of Dr. Man Mohan Singh, our Prime Minister, for the prosecution of T R Baalu, Union Shipping Minister, under the Prevention of Corruption Act. He has detailed all the acts of massive corruption of T R Baalu. By deliberately delaying the sanction of prosecution of T R Baalu, our Prime Minister has given the clear political signal that he is an unchallenged champion, if not promoter, of Sonia-directed Himalayan corruption in India. This general public view has been further cemented by his hasty and hurried decision to give a clearance for a massive allocation of Rs. 5286 crores to the Union Shipping Ministry and T R Baalu for carrying out new projects in Tuticorin Harbour. What is significant to note is that on the 5th of June 2008 there was only one subject earmarked for discussion and decision and that was in regard to this proposal relating to the Tuticorin Harbour Project. Indeed, it was an extraordinary Cabinet Meeting meant for finalizing an extraordinarily corrupt project, in order to extend extraordinary political support (through an extraordinarily corrupt Union Cabinet Minister) to a political party in Tamil Nadu, with an extraordinary track record of national and international
corruption. In this extraordinary context, the extraordinarily brilliant maxim of La Rochefoucauld (1613-1680) becomes relevant here: `We are never so easily deceived as when we imagine we are deceiving others'. My repetitive and alliterative use of the term `extraordinary' may sound bizarre; yet I wish to declare that it emanates from and is rooted in extra sensitive good faith.

(The writer is a retired IAS officer)e-mail the writer at
vsundaram@newstodaynet.com

http://newstodaynet.com/col.php?section=20&catid=33

Rama Setu: case in New York Supreme Court citing Sonia Gandhi and INC religious intolerance

Rama Setu: case in New York Supreme Court citing Sonia Gandhi and INC religious intolerance

1. Balagokulam

Bloomington kids mesmerize audience with Grand Ramayan Play

Published on June 12th, 2008

The great Indian epic Ramayan was presented by 60 kids from Bloomington - Normal, Illinois, USA with all fanfare and festivity on June 8 ,2008 at the prestigious Bloomington Center of Performing Arts (BCPA). This event was attended by more than 600 spectators who appreciated the talent and enthusiasm of kids enacting the scenes from this timeless epic. The occasion was the grand finale of "Kaun Banega Ramayan Expert" (KBRE) contest. This contest was organized simultaneously across towns in USA by Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (HSS) . Preparation for the event extended over a period of three months. The kids ranged in age from 4 to 15. All the dialogs were in English while preserving the reverence and deep emotional fervor associated with Ramayan.The well choreographed enactment was interspersed with drama, songs & dances, war scenes and melodrama. This is the first time such a large revue on Ramayana was performed in Midwest America. The main objective of the event was to bring the spirit of Ramayan to every one in the community and lay the foundation of strong value oriented character among kids and adults. Mr. Shrinarayan Chandak (Vice President -HSS - Midwest region - USA, ) in his opening remarks dwelt on the significance of Shri Ram's message in our current life and times. He emphasized on how lessons from the Ramayan can help us become better leaders and generate lasting success in our social, business, corporate and political involvement. Mr. Saumitra Gokhale (North America HSS teacher) brought out significant and subtle relevance of being involved with Ramayan. Among others he also emphasized the valor of a bird called Jatayu in Ramayan who sacrifices his life fighting the powerful demon king Ravan. This episode reflects on the sheer conviction to fight for righteousness irrespective of strength. In another instance Lakshman decides to follow his elder brother, Shri Ram to the forest. Here the attachment and reverence of Lakshman was to the all noble and strong ideals of Shri Ram in addition to the unconditional love of a brother. Mr. Gokhale also stressed on how Ramayan is very relevant to our lives in spite being set in a very ancient time. The scenes from Ramayan that got enacted included 'Balakand', 'Vidyabhyas at Vishwamitra's gurukul', 'Sita Swamyavar', 'Ram Vanvas', ' Sita Apharan', 'Lanka Dahan', 'Setu Bandhan', 'Lakshman Indrajit yudh', 'Hanuman Sanjivani', 'Kumbhakaran yudh', 'Ram Ravan yudh', 'return of Shri Ram to Ayodhya' and 'Shri Ram Pattabhishekam'. The extravagant show was appreciated by all in the community. The evening concluded by handing over of prizes to the winners of the KBRE competition which included online and in-person Ramayan quizzes, painting on Ramayan themes, story telling and elocution.The contest was preceded by narrating Ramayan stories to kids in the community. The documentary on the ceremonious enactment of Ramayan in various cultures across the world from Siberia to Indonesia and from Myanmar, Thailand, Singapore and beyond brought in focus the global hues in celebrating the glory and values of Shri Ram. An informative documentary on the resources available to the kids in the community through 'Balagokulam' – a Sunday school on divine Hindu morals, scriptures and inspirations was also presented. The HSS Bloomington chapter has been successfully conducting 'Balagokulam' for kids for quite sometime now. The evening of celebration left the kids and the audience ecstatic with divine joy commonly associated with Ramayan.

http://hssusa.indiainteracts.com/2008/06/12/bloomington-kids-mesmerize-audience-with-grand-ramayan-play/

2. Case in New York Supreme Court citing Sonia Gandhi and INC religious intolerance


A historic case is being fought in the Supreme Court in the State of New York, USA. It is a libel suit by INOC Inc. against Narain Kataria, Arish Sahani and others. One of the issues raised relates to the involvement of Congress Party and its chief, Sonia Gandhi in destroying Rama Setu.

This case has implications for the ongoing struggle to protect the world heritage, Rama Setu.

Congress Party `has shown religious intolerance towards 900 million Hindus by blowing up Rama Sethu, an ancient Hindu heritage monument. This is similar to Taliban blowing up the Bamyan Buddhas'. One of the charges which will be framed in due course is a charge that Sonia Gandhi and her Congress Party had denigrated Hindu dharma by showing intolerance to Hindu religion.

The discovery process will reveal the role played by Sonia Gandhi in showing this religious intolerance towards 900 million Hindus by blowing up Rama Setu.

Cultural and the Customary Rites of the Hindus would be violated by the Setu Project
as Ram Setu is claimed by hindus to be their teerthasthaanam, a place of pilgrimage, where over 5 lakhs people gather every year on Ashadha amavaasya day to offer tarpanam remembering the ancestors (pitrus), led by Sri Rama: Sri Rama rama rameti vyapohati nasams’ayah is part of the samkalpa delineating the time and space of the prayers offered.

The destruction of Ram Setu by the Project will cause irreparable damage to the religious sentiments of Hindus as Ram Setu is considered as a holy place for performing religious ceremonies and oblations which is mentioned in various Puranas and Valmiki Ramayana. A duty is also cast upon every citizen of the nation to protect Rama Setu by the order of Shri Rama as Veda Vyaasa notes in the Mahabharata of the tradition in Mahabharata times: Ramasyaajnaam puraskritya dhaaryate girisannibhaah (By Rama’s orders, we are protecting the Setu).

Ram Setu is a sacred object for Hindus within the meaning of Section 295 of Indian Penal Code, and any action destroying, damaging or defiling the said sacred object will insult the religious feelings of Hindus under section 295 of Indian Penal Code.

In AIR 1958 SC 1032 at para. 7; p.1035, Supreme Court held: “Any object however trivial or destitute of real value in itself, if regarded as sacred by any class of persons would come within the meaning of the penal section” [ i.e., Section 295 IPC which penalizes any destruction, damage or defilement of any object held as sacred by any This Court further held in that matter that: “ Courts have to be very circumspect in such matters, and to pay due regard to the feelings and religious emotions of different classes of persons with different beliefs, irrespective of the consideration whether or not they share those beliefs, or whether they are rational or otherwise, in the opinion of the court”. By their actions, the Party led by Sonia Gandhi have shown utter disregard for the feelings and emotions of Hindus who venerate and perform pujas at Rama Setu which is a pre-eminent tirthasthaanam in Hindu tradition from time immemorial.
It will be exposed during the discovery process of the ongoing trial in New York that Sonia Gandhi has participated in this process and hence, will be liable under Sec. 295 and also for violation of Articles 48A, 49, 51A of the Constitution of India.

