GREAT NICOBAR HOLISTIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT: STRATEGIC NECESSITY VS ECOLOGICAL FRAGILITY

Copyright infringement not intended

Picture Courtesy:  INDIAN EXPRESS

Context

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) declined to stay the Environmental Clearance (EC) granted to the Great Nicobar Development Project.

What is the Great Nicobar Island (GNI) Project? 

It is an ₹81,000-crore mega infrastructure initiative designed to transform the island into a major global maritime, economic, and defence hub. 

Initially driven by NITI Aayog, the project’s implementing agency is now the Andaman and Nicobar Island Integrated Development Corp Ltd (ANIIDCO).

Core Components

The project spans approximately 166 sq km (about 18% of the island) and consists of four main pillars: 

• International Container Transshipment Terminal (ICTT): Deep-water port at Galathea Bay (up to 14.2 million TEUs annually), competing with Singapore and Colombo.
• Greenfield International Airport: Dual-use facility for civilian tourism and rapid military deployment.
• Integrated Township: Planned "greenfield city" to accommodate up to 6.5 lakh people (current island population around 8,500).
• Power Plant: 450 MVA gas and solar-based hybrid plant for sustainable energy.

Why is this Project Strategically Vital for India?

Control over Malacca Strait

Great Nicobar's strategic location at the Malacca Strait allows India to monitor naval movements, particularly of China, as 80% of China's energy imports and 30% of global trade pass through this critical choke point. (Source: World Economic Forum)

Countering China's "String of Pearls"

The project is a key part of India's "Double Fish Hook" strategy to counter China's "String of Pearls" strategy; port development in Gwadar (Pakistan), Hambantota (Sri Lanka), and Kyaukpyu (Myanmar) to encircle India..

Economic Gains from Transshipment

The Galathea Bay port aims to capture roughly 75% of India's transshipped cargo currently handled by foreign ports like Colombo and Singapore, thereby addressing an estimated annual loss of $200-$220 million and boosting India's economy and maritime trade. (Source: Ministry of Ports)

What are the Ecological Concerns of the Project?

Deforestation and Biodiversity Loss

The project requires clearing 130.75 sq km of tropical rainforest, which involves felling an estimated 9.64 lakh trees (Source: Minister of State for Environment)

Threat to Endemic Species: The project poses a direct threat to unique wildlife:

• Giant Leatherback Turtle: Galathea Bay is the most important nesting site for this Schedule I species in the Northern Indian Ocean. Port construction will disrupt this critical habitat.
• Nicobar Megapode: This ground-nesting bird is found only in the Nicobar Islands and faces severe habitat loss due to the project.

Destruction of Marine Ecosystems and Geological Risks

Coral Reefs: The sea-reclamation project will destroy vast, pristine coral reefs. The controversial coral "translocation" plan has a very low chance of success globally. (Source: IPCC Ocean Reports).

Seismic Vulnerability: Located in the seismic "Ring of Fire," the island was the 2004 Tsunami epicenter, causing the land to permanently sink by up to 4 meters (eg. Indira Point). Large-scale infrastructure construction here poses an immense disaster risk. (Source: National Centre for Seismology Data).

How Does the Project Impact Indigenous Communities?

The project's human cost is centered on the potential impact on two vulnerable tribal groups protected under the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (Protection of Aboriginal Tribes) Regulation, 1956.

• The Shompen (PVTG): Live in voluntary isolation. Project area overlaps with their traditional hunting/foraging grounds. Outsider influx risks disease exposure and potential extinction due to lack of immunity.
• The Nicobarese: Coastal community severely affected by the 2004 Tsunami; many are still in relief camps. Some ancestral lands are now part of the project area. Tribal Council previously noted a lack of transparent consultation.

The Compensatory Afforestation Controversy

The plan to compensate for dense tropical rainforest loss in Nicobar by planting trees in the arid Aravalli landscape of Haryana, thousands of kilometers away, has been widely criticized as an "ecological fallacy."

The proposal to replace a complex, biodiverse tropical rainforest with a plantation in a semi-arid zone lacks ecological equivalence. This violates the "like-with-like" replacement principle established by the Supreme Court in the T.N. Godavarman case.

Way Forward

Strict Oversight: The NGT-appointed High-Power Committee must enforce stringent environmental safeguards with full transparency.

Re-evaluating Project Scale: The government could consider reducing the scale of the township component to minimize the required forest diversion while prioritizing the core strategic assets (port and airfield).

Upholding Tribal Rights: The rights of the Shompen and Nicobarese, as guaranteed under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2006, must be protected. Their "Free, Prior, and Informed Consent" (FPIC) must be obtained genuinely, not just as a procedural formality.

Building Disaster-Resilient Infrastructure: All construction must adhere to the highest standards of seismic and tsunami resilience to mitigate the inherent geological risks of the region.

Conclusion

The Great Nicobar Project highlights the trade-off between national security and ecological preservation. While its strategic value is clear, the implementation needs careful reassessment.

India must balance the goal of being a "Net Security Provider" in the Indian Ocean with its responsibility to avoid becoming a "Net Ecological Destroyer" in this fragile territory.

Source: INDIAN EXPRESS