Shri Anupam Mishra of Gandhi Marg: “So far, we have seen people who are trying to convert agriculture into business opportunities unleash different kinds of weapons – amongst them, chemical fertilizers and chemical pesticides were prominent. Now, these business houses have begun eyeing Seed as a means of profiteering. Natural characteristics of Seed are being modified wherein various business possibilities are being inserted into the seed itself for larger markets. It has to be noted by farmers that wherever they buy and sow such seeds, the business interests of these corporations will take roots, flower and expand. We should all collectively decide what we will do with such Seed and whether we will let the control go away from the hands of farmers – this is one of the main issues that the Kisan Swaraj Yatra will raise for debate”.

“It is time to say loud and clear and in many diverse voices that India’s agriculture and farming community should not only survive but thrive, that it should find its own unique path and not simply follow in the disastrous footsteps of American agriculture. It is time to highlight the many solutions already proven at the field level, and the many solutions we are proposing at the policy level – and to formulate and proclaim all these in terms of a larger vision for agriculture to effectively counter the anti-farmer consensus among the powerful elite in Delhi and elsewhere. Even though some governments have come forward to promote organic farming, a word of caution needs to be sounded here: the same governments are also getting into partnerships with corporations like Monsanto and encouraging GM seeds. These two visions and systems cannot just co-exist”: Shri Kapil Shah of Jatan, Gujarat.

New Delhi, August 25th 2010: The Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA), a new network of individuals and organizations across the country has announced that a “Kisan Swaraj Yatra” would set off from Sabarmati Ashram on October 2nd 2010, to remind all Indians of our hard-won independence and the insidious ways in which agri-business corporations, supported by the State are taking this independence and sovereignty away, especially with regard to our food and farming. This Yatra is a call for joining forces to save Indian farming and farmers mired in deep distress and to forge a sustainable path forward for Indian farming.

In the last few weeks, two issues have dominated our public conscience – the rotting of grains in FCI’s holds, and the firing on farmers protesting inadequate compensation for land acquisition. As on 1 January 2010, there were 10.6 lakh tones of grains lying waste under FCI, on which the Supreme Court suggested that these be distributed free to the poor rather than be allowed to rot. In what has become his typical attitude and stand, the Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar glibly rejected the suggestion. In Aligarh, on Independence Day, the police opened fire on farmers demanding better compensation (at par with that given to farmers in NOIDA) for their land acquired for the Yamuna Expressway, killing at least four people. An irrelevant and insensitive Land Acquisition Act of 1894, whose date of expiry should have been 1947, is still wielded to rob the farmers off their fertile agriculture land and present it on a silver platter to industrialists and real estate developers. And yet, these two cases are only the latest reflection of what ails India’s agriculture and her small farmers, who are today at possibly the worst crossroads in their history. These cases, and many other similar or worse cases taking place across the country, are the inevitable ramifications of a market oriented paradigm that was cunningly forced on the people and the farmers of the country in the early sixties. The Swaraj Yatra is being launched to question this and to collectively regain self-reliance in farming and rights over resources for farming, ASHA members explained.

The new agriculture poisoned the soil, depleted and poisoned the water resources, demolished native seeds, agro-biodiversity and livelihood systems, eroded the farmers’ indigenous knowledge, practice and experience of thousands of years, multiplied the cost of inputs, gravely and increasingly threatened people’s health and nutrition through chemical intrusion in agriculture, and now through GM seeds, is all set to exacerbate the distress all around. Effectively, the messiahs of new agriculture have taken the control over agriculture from the farmers’ hands and placed it firmly at the market’s feet, and have squarely undermined people’s food security.

Since 1997, according to the Union Home Ministry’s National Crime Records Bureau, a staggering 1,82,936 farmers have committed suicides. Between 1997 and 2007, over 8 million farmers have given up farming altogether. The extent of hunger and malnutrition in India is the second highest in the world. A farmer today is at the lowest rung of the social and economic strata. Once an ‘annadata’, the farmers today have been pushed to become ‘anna-pata’. The worst affected by the ecomonic crisis are the farmers and agriculture; the worst affected by global warming and climate change are again farmers and agriculture; the worst affected by any disaster are, again, farmers and agriculture.

This is a historic juncture for the farmers in the country. There are obviously strong forces pushing farmers out of agriculture, with the vision that Indian agriculture will be more ‘manageable’ and ‘productive’ with around 15% of population engaged in farming, under the domination of corporatization, biotechnology and heavy machinery. There is also a vision driving policies that believes that pushing people out of farming and rural areas into other sectors and into cities is what constitutes development. The effects of this are already evident, with the distress migration from villages to cities, the forcible acquisition of agricultural land for industry and SEZs, and the increasing difficulty of the farmers to make ends meet. This Yatra will seek to create a debate on this ‘developmental inevitability’ that is being pursued.

This is the time to speak more loudly than ever, about the return of the small farmer and sustainable and holistic agriculture in our national conscience. There is a growing body of research, knowledge and opinion against the diabolic fallacy of pursuing the market agenda in food and agriculture, and in favour of biodiversity-based ecological agriculture. The IAASTD report issued in 2008, prepared over four years and based on the work and deliberation of over 800 scientists and intellectuals across the world, has pronounced that sustainable, ecological agriculture is the only way forward, if humanity was to have any semblance of purposeful survival in future. More recently, scientists and other concerned voices have underlined a return to chemical-free, localized agriculture as one of the main solutions to the problems of climate change.

It was 80 years ago that Gandhiji led the Namak Satyagrah (or the Dandi Yatra) to claim people’s sovereignty over their natural resources. It was hundred years ago that he extended a development model for India centred around the concept of “Hind Swaraj”. This year, on 2 October 2010, dozens of farmers’ movements and other organizations across the country will launch the “Kisan Swaraj Yatra” that will take off from the Sabarmati Ashram in Gujarat and traverse through 20 states to reach Rajghat (New Delhi) on 11 December. The Yatra will be flagged off by renowned natural farmer Shri Bhaskar Bhai Save.