Article 48A of the Constitution casts the duty on the State to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.

Article 49 of the Constitution casts a duty on the State to protect monuments or place or objects of artistic or historic interest from spoliation disfigurement destruction, removal, disposal or export as the case maybe.

Fundamental duties cast upon every citizen of India under Article 51A . 1) Article 51A (f) to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture; 2) Article 51A (g) to protect and improve the national environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life and to have compassion towards living creatures. 3) Article 51A (h) to develop scientific temper, humanism and spirit of enquiry and reform 51A (i) is to safeguard public property and to abjure violence

During the discovery process, the Attorneys for Narain Kataria and Arish Sahani will surely call for documents on Sonia Gandhi’s involvement, if any (since she is the acknowledged leader of the UPA government in India), in the processes related to the filing of affidavits in the Supreme Court of India on the Public Interest Litigation petitions pending in this latter court.

One of the aspects of the discovery will be on the role of Sonia Gandhi and INC in the attempt to blow up Rama Setu as brought out in the following submissions to the Supreme Court on 31 August 2007:

The injunction orders to stop any work on Rama Setu were passed by Supreme Court on 31.8.07 and again on 14.9.07 after hearing both parties—Dr. Subramanian Swamy, the Petitioner and the Respondents. The prima facie validity of the case of the Petitioner was fully argued and the Respondents made every effort to rebut it but to no avail. It was also argued by the Petitioner that the injunction was urgently necessary because he had credible reports that the Respondent was proposing the present a fait accompli by using explosives to cut through the Rama Setu since the dredging operations had failed and the ship dredgers were seriously damaged. There were also media reports in respected news dailies, but were not contradicted by the Respondents. Moreover, neither these reports nor the averments of this Petitioner were denied by the Respondents even after the Court repeatedly asked the Respondents to make a declaration in court that they had no such intention. Detonating explosives on the Rama Setu would have been irreversible act of profound consequence, and a sacrilege that would have caused grave public disorder. It would have erased the cause of action of my Petition which has been admitted by the Court for a full hearing and appropriate disposal.
There were news reports (just prior to the filing of the affidavit by Govt. of India in February 2008 in Supreme Court), which said that Hon’ble Minister for Culture wanted more time to conduct archaeological investigations according to standard international norms to declare Rama Setu as a monument of National importance under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 and as World Heritage under UN Law of Sea Convention, 1982. the UNESCO conventions on World Heritage and Underwater Cultural Heritage, to which India is a signatory. UNESCO is already considering submissions made to declare Rama Setu and Gulf of Mannar marine bioreserve as a World Heritage.

These reports were later negated when the Secretary of the Ministry of Shipping filed an affidavit on behalf of Union of India in the Supreme Court passing the buck to the Court stating that the State has no clue on how to conduct such a study.

Para 84 of the GOI’s response in the Supreme Court on February 29, 2008, contains an extraordinary submission and admission of the Respondents. It is stated therein (re: the contention of the Petitioners) as follows: “….in particular relating to archaeological, historical and cultural aspects. They have also made presentations in this regard before the Committee of Eminent Persons. It is submitted that archaeological investigations/studies have to be carried out as per established procedures and certain national/international principles, guidelines and legislation. Since no archaeological studies have been conducted, it is not possible to predicate the outcome in the event such investigations are carried out [emphasis added].”

“The Union of India is of the belief that it should not be called upon to respond to issues of faith, except in recognizing their existence”.[ref: COUNTER AFFIDAVIT para.88;p.59].
In the sworn written submission on behalf of the Union of India [UOI], the Additional Solicitor had on September 14, 2007 given to this Hon’ble Court two assurances which was expected to be honoured in the revised and new counter affidavit that the Respondent UOI would subsequently file. The withdrawn affidavit contained averments that hurt the religious and cultural sentiments of the people of India. The withdrawn affidavit had questioned the historicity and religious significance of Shri Rama, Ramayana and the Rama Setu. However these assurances have not been honoured in this new counter affidavit filed on February 29, 2008 almost six months later, despite the Respondent, viz., the Ministry of Shipping’s awareness of the same.

Did Sonia Gandhi authorize the averments made in the withdrawn affidavit (Sept. 14, 2007 after the chakka-jam of Sept. 12, 2007) denying Shri Rama and thus, did she intend to hurt the sentiments of a billion Hindus, by denigrating the very identity of the Hindu civilization and the integrity and unity of the nation governed by this vigrahavaan dharma – the very personification of dharma? Did she desire to desecrate Rama Setu, admittedly worshipped by millions of persons of a large number of creeds? [ref: APPLICATION OF UNION OF INDIA IN I.A. NO.1 of 2007, para. 7; p.24]

The earlier counter affidavit of the Respondent UOI had to be withdrawn when remarks of the non-existence of Sri Rama in the text led to great public indignation and protests. Most prominent and respected Hindu religious leaders came out of their religious seminaries and strongly objected. Hence, by doing or not doing, the Respondents could put public order at risk. Hence the Respondents in the case of Rama Setu must respond appropriately to issues of faith when such matters arise from government policy. This has been the practice in the past.

In the famous Shah Bano case, the Union of India was not called upon by this Hon’ble Court to respond to issue of faith in amending personal law of Muslims. Yet a Bill was enacted into law by the Parliament to in effect nullify this Hon’ble Court’s earlier judgment.

In the Delhi Metro Rail AIIMS-Qutab Minar Corridor construction, the Union of India intervened after an issue of faith was raised against the Corridor alignment by some Islamic NGOs. They contended that the overhead alignment proposed in the Detailed Project Report of the Rs.2358 crore project could threaten the Qutab Minar and some en route tombs by the vibrations of the Metro Rail service, and hence wanted the Alignment changed. The Union of India then directed the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation to change the Alignment despite the project’s work being in full swing. At an additional cost of Rs 400 crores, the Corporation changed the chosen Alignment to meet the demands of faith [ref: ANNEXURE P-12 ] and re-worked a new underground Alignment.
The Rama Setu desecration matter, besides it being violative of Article 49 of the Constitution, the statutory provisions of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites & Remains Act(1958), and the Indian Penal Code]Section 295], the demolition or damaging of the Rama Setu will have cataclysmic and profound consequences for the secular and public order of Indian society. It is well settled by case laws that Supreme Court may then intervene in such cases to judicially review the decision-making process so as not to allow injury to the public because of dereliction of constitutional and statutory obligations and duties on part of the Respondent.

Moreover, what to do, or not to do, so as to promote economic development while respecting issues of faith is a very important question that impinges importantly on Constitutional law and that requires urgent judicial determination by a Constitutional Bench of this Hon’ble Court. In the United States, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act[RFRA] holds that the Federal government may not “substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion” in pursuing economic interests. On March 12, 2007, the three judge bench of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, in a celebrated case set aside the clearance granted to an Arizona State ski resort vide the Final Environmental Impact Statement under the National Environment Policy Act. The ski resort’s plan, as cleared, was for use of treated sewage effluent of a small tourist destination city called Flagstaff, to make artificial snow and spread it on the slopes of a mountain held sacred by native American tribes. The case pitted 13 native American tribes such as Navajos, Apaches etc., who claimed hurt to their religious beliefs versus local economic interests of skiing tourism. The Court unanimously held that the clearance violated the RFRA and hence should cancelled.

