[sacw] SACW #2 (14 June 01)

aiindex@mnet.fr aiindex@mnet.fr
Wed, 13 Jun 2001 21:55:43 +0200


South Asia Citizens Wire / Dispatch # 2.
14 June 2001
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex

----------

#1. India: Narmada Bachao Andolan - Press Note/ June 8, 2001
#2. India: Indefinite "Dharna" [sit-in] begins in Jaipur
#3. War over Water

--------------------------

#1.

Narmada Bachao Andolan
Press Note/ June 8, 2001

SARDAR SAROVAR WOULD BE ANOTHER ENRON FOR MAHARASHTRA. STATE MUST REVIEW
COST-BENEFIT OF PROJECT: SATYAGRAHA FROM JULY 5

As the Narmada valley prepares for the another illegal, inhuman and fatal
submergence threatening the farms and houses of over 5000 project affected
families in three states, the Maharashtra government has been supporting th=
e
further work on the damundermining the rights of its own tribals and
thecost-benefit of the project for the state. It is sure that the Sardar
Sarovar Project (SSP) would prove to be another Enron for the state and
government has to call a halt and reviewthe project before it is too late.
>From July 5, the people will launch the Satyagraha against the dam,
displacement and submergence at Domkhedi ( Maharashtra) and Jalsindhi and
the Chhoti Kasaravad ( M.P.) near the residence of Baba Amte, confronting
the submergence water.

The work on the SSP was stopped at the height of 90 meters and the Gujarat
government got the additional 3 meters of humps through pressure tactics an=
d
manipulations. This has been done with callous disregard towards the legal
provisions in the Narmada Valley Dispute Tribunal (NWDT) award and also the
Supreme Court verdict, let alone theconstitutional and human rights of the
tribals in theNarmada valley.Even the oustees belowthe dam height of 80
meters have not been resettled fully, the dam was allowed to go upto 93
meters. This was illegal in itself. However, the dam had to be stopped at 9=
0
meters as the Resettlement sub-group and Environment sub-group of the
Narmada Control Authority (NCA) have refused the permission for the increas=
e
in the further height of the dam due to the failure to complete the
resettlement and the non-fulfillment of the conditions. It is curious that
while the government of Madhya Pradesh opposed the increase in the height
including the humps, the Maharashtra government endorsed the Gujarat
government's stand for erecting humps of additional 3 meters while knowing
fully the reality regarding the rehabilitation. It is reprehensible that
Maharashtra bureaucrats have no compunctions to sacrifice the lives of the
tribals in the state under the pressure of Gujarat and the political
leadership turning the blind eye towards this impropriety of the officials.
The government of Gujarat and Maharashtra have acted in contravention of
even the Supreme Court judgment which stipulates that no construction beyon=
d
90 meters should be undertaken without the permission of the Rehabilitation
and Resettlement sub-group of the NCA. After these sub-groups refused the
permission for the humps, the Gujarat and Central governments connived to
get the permission in a fraudulent way, through the Attorney General of
India, falsely claiming that the effective height of the submergence will
not increase even after raising the humps. The governments have thus
committed the contempt of the court.

At present all the claims of Maharashtra government regarding rehabilitatio=
n
of the affected tribal families again stand exposed during the public
hearings before the Justice (retd.) Dawood committee, appointed by the stat=
e
government itself. As NBA has been arguing it would have been prudent for
the government not to allow work on the dam before the report of this
committee is submitted. The officials should have updated the records of th=
e
land rights, entitlements of the tribals and prepare the Master Plan for
rehabilitation to prove the feasibility of this human task with land for
land for the affected families.. However, the bureaucracy and the political
leadership of Maharashtra still seem to be subservient more to the interest=
s
of the Gujarat capitalists at the cost of the tribals from their own state.

Another Enron

It is now proved that the project is not a solution for the drought stricke=
n
areas and the |Sardar Sarovar Project water is not meant for the Saurashtra
and Kutch. The Gujarat government has no money for the water resource
development in Kutch as 85-90% of the irrigation budget of the state is
spent on the single Sardar Sarovar Project. The recent gimmick of the
pumping the Sardar Sarovar Project water through the pumps into the canals
proves the point. The water is first taken for the metros of Ahmedabad and
Baroda while the real needy region remains out of bound. The original
drinking water plan of the SSP didn=92t include any city as beneficiary. No=
w,
therefore the plan seems to have changed and no one knows how much has the
original allocation for the Kutch and Saurashtra water has been further
reduced. The project is also a liability for the Maharashtra government and
its people.

