The gigantic negative consequences of the proposal are being ignored by its proponents in government and outside

The proposal for interlinking all the major rivers shows a super market approach to meeting all basic needs under one roof. Water for drinking: count on interlinking of rivers. Water for irrigation: lift it from the interlinked rivers. Power for industry: switch to hydropower from the interlinked rivers. A perfect political tool to woo the electorate, and opposition to this magic wand has been hard to come by.

For the small minority of conscientious citizens, this has been the greatest contemporary challenge that the governing elite has posed. It has several times the combined impact of all major development projects in the country. Benefits notwithstanding, it is the mantra for growth that may offer a cover for rampant corruption and lucrative kickbacks. It is one giant move to complete nature's unfinished agenda. With surplus flow in the Brahmaputra river and less-than-desired flow in the Cauvery being the overriding concerns, the governing elite intends playing God by bringing in equality in water access across the country's diverse eco-regions.

Short-circuiting nature
By 2050, per capita availability in the Brahmaputra basin would be 9000 kilolitres as against 400 for the peninsular basins of Cauvery and Pennar. For the powers-that-be, this is not acceptable as this would mean less than the minimum per capita requirement of 1000 kilolitres. Make no mistake, they say: if the roads can be linked, so be the rivers too! Short-circuiting nature may seem technologically feasible. but in the process ecology will be undermined and geography will be at the receiving end. Both are being altered.

What if the food (the elusive calcium molecule that travels from the mountain slopes) doesn't reach the corals in the sea' The corals and the fish are the least of anybody's concern. Nor does resultant displacement; anticipated waterlogging and pollutants transfer bother anyone. Such ecological damages could neither be averted nor satisfactorily addressed in any mega project so far.

About 1869 billion cubic metre (bcm) of fresh water is all that is available currently out of the annual precipitation of 4000 bcm. Even considering the country's projected demand in 2050, the current supply is enough to meet the need for 1447 bcm of water. Much cheaper eco-friendly options are being bypassed in favour of this proposal that will cost the country well over US $500 billion by present estimates.

Not many know that the country's first Prime Minister did not allow the 'disease of gigantism' to trouble him for long. In 'Jawaharlal - A Biography', Prof S Gopal records Nehru's views on the subject, expressed at the meeting of the Central Board of Irrigation, November 17, 1958: Nehru was now more aware than in the past when, surveying the Bhakra-Nangal dam in 1956, he whispered to himself, 'These are the new temples of India where I worship'. At the meeting, Nehru remarked, " (he) doubted if the government would have initiated such a project if it came before them at this time. Such a dam is exceedingly expensive, involved a considerable amount of foreign exchange and took a long time to be completed. All that India has gained from it was electric power and little irrigation.'

No benefits
Rajiv Gandhi, speaking to State Irrigation Ministers in August 1986, said, 'The situation today is that since 1951, 246 big surface irrigation projects have been initiated. Only 66 out of these have been completed, 181 are still under construction. Perhaps, we can safely say that almost no benefit has come to the people from these projects. For 16 years, we have poured out money. The people have got nothing back.'

A decision that may impact the lives of millions must go through the rigour of comprehensive scrutiny. By ignoring the ones that are critical, the government has shown that its interest in people may indeed be vested. By proposing interlinking of rivers, the government has turned simple political ambition into collective avarice. For the politicians, interlinking offers electoral gains as votes can still be bought for false promises. For the industry, interlinking promises consumption of cement and steel for decades. For the bureaucrats, it presents an opportunity to barter contracts. For the engineers, interlinking is a dream come true.

Collective avarice is manifest in the proposal to bring about equality in water access. Unless all round equality is ensured, providing access to water alone may not prove any point. It may be akin to producing food grains for all but without ensuring purchasing capacity for most. Further, providing access to water where even nature has been frugal may indeed encourage mass wastage.

The promise that the plan will generate 34,000 megawatts of power, extend irrigation to dry districts in the country, and boost the GDP by 4 per cent sounds good on paper. If the track record of past projects is any indication, it is an illusion that has been successfully sustained through five decades.

(The writer is a Delhi-based water expert and a development analyst.)