The preferential treatment accorded to those observing Islamic faith and consistent efforts to destroy Rama Setu clearly demonstrate the anti-Hindu sentiments of the Party led by Sonia Gandhi.

Excerpts from the affidavit filed by Kornstein Veisz Wexler & Pollard, LP, New York, the Attorneys for Narain Kataria and Arish Sahani, in the libel case filed against them by INOC Inc. in the Supreme Court in the State of New York, USA.

Statements about the Indian National Congress Party …2.The ad allegedly accuses the Indian National Congress Party of `religious intolerance similar to the Taliban'. (INOC's Amended Complaint 31 18)'.

Here once again the amended complaint in New York Supreme Court distorts rather than quotes. The ad never says that the Congress Party has shown `religious intolerance similar to the Taliban'. Instead it makes the very different statement that the party `has shown religious intolerance towards 900 million Hindus by blowing up Rama Sethu, an ancient Hindu heritage monument. This is similar to Taliban blowing up the Bamyan Buddhas'. INOC does not, and cannot, deny that the Congress Party supported the removal of Rama Sethu, a site that many Hindus consider as very sacred, a belief that goes back to the dawn of history. The ad's opinion that this act showed religious intolerance and was similar to the Taliban's destruction of a Buddhist monument is fully protected opinion.

…`This politically motivated libel action (by INOC Inc.) should be barred at the threshold. The statements at issue are not `of and concerning' the plaintiff. As a matter of constitutional law, they were not made with `actual malice'. They are, moreover, either true, free of defamatory meaning, protected opinion or permissible hyperbole. Dismissal, now, at the start of this litigation, is amply justified and absolutely necessary, lest a bad precedent breed more such misguided libel cases. Early dismissal becomes even more essential when one considers the political context of this case. At bottom, this is a case about a U.S. subsidiary of a powerful political party in a large foreign country attempting to use our Courts to silence and intimidate its American critics in America. This is not only unacceptable; it is intolerable. We as a people have completely rejected the notion that a political party can `use the courts to destroy political opponents'. [United States v. Helstoski, 442 U.S. 477, 493 (1979)]'.

Dr. Babu Suseelan cited at http://newstodaynet.com/col.php?section=20&catid=33 : `The Congress Party has failed miserably in defending our borders, Hindus, Hindu culture, or to do anything more than protecting their own narrow political interests. As a party, the Congress has reduced its mind and heart to the level of intellectual and moral bankruptcy, outright dishonesty, corruption, ineptitude, nepotism, and inefficiency. These immoral practices have become the fallback mode of the Congress leaders. In the name of pseudo secularism, Congress moral relativists, atheists, and agnostics want to appease Muslims and want to overturn traditional Hindu culture and moral values. Now the Congress Party headed by the Italian Catholic Sonia is devising new cunning schemes to restrict our liberties. For several years, Hindu organizations around the world had exposed Congress leaders' despicable behavior and corrupt practices. It is about time Indians realize Sonia Gandhi is a `plant' by European Christian politics whose aim is to expand Christianity in India. From Hindu religious beliefs Christianity is not a religion in the true sense but a disguised politics of power. These people will kill, murder and annihilate any existing community to further their fanatical goals'.

Setu like a cyclotron accumulating thorium, making India a nuclear resource zone

Setu like a cyclotron accumulating thorium, making India a nuclear resource zone

It is now common knowledge that beach sands are being exported and that these sands contain strategic metals: thorium, titanium. Thorium is strategic for the nation’s nuclear programme; titanium is strategic for the nation’s space programme. These strategic metals should NOT be allowed to be exported in any form or formulation and retained as nation’s reserves for nation’s integrity and energy independence. It is also reliably learnt (Hon’ble Pon. Radhakrishnan ji) that thorium from IREL’s stockpiles is also vanishing. Kalyanaraman 24 August 2007

Strategic metals and resources of India Jayaram’s article on thorium placers is also confirmed by US Geological Survey at http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/thorium/thorimcs07.pdf

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium See also: http://kalyan97.wordpress.com/2007/08/25/thorium-strategic-nuclear-fuel-of-india/

Don’t you think that this world’s weath should be safeguarded? Who is in charge for the security of this world’s wealth, nation’s wealth? Kalyanaraman

RSS gives Sethu a nuke twist
‘Sethu’s Like A Cyclotron Accumulating Thorium’
Girish Kuber MUMBAI (Economic Times, Bangalore, Page 3)

RASHTRIYA Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has found more credible reasons to oppose the Centre’s controversial Ram Setu project. The Sangh has pointed out that the project will severely impact the country’s nuclear programme and undersea mineral resources.
Giving a scientific twist to its stance against the demolition of Ram Setu (Adam’s bridge) under the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP), the Sangha has cautioned that rich deposits of Thorium, considered important for energy independence, would be disturbed if the Ram Setu is destroyed.

The Rs 2,300 crore SSCP has been mired in controversy ever since it was inaugurated by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in July 2005. The decision to destroy the Rama Setu, the ancient bridge between India and Sri Lanka, as the Sangh claims, is against India’s heritage, religious sentiments, environment and the poor farmers of Tamil Nadu.

Former international banker Dr S Kalyanaraman, who is currently spearheading Sangh’s mission to enlighten people on the project, in a detailed presentation to a select group of mediamen harped on country’s energy security vis-a-vis the project. He referred to various studies that have reported precious mineral deposits including that of thorium on a coastline close to Ram Setu. A large deposit of titanium too has been found in the region around the sethu.

Although uranium is the only naturally occurring fissile element directly usable in a nuclear reactor, India has just about 0.8% of the world’s uranium reserves and as such is dependent on import. But it’s been proved beyond doubt that thorium can replace uranium.

Why should we jeopardise these thorium deposits,” he asked. According to official data, India has around 3,00,000 tonnes of thorium reserves — third largest in the world — in the beach sands of Manavalakurichi in Tamil Nadu, Aluva and Chavara in Kerala and Chatrapura in Orissa. “These deposits are waiting to be tapped. The setu acts like a cyclotron accumulating placer deposits. This natural system will be destroyed if the project is implemented,” Dr Kalyanaraman said.

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/getimage.dll?path=ETBG/2008/06/02/3/Img/Pg003.png (Page 3, 2 June 2008 ET Bangalore edition)

Setu project: a white elephant, an ecological-social disaster, being falsely foisted as a dream project.

Setu project: a white elephant, an ecological-social disaster, being falsely foisted as a dream project.

Thanks to Capt. Balakrishna and to Sudarshan Rodriguez for their incisive analyses.

Executive Summary: Setu project is a white elephant, an ecological disaster, and is being foisted as a dream project without involving detailed studies using the expertise of Geological Survey of India (GSI) and National Institute of Oceanography (Goa), without consulting the local pollution control, maritime boards, without consulting the neighbouring country under international treaty obligations, ignoring international treaty obligations related to UN Law of the Sea, UNESCO World Heritage and Underwater Cultural Heritage Conventions. Above all, there is a cognizable criminal offence involved by violating Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code which prohibits the hurting of sentiments of a community.

It is shocking that a fundamental question remains unanswered: for whose benefit is this project? How will it benefit the coastal people? Has an alternative of Marine Economic Zones along the long 8000 km. of the nation been evaluated which has the potential to increase marine product export foreign exchange earnings from the present Rs. 8000 crores per annum to Rs. 40000 crores per annum?

Scrap the project. Don't ever dream such project disasters.