The Yatra will highlight issues such as seeds sovereignty, land grab, climate change, food sovereignty and security, GE seeds, chemical pesticides, farm produce pricing, etc. that directly and indirectly affect small farmers in addition to bringing up a debate around the proposed Green Revolution in Eastern India, the tie-ups that several governments have with MNCs like Monsanto, the continuing saga of farmers’ suicides and so on. The Yatra will also raise the concerns over free trade and bilateral agreements, the proposed food security and seeds laws, BRAI Bill, the handing over of public resources for private gains etc. The Kisan Swaraj Yatra will also draw in urban consumers into its fold and will raise issues of food safety, consumer choices etc. The Yatra will celebrate the conservation of diversity by farmers, farmers’ knowledge and will highlight the successes of ecological farming. The participants will develop concurrent events, programmes, campaigns in accordance with the needs and priorities in their respective states.

* * *
For more information, contact the persons listed in the Yatra’s route throughout 20 states of India.

India: An Innovative Way of Sharing Diminishing Groundwater

“We no longer worry about the rains. We now have the confidence to grow alternative crops even if the monsoon fails,” said Balaraju, a farmer in one of the most drought-prone and economically vulnerable regions of Andhra Pradesh in southern India.

Last year, when large parts of the state were facing the severest drought in 30 years, Balaraju’s lands were unaffected. This is because the villagers now share groundwater, a practice introduced by the World Bank’s pilot project – The Andhra Pradesh Drought Adaptation Initiative (APDAI). Before the project, only the richer farmers had access to groundwater because only they could afford to dig deep wells. The rest, including Balaraju, had to depend on the unreliable monsoon rains to irrigate their crops.

But, convincing the richer farmers to share the water from their wells was not easy. However they agreed to do so because many of them too had fields that were far from their wells. If a pipeline was laid, these fields would also gain access to water.

In return for the water, the villagers agreed not to dig new bore wells for a period of ten years. They also agreed to regulate their water use. Farmers were encouraged to move away from cultivating high water-consuming crops such as rice to those that require less water, such as groundnuts (peanuts).

To reduce their water consumption, all farmers used sprinklers to irrigate most of their land. And, ground water was not drawn for 6 days each month. Moreover, no one person operated the system – all group members took it in turns.

As a result, the farmers have been able to raise their incomes several fold. This year, growing peanuts on 2.5 acres of land fetched an average of about $8000, as against about $1000 for growing rice the previous year.

Moreover, no new bore well has been dug in the project area over the past two years, while the number of such wells in the surrounding area have gone up. In addition to conserving the aquifer, this practice has also prevented the soil and rock from compacting and sinking.

Ramakrishna, a bore well owner, is happy that no new well will come up in the area for the next 10 years. “ Moreover, the underground pipeline network is helping water reach even my rain-fed crops, which was not the case earlier,” he says.

The pilot project has also sought to increase the resilience of farmers to climate change. The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) which uses less water for the cultivation of rice has been introduced, and the climate-resistant local breed of Deccani sheep is being revived. Tank-based fisheries are also being improved.

With the success of this series of 19 pilots, the state government is now mainstreaming some of the innovations. When scaled up, these innovations can benefit nearly 35 million farmers in the rain shadow areas of the state, as well as in other arid and semi-arid regions of the country.

25th March, Thursday
Bhagat Puran Singh Natural Farming Center, Dhirakot , Near Jandiala Guru, Amritsar
Contact person :Mr. Rajbir Singh – 9781401141

26th March, Friday
Hoshiarpur
Contact person : Mr. Madan lal- 9872092162

27th March, Saturday
Village Dhudhike, Dist.Moga Contact person : Chamkaur Singh – 9815069078

28th March, Sunday
Village Chaina, Dist. Faridkot Contact person : Gora Singh – 9465305321

29th March, Monday
Village Bhotna, Dist. Barnala Contact person: Nirmal Singh – 9815280405

30th March, Tuesday
Malerkotla
Contact person: Kuldeep Singh- 9815427989

31st March, Wednesday
Village Mandoli, Dist. Patiala Contact person : Gurmeet Singh – 9814124344

All are cordially invited to join this initiative of KVM for serving the Mother Nature and making our food and agriculture free from pesticides and agro-chemicals.

We, the undersigned, hereby express our grave concern over the recent
press reports that ‘The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill 2009’
is planned to be tabled in the ongoing Budget Session of Parliament
and the UPA government is apparently bent upon rushing it through
without holding fair and transparent public consultations, regardless
of its profound consequences.

A quantum leap in installed capacity for nuclear power generation,
from the current level of 4,120 MW to 63,000 MW by 2032, which you
have committed yourself to, is but an invitation to disaster given the
intrinsically hazardous and potentially catastrophic nature of the
industry. It is necessary to further bear in mind that the health
burden, clean-up and recovery costs for damages arising out of any
nuclear accident are irreversible in consequence and generational in
effect, poisoning not just human beings in the vicinity of a nuclear
plant but the web of life itself through air, water and soil
contamination.

Yet, pretty much shockingly, the nuclear liability bill, approved by
the Union Cabinet in last November, understandably overriding strong
objections even from two nodal ministries, viz. Finance and
Environment, appears to pave the path for the entry of private
enterprises, known to cut corners to maximize profits, not just as
equipment suppliers but also as operators of nuclear power plants.

The nuclear liability bill, as per the reports leaked in the media,
proposes to cap the total liability amount to 3 hundred million
Special Drawing Rights. This works out to just about a paltry US$ 450
million or Rs 2100 crore per accident. We find it inconceivable and
outrageous that any cap, let alone such a meagre one, be placed on the
total liability, regardless of the scale of disaster.