With no irrigation, the state is to get 27% of the electricity that may be
produced from the dam. The NBA and other independent experts have shown tha=
t
the power from the Sardar Sarovar Project would be most uncertain and
miniscule for the state. And much of it would be only for a few years As it
is the improved calculations prove that the earlier calculations regarding
the water in the Narmada river was an overestimation. The upstream Narmada
Sagar Project is still to see the completion. As the canals of Sardar
Sarovar Project have preceded the dam, the damned water will be diverted fo=
r
the irrigation from the initial period itself. So the assurance of the firs=
t
30 years of major part of electricity generation when the water would not
have been used for irrigation now stands negated. Furthermore, the assured
(firm) power is far less than the installed capacity of the power generatio=
n
from the dam. Thus, it is estimated that Sardar Sarovar Project may
contribute about 110 MW in the beginning to 20 MW in the end firm power for
Maharashtra. That is also uncertain on many technical and economic grounds.

However, Maharashtra is ready to sacrifice the lives and resources of over
5000 tribal families on the banks of Narmada. It has already sacrificed
10,000 hectares of forest, most of it prime forest of the state, in the
submergence zone ( 6800 ha.)or in the name of rehabilitation (4200 ha.) .
Above all this, the state has to shell anywhere upto Rs. 1200 crores as its
share in the project cost. This year, the state government has allocated Rs=
.
84 crores as share of the Sardar Sarovar Project, while the local and small
irrigation schemes in Nandurbar and other needy districts, where the
affected villages are also situated, are starving of the funds as is obviou=
s
from the successive budget allocations of the state.

The project would prove to be a liability for the state government as in th=
e
case of Enron Power Project. The cost of this liability would be borne by
the tribals in Maharashtra for the sake of the capitalists in Gujarat. The
Maharashtra government is still not ready to issue the order for the review
of the cost-benefit of this project to the state, contrary to the formal
announcement by the Chief Minister on January 4. We demand that Maharashtra
should stop the further construction on the dam and must start the review o=
f
the cost-benefit of Sardar Sarovar Project for the state.

As the people in the Narmada valley will be facing the submergence, the
government of Maharashtra will face the challenge to its credibility. At
this juncture, we expect that Maharashtra government, instead of resorting
to the same tactics of arresting and releasing the people facing submergenc=
e
would respond to the serious issues raised by them. It will be far more
fruitful to stop any work on the dam and have a review of the cost-benefit
of the dam to the state. It should pursue the basic issues of rehabilitatio=
n
raised through Dawood committee report and make the master plan of
rehabilitation with the consultation and consent of the people and their
organization, NBA, in the valley. Maharashtra government has both a
challenge and an opportunity to break a new path vis-a-vis Sardar Sarovar
Project and the issue of the displacement and development.

Vain Attempts

Of late, some elements have been making baseless allegations on myself and
NBA. Among them are some V.K. Saxena from an unheard of National Council fo=
r
Civil Liberties (NCCL) from Gujarat and Ms. Jamuna Devi, Deputy Chief
Minister from M.P. The NBA has issued legal notice to Ms. Jamuna Devi and
file a defamation case against Saxena. They will not be successful in
diverting the attention of the struggle in some trivial and patently false
matters. At the same time we reassert that all these allegations are
baseless and false, aimed to suppress the people's movement, which has been
a part of such attempts all over India.

Medha Patkar
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
In the name of development, they are DAMNED
Without proper rehabilitation, they are DOOMED
Now with justice denied, they are being DROWNED

_______

#2.

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 18:31:49 +0100 (BST)
From: Kavita Srivastava <kavisriv@y...>
Subject: Jaipur dharna begins (please circulate widely)
To: act-owner@yahoogroups.com

INDEFINITE DHARNA BEGINS IN JAIPUR

The people of Rajasthan have been severely affected by prolonged drought=20
during the last three years. Relief programmes have been highly=20
inadequate, and there is much evidence of extreme hardship in=20
drought-affected areas. The situation is all the more unacceptable as 50=20
million tonnes of food are lying idle in public godowns across the=20
country. Hardship is expected to worsen during the forthcoming monsoon=20
months with the discontinuation of relief programmes.

Akal Sangharsh Samiti, a network of about 60 grassroots organisations in=20
Rajasthan, has been campaigning for an expansion of drought relief=20
programmes as well as for greater public accontability in relief=20
works. Tomorrow, 14 June, Akal Sangharsh Samiti is launching an indefinite=
=20
=93dharna=94 in Jaipur, to demand (1) the continuation of relief programmes=
=20
until the next harvest, (2) the release of foodgrain stocks for ensuring=20
food security and an effective public distribution system. The=20
participants are mainly poor farmers and labourers from drought-affected ar=
eas.

Supporters are welcome to join the dharna at any time. The venue is Statue=
=20
Circle (near the State Secretariat) in Jaipur. If possible, please inform=
=20
in advance (contact tel: 0141-591 408 and 511 483, e-mail kavisriv@y...=
m).