The project zone is Rama’s hotspot with mannar volcanic rocks and hotsprings all along the coastline and is close to the most fragile eco-system – the Sunda plate which is subject to almost daily earthquakes and which scientists (Nature magazine 6 Sept. 2007) have noted as a potential disaster zone which will adversely impact 6 crore coastal people from Kolkata to Kerala by a more devastating tsunami than the one which occurred on Dec. 26, 2004 killing 2,60,000 people. How could any rational government have conceived a project and inaugurated it on 2 July 2005 (that is within 6 months of the tsunami) without a detailed evaluation of the impact of the Dec. 2004 tsunami on the bathymetry of the ocean and without providing for tsunami protection measures to save the nation’s coastal property and peoples’ lives? How could anyone approve of a project which 34 Sri Lankan experts claim will impact adversely the drinking water supply to Rameshwaram and Jaffna if the fresh-water bearing limestone caves in Rama Setu are blasted off? Do we have a socially responsible governance or not?

The detailed project report prepared by the consultants for Setusamudram Corporation is an UNRELIABLE, document, based on computational errors, erroneous/biased assumptions and is intended only as a make-believe exercise, a pathetic attempt in economic casuistry. The project economics presented in the DPR is simply bogus. Capt. Balakrishnan conclusively proved that the project is nautical folly.

In addition to social costs which are excluded from the computations of economic viability, the following costs are also either excluded or grossly understated: 1. additional security costs which will devolve on the Indian Navy to acquire, for example, special anit-mine-warfare vessels which can traverse through a shallow channel in narrow straits (which may be of the order of Rs. 3000 crores); 2. costs to the neighbouring country, Sri Lanka, very close (3 kms. proximity) to the channel; 3. maintenance dredging costs in one of the five sedimentation sinks of the world constituting the Gulf of Mannar-Palk Straits; 4. costs of facilities which are an imperative, for salvage operations in case a ship gets grounded in the shallow sands; 5. failure to estimate the number of ships which will be less than 30,000 dwt (dead-weight-tonnes) and which will be phased out during the next 10 years since the trend is to build large-tonnage ships going upto 1 million dwt.; 6. losses which will be suffered by coastal people due to denial of access to about 26% of the ocean zone – the breeding zone for marine products and fish nurseries -- in Gulf of Mannar-Palk Straits by creating a veritable international boundary channel 3 kms. west of the Indi-Sri Lanka medial line (considering that the distance between Dhanushkodi and the Medial Line is only 15 kms.); 7. failure to include provisions/facilities for tsunami-cyclone protection to safeguard the integrity of the nation’s coastline.

SSCP will be a perpetual sick unit. The claim that Setusamudram Corp. Ltd. (SCL) will be financially self-sustaining is thus questionable. No sensible banker will lend money to such an entity. It will be a tax-payer’s burden for the foreseeable future.

First year Loss: Rs. 54 crores
(3055 passages/year X Rs.1.78 lakhs, i.e. Tariff of Rs. 3.89 lakhs minus Rs. 2.11 lakhs fuel and cost savings per passage of a ship);

9th year Loss: Rs. 143 crores
(3055 passages/year X Rs. 4.68 lakhs, i.e. Tariff of Rs. 6.79 lakhs minus Rs. 2.11 lakhs fuel and cost savings per passage of a ship).

There are hidden costs which have not been included; if included, the sickness of SCL will become chronic: a) Capital and maintenance costs for Naval security of the channel; b) Maintenance dredging costs may be as high as Rs. 1000 crores per annum; c) Provisions of tsunami protection walls as in Japan to save lives and property along the coastline; d) social costs such as loss of livelihood for coastal people dependent upon fisheries and marketing of marine products.

Dr. S. Kalyanaraman

Special Investigation June 15, 2008


An expert analysis of Sethu project
The howlers in the expert committee report on SSCP
By Captain (Retd) H. Balakrishnan, I.N.

During the course of my analysis of the Report submitted by the ‘Committee of Eminent Persons’, I found that the Report faulted the ‘Detailed Project Report (DPR), prepared by the Consultants to the Project—M/s L&T Thornboll. Yet, Cabinet sanction for the SSCP was accorded on the basis of the DPR!! This left me wondering—‘What sanctity for Cabinet approvals, if the ‘due process of application of mind’ is conspicuous by its absence?

Report of ‘the committee of eminent persons’ finds fault with the DPR

Chapter-8: “Economic Viability And Related Issues”

Para 8.2.3 (pp –96)
“Hence, it may not be fair to pick up a few developments selectively and object to the viability of the Project, which was worked out sometime ago. As regards the comments made on the approach and assumptions adopted in the DPR, the main argument against the DPR rests on the distance that will be saved by ships that are coming from Europe, America, Persian Gulf and Africa (using Suez Canal). While the DPR takes the savings in distance from Cape Comorin, it has been argued that these ships need not come right up to Cape Comorin to go around Sri Lanka. This observation is valid as the ships coming from Europe, America, Africa etc. need not come to Cape Comorin for going around Sri Lanka. To that extent the savings in distance, particularly for non-coastal cargo, will be less.”

Para 8.2.6 (pp – 97)
“It is clear from this Table that there is hardly any saving for a ship coming via Port Louis (Mauritius) to the east coast ports. Hence, the point made that the ships coming from Mauritius using Cape of Good Hope route will not use the Channel is valid. However, the consultants have also not identified the ships coming via Mauritius in any of the five origin – destination pairs identified for the SSC (Table 6.10 of the DPR). It is seen that the difference in distance saved by the ships coming from Suez Canal to the east coast ports as obtained from the Chief Hydrographer and the one given by the Consultants in DPR is only 19 NM. The Consultants in DPR have taken the Channel length as 152 km for calculation of savings in fuel and savings in time charters whereas, the actual Channel length in DPR is 167.22 km. These differences, in Channel length and savings in distance, will have some impact on the savings of the ships.”

Para 8.2.7 (pp – 98)
The second argument is that the Consultants have taken the average distance saved instead of calculating the savings in distance for each ship journey. It is seen from the distances in the DPR that the distance saved varies from 254 NM to 424 NM. With this variation in distance, taking a simple average of 335.5 NM may not reveal the correct picture. It is seen as per the traffic statement for SSC in DPR (Table 6-11 page 158 of DPR), there is no coastal movement between Chennai and Tuiticorin, where the distance saved is maximum. However, the possibility of cargo movement between these ports exists, when the coastal shipping picks up. Most of the revenue is coming from non-coastal cargo. The average distance saved from Aden to different ports on east coast, excluding Tuiticorin, as per the distances obtained from Chief Hydrographer is 271 NM. The Consultants may have taken average distance so as to determine uniform Channel Charges for all routes; nevertheless, it would have been better if the Consultants had calculated the distance saved for each pair for estimating savings of ships and then recommend a tariff rate. The approach followed by the Consultants to propose tariff @ 75 per cent of savings in one of the alternatives, may result in a scenario where the Channel charges may be higher than the savings. As the tariff @ 50 per cent of savings has been proposed, in the base case IRR, such a situation has been avoided. However, the savings to some ships will be more than 50 per cent while for some it will be lower.”

Para 8.2.8 (pp – 98)
“It is, however, worthwhile to mention that the average distance taken (142 NM) in the Report captioned “Review of the Environmental and Economic Aspects of the Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project (SSCP)” is the average of ships taking the Suez route as well as the Mauritius route. This is also not relevant because the DPR does not envisage the ships moving via Cape of Good Hope and Mauritius as potential traffic for SSC. However, the Consultants have not explained how the ships coming from Africa other than Suez route, have not been taken into account while identifying SSC cargo from Africa. Similarly, the Consultants have not clarified how crude oil vessels and inter-port movements within east coast ports, have been excluded.”

Para 8.2.13 (pp – 100)
“ As regards speed of vessels, the Consultants have assumed that the ships will move at an average speed of 12 NM in open sea and 8 NM in the restricted channel. There are some apprehensions about the speed at which ships can move in a regulated channel. - - - - - -. Based on the impression gathered by the Members from the mariners, it is felt that an average speed of 6 to 8 NM in the proposed Channel is not an unreasonable assumption.”