Ironically, the total liability cap amount now being proposed, $450
million, is marginally less than the amount awarded in the Bhopal Gas
case way back in 1989, which was a gross under-assessment of liability
even at that time. Today, more than two decades since, and given that
a major nuclear disaster could very much dwarf the Bhopal disaster,
the proposed nuclear liability cap appears to be truly a slap in the
face of the people of this country. Further, while the supplier of
nuclear equipment would enjoy standard indemnity, the maximum
liability of the operator reportedly would not exceed the ridiculously
low amount of Rs 300 crore or thereabout. In fact, it may even be as
low as Rs 100 crore. This cannot but be considered as a brazen move
towards helping profiteering corporations while penalizing the
unsuspecting Indian people, who have elected you to the office you
hold.

We further draw your attention to the public statement of former
Attorney General of India, Soli Sorabjee, that putting a cap on
nuclear liability violates the very Right to Life as enshrined in
Article 21 of the Constitution.

It is shocking that a bill that compromises the Right to Life is being
pushed through without soliciting the opinion of the people of the
country, whose health and well-being, safety and human rights, and
life, are being put directly in danger.

This is just unacceptable. We strongly condemn any attempt to
introduce any caps whatsoever on nuclear liability and that too
without widespread public debate on the issues involved.

Hence we demand that the contents of the proposed nuclear liability
cap bill be disclosed forthwith to the public.

We further demand that widespread public consultations be held before
any attempt is made to introduce such profound changes in the nuclear
liability regime.

Sincerely,

Undersigned

The BRAI (Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India), still shrouded in secrecy, has a number of most disconcerting provisions that cause profound concerns among all of us who are demanding a democratic debate on the need to bring in genetic engineering technology into the arena of food and farming in India. The Bt Brinjal debate was the first of its kind and offered a glimmer of hope that we, as citizens of this country, can participate in making the decisions on what we grow and eat. But even before this glimmer can grow into a beacon, efforts are afoot to extinguish it by introducing the draconian BRAI Bill.

There is a need to look at the introduction of this Bill in the context of the developments that have taken place in the past week. The most significant is the letter shot off by the Agricultural Minister Mr Sharad Pawar, who has complained that “significant investment had already been made by private and public organisations in developing BT crops and all that would go waste if GM cultivation was banned.” Similar is the argument of the Science and Technology Minister Shri Prithviraj Chavaan, who is reported to have argued that “the moratorium was sending out wrong signals and was stopping investments in Indian agro-technology.”

The other important development is the intervention of the PM’s economic advisory group led by one of our coldest economic thinkers, Dr Rangarajan. This Group has come up with the advise that “After the success of Bt cotton and the benefits it has brought to farmers in Gujarat and Maharashtra, it is imperative that the government must have a clear policy on genetically modified crops,” The council has also urged the government to “……bring the results into the public domain at the shortest possible time”.
The insistence on shortest possible time is significant for the reason that it is symptomatic of a stock market approach and not that of a sound science. Sound science in food, medicine and agriculture always looks at long term impacts of any organism introduced into environment, food and health systems. Short cutting this process can only result in unprecedented harm our environment, health and food systems.

All the above are not isolated, stray remarks or developments. They are very coherent, organized, and orchestrated attempts to push the GE agricultural policy to mutate and morph as an economic argument with scant regard to the issues of citizens’ health and what we grow and eat; nor has there been any concern shown for the natural environment of the country’s farming landscape. The overriding and dominant concern, sadly, is for the economic investment, whatever the cost!

This is a dangerous argument by itself. But the fact that this is being obviously forced by the biotechnology industry and their masters in the USA is scary. The way the Bill is being fashioned is an indication to this distance learning of its framers.

How does BRAI want to treat the environmental citizens of this country who would like to voice their concerns against genetic engineering? Read the following clause in the Bill:
63. Whoever, without any evidence or scientific record misleads the public about the safety of the organisms and products specified in Part I or. Part II or Part III of the Schedule I, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to one year and with fine, which may extend to two lakh rupees or with both.

Reading this, one doesn’t believe that one is living in a democratic country! Are the pressure, clout and power of the multinational agrochemical corporations and their government in the USA so powerful that our government is turning this country into a banana republic? We knew and had heard that in the Latin American countries which were completely dependent upon the USA for their economic survival, such USA-compliant laws were enacted to enforce a complete ban on dissent. But imagine similar laws in India, an emerging Economic Tiger! Just Unbelievable!.

What is the purport of this clause? What kind of evidences are admissible before an environment activist like me or a media person like you are put behind bars for pointing to the dangers of GE foods? The very core of the BRAI mandates the Authority to make a science-based evidence to clear any biotechnology product. The term science based itself is contentious, especially in the context of “modern biotechnology” the cause of which the Bill espouses.

Increasingly, the world over, the problems and limitations of Genetic Engineering are being seen clearly by all reputed world bodies. In the International Assessment on Agricultural Science and Technology for Development [IAASTD], in which over 400 world class scientists participated under the banner of the World Bank, FAO, WHO, UNESCO etc., there was clearly a refusal to endorse genetic engineering as a solution to food security. Last week, the Head of UNDP Ms Helen Clark, who was formerly the Prime Minister of New Zealand, clearly said, “I don’t think GE is the solution to the food security problem. Instead, I recommend more funding for agriculture that emphasizes solutions to the problems faced by poor farmers”.

While this rethinking and soul searching is going on in the civilized sectors of the world, one of the hotheads of the GE industry who is on the payrolls of a major agrochemical company, recently termed the revered scientist Dr P M Bhargava “senile’ for opposing Bt Brinjal. Far more ominous is the fate encountered by the evidences brought by the Centre for Science and Environment [CSE] against the soft drinks Coca Cola and Pepsi. All the diligent research done by the CSE was demolished by the soft drink giants saying that India had no capacity to test their drinks. Similar arguments will be presented by the GE industry by creating a plethora of protocols and procedures if someone challenges them. For them science is what is defined by their market mechanisms. Science is not necessarily truth if it is opposed to them. This is the environment that will confront us tomorrow once the BRAI becomes an Act.