It is hoped that this and other initiatives will ultimately lead to a=20
broader, nation-wide movement/platform for the right to food. If there is=
=20
a concerted effort at the national level, the time is ripe for rescuing the=
=20
public distribution system.

________

#3.

Tue, 12 Jun 2001 01:46:26 +0530
From: vinod raina

War on Water

(It remains to be seen how much the coming monsoons shall assuage the=20
unprecedented drought that has condemned millions to misery this year,=20
since such conditions are not necessarily an outcome of lack of rainfall.=20
An insensitive state that prefers to let foodgrains rot in godowns, or=20
exports it cheaply, rather than feed its own people on the insane pretext=20
that distribution will lead to fiscal deficit reducing the country's=20
economic rating, and thus affect foriegn loans and investment shows how=20
servile the nation has become under the the explosive LPG regime (=20
Liberalisation, Privatisation, Globalisation). Under this regime, the=20
future seems really violent since water is likely to become the most=20
incidiary item in coming years. While people scrounge with local methods=20
to gather whatever moisture and precipitation they can, unknown to them, a=
=20
water scenario where nations will lose their sovreignity to such a natural=
=20
resource is relentlessly being crafted. It is time we started paying=20
attention to it with the same intensity as we are now forced do in the case=
=20
of power and agriculture, since economic changes in the water regime will=20
leave literally nothing untouched. The accompanying write up, the contents=
=20
of which may anyway be known to you, is being sent with such a purpose).
Vinod Raina; (All India People's Science Network ), E1/193, Arera Colony,=20
Bhopal 462016

WAR OVER WATER
=91Water flows Uphill to Money'

Vinod Raina

Since the beginning of the world, gravity has been the nature=92s engine to=
=20
distribute water over the earth. But as mankind (marginally womankind) has=
=20
progressed, we have reached a state of economic =91progress=92 that will=20
finally defy nature and its gravity no, water has not acquired wings, but=
=20
with privatization of water on the anvil, it will =91flow uphill to money=
=92,=20
as a resident of the high desert in New Mexico observed after his=20
community=92s water had been diverted for use by the high-tech industry.

There is, sickeningly, a consistent universal solution to all the problems=
=20
of the world today - globalisation. So why should water remain confined to=
=20
local regions or within national boundaries. The corporate solution is=20
simple, let national governments hand over right to water to them; they=20
will transfer water in bulk across nations and continents. And if in the=20
process the poor and the needy are further deprived from their scarce water=
=20
sources at the expense of industry and the rich, and corporations make=20
profits, well what is wrong! In 1998, the Nova Company of Canada awoke the=
=20
region to the fact that diverting or exporting Great Lakes water to regions=
=20
of the globe that would buy it was a real possibility. Nova was granted a=20
permit to ship tankers of Lake Superior water to Asia. The permit was=20
withdrawn after protests from the Canadian and US citizens and elected=20
leaders. Then in October 1999, Sunbelt Corporation of California filed a=20
$10.5 billion claim under NAFTA because of British Columbia=92s withdrawal =
of=20
a water export permit. Using trade agreements like NAFTA (North American=20
Free Trade Agreement) and GATT/WTO, corporations smell blood in water=20
trade, and the war over water is truly on. But like vultures, the=20
corporations must first sight the carcass before swooping down, which is=20
what the present water crisis gripping the globe provides them.

The Crisis

We live under a wrong illusion that there is an infinite supply of water on=
=20
earth. Available fresh water has continued to be the same for over 2000=20
years, and it amounts to less than half percent of all water on earth. The=
=20
rest is seawater or inaccessible in ice caps, ground water and soil. The=20
population has risen over 33 times during these 2000 years. Consequently,=20
United Nations estimates that one billion people already lack access to=20
fresh drinking water, and within the next 25 years, the number of countries=
=20
facing chronic water shortages will swell to 50 with three billion people,=
=20
about 35 percent of world population. World Bank and United Nations=20
estimates predict that by 2025, the demand for fresh water will rise by=20
over 56 percent more than is currently available. While the only renewable=
=20
source of freshwater is continental rainfall (which generates a more or=20
less constant global supply of 40,000 to 45,000 cubic km per year), the=20
world population keeps increasing by roughly 85 million per year. Therefore=
=20
the availability of fresh water per head is decreasing rapidly. Most=20
stupidly, overuse, pollution, diversion and depletion of this finite source=
=20
of freshwater is taking place at mind-boggling rates. Averages hide lies.=20
It is not as if the increasing population has access, or is using equally,=
=20
this finite resource. The United Nations reports that Europeans spend $11=20
billion a year on ice cream (made mostly of water), $2 billion more than=20
the estimated total money needed to provide clean water and safe sewers for=
=20
the world=92s population. More than five million people, most of them=20
children die every year from illnesses caused by drinking poor quality=20
water. While billions go without clean water, North Americans use about=20
5000 liters of water per person per day!

