T N Ninan: The Elwin question again

Twenty-five years ago, Kalahandi in Orissa (as it was then) provoked national outrage following reports of deaths from starvation. Now as then, Odisha is the country's poorest state, and Kalahandi and neighbouring Rayagada its poorest districts. Then, you could travel from one wretched hamlet to another, and meet people surviving on roots and leaves. The development arm of the state was not to be seen. Today, in the Lanjigarh area straddling the two districts, local Kondh tribals and Dalits still seem desperately poor; barefoot women cover their bodies with a single piece of cloth.

Probe a little and it turns out that some of them own up to 30 acres of land; most have bank accounts - to get paid for work under the rural unemployment guarantee programme. The overwhelming majority also have "Below Poverty Line" (or BPL) cards, which gets them government rice at a rupee a kg. Every hamlet has a home or two being rebuilt, with brick walls and tiled roofs - financed under the Indira Awaas Yojana, which gives Rs 75,000 to each beneficiary. Though wages rule at half the stipulated minimum, the rudimentary safety net provided by an "entitlement state" is everywhere visible, and the tribals say they will vote the Congress - Rahul Gandhi has visited twice and is leading their fight against bauxite mining at the top of the Niyam Dangar hill, whose giant massif dominates the skyline.

There is little chance of any mining taking place; asked by the Supreme Court, every village council in the area has said it does not want mining to happen. The tribal god, Niyam Raja, is said to live on top of Niyam Dangar and the tribals say they trek up once a year to offer sacrifices and conduct animist rites. There is no particular place or house of worship on the mountaintop, so this is not another Babri Masjid. The case, therefore, raises some curious issues (besides a lot of emotion). When no one is to either be displaced or have his/her land acquired, what say do the tribals have in the matter of a mining lease? The Supreme Court has asked whether mining will disturb the tribals' religious observances; but such observances have no protection in the law governing the rights of forest people. If disturbing the status quo is illegal, it could stop almost all mining activity.

Vedanta Aluminium, which wants the bauxite for its local alumina refinery, is evil incarnate in the eyes of the NGOs that have organised the Kondh tribals. Some say the science fiction wonder-film Avatar is an allegory on the fight at Lanjigarh, though there is no evidence one can find in support. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has ordered that Vedanta set apart five per cent of profits, subject to a minimum, to improve local livelihoods. The money has helped provide tarred roads, electricity lines, water supply, a school and a hospital. Vedanta says it has put more money into local development in the last five years than the government has in 65. It isn't hard to believe - but a school and day care centre up the hillside have been abandoned after Maoists attacked company vehicles.

Vedanta is sinking Rs 50,000 crore into two separate but related projects in the general area. It is mineral-rich Odisha's largest investment in 30 years, and the stakes couldn't be higher - for the company and the state government (which will get thousands of crores of rupees annually as royalty, cess and taxes). That should be manna for a poor state - to finance schools, hospitals and proper housing, and create jobs. But what about the tribals? Lanjigarh is pristine in its unspoilt beauty, and the Kondhs live on wooded slopes that provide them with their needs. The gentle breeze and cool streams evoke Arundhati Roy's memorable "seven-star" phrasing. Why would the Kondhs want an ugly mine to scar the hilltop where they commune with their god, and disrupt the rhythm of lives lived with nature? At the end it is economics vs Verrier Elwin's "philanthropology", mineral wealth vs sustenance lifestyles, the law or activism … in essence, "progress" vs "savaging the civilised". But is keeping poor tribal women clothed in a single piece of cloth for another 25 years anyone's idea of a desirable future?