In the BRAI, the people who will decide what organisms can be permitted, imported and field-trialed will be a group of three who will all be composed of scientists in the area of biotechnology or medicine or industrial science. It has no place for environmentalists, farmers or food consumers. Thus, all our rights to decide for ourselves what we farm and what we eat will be snatched away from us. And we cannot go to normal courts to challenge them. The BRAI will set up its own Appellate Tribunal which will have the jurisdiction to hear arguments on the issues concerning biotechnology. If one wants to appeal against the decisions of this Tribunal, the only court we can go to is the Supreme Court of India. Who will have the time, money and energy to go into such lengthy and expensive legal processes? This is the surest way of dis empowering citizen activists of the country.

The list of booby traps embedded in BRAI is long and dark. The only way it can be countered is to say a clear no to it. We don’t want a BRAI for this country. As Minister Jairam Ramesh said, giving the power to determine what we should grow and eat to a body of three persons is anti democracy and anti human rights. Therefore South Against Genetic Engineering calls on the government to quash the Bill even before it is tabled in the Parliament and earn the respect of its citizens while restoring faith that this government respects democracy and the well-being of its citizens.

P. V. Satheesh

National Convener, South Against Genetic Engineering

Director, Deccan Development Society, Hyderabad

Press Release: NAAM Opposes the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill

Kuppan sins but Suppan gets punished! That is exactly how the infamous Civil Nuclear Liability Bill of the UPA government works. According to this legislation, if there was an accident in a nuclear power facility, the onus for paying the damages will be on the operator of the facility and not on the supplier of the equipment or the builder of the facility.

Let us give you an example. Some 18 years ago, on February 27, 1992 (to be exact), a 79-year-old American woman called Stella Liebeck from Albuquerque, New Mexico ordered a cup of coffee from a local McDonald’s restaurant. She had placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the lid to add cream and sugar and in the process spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap. Liebeck suffered third-degree burns and had to be in hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. When McDonald’s turned down Liebeck’s claim of her medical costs, she sued the company for “gross negligence.” The trial took place in August 1994 and the jury concluded that McDonald’s was 80% responsible for the incident and awarded Liebeck US$200,000 in compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages. The judge reduced these amounts a bit and both parties settled out of court for an undisclosed amount less than $600,000. If this case was conducted along the lines of the Indian Civil Nuclear Liability Bill, the local franchisee or the server who served the hot coffee would pay the damages to Liebeck and McDonald’s themselves would go scot free.

A nuclear accident is much more serious and deadly than spilling a cup of coffee. Not just one individual but an entire locality could be wiped out in a nuclear catastrophe. Nevertheless, the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill provides for a cap of Rs 2,400 crores by way of damages in case of a nuclear accident and the Indian government will facilitate compensation through the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL), the operator of the nuclear facilities in the country.

The Indian government’s passing the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill is an important precondition that allows US companies such as General Electric and Westinghouse to seek insurance cover at home. Without the liability law, US firms will not get insurance cover for their projects in India. Other foreign companies such as Areva (France) and Rosatom Corp (Russia) have also been lobbying in New Delhi for this kind of liability bill. Indian companies like Reliance, Tata Power and GMR are also keen on this operator-based liability arrangement.

The Indian government fixes the civil liability at approximately Rs 2,400 crores because the manufacturers insist that liability cannot be impractically high. But the anti-nuclear activists, citing the tragic Bhopal experiences, point out the lack of criminal liability in the Bill and argue that the liability clause is not stringent enough.

While the foreign and Indian companies will make profits from their nuclear commerce, the NPCIL, a state-run and public-funded agency will become the guarantor of compensation in case of liabilities. In other words, the affected parties (the Indian public in this case) will pay compensation to themselves with their own monies and the profiteering capitalists will go scot free with their interests intact. What an ingenious plan!?

This legislation on liability will facilitate foreign nuclear companies’ investment in India, and will also necessitate suitable amendment to the Atomic Energy Act 1962 that will allow private entry into nuclear business. This civil nuclear liability regime would pave the way for India joining the international convention, and the amended Atomic Energy Act would facilitate Indian companies’ entry into nuclear commerce.

The dangerous combination of secretive state, profiteering companies and careerist nuclear scientists will not be in the best interests of the Indian public. Like the Bhopal victims who are running from pillar to post even after 25 years of the worst industrial disaster, they will be out on the street with radiation illnesses in a radioactive bodypolitik.
The UPA government that gave a nod to the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill back in November 2009 is planning to push the Bill in the ongoing Winter Session of the Parliament. The Prime Minister has even sought the backing of the opposition BJP as his ruling combine does not have the sufficient votes in the Rajya Sabha.

NAAM and its constituents should do everything possible to resist this evil design that seeks to protect the interests of the rich and powerful while leaving the Indian citizens high and dry on the nuclear highway.

Last day, we had a trip to amazing place in Delhi namely, Okhla Landfill near Tuglakabad fort, the emerging mountain range of Delhi. It is the smallest landfill site in Delhi with an area of 50 acres. The beauty of the region cannot be explained in words. A young fold hill rising from the ground surface, here geomorphological or geological processes are not contributing in this noble cause. But the domestic activities at our homes and construction sites are fulfilling the absence of geo-processes. The site has a very fragile ecology, we need to conserve it. The biodiversity is also emerging, crows flying in the sky, grass and other plants growing around, cows and dogs moving around satisfy the criteria of rich biodiversity. This hill started emerging in 1995, but the load is more than its capacity. Everyday more than 1150 M.T. is contributed to increase the height and make it a mountain. Even this place also fulfills the eligibility for a volcano too, as gases are fuming out. Even one can find the beautiful black streams emerging, which makes it similar to young fold mountains of Himalayas. My mental condition was similar to William Wordsworth when he was looking at Daffodils. We had a nice trek there. My friends wanted to have a proper picnic; some were in the favor of camping and camp fire. I had the same feeling which Edmund Hillary had while capturing the Mount Everest. This place needs heritage status too. I request all the organizations to come forward and help us in making it a complete mountain range similar to Andes and Himalayas. My appeal to all citizens of India is to make India proud, by creating these types of mountain and plateau ranges in every city, town and village.