Water inequality does not exist only between nations but within nations=20
too. The ongoing unprecedented drought in India is affecting millions of=20
humans and cattle, and is leading to famine like conditions and large-scale=
=20
migration, even though the government takes pride in proclaiming that food=
=20
godowns are bursting with huge stocks! Millions of people are scrounging=20
for cupfuls of water and morsels of food on a daily basis. However, water=20
sport amusement parks are sprouting all over the big cities and highways of=
=20
the country and are being advertised prominently in colour, on the same=20
pages of national dailies that allow no more than a centimeter deep news of=
=20
the drought. Likewise in 1994, when Indonesia was hit with a major drought,=
=20
residents=92 wells ran dry, but Jakarta=92s golf courses continued to recei=
ve=20
1000 cubic meters per course per day. In 1998, in the midst of a three year=
=20
drought that dried up river systems, the Cyprus government cut the water=20
supply to farmers by 50 percent while guaranteeing the country=92s two=20
million tourists a year all the water they needed. In Lima, Peru, poor=20
people may pay a private vendor as much as $3 for a cubic meter of water,=20
which is often contaminated and has to be collected in buckets. The more=20
affluent on the other hand pay 30 cents per cubic meter for treated water=20
provided through taps in the houses. In Dhaka, Bangladesh, squatters pay=20
water rates that are twelve times higher than the local utility charges.=20
Indigenous people have been impacted in a particularly brutal fashion by=20
the theft of their water. It is the immediate relationship that these=20
people have to water that makes them especially vulnerable to any=20
large-scale project that alters aquatic ecosystems.

Water inequalities have profound impacts on the food security of the=20
majority of people on earth. Irrigation and crop claims 65 percent of all=20
water used by the humans, compared to 25 percent for industry and 10=20
percent for households and municipalities. The annual rise in population=20
and over consumption demands higher food production, requiring larger=20
amounts of water. But the world=92s expanding cities and industries are=20
successfully competing and taking more and more water from agriculture=20
every year. Throughout rural Latin America and Asia, massive=20
industrialization is disrupting the relationship between humans and nature.=
=20
Export oriented agribusiness is claiming more and more of the water once=20
used by small farmers for food self-sufficiency. The other major drain on=20
local water supplies are the more than 800 free trade zones in the=20
developing world where assembly lines produce goods for the global market.=
=20
In such zones in Mexico, for example, clean water is so scarce that babies=
=20
and children drink Coca-Cola and Pepsi instead! During a drought in=20
northern Mexico in 1995, the government cut water supplies to local farmers=
=20
while ensuring emergency supplies to the mostly foreign controlled=20
industries of the region.

The Worldwatch Institute warns that an unexpectedly abrupt decline in the=20
supply of water for China=92s farmers could threaten world food security.=20
China faces severe grain shortages in the near future because of water=20
depletion due to the current shift of limited water resources from=20
agriculture to industry and cities. The resulting demand for grain in China=
=20
could exceed the world=92s available exportable supplies. The western half =
of=20
China is made up mostly of deserts and mountains, the bulk of the country=
=92s=20
1.2 billion people live on several great rivers whose systems cannot=20
sustain such demands. For instance, in 1972, the Yellow River failed to=20
reach the sea for the first time in history. That year it failed for 15=20
days, every year since, it has run dry for more days. In 1997, it failed to=
=20
reach the sea for 226 days. The story is the same with all of China=92s=20
rivers and with its depleting water tables beneath the North China Plain.=20
As big industrial wells probe the ground ever deeper to tap the remaining=20
water, millions of Chinese farmers have found their wells pumped dry. Three=
=20
hundred Chinese cities are already facing severe shortages. These shortages=
=20
come at a time when China will see a population increase in the next 30=20
years greater than the entire population of the United States. Conservative=
=20
estimates suggest that the annual industrial water use in China could grow=
=20
from 52 billion tons to 269 billion tons in the same period, and when=20
rising incomes are allowing millions of Chinese to install indoor plumbing=
=20
with showers and flush toilets. Worldwatch predicts China will be the first=
=20
country in the world that will have to literally restructure its economy to=
=20
respond to water scarcity.