Para 8.2.14 (pp – 100)
“The proposed Channel is a double lane Channel. The Consultants have recommended a double lane Channel as reducing it to a single lane would have enhanced the waiting period. This could have also been backed by a financial analysis.”

Para 8.2.15 (pp –100)
“The Consultants have estimated revenues escalating @ five per cent per annum. The revenues come mainly from the Channel charges. The charges are linked to savings in fuel cost and savings in charter costs. Hence, the increase in revenue is related to the increase in charter and bunker prices. The basis for estimating the escalation of five per cent per annum in revenue and costs has not been spelt out. The Consultants have also made no mention of the social cost.”

Para 8.2.16 (pp-100)
“The Consultants have taken 2001-02 as base for port-wise and commodity-wise forecast for next 20 years. The Consultants have taken average parcel load of previous three years from 1999-00 to 2001-02 as the basis to estimate the number of potential ships for the Channel in the next 20 years. Again, the Consultants have taken the DWT wise break up of vessels calling at east coast ports (excluding Tuiticorin) in 2001-02 as the basis to estimate the size-wise number of ships likely to use the Channel. The Committee feels that the Consultants should have taken into account the trend or other developments that may change the inter-se share in future.”

Chapter 6: Environment And Related Issues
“Issue 5: Impact of Cyclones on the Project and also on sedimentation dynamics”

Para 6.4.13 (pp – 77)
(A Howler!!!)

“It appears that all the ports on the coast will be vulnerable and not only the SSCP. Necessary safeguards to deal with cyclone condition have been incorporated in the Project design.”

(Comment: As young mariners, we are taught in the Navigation School, about the dangers posed by the ‘Tropical Revolving Storms’ (Cyclones) and the precautions and actions to be taken at sea to ‘avoid’ these ‘Cyclones’. These are highlighted in the Admiralty publication “The Mariner’s Handbook”. But, this is the FIRST TIME, I’m learning about ‘necessary precautions’ taken to safeguard a ‘static entity’ called the SSCP’!! Should be in the reckoning for the Nobel Prize in ‘SCIENCE’!!)

“Issue 7: Impact of sulphur in the fuel on environment”

Para 6.4.20 (pp – 79)
“The emission of SO2 due to burning of fuel in ship is considered as a line source. The ships have been recommended to use low sulphur fuel. The emissions envisaged will be low and impact of these emissions on the Marine National Park which is 20 km away from the Channel, considering the dispersion and dilution potential available due to sea wind, is not envisaged”.

(Comment: The use of Low Sulphur High Speed Diesel (LSHSD) by ships will affect the fuel savings costs as LSHSD is nearly 1.5 times costlier than HSD. The difference in rates between HSD and LSHSD can be clearly seen on the website www.bunkerworld.com)

(The writer can be contacted at “Athreya”A1/8-flat-5 22nd Cross Street Besantnagar, Chennai-600 090)
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=241&page=13

http://setubandha.blogspot.com/2008/05/analysing-economic-viability-of-sscp.html
Analysing the economic viability of the SSCP from a shipping perspective on the basis of official reports – Part 7 by Capt. (Retd.) H. Balakrishnan, I.N.

Introduction

1. Over the past year (2007), much has been written and stated, in the media, about the viability or otherwise, of the SSCP. The statements have also highlighted the economic benefits that would accrue to the Southern districts of Tamil Nadu on account of the SSCP.
2. This paper analyses the economic viability of the SSCP, from a shipping perspective, on the basis of information contained in various 'official documents' and reports such as:
(a) The website of the Sethusamudram Corporation Ltd. (SCL)
(b) The 'Report' submitted by the 'Committee of Eminent Persons' to the Govt. of India. This 'Report had formed the basis of the revised affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, by the Govt. of India.
(c) The 'Information Memorandum of Sept. 2005' prepared by the then UTI Bank (now Axis Bank), the lead Bank for arranging the financial loan for the execution of the Project.

Economic viability of the SSCP

SCL Website

3. The website, in addition to highlighting various USPs of the project, states: "Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project, which envisages digging a ship channel across the Palk Straits between India and Sri Lanka, is finally taking shape. The project will allow ships sailing between the East and West Coasts of India to have a straight passage through India's territorial waters, instead of having to circumvent Sri Lanka. This will lead to a saving of upto 424 nautical miles (780 kms) and upto 30 hours in sailing time." It further states: "The project will become self-sustaining over a period of time. According to conservative estimates, about 3055 vessels will be using the canal annually. This will inevitably go up further."
4. The foregoing statement in the website implies that the SSCP is envisaged as a profitable undertaking which would lead to its self-sustenance in the years ahead.

Information Memorandum of the UTI Bank (now Axis Bank)

5. From this document, the annual expenditure for the SCL can be calculated. The main items forming this expenditure are summarized below.
6. Operation and Maintenance Costs (O&M Costs). From item 10.2 of the 'Information Memorandum', the budgeted figures for the O&M costs are as follows:


(a)Maintenance Costs
(Rs. in millions)
-- Maintenance of Vessel traffic Management Scheme (VTMS) 50
-- Maintenance dredging 200
(Note: For the 3rd and 4th year Maintenance Dredging has been
pegged at Rs. 170 million and from the 5th year onwards it
stabilizes at Rs. 140 million)
-- Civil Maintenance 10
-- Tugs and launches 100
-- Plant and Machinery 10

(b) Operation costs
-- Administration and staff costs 50
--VTMS 8.5
--Tugs and Launches 68
-- Plant and Machinery 20

(d) Contingency and Project Management costs
-- Contingencies 25.8
(Note: For the 3rd and 4th year, this has been pegged at
Rs. 24.3 million. From the 5th year onwards, it stabilizes at
Rs. 22.8 million).

7. Details of the financial loan. From Item 14 of the Information Memorandum, entitled 'Indicative Term Sheet,' the following are the details of the financial loan:--
(a) Rupee loan
-- Amount Rs. 4369 million
-- Interest rate 8%
-- Loan period 13 years
-- Moratorium period 5 years
-- Principal repayment 16 'equal installments' from the end of 5 years

(b) US Dollar loan
-- Amount USD 100 milion
-- Interest rate Libor + 125 to 175 basis points = 5%
-- Loan period 20 years
-- Moratorium period 8 years
-- Principal repayment 24 'equal installments' from the end of 8 years
(c) Zero coupon bonds
-- Amount Rs. 5826 million
-- Interest rate NIL
-- Loan period 30 years
-- Moratorium period 18 years
- Principal repayment 12 'annual instalments' beginning from the end of 18 years

8. Profitability. A profit margin of 9% has been assumed for the project to build reserves.
9. Thus, the 'Income to be generated' by the SCL to become a self-sustaining undertaking, on an annual basis, is tabulated at Appendix A. The Zero Coupon Bonds have not been taken into account for the purposes of this analysis.
10. Ship tariff. As the SCL website anticipates an annual shipping traffic of 3055 ships to pass through the SSCP, the possible tariff to be levied on individual ships has been calculated and tabulated at Appendix A.