Forward this message to every enlightened Indian. We need your support. Issued in public interest by Garbage Mountain Preservation Campaign, New Delhi.

Revered Citizens of India,
I am mother of one sixth of humanity, But now a stigma on my own sons. My own sons are raping me for their own prosperity and development. I want to tell you what is my story and what are my ideas while sitting on the death bed.

My story starts from a myth and a reality. My sons believe that I came from heaven while scientists say that I have originated from the glaciers of Himalayas. I believe in both. My father is Himalaya and I originate from Yamunotari glacier, now in state of Uttarakhand. My birth was considered as the end of vows of Aryan civilization. The oldest civilization started flourishing on my banks and sister Ganges also supported this cause. World’s greatest religion was founded in my territory. The Godly men like Sri Krishna played in my lap, Hazarat Nizamudin the follower of last Prophet spread the message of peace in front of my eyes, Sahib-e-Kamal Guru Gobind Singh composed divine poems in my company. The mighty rulers came to conquer the lands of mine. My children fought well, many were martyred but they never surrendered. I am the symbol of their courage and spirit of freedom. When Britishers took off the city residing my side, I felt a little bit discouraged. Blood was shed but Alas! Peace came. They gave my daughter Delhi same status which she had before. I felt satisfied.

At the mighty night on 14th August, 1947 my sons claimed independence. The first Prime Minister of India removed the flag of slavery from Red Fort and displayed the flag of sovereignty. My eyes were full of tears and my heart was filled with happiness. I felt proud of my sons.

My hopes started shattering with the rise of India. I saw the development happening; my soul started questioning the inhuman face of ongoing progress. My own sons started encroaching my hands, somewhere they constructed huge dams to suck my blood, I said nothing instead felt proud with the idea that I am serving my sons. On the door of my daughter Delhi, Wazirabad I was again captured. The water from my body was satisfying the thirst of capital. My heart was delighted with this. While I was welcomed by Najafgarh drain in the entrance, I made the cancerous water part of my pure blood. After this episode I didn’t stop many other drains were thrown in me forcibly. The cities like Agra, Vrindavan, Mathura and Allahabad instead of protesting started competing with Delhi. I felt betrayed.

Today, when more than 60 years of independence have been completed, I am dying. On the death bed only sometimes my lips start moving. I start laughing on my sons. On one side they are raping me and my sisters, their own mothers. While on the other hand, they are fighting for the temple of Rama in Ayodhya, burned whole of Gujarat and Mumbai for that, this seems to me very contradictory. I am their mother existing in this world serving them, instead of fighting for my cause. They are killing thousands of innocent people for a person whose mere existence has been questioned by many intellectuals. Now the Amarnath issue, my sons are the foolish people I have seen in the world. For a mere piece of land they have placed heaven of earth on fire. The lands of me and my sisters, their mothers with whose pure milk they have flourished are being encroached. They themselves celebrating the encroachment and fighting for God, about whose existence nobody is sure.

Shame on me and my sons.

Mother of 115 crores of shameless people.

Yamuna

Good morning. It’s an honor to for me to join this distinguished group of leaders from nations around the world. We come together here in Copenhagen because climate change poses a grave and growing danger to our people. You would not be here unless you – like me – were convinced that this danger is real. This is not fiction, this is science. Unchecked, climate change will pose unacceptable risks to our security, our economies, and our planet. That much we know.

So the question before us is no longer the nature of the challenge – the question is our capacity to meet it. For while the reality of climate change is not in doubt, our ability to take collective action hangs in the balance.

I believe that we can act boldly, and decisively, in the face of this common threat. And that is why I have come here today.

As the world’s largest economy and the world’s second largest emitter, America bears our share of responsibility in addressing climate change, and we intend to meet that responsibility. That is why we have renewed our leadership within international climate negotiations, and worked with other nations to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. And that is why we have taken bold action at home – by making historic investments in renewable energy; by putting our people to work increasing efficiency in our homes and buildings; and by pursuing comprehensive legislation to transform to a clean energy economy.

These actions are ambitious, and we are taking them not simply to meet our global responsibilities. We are convinced that changing the way that we produce and use energy is essential to America’s economic future – that it will create millions of new jobs, power new industry, keep us competitive, and spark new innovation. And we are convinced that changing the way we use energy is essential to America’s national security, because it will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and help us deal with some of the dangers posed by climate change.

So America is going to continue on this course of action no matter what happens in Copenhagen. But we will all be stronger and safer and more secure if we act together. That is why it is in our mutual interest to achieve a global accord in which we agree to take certain steps, and to hold each other accountable for our commitments.

After months of talk, and two weeks of negotiations, I believe that the pieces of that accord are now clear.

First, all major economies must put forward decisive national actions that will reduce their emissions, and begin to turn the corner on climate change. I’m pleased that many of us have already done so, and I’m confident that America will fulfill the commitments that we have made: cutting our emissions in the range of 17 percent by 2020, and by more than 80 percent by 2050 in line with final legislation.

Second, we must have a mechanism to review whether we are keeping our commitments, and to exchange this information in a transparent manner. These measures need not be intrusive, or infringe upon sovereignty. They must, however, ensure that an accord is credible, and that we are living up to our obligations. For without such accountability, any agreement would be empty words on a page.

Third, we must have financing that helps developing countries adapt, particularly the least-developed and most vulnerable to climate change. America will be a part of fast-start funding that will ramp up to $10 billion in 2012. And, yesterday, Secretary Clinton made it clear that we will engage in a global effort to mobilize $100 billion in financing by 2020, if – and only if – it is part of the broader accord that I have just described.

Mitigation. Transparency. And financing. It is a clear formula – one that embraces the principle of common but differentiated responses and respective capabilities. And it adds up to a significant accord – one that takes us farther than we have ever gone before as an international community.