The situation is not much different in the other billion plus population=20
country, India. Most agree that the ongoing drought of the year 2001 is the=
=20
worst ever, affecting the entire central belt, from East to West. Rivers=20
and wells have run dry and over pumping has either emptied aquifers or=20
plunged them deep down. In the beach area of Madras, aquifers have got=20
filled with saline water, ensuring that numerous high rise apartments and=20
condominiums that have sprung up along the beach remain unoccupied, or have=
=20
tankers ferrying water to them. With depleted rivers, a lot of hydropower=20
generation has got badly affected, reducing power supply to farms and=20
cities to alarming levels. And all this has happened during the winter=20
months, when the water bodies are normally full after the monsoons. The=20
coming summer, when temperatures soar to above 45 degrees Celsius in the=20
drought belt, could be calamitous.

The official response, around the world to such conditions and water=20
demands is to build more dams and divert more rivers. We are now tampering=
=20
with water systems on a scale that is totally unsustainable. The number of=
=20
large dams worldwide has climbed from just over 5000 in 1950 to almost=20
500,000. In the northern hemisphere, three-quarters of the flow from the=20
world=92s major rivers has been harnessed and tamed for power generation. I=
n=20
the U.S., only 2 percent of the country=92s rivers and streams remain free=
=20
flowing and undeveloped. All but one of England=92s 33 major rivers is=20
suffering; some are now less than a third of their average depth. The=20
Thames is threatening to run dry and already larger ships have to restrict=
=20
their movements to high tides. Development has cut the Rhine River in=20
Europe off from 90 percent of its original flood plains. Over the last 25=20
years, the Danube=92s phosphate and nitrate concentrations have increased=20
six-fold and four-fold, respectively. According to FAO, 80 percent of=20
China=92s major rivers are so degraded they no longer support fish. After t=
he=20
Pak Mun Dam was built in Thailand, all 150 fish species that had inhabited=
=20
the Mun River virtually disappeared. The world=92s waterways are struggling=
=20
with the full range of modern toxic pollution problems. Ninety percent of=20
the developing world=92s wastewater is still discharged untreated into loca=
l=20
rivers and streams.

The Aral Sea basin shared by Afghanistan, Iran, and five countries of the=20
former Soviet Union, was once the world=92s fourth largest lake. Excessive=
=20
river diversions have caused it to lose half its area and three-fourths of=
=20
its volume, while its surrounding wetlands have shrunk by 85 percent.=20
Almost all fish and waterfowl species have been decimated in what is=20
perhaps the planet=92s greatest environmental tragedy. Each year, winds pic=
k=20
up 40-150 million tons of a toxic salt mixture from the dry seabed and dump=
=20
it on the surrounding farmlands. Millions of =91ecological refugees=92 have=
=20
fled the area.

Where as advances in modern engineering have allowed governments to supply=
=20
farms and cities with water and hydropower, the human, social and=20
environmental costs have been enormous. There is simply no way to overstate=
=20
the water crisis of the planet today. Till now, deprived and affected=20
populations have been agitating for their share of land, water and forests=
=20
with their governments. But instead of radical reforms to address the grave=
=20
water and ecological problems, the governments are likely to wash their=20
hands off the water problem, by giving the control to corporations, which=20
is bound to push the world to a nightmare.

Commodification and Privatisation

We are now in the era of =91Everything is for sale=92. Even those areas of =
life=20
once considered sacred, such as health and education, culture and heritage,=
=20
genetic codes and seeds, and natural resources such as air and water. In=20
1997, $157 billion worth of global public government resources were=20
transferred to private companies, an increase of 70 percent in one year. A=
=20
new global royalty now centrally plans the market, destroying lives and=20
nature in its wake. As David Korten, former senior advisor to USAID says,=20
=91The world is now ruled by a global financial casino staffed by faceless=
=20
bankers and hedge-fund speculators who operate with a herd mentality in the=
=20
shadowy world of global finance. Each day, they move more than two trillion=
=20
dollars around the world in search of quick profits and safe havens,=20
sending exchange rates and stock markets into wild gyrations wholly=20
unrelated to any underlying economic reality. With abandon they make and=20
break national economies, buy and sell corporations and hold politicians=20
hostage to their interests.=92

As demand for fresh water continues to grow, more and more governments and=
=20
corporations are considering the commodification of water buying, selling,=
=20
shipping and bottling. International trade agreements are increasingly the=
=20
means by which environmental resources are valued and disputes settled. In=
=20
industries ranging from wastewater services to bottled water to bulk water=
=20
exporting, corporations are jumping to exploit water shortages.