Time and fuel cost savings

11. The Report submitted by the 'Committee of Eminent Persons' (Chapter 8, para 8.2.5), gives the voyage distances between the ports of 'Origin' and 'Destination'. The voyage speeds in the 'open sea' as also through the 'SSCP' have been given in this Report (Chapter 8, para 8.2.13).
12. On the basis of the foregoing, the following have been tabulated: (a) Fuel cost savings—Appendix B; (b) Time savings –-Appendix C

Analysis of the Appendices

13. The Report by the 'Committee of Eminent Persons', in Chapter 8, Para 8.2.7 states: "The approach followed by the consultants to propose tariff @ 75% of savings in one of the alternatives, may result in a scenario where the channel charges may be higher than the savings. As the tariff rate @50% of savings has been proposed, in the base case I.R.R., such a situation has been avoided. However, the savings to some ships will be more than 50%, while for some, it will be lower."
14. In the light of the foregoing, comparison of the possible tariff to be levied on individual ships as calculated at Appendix A, and 50% the Fuel Cost Savings at Appendix B (column 'q'), will clearly reveal that the SCL will NOT be able to recover its expenditure burden in the FIRST YEAR OF OPERATION ITSELF.
15. On the other hand, if the SCL decides on a higher tariff regime, as in the case of the major ports of India (e.g. Chennai Port Rs. 1.11 lakh/km for 7 kms of 'pilotage'), then the fuel cost savings achieved by navigating through the SSCP, will be nullified for the shipping companies.
16. The 'Time Savings' tabulation at Appendix C debunks the claim of the SCL website of 'Savings upto 30 hours in sailing time'. The same is the case in 'Savings in Voyage distances' also.
17. Cost escalation. A report in the economics daily 'MINT' of 25 Sept. 2007, entitled 'Money runs dry for Sethusamudram', stated the cost of the project has 'Skyrocketed to at least 4000 crores, interest rates have crawled higher and old loan terms have lapsed.' In a word, higher tariff regime for ships other than indicated at Appendix A.

Conclusion

18. In my earlier 6 Part analysis of the SSCP, I had concluded that the 'SSCP just does not make any nautical sense.'
19. The present analysis, on the basis of official reports, has only served to reinforce the earlier conclusion.
20. The SSCP is a nautical folly.


Appendices:
(A) Income Generatin and Possible ship Tariff
(B) Fuel Cost Savings
(C) Time Savings

References:
(1) Sethusamudram Corporation Ltd. Website URL: www.sethusamudram.gov.in
(2) Report by the 'Committee of Eminent Persons'
(3) Informatin Memorandum of the UTI Bank (Axis Bank) URL: http://sethusamudram.gov.in/Images/InfoMemo.doc



Appendix A SSCP – Income Generation and Ship Tariff
(Rs. in Lakhs); US $ = Rs. 39.79

Year/item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Rupee loan interest 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2
Rupee loan principal 5461.25 5461.25 5461.25 5461.25
US $ loan interest 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5
US $ loan
principal 3315.83
O&M 5423.0 5423.0 5108.0 5108.0 4793.0 4793.0 4793.0 4793.0 4793.0
9% profit 981.69 981.69 953.34 953.34 924.99 1416.5 1416.5 1416.5 1714.93
TOTAL 11889.39 11889.39 11546.04 11546.04 11202.69 17155.40 17155.40 17155.40 20769.71
TARIFF
(Total / 3055) 3.89 3.89 3.78 3.78 3.66 5.61 5.61 5.61 6.79

Appendix B SSCP Voyages: Fuel Costs and Savings
(Open sea speed = 12 knots; SSCP speed = 6 knots)

Voyage From Voyage To Voyage Fuel Cost (Around Srilanka) Voyage Vuel Cost (Via SSCP) Savings Rs.
Aden Chennai 64,26,744.3 60,04,222.8 4.22,521.5
Aden Vizag 70,53,937.8 67,63,501.8 2,90,436.0
Aden Kolkata 78,47,019.3 76,63,104.0 1,83,915.3
Kochi Chennai 22,36,933.0 18,04,469.6
...

[Message clipped] View entire message
Reply
Forward


Mail Delivery Subsystem This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification Delivery to t...
May 3

Mail Delivery Subsystem shakti-l@vhs-net.com PERM_FAILURE: Gmail tried to deliver your message, but i...
May 3

M. Srinivasan to Branded_Indian, me

show details May 4
Reply


If SSP Corporationis chronically sick,it may not matter much to Baalu. The Government will not become bankrupt overnight! Much less, the longevity of Baaly in politis is limited, He is simply making hay while sun shines! For the opportunists and self seekers like Baa;u. the arguments of Dr. Kalyanaram, though most sensible, may not mean much to Baalu

M.Srinivaan

--- On Sat, 3/5/08, kalyan97 wrote:
From: kalyan97
Subject: [Branded Indian] Analysing the economic viability of the SSCP -- Capt. (Retd) H. Balakrishnan, I.N.
To:
Date: Saturday, 3 May, 2008, 5:11 PM
http://setubandha. blogspot. com/2008/ 05/analysing- economic- viability- of-sscp.html
Analysing the economic viability of the SSCP from a shipping perspective on the basis of official reports – Part 7 by Capt. (Retd.) H. Balakrishnan, I.N.
Introduction
1. Over the past year (2007), much has been written and stated, in the media, about the viability or otherwise, of the SSCP. The statements have also highlighted the economic benefits that would accrue to the Southern districts of Tamil Nadu on account of the SSCP.
2. This paper analyses the economic viability of the SSCP, from a shipping perspective, on the basis of information contained in various 'official documents' and reports such as:
(a) The website of the Sethusamudram Corporation Ltd. (SCL)
(b) The 'Report' submitted by the 'Committee of Eminent Persons' to the Govt. of India. This 'Report had formed the basis of the revised affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, by the Govt. of India.
(c) The 'Information Memorandum of Sept. 2005' prepared by the then UTI Bank (now Axis Bank), the lead Bank for arranging the financial loan for the execution of the Project.

Economic viability of the SSCP

SCL Website

3. The website, in addition to highlighting various USPs of the project, states: "Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project, which envisages digging a ship channel across the Palk Straits between India and Sri Lanka, is finally taking shape. The project will allow ships sailing between the East and West Coasts of India to have a straight passage through India's territorial waters, instead of having to circumvent Sri Lanka. This will lead to a saving of upto 424 nautical miles (780 kms) and upto 30 hours in sailing time." It further states: "The project will become self-sustaining over a period of time. According to conservative estimates, about 3055 vessels will be using the canal annually.. This will inevitably go up further."
4. The foregoing statement in the website implies that the SSCP is envisaged as a profitable undertaking which would lead to its self-sustenance in the years ahead.

Information Memorandum of the UTI Bank (now Axis Bank)

5. From this document, the annual expenditure for the SCL can be calculated. The main items forming this expenditure are summarized below.
6. Operation and Maintenance Costs (O&M Costs). From item 10.2 of the 'Information Memorandum', the budgeted figures for the O&M costs are as follows:


(a)Maintenance Costs
(Rs. in millions)
-- Maintenance of Vessel traffic Management Scheme (VTMS) 50
-- Maintenance dredging 200
(Note: For the 3rd and 4th year Maintenance Dredging has been
pegged at Rs. 170 million and from the 5th year onwards it
stabilizes at Rs. 140 million)
-- Civil Maintenance 10
-- Tugs and launches 100
-- Plant and Machinery 10
(b) Operation costs
-- Administration and staff costs 50
--VTMS 8.5
--Tugs and Launches 68
-- Plant and Machinery 20
(d) Contingency and Project Management costs
-- Contingencies 25.8
(Note: For the 3rd and 4th year, this has been pegged at
Rs. 24.3 million. From the 5th year onwards, it stabilizes at
Rs. 22.8 million).
7. Details of the financial loan. From Item 14 of the Information Memorandum, entitled 'Indicative Term Sheet,' the following are the details of the financial loan:--
(a) Rupee loan
-- Amount Rs. 4369 million
-- Interest rate 8%
-- Loan period 13 years
-- Moratorium period 5 years
-- Principal repayment 16 'equal installments' from the end of 5 years
(b) US Dollar loan
-- Amount USD 100 milion
-- Interest rate Libor + 125 to 175 basis points = 5%
-- Loan period 20 years
-- Moratorium period 8 years
-- Principal repayment 24 'equal installments' from the end of 8 years
(c) Zero coupon bonds
-- Amount Rs. 5826 million
-- Interest rate NIL
-- Loan period 30 years
-- Moratorium period 18 years
- Principal repayment 12 'annual instalments' beginning from the end of 18 years
8. Profitability.. A profit margin of 9% has been assumed for the project to build reserves.
9. Thus, the 'Income to be generated' by the SCL to become a self-sustaining undertaking, on an annual basis, is tabulated at Appendix A. The Zero Coupon Bonds have not been taken into account for the purposes of this analysis.
10. Ship tariff. As the SCL website anticipates an annual shipping traffic of 3055 ships to pass through the SSCP, the possible tariff to be levied on individual ships has been calculated and tabulated at Appendix A.
Time and fuel cost savings
11. The Report submitted by the 'Committee of Eminent Persons' (Chapter 8, para 8.2.5), gives the voyage distances between the ports of 'Origin' and 'Destination' . The voyage speeds in the 'open sea' as also through the 'SSCP' have been given in this Report (Chapter 8, para 8.2.13).
12. On the basis of the foregoing, the following have been tabulated: (a) Fuel cost savings—Appendix B; (b) Time savings –-Appendix C
Analysis of the Appendices
13. The Report by the 'Committee of Eminent Persons', in Chapter 8, Para 8.2.7 states: "The approach followed by the consultants to propose tariff @ 75% of savings in one of the alternatives, may result in a scenario where the channel charges may be higher than the savings. As the tariff rate @50% of savings has been proposed, in the base case I.R.R., such a situation has been avoided. However, the savings to some ships will be more than 50%, while for some, it will be lower."
14. In the light of the foregoing, comparison of the possible tariff to be levied on individual ships as calculated at Appendix A, and 50% the Fuel Cost Savings at Appendix B (column 'q'), will clearly reveal that the SCL will NOT be able to recover its expenditure burden in the FIRST YEAR OF OPERATION ITSELF.
15. On the other hand, if the SCL decides on a higher tariff regime, as in the case of the major ports of India (e.g. Chennai Port Rs. 1.11 lakh/km for 7 kms of 'pilotage'), then the fuel cost savings achieved by navigating through the SSCP, will be nullified for the shipping companies.
16. The 'Time Savings' tabulation at Appendix C debunks the claim of the SCL website of 'Savings upto 30 hours in sailing time'. The same is the case in 'Savings in Voyage distances' also.
17. Cost escalation. A report in the economics daily 'MINT' of 25 Sept. 2007, entitled 'Money runs dry for Sethusamudram' , stated the cost of the project has 'Skyrocketed to at least 4000 crores, interest rates have crawled higher and old loan terms have lapsed.' In a word, higher tariff regime for ships other than indicated at Appendix A.
Conclusion
18. In my earlier 6 Part analysis of the SSCP, I had concluded that the 'SSCP just does not make any nautical sense.'
19. The present analysis, on the basis of official reports, has only served to reinforce the earlier conclusion.
20. The SSCP is a nautical folly.
Appendices:
(A) Income Generatin and Possible ship Tariff
(B) Fuel Cost Savings
(C) Time Savings

References:
(1) Sethusamudram Corporation Ltd. Website URL: www.sethusamudram. gov.in
(2) Report by the 'Committee of Eminent Persons'
(3) Informatin Memorandum of the UTI Bank (Axis Bank) URL: http://sethusamudra m.gov.in/ Images/InfoMemo. doc
- Show quoted text -

Appendix A SSCP – Income Generation and Ship Tariff
(Rs. in Lakhs); US $ = Rs. 39.79
Year/item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Rupee loan interest 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2 3495.2
Rupee loan principal 5461.25 5461.25 5461.25 5461.25
US $ loan interest 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5 1989.5
US $ loan
principal 3315.83
O&M 5423.0 5423.0 5108.0 5108.0 4793.0 4793.0 4793.0 4793.0 4793.0
9% profit 981.69 981.69 953.34 953.34 924.99 1416.5 1416.5 1416.5 1714.93
TOTAL 11889.39 11889.39 11546.04 11546.04 11202.69 17155.40 17155.40 17155.40 20769.71
TARIFF
(Total / 3055) 3.89 3.89 3.78 3.78 3.66 5.61 5.61 5.61 6.79
Appendix B SSCP Voyages: Fuel Costs and Savings
(Open sea speed = 12 knots; SSCP speed = 6 knots)
- Show quoted text -
Voyage From Voyage To Voyage Fuel Cost (Around Srilanka) Voyage Vuel Cost (Via SSCP) Savings Rs.
Aden Chennai 64,26,744.3 60,04,222.8 4.22,521.5
Aden Vizag 70,53,937.8 67,63,501.8 2,90,436.0
Aden Kolkata 78,47,019.3 76,63,104.0 1,83,915.3
- Show quoted text -
Kochi Chennai 22,36,933.0 18,04,469.6 4,32,403.4
Kochi Paradeep 33,25,715.9 31,29,586.2 1,96,129.7
Kochi Kolkata 36,57,208.1 34,59,090.0 1,98,118.1
Tuticorin Vizag 24,71,278.5 19,56,439.0 5,14,839.5
Tuticorin Kolkata 32,66,634.8 28,56,893.0 4,09,741.4
Notes
(A) The distance and speeds used for the calculations have been obtained from the 'Report' submitted by 'The Committee of Eminent Persons'
(B) The Indian Oil Corporation tariffs effective from 1 March 2008 for various marine fuels per metric tonne (Mt) are as follows:
(i) High Speed Diesel (HSD) for use in the SSCP = Rs. 27,384 + 23.43% VAT = Rs. 33,800/Mt
(ii) Heavy Oil (H.O.) for use in the Open Sea = Rs. 27,313 + 4% VAT = Rs. 28,405.5/Mt
(C) The average fuel consumption has been taken as 1 Mt per hour
(D) These calculations do NOT take into account the 'Pilotage Rates' that are going to be levied for using the SSCP
(E) Based on current Pilotage Rates being levied at Major Ports in India, it is probable that circumnavigating Sri Lanka would be more cost-effective.
Appendix C SSCP Time Savings for voyages
(Open sea speed = 12 knots; SSCP speed = 6 knots)
Voyage From Voyage To Voyage distance around Sri Lanka (km) Voyage distance via SSCP (km) Voyage Time around Sri Lanka Voyage Time via SSCP Savings in Time (Hours)
Aden Chennai 2715 2380 226.25 206.96 19.2
Aden Vizag 2980 2700 248.33 233.63 14.7
Aden Kolkata 3315 3080 276.25 265.3 10.9
Kochi Chennai 945 605 78.75 59 19.7
Kochi Paradeep 1405 1165 117.08 105.71 11.37
Kochi Kolkata 1545 1305 128.75 117.3 11.45
Tuticorin Vizag 1045 670 87 64.4 22.6
Tuticorin Kolkata 1380 1050







June 15, 2008

Sethu project

A mockery of science, conservation and environmental laws
By Sudarshan Rodriguez
It is beyond doubt that the Sethusamudram project will have disastrous consequences for the region’s biodiversity.

UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTIONS: Dredging activity will result in the killing of species protected under the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

The religio-political controversy and public debate surrounding the Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project (SSCP) have overshadowed the original arguments raised against this project, namely its environmental, economic and social impacts.

Ecological significance
Part of the project area, specifically Adam’s Bridge, falls within the Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve (GOMBR). It is India’s largest biosphere reserve and has an area of 10,500 sq km, covering the “Indian part of Gulf of Mannar between India and Sri Lanka.” It is one of India’s major coral reef ecosystems with 3,600 species of flora and fauna, of which 377 are endemic. It is famous for its chanks (conches and other shells) which make Rameswaram one of the world’s largest shell trade and craft centres. The 21 islands that constitute the core zone of the GOMBR form the Gulf of Mannar Marine National Park, which is India’s second marine national park. UNESCO’s Biosphere Reserve concept is based on the idea of oneness of humanity transcending national frontiers and recognises the need for conservation of vanishing species and habitats. The canal at Adam’s Bridge is a mere 20 km from Shingle Island, one of these 21 islands. With the completion of the SSCP, ships will be navigating through the biosphere reserve and close to the park.

The other part where most of the capital dredging is planned in the Palk Bay, which is also ecologically sensitive and has extensive sea grass meadows. Sea grasses serve as nurseries for fish stocks, and are essential grazing areas for turtles and dugongs (also known as the sea cow: a highly endangered species on the verge of extinction).

Rohan Arthur, an ecologist and a leading expert on sea grasses and corals with the Nature Conservation Foundation, is of the view that “the importance of the sea grass meadows of the Palk Bay and Gulf of Mannar cannot be overstated, as they are a conservation hotspot of regional and global relevance.” (from Review of the Environmental and Economic Aspects of the Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project by Sudarshan Rodriguez, Jacob John, Rohan Arthur, Kartik Shanker and Aarthi Sridhar.)

Impact of dredging
The Palk Bay, known for its unusually high sedimentation rate, is one of the five permanent sediment sinks of India, that is, sediments are constantly being deposited in the Palk Bay and Palk Strait. The sediment sink and transport mechanism in the region are yet to be fully understood. Strangely, all the project documents summarily ignore important knowledge of sedimentation, and the bibliography stops at 1989 while some of the key papers were published in the late 1990s and since 2000. Dredging Adam’s Bridge along a 300-metre wide stretch to make the canal passage will have drastic consequences for marine ecosystems in the Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar.

It will be akin to opening the floodgates of a dam and will allow sediments from the Palk Bay to flow freely into the Gulf of Mannar, thus affecting the corals and fisheries in the Marine National Park and the whole biosphere reserve. Both sea grasses and corals are sensitive to increases in sediment levels. “The changed sediment conditions have a range of effects on corals and sea grasses, affecting their basic physiology, reproduction, recruitment, population and community structure,” says Rohan Arthur in Review of the Environmental and Economic Aspects of the Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project (cited above).

Loss of wildlife
The project directly results in loss of wildlife, specifically protected species. This is evident from its own documents (Section 1.3 and 3.2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment prepared by NEERI) which acknowledges the presence of corals, sea fans, sponges, pearl oysters, chanks and sea cucumbers along the canal. The EIA (Section 6.4.1.2 and 6.6) report states: “Due to dredging, the bottom flora and fauna on an area of about 6 sq km along the channel alignment in Adam’s Bridge and about 16-17 sq km in Palk Bay/Palk Strait area will be lost permanently.” Thus, the dredging activity for the canal will result in the killing of corals, sea fans, sponges, and sea cucumbers, all of which are protected species under the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

In fact, corals are Schedule I species, which means the government accords it the same protected status as a tiger. It is shocking that this aspect is being overlooked. According to the proponents of the project, it is an acceptable price to pay.

Environmental laws
The EIA did not have a dredging management programme. This is also pointed out in the L&T-Ramboll Detail Project Report (DPR) of the SSCP, which recommends that this be done (L&T-Ramboll DPR, Section 12.9.2 on page 12-11, bullet point 2). The EIA of the project also did not have a Disaster Management Plan (DMP), a mandatory legal requirement. (Under Form A, Item 11 of the EIA notification, 1994 and the Ministry of Environment and Forest’s EIA Manual).

Till date there is no DMP for the project and the project authorities have stated on various occasions that the Tuticorin Port Trust’s (TPT) DMP would be applicable for the project. The TPT’s DMP was developed only for the functioning of the Tuticorin port, where ships navigated in the southern Gulf of Mannar (around Kanyakumari) to Tuticorin and not further through the Adam’s Bridge and the Palk Bay.

Many experts have pointed out severe shortcomings in the project’s documents and design in terms of data gaps with respect to basic parameters such as sub-surface geology, bathymetry, and sedimentation process in the project area. These have resulted in the poor design of the project and inadequate assessment of risks, hazards and environmental impacts. It is beyond doubt that it will have disastrous consequences for the region’s biodiversity, causing major and permanent losses to fisheries and livelihoods.

The government needs to answer some uncomfortable questions on why it ignored its own conservation and environment laws. The relegation of the above-mentioned environmental arguments against the SSCP, and the lack of scientific rigour in the design and EIA of the project, represent a mockery of science, conservation and environmental laws.

(The writer is a Senior Research Associate at the Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE). He can be contacted at sudarshanr@yahoo.com)

http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=241&page=14

History, ecology are at stake
From The Pioneer Edit Desk on June 12th

When the Taliban destroyed the Bamiyan statues, the world reacted with shocked horror at this act of barbarism. What the UPA Government in India proposes to do to Ram Setu, also known as Adam’s Bridge, is no less horrifying. As may be recalled, the Setusamudram Ship Channel Project aims to create a navigable sea route, between the Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay, by slicing the Ram Setu in order to reduce the sailing distance between India’s coasts. Consequently, the Ram Setu, of known spiritual significance to Hindus, will be destroyed through extensive dredging. In fact, there are sound reasons for rejecting the project, as conceived at present, other than the important one of protecting the site for its cultural and religious worth. Among them, what are weighty are the objections that pertain to its wide-ranging environmental impact. For instance, experts have claimed shifts in the flows of currents would adversely affect sensitive ecosystems, as would the increasing possibility of damaging oil spills. It is estimated that fragile marine life, such as delicate corals, would be destroyed through the various processes unleashed. Life on the mainland would not remain unaffected as changes in seawater flows and temperature would impact climate and affect rainfall in coastal areas even as erosion could increase. Most importantly, experts inform us, the Ram Setu forms a barrier that blocks tsunamis, in the absence of which the entire coasts of Kerala and Tamil Nadu could be endangered. Were this not reason enough, Thorium deposits in Kerala and Tamil Nadu may be affected, upsetting India’s indigenous nuclear programme. It is significant that the Sir Mudaliar Committee Report of 1956 had recommended the abandonment of the idea of such a project, finding the channel alignment unsuitable.

The argument about the spiritual significance of the site is no less compelling. It is neither here nor there to argue that there is little scientific evidence to prove that Adam’s Bridge is manmade. For, within each spiritual tradition are matters purely of belief for which no rational explanations or scientific proofs are available. Thus Christians believe in the immaculate conception, the Jews that the Red Sea parted for Moses, and Muslims that Islam was revealed to the Prophet through the divine agency of Angel Gabriel. The Hindu belief that Hanuman’s vanar sena built a bridge to Lanka that allowed Ram to cross over, fell Ravana and rescue Sita is in a similar vein and should hardly be scoffed at. The historicity of the event has little relevance to the debate, though it is possible that, as Indians were prone to oral narratives rather than written records, facts are likely to be the basis of the Ramayan. As the sentiments of hundreds of millions of people are involved, these cannot be trumped by the views of an individual Minister in a democracy. Nothing explains the unholy hurry in going ahead with the project except the need to pander to the crassest financial interests.
Editor’s addendum: S Badrinarayanan, former director of Geological Survey of India and a member of the National Institute of Ocean Technology (NIOT) says the Adam’s Bridge was not a natural formation. “Such a natural formation is impossible. Unless somebody has transported them and dumped them there, those reefs could not have come there. Some boulders were so light that they could float on water. Apparently, whoever has done it, has identified light (but strong) boulders to make it easy for transportation. Since they are strong, they can withstand a lot of weight. It should be preserved as a national monument,” he opined.

http://www.hinduyuva.org/tattva-blog/2007/07/save-ram-setu/