The question is whether we will move forward together, or split apart. This is not a perfect agreement, and no country would get everything that it wants. There are those developing countries that want aid with no strings attached, and who think that the most advanced nations should pay a higher price. And there are those advanced nations who think that developing countries cannot absorb this assistance, or that the world’s fastest-growing emitters should bear a greater share of the burden.

We know the fault lines because we’ve been imprisoned by them for years. But here is the bottom line: we can embrace this accord, take a substantial step forward, and continue to refine it and build upon its foundation. We can do that, and everyone who is in this room will be a part of an historic endeavor – one that makes life better for our children and grandchildren.

Or we can again choose delay, falling back into the same divisions that have stood in the way of action for years. And we will be back having the same stale arguments month after month, year after year – all while the danger of climate change grows until it is irreversible.

There is no time to waste. America has made our choice. We have charted our course, we have made our commitments, and we will do what we say. Now, I believe that it’s time for the nations and people of the world to come together behind a common purpose.

We must choose action over inaction; the future over the past – with courage and faith, let us meet our responsibility to our people, and to the future of our planet.

Thank you.

The hearing, organized by Oxfam International and Action for a Global Climate Community , was designed to put climate change victims-those whom climate change affects the most yet who have contributed least to the problem-at the center of the climate debate, according to Oxfam Executive Director Jeremy Hobbs.

The concept of “climate justice” is widespread in the negotiation rooms, side events, and rallies at the ongoing international climate talks in the Danish capital.

“Fourteen percent of the world population has produced 60 percent of the world’s carbon emissions since 1850,” said Mary Robinson, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, at the hearing. “The poorest have the least role in causing climate change yet they are being hit first, hardest, and worst.”

Wealthy nations have proposed distributing $100 billion in climate aid annually by 2020 to the most vulnerable nations affected by climate change. U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton announced Thursday that the United States would help raise public and private funds for the effort.

Ethiopian President Meles Zenawi proposed on Wednesday that poorer nations receive $50 billion each year in immediate climate funding, with the aid increasing to $100 billion annually by 2020. Other African leaders have criticized the proposal as insufficient.

Pelenise Olafa, a community leader from the island nation of Kiribati, called for additional support for the South Pacific islands, where the highest land area is less than four meters above sea level. “We are on the frontline and may be the first countries to go down,” Olafa said. “Don’t we understand that climate change is not negotiable? It is a matter of life and death.”

Shorbanu Khatun, a single mother of four from Bangladesh, described the loss of her husband and home as a result of rising sea levels, increased ground salinity, and the onslaught of Cyclone Isla. She and her children have lived hand to mouth during the decade since their home was lost to the sea.

“We have lost everything,” Khatun said. “We used to think that God was punishing us, but I have come to know that climate change is manmade. I have come to you to seek justice and compensation. I want my life back.”

Climate impacts are being observed in the mountain regions of South America as well. Cayetano Huanca, a farmer from Peru’s Ocongate district, described new emerging diseases in his homeland. “The weather seasons have changed completely and are affecting our culture, cattle herding, and the life of human beings,” Huanca said, noting that crop failures, glacial melt, and large temperature swings are becoming more regular. “We the indigenous people will not pay for the consequences. Are we guilty?”

Constance Okollet, a farmer from Uganda, described the devastating drought, flooding, and disease that has occurred in her village of Tororo since 2007. “We want our seasons back. We want our generations. Children and old people are dying. We want them to stop the emissions because we are suffering and dying as a result of them. We want money to adapt with the changes of climate because we are dying,” she said.

“All of us are seeking to be heard,” said Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, who oversaw the session. “People who are living on the frontline of climate change…are the ones that must be listened to more than anyone else. They are the voices that must be heard…heeded…and acted upon.”

Most of the individuals currently suffering from the impacts of climate change have not taken legal action to collect repayment for damages done.

However, on Wednesday the International Court for the Environment Coalition, a campaign run by “lawyers and environmentalists throughout the world,” announced plans to create an International Court for the Environment where victims of climate-related human rights violations could air their grievances, said Philip Riches, the coalition’s director.

At the conclusion of the testimonies, Commissioner Robinson delivered her verdict, observing that climate change is a “deep and global injustice” that is “undermining human rights on an unprecedented scale.”

Archbishop Tutu closed the session with words of caution: “We are here to tell the leaders of the world we have one Earth home. If it is destroyed, there is no other. And we are in it together. We are going to swim or drown together. We are interconnected. We are bound together. If one slips down inexorably, he or she brings down the whole lot. We are here to call for action.”

Worldwatch Staff Writer Ben Block contributed to this report.

Cross-posted from Eye on Earth, Worldwatch Institute

In light of the recent developments at Copenhagen, the Indian Youth Climate Network, on behalf of the youth of India would like to call to your attention their point of view. We represent a country that houses a large proportion of the poor in the world. The COP in Copenhagen rests on a lot of expectations especially from the people in the most backward and vulnerable parts of the world.
We all believe that the talks in Copenhagen can lead to positive and productive structural change in climate change mitigation and adaptation. We expect the UN negotiations to be impartial, democratic and just. But yesterday’s events belie these expectations given the way the peaceful protesters were beaten up. The fact that The Danish government did not allow majority of the participants entry into the main venue Bella Center also shows poorly on the entire negotiation process. From the way the developed nations have been trying these arm twisting tactics it looks like they are not ready to take the tough path of real emission reductions.

We and everyone in the developing world feels highly disappointed with the un-democratic process in which the negotiations are proceeding. We feel betrayed by the exclusion of civil society from the talks, why were only 90 representatives of Civil Society organizations allowed inside when thousands have been registered?

When the future of the mankind is at stake why are the leaders busy bargaining, excluding, marginalizing, and suppressing the voices of the poor? We, the future, want a climate deal which is fair, ambitious and binding based on true participatory democratic principles that include the interests of last person in the room.

The need of the hour is real leadership to avert a global crisis. The world is looking at both the developed as well as developing countries specially the US, UK, Canada, China and India. Going by the events at Copenhagen, the important question is who to call on to lead and who will be blamed if they fail to lead?
Low level of ambition exhibited by the Annexe 1 countries particular in US and the lack of flexibility on important issues of achievable targets and finance for mitigation and adaptation as well as GHG reduction is worrisome. It looks like the fossil fuel lobby has undermined the whole process.

The deadlock on the softening of the Intellectual Property regime for the benefit of the poor and developing countries is an example of corporate interests sabotaging the climate deal and our future. The future of the coming generations should not be vulnerable to the lobbying by the corporate houses of the world. We would like to register our disappointment and protest ever of lack of political will exhibited by developed world.

With deep regards
Indian Youth Climate Network

Yesterday was a lucky day for me at the Bella Center. I met Push or ‘Pushpanath Krishnamurthy’ who has walked all the way from his home at Oxford in the UK to the UN Climate Summit in Copenhagen, to show his solidarity and support to the cause of climate change. I was fortunate enough to spend some time with him and interview him. I am sharing a brief version of the interview here.

Q. What do you do and how did this idea come to you?

I am Climate Change Campaigner with Oxfam and I strongly believe that this is the time to act and do something about climate change. I was willing to do a direct action and realized that a walk is the most carbon neutral thing one can do. And here I am! It took me about 2o days to reach here and I have thoroughly enjoyed this adventure.

Q. Why ‘climate change’?

Well, during my visit to India, Bangladesh, Indonesia and a couple of African countries, I witnessed the number of ecological problems that climate change has caused. In the coastal areas of Andhra Pradesh and Kerela in India, the rise in sea levels has made the agricultural land brackish and as a consequence, farmers have started shrimp farming which has a lot of bad side effects. Even the paddy cultivation is completely under threat and as you know, we have been witnessing a growing number of farmer suicides in the past few years. The African countries have caused the least problems but are among the first, worst and hardest hit.

Q. What inspires you to work for climate change?

I am a Gandhian follower and believe that the spirit of standing up when you something unjust happening is the most noble thing to do.

Q. Tell us something about how you planned your trip, how did you gather support and what were the problems that you faced?

I contacted a few colleagues at Oxfam and some friends from India. Since I am not much familiar with using computers, one of my friends helped plan my trip. I got a lot of support from my wife and children, who are also here with me. They too walked a few legs of the journey with me. I began my journey on Nov. 16th from Oxford along with David Bryer (ex-Director of Oxfam) and a musician. I reached Harwich (140 miles from Oxford) on Nov. 27th , took a ferry, landed on Esberg (on the coast of Denmark) and walked another 16 days to reach Copenhagen on Dec 13th. On the way, I was carrying no food with me to express solidarity with hundreds of people, who have been affected by drought and floods, and I was eating only when I was offered a meal from local people.

Q. Would you like to tell us something else and do you have a message for the youth?

I would like all of you to visit my website www.gopushgo.com. Another thing I forgot to mention was that my brother, Krishna Raga, recently released a music album “Earth Depressed”, dedicated to environment. As far as a message is concerned, I am really glad that the youth are raising their voice here and I hope that my campaign will help contribute to the global movement against climate change.

GM crops are created by the unnatural insertion of foreign genes into host DNA of a plant, which leads to numerous unpredictable changes that are potentially dangerous for health. There are a host of other concerns too, centred around this technology and its deployment in our food and farming systems. Bt Brinjal has been artificially created by insertion of a bacterial gene (Bacillus thuringiensis-Bt ) to produce a toxin 24X7 inside the plant to target one pest-the Brinjal Fruit & Shoot Borer (it has to be noted that while many pests and diseases attack the crop, this technology is claimed as a solution to one such pest).

All the decision-making on Bt Brinjal happened based on the crop-developer’s (i.e. Monsanto/Mahyco’s) data, without any independent and long term studies. What’s more, independent analyses of the crop developer’s biosafety data concluded that this Bt Brinjal is unsafe and unfit for human consumption.

On the other hand, a majority of Indians are still not aware of fundamental changes being made to their food, their right to know what they are eating and to be able to make informed choices is at stake here. They would also not be able to distinguish between GM and non-GM foods because they will look the same.

It is in this context that a Lok Chetna Padayatra is being proposed. This padayatra, i.e, journey on foot, is a collaborative effort of Zakir Hussain College and Youth for Safe Food. The main purpose of the walk is to create an informed debate on the issue of GM (Genetically Modified) foods, for the sake of ordinary citizens of India, to enable them to make informed and democratic choices about their food. This is to invite you to join us in large numbers in this Padayatra.

Padayatra beginning point: Zakir Hussain College
Date: December 17, 2009; Time: 9.30 am

Contacts:
Nayani Nasa – +91-9999-778-674
Ankit Kumar – +919313-537-417

1. Adaptation funding should be separate from and in addition to existing Official
Development Assistance (ODA) commitments and commensurate with the immense scale
of developed countries’ historical contributions to this global crisis.

2. The amount of funding available for adaptation must be sufficient: In excess of 100
billion USD per year, and increasing as necessary.

3. Adaptation must be allocated in a manner that gives priority to those most vulnerable to
the impacts of climate change: least developed countries (LDCs), small island developing
States (SIDS), and countries affected by drought, desertification and floods. The projects
should ensure the involvement of youth, women, indigenous communities and those
living in poverty.

4. Funding should be allocated through an accessible, consistent, and transparent international mechanism that is accountable to the UNFCCC.

5. Adaptation projects should take into consideration that fully-functioning ecosystems play a vital role in maintaining resilience to climate change.

Desmond Tutu presenting the Petition to Yvo de Boer

Leading the crowd in calling “NO to the injustice of climate change,” he stated the position of non-annex 1 countries simply and sweetly: “Ok, Ok, we [non-annex 1] want to develop. But we don’t want to develop the way in which you [Annex 1] developed, causing the ozone layer to thin, causing droughts, causing floods… but it will cost a little money.”

With comedy and poignancy, Reverend Tutu touched on the amazing disparities in the pledges of support made by Annex 1 nations, and their expenditures in other arenas. While Annex 1 nations have forwarded a draft text that pledges 2 billion dollars of money to the adaptation fund, “just think of the billions and billions that is being spent on arms… the billions they are paying to destroy their brothers and sisters.”

Reminding us that we are on the winning side, that we have Right on our side, that we have Justice on our side, and that God is on our side, Reverend Tutu expressed our campaign as a prayer to God, us saying “Come on God, Do something! Well God says ‘Yea, I will do something, and I will have all of you be my partners, working with me, to make this a better world.’”

“You and I are going to make this world a better place for all of us… We are sisters and brothers, we belong to one family, the human family.”

Reverend Tutu expressed that God must be happy with us in Copenhagen: here are people finally doing something good!

The contents of the petition requires developed nations to reduce their emissions by 40% on 1990 levels by year 2050, limit temperature rise worldwide to a maximum of 2 degrees celsius, and all nations to create a legally binding framework in Copenhagen, at the COP15.

Concluding his speech, Desmond Tutu called out to politions to join the winning side, and make this world a place of joy, laughter, without hunger and poverty. After all, he pointed out, if we loose, there is no survival for any of us!

After his speech, Desmond Tutu was met by Yvo de Boer onstage, to deliver the 512894 signatures on the “Countdown to Copenhagen: Time for Climate Justice” petition to him.

“On behalf of all of the people of the world, on behalf of all of these wonderful people, we say, this is the number of people who signed, and say they know you are a smart man. You are, aren’t you? Well you persuade them to be sensible like you.”

In his acknowledgement speech, Yvo de Boer said that 40% on 1990 levels was a little too modest, that he believed that 80% was achievable. Pragmatically, he then adressed the crowd, telling us that if this is to happen, we need to make our polititions know that it is what we want, we need to make it ourselves.

The function was followed by a live concert by Outlandish. I’ve never heard of them before, and though I’m not a fan yet, I would like to hear more of their music.

“President Obama’s hands are not tied by Congress’s lack of action or the grossly inadequate cap-and-trade bills currently under debate. President Obama can lead, rather than follow, by using his power under the Clean Air Act and other laws to achieve deep and rapid greenhouse emissions reductions from major polluters. Obama can use his authority to make a binding agreement in Copenhagen without additional action from Congress. The Constitution and existing domestic environmental laws give President Obama all the power he needs to join with other nations in making a real commitment to solve the climate crisis.” said attorney Kevin Bundy (from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD)’s Climate Law Institute), the lead author of a report released at a side-event in COP15 on Tuesday, December 8th.

The report, titled “Yes, He Can: President Obama’s Power to Make an International Climate Commitment Without Waiting for Congress”, concludes that the President need not wait for Congress to act before taking strong action to reduce U.S. emissions and that he can SEAL THE DEAL without the 66 votes.

Going to back to the time of Clinton and Gore, the senators had declared the accord “dead on arrival” and this is exactly the fear that, intentionally or unintentionally, is trying to be created. In this light, the report by the CBD is a breakthrough and proves that US can indeed sign a legally binding deal in Copenhagen itself.

The figure is given in a New York Times feature, quoting Brazil’s lead climate negotiator, Luiz Alberto Figueiredo Machado:

“The level of ambition in funding is not matching up to the sense of urgency everyone now has (…) an inadequate level of financing (is) a deal breaker for us.”

The fund is set up to receive two types of income. One is voluntary contributions from rich countries – these have been scarce so far – and the other is a two percent tax on carbon credits sold under UN-backed schemes such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). The tax was estimated to generate at least 1.6 billion US dollars by 2012, but revenues have so far been low due to bottlenecks in the CDM administration.

Connie Hedegaard, Danish Minister for Climate and Energy and host of the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen this December, recently suggested new taxes on shipping fuel or on airline flights as alternative ways of generating income for the fund.

However, the developing world is “increasingly sceptical, having witnessed the way past promises evaporated when the economy soured”, the New York Times notes, again quoting Brazil’s Luiz Alberto Figueiredo Machado:

“Developing countries are not convinced that the market will find them the 100 billion US dollars they need. They want guarantees.”

Second Place: Germany

Climate finance from Germany’s side can only be expected if the country’s expenses are cut down on other development funds. That is the country’s development minister’s stand at least. This means that Germany fails to make clear that climate funds should be additional to already existing aid funds.

Third Place: New Zealand

“I am not focused on increasing New Zealand’s target. What I am focused on is going to Copenhagen and making sure that New Zealand can successfully negotiate the conditions that we think are important in order for us to achieve a target of 10 to 20 percent. If we do not negotiate those conditions, we will not be able to achieve a target of 10 to 20 percent and we would have to have a lower target. …If New Zealand were to achieve a target of 10 percent less, that would be a significant milestone.” (NZ Prime Minister, John Key)

Though I have lost in understanding the process of COP 15 functioning, still I tried to make my own calendar of events where I can associate myself in the next couple of weeks. And, I am sure that really helping me a lot.

Attended “welcoming ceremony” with lots of excitement and with butterflies in the stomach with the song “Hey I am in United Nation Conference”. Followed by the welcoming ceremony I attended Conference of parties’ framework (COP) and Conference of the parties serving as the meeting of the parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP). But, fortunately I got a call from my stomach that I am hungry. Searched for food and finally landed up by paying 23DKK to get Burger and Fish. Had good food and good chat with Roslyin 350.org about my research.

After lunch I tracked Ad Hoc working group on Long Term Co-Operative Action under the convention (AWG-LCA) where I understood not really much but still observed the representation of different countries and learned how to use the headphone and turn the radio in to our language of interest.

Evening, I had a little discussion with Suren to set up Base camp along with Nistha and fulfilled the request asked by Caroline to send one page write up for Base Camp. After that went to Rock concert and had a great time with “Shaggy” and reached absalon campaign with Algerian Youth and learned their culture in metro and went to bed with peace.

Saleem Khan
IYD-IYCN