Two French transnationals dominate the world of privatized water, Vivendi=20
SA, whose water division is Generale des Eaux, and Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux=
=20
(which built the Suez Canal and has holdings of $56 billion). They are=20
referred to as the General Motors and Ford Company of the water world.=20
Between them, they own, or have controlling interests in, water companies=20
in approximately 120 countries on five continents and distribute water to=20
almost 100 million people in the world. In March 1999, Vivendi purchased=20
U.S. Filter Corp. for more than $6 billion in cash, making this merger the=
=20
world=92s largest water company in North America with projected revenue of=
=20
$12 billion in annual sales. With close to $90 billion in annual revenues,=
=20
the US is the world=92s largest water market. Until now small scale=20
public-sector operators have almost exclusively controlled this sector.=20
Vivendi is poised to promote the massive privatization of the American=20
water market.

None other the Dabhol power plant constructor, which has virtually=20
blackmailed the governments of Maharashta and the central government in=20
India, the power giant Enron, having acquired Wessex Water PLC of Britain,=
=20
is bidding for huge contracts against established players for newly=20
privatised water services in Bulgaria, Rio de Janeiro, Berlin and Panama.=20
The very familiar Rebecca Mark is the CEO of Enron=92s recently formed wate=
r=20
division, Azurix. Ms. Mark, whom the Fortune magazine named as one of the=20
50 most powerful women in the US in 1998, says she wants to change her=20
lifestyle so she can ski every day and ride her horses, but not before she=
=20
has fully privatized the global water market. She estimates it worth to be=
=20
approximately $300 billion (the World Bank places the value at closer to=20
$800 billion).

One form of privatized water familiar even in developing countries is=20
bottled drinking water. The ability of municipal bodies, throttled with=20
financial cuts, to supply quality drinking water is increasingly=20
diminishing. So, enter private packaged suppliers. In the thirst rich=20
country like India, brand names like Triputi, Ganga, Bisleri, wrongly claim=
=20
to provide mineral water; Ganga of course claims its water is lifted from=20
the holy Ganges. Worldwide, trade in bottled water is one of the fastest=20
growing, and least regulated. In the 1970=92s, the annual volume was around=
=20
9000 million liters. By 1980 this figure had reached around 19,000 million=
=20
liters and by the end of the decade, the world was drinking around 6=20
billion liters of bottled water each year. In 1998 over 18 billion liters=20
of water was bottled and traded globally, over 90 percent of it in=20
non-renewable plastic containers. As the world=92s freshwater supply become=
s=20
more degraded, those who can afford it are favouring the packaged item,=20
even though bottled water is subject to less rigorous testing and purity=20
standards than tap water (Indians can feel reassured that the problem is=20
worldwide!). A March 1999 study by the US based Natural Resources Defense=20
Council (NRDC) found that much bottled water is less safe than tap water.=20
One third of 103 brands of bottled water studied contained levels of=20
contamination, including traces of arsenic and e. coli, and at least one=20
fourth of bottled water is actually bottled tap water the study found, a=20
fact that is all too familiar in India.

Alongside the giants of the industry, such as Perrier, Evian, Naya, Poland=
=20
Spring, Clearly Canadian, La Croix and Purely Alaskan, and thousands of=20
smaller outfits, the big soft drink companies are entering the market in=20
force. Pepsi has its Aquafina line and Coca-Cola has recently launched the=
=20
North American version of its international label, Bon Aqua, called Dasani.=
=20
Coca Cola predicts that its water line will surpass its soft-drink line=20
within a decade. These companies are engaged in a constant search for new=20
water supplies to feed the insatiable appetite of the business and are=20
engaging in the trade of water by tanker shipments and by purchasing water=
=20
rights from farmers. In rural communities all over the world, corporate=20
interests are buying up farmland to access wells and then moving on when=20
supplies are depleted.

The global income gap is clearly reflected in inequitable access to bottled=
=20
water. The NRDC reports that some people spend up to 3,000 times more per=20
liter for bottled water than they do for tap water. For the same price as=20
one bottle of this consumer item, 3000 liters of tap water could be=20
delivered to homes, according to the American Water Works Association.=20
Ironically, the same industry that contributes to the destruction of public=
=20
water sources, in order to provide =91pure=92 water to the world=92s elite =
in=20
non-renewable plastic, peddles its product as being environmentally=20
friendly and part of a healthy lifestyle!

Bottled water is however a very small component of the projected global=20
trade in water, the mass export of bulk water, by diversion, sealed bags=20
and supertankers. Barges already deliver water to the islands in Bahamas,=20
and tankers deliver water to Japan, Taiwan and Korea. A Turkey government=20
water company had begun work to divert water from the Manavgat River, to be=
=20
shipped across the Mediterranean to Cyprus, Malta, Libya, Israel, Greece=20
and Egypt, until political tensions halted the project. The European=20
Commission is looking into the possibility of establishing a European Water=
=20
Network such that alpine water from Austria can flow into Spain or Greece,=
=20
rather than into Vienna=92s reservoirs. A high-tech pipeline already=20
transports quality spring water from the Austrian Alps to Vienna, and there=
=20
are proposals to extend it to other countries. Similarly, several companies=
=20
are exploring to meet the water shortages of England by large scale export=
=20
of water from Scotland, by tanker and by pipeline.

