=============================================================================
FREE FORESTS FOR DEVELOPED COUNTRIES (FFDC)
by Bittu Sahgal
More than 250 people attended the First Ministerial Conference of the Forestry
Forum for Developing Countries (FFDC) at New Delhi, between September 1 and 3,
1993. By any measure the meeting was a high level affair, with India's Prime
Minister, President, Vice-President, Finance Minister, Environment Minister,
Minister of Information and Broadcasting and Minister of Wastelands in
attendance. The author explains why, at a time when the subject of
environment is being given the go by in government circles, so many eagles
landed in New Delhi.
You know that dream? The one where a train comes hurtling down at you and
your legs refuse to carry you out of harm's way? That was precisely the way I
felt for my country as I sat for three long and troubled days through the
FFDC. While blaming poverty for being the greatest pollutant, delegates to the
conference ignored their own role in the destruction of the forests they has
ostensibly come to New Delhi to save.
The conference was a gala UN affair, with endless supplies of bottled mineral
water, folk dances, air-conditioned five-star hotel comforts, platitudes,
sumptuous food and triple helpings of double talk on issues of sustainable
development. A follow up on the equally fatuous Earth Summit, the FFDC was,
in the words of an unnamed External Affairs bureaucrat, "A step closer to
India assuming a position at the apex of Third World leadership." Wonderful!
As a follow up to the Earth Summit, one might have reasonably hoped that the
idea was to take a step closer to saving the biodiversity of the world's
forests, but that would be unthinkably naive.
Officials from the Ministry of Environment were, of course, particularly
delighted that the Finance Minister of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh and the Prime
Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao, were present at the FFDC. But we should save the
celebrations for another day. In truth, neither is unduly concerned about the
fate of tropical forests. They were at the FFDC to partake of the forest
booty in the global-forest-free-for-all declared by the World Bank, the UN
Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), UNDP, the Asian Development Bank
(ADB) and the International Tropical Timber Organisation (ITTO).
At the FFDC, in this the Year of the Indigenous People, the voice of the much
talked about but little respected tribal people was unheard. Though women's
groups were present, they were not given a chance to speak. As for welfare
groups working for children, they were conspicuous by their absence.
The seeds of destruction
As the FFDC conference wore on the magnitude of the disaster that awaited the
forests of India and the rest of the Third World began to be revealed. Those
of us working on the entwined issues of forest conservation and human rights
already knew that several states in India had begun opt for World Bank
sponsored monocultures on common lands. But the magnitude of what was being
proposed at the FFDC put all past programmes to shame. The key players here
were the FAO and the World Bank. The former offered `expert advice' on
monoculture forestry and the latter financed the projects. Between them they
seem to have mesmerised the bureaucracy and political systems of the Third
World. Worse, using thinly disguised bribes, clothed in the garb of
consultancies, they had also managed to co-opt a vast array of
Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs) and `experts' many of whom were now
towing the World Bank line with embarrassing alacrity after opposing such
ideas for years.
To understand the true nature of the threat -- and the sell out -- we need to
travel back to the year 1985 when the FAO and the World Bank sprung their $8
billion Tropical Forestry Action Plan (TFAP) on an unsuspecting world. They
said it was to be an "emergency action plan to arrest deforestation."
Initially most environmentalists welcomed the TFAP, believing that the
importance of conserving forests had finally been recognised. In time,
however, it came to be recognised that the TFAP was little more than a
proposal to open dense forests to commercial logging, industrial plantations
and land diversion for mega-projects. Nowhere in the TFAP was there a
recognition of the rights of indigenous people to their lands or resources,
nor was there any real admission of the ecological role of forests in soil and
moisture conservation and climate control. On the contrary, tribals became
the target of FAO/World Bank project contractors