Several companies around the world are developing technology to make it=20
possible to load large quantities of fresh water into huge sealed bags, to=
=20
be towed across oceans for sale. The Nordic Water Supply Company in Oslo=20
has signed a contract to deliver 7 million cubic meters of water per year=20
to Northern Cyprus. Aquaris Water Trading and Transportation Ltd. of=20
England has begun the first commercial deliveries of fresh water by bag to=
=20
the Greek Islands. But it is in North America that companies are lining up=
=20
in numbers to trade in water. Several are directly involved with plans to=20
divert massive amounts of Canadian water to water-scarce areas of the=20
United States, Asia and the Middle East by tanker, pipeline, or rerouting=20
of natural river systems.

Ominously therefore, it wouldn=92t take long before many of these companies=
,=20
helped by weak and willing national governments get a stranglehold in Asia.=
=20
Apart from the lucrative market in water starved areas of Asia, regions=20
like the Himalayas and its river and lake system stretching through=20
Pakistan, India, Nepal, China and Bangladesh provides a vital source for=20
fresh water mining. The consequent ecological damage could threaten the=20
most populated region of the world.

NAFTA and WTO

As mentioned at the beginning, the permit granted to the Nova Company to=20
ship tankers of Lake Superior water to Asia, and the case filed by the=20
Sunbelt Corporation of California has awakened the world to the imminence=20
of large scale water trading. Though in both the cases, the governments=20
have acted to withdraw permission under public pressure, the legal validity=
=20
of such withdrawals will set the course for future action. Sunbelt has=20
already filed a claim for $10.5 billion under NAFTA. Public outcry against=
=20
the environmental hazards due to bulk transfer of water and the ethics of=20
treating a universal public resource like water as a tradable good will=20
have to pressurise not only the respective national governments, but fight=
=20
against multilateral trade agreements that not only restrict fresh=20
environmental legislations but are being systematically used to dismantle=20
existing environmental protection measures, in favour of trade.

NAFTA clearly provides the blueprint for the future of water trading. Its=20
Chapter 3 establishes obligations regarding the trade in goods. It uses the=
=20
GATT definition of a =91good=92, which clearly lists =91waters, including n=
atural=20
or artificial waters and aerated waters=92 and adds in an explanatory note=
=20
that =91ordinary natural water of all kinds (other than sea water)=92 is=20
included=92. It would therefore appear that we must confront the reality th=
at=20
under NAFTA and WTO rules, water export controls are prohibited. Moreover=20
under NAFTA, Canada is also precluded from denying US investors and service=
=20
providers the same access to Canadian water it allows Canadian companies,=20
communities and residents.

Common sense and environmental ethics demand that water in its =91natural=20
state=92 should not to be considered a tradable =91good=92 and therefore sh=
ould=20
be outside the purview of trade rules; however, under both the US and=20
international law, water in its natural state is considered a commercial=20
good. Moreover, a very large portion of water resources of all nations=20
would already have to be considered as having entered into commerce,=20
because it is being used to generate power, irrigate crops, support=20
industry and service individual consumers.

The most likely source that places water at risk is Article XI of WTO that=
=20
imposes a blanket prohibition against the use of quantitative export=20
controls on any product destined for the territory of any contracting=20
party. Which means that quotas or bans on the export of water imposed for=20
environmental purposes could be challenged as a form of protectionism. Two=
=20
recent WTO rulings suggest that precedents have been set up against=20
environmental protection American law to protect Asian sea turtles from=20
shrimp nets and dolphins from drift nets has been successfully challenged,=
=20
and Indonesia was forced to lift its ban on the export of raw logs both=20
bode badly for a nation=92s right to protect its natural resources. The Wes=
t=20
Coast Environmental Law Association thinks that these rulings will=20
reverberate in all natural resource sectors. WTO of course has both the=20
legislative and judicial authority to challenge laws, policies, and=20
programs of member countries if they do not conform to WTO rules, and it=20
has the power to strike down these rules if they can be shown to be =91trad=
e=20
restrictive=92.

There could be a mistaken view that Article XX of WTO can protect the=20
environment and natural resources of a member country. According to this=20
Article, member countries can still adopt laws =91necessary to protect huma=
n,=20
animal or plant life or health =85 relating to the conservation of=20
exhaustible natural resources if such measures are made effective in=20
conjunction with restrictions on domestic production or consumption.=92=20
However, the Article can only be applied in =91non-discriminatory=92 fashio=
n=20
and cannot be a disguised barrier to trade. Up till now, in each case the=20
WTO has upheld the rights of commerce over the rights of environmental=20
protection. To complicate matters, WTO does not recognize the authority of=
=20
Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), making it inimical to=20
environmental laws.

As for legal measures to restrict water trading, ensuring that water in its=
=20
=91natural state=92 should be treated as a non-tradable good, in the opinio=
n of=20
the West Coast Environmental Law Association, is no longer feasible because=
=20
of NAFTA and WTO, unless pressure is put to change the NAFTA/WTO=20
provisions. The Association suggests that the best approach for preventing=
=20
bulk water removals is the enactment of national legislations designed=20
specifically for the purpose. This may not prevent corporations from=20
attempting to buy water rights, but could inoculate nations against=20
investor claims.

Towards a Water Conservation Ethic

Countries in Asia, particularly China and India need to wake up to provide=
=20
a lead such that their water resources do not become the next target of=20
profit hungry corporations, destroying in the process the already=20
endangered Himalayan ecological system, the source of most of the fresh=20
water in the world. Apart from studying the various legal strategies that=20
can confront trade related assaults, what seems to be desperately required,=
=20
even to overcome internal water requirements, is citizen action based on a=
=20
Water Conservation Ethic. Such an Ethic would recognize that:

- Water belongs to the earth and all species.
- Water is a finite resource.
- Water is a part of an ecosystem, interconnected to land and biomass. It=20
must be left where it is
and is best protected in natural watersheds.
- Polluted water must be recycled
- An adequate supply of clean water is a basic human right.
- Citizens and local communities have rights to decisions concerning water=
=20
use and must be legally
empowered.
- Economic globalisation policies are not water-sustainable

As Georg Wurmitzer, mayor of a small town of Simitz in the Austrian Alps=20
states, =91It is a sacred duty to help someone who is suffering from thirst=
.=20
However, it is a sin to transfer water just so that people can flush their=
=20
toilets and wash cars in dry areas =85 It makes no sense and is ecological=
=20
and economic madness.=92 We must recognize that the world is in the midst o=
f=20
a severe water crisis today. Entire societies and ecosystems are under=20
threat. Governments are losing their right to protect their water heritage,=
=20
or are willingly bartering them away. Most haven=92t even begun to address=
=20
the issues of privatization, commercialization and trade in water. Yet,=20
while they leave their water resources unprotected by legislation, they are=
=20
actively negotiating and signing international trade and investment=20
agreements that supersede national laws. But there must be hope, a radical=
=20
rethinking of our values, priorities and political systems is urgent and=20
still possible.

Sources:

1. Barlow, Maude; Blue Gold, The Global Water Crisis and the=20
Commodification of the World=92s Water Supply, International Forum on=20
Globalization, June 1999. Liberally used here.
2. What=92s Trade Got to do With It? Water: A Case Study; National Wildlife=
=20
Federation, Canada, November 1999
3. A Legal Opinion Concerning Water Export Controls and Canadian=20
Obligations Under NAFTA and the WTO; West Coast Environmental Law=20
Association, September 1999
4. Stikker, Allerd; Water Today and Tomorrow, Prospects for Overcoming=20
Scarcity, Futures, Vol 30, No1, Elsevier Science, 1998
5. Nelson, Joyce; There Goes our Water, Internal paper for the Canadian=20
Union of Public Employees, January 1997
6. Menotti, Victor, The Environmental Impacts of Economic Globalisation,=20
International Forum on Globalisation, August 1998
7. Brown, Lester, and Halweil, Brian; China=92s Water Shortage Could Shake=
=20
World Food Security, Worldwatch, July=92August 1998
8. Postel, Sandra; Forging a Sustainable Water Strategy, State of the=20
World, 1996, Worldwatch Institute
9. Global Water Corporation Web site: www.globalwatercorporation.com
10.Global Initiators Committee for the Water Contract, The Water Manifesto,=
=20
The Right to Life, Lisbon, 1998
11.Gleick, Peter; The World=92s Water: The Biennial Report on Freshwater=20
Resources, 1998/1999, Island Press, California, 1998
12.National Geographic, Water, Special edition, 1993
13.Water Watch - a community action guide. Asia Pacific People's=20
Environment Network, Penang

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service run by
South Asia Citizens Web (http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex) since 1996. Dispatch
archive from 1998 can be accessed at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/act/messages/ . To subscribe send a blank
message to: <act-subscribe@yahoogroups.com> / To unsubscribe send a blank
message to: <act-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
________________________________________
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.

[ All interested and concerned by the dangers of Nuclearisation of South
Asia are invited to join South Asians Against Nukes Mailing List. =3D> send=
a
blank e-mail message to : <saan-subscribe@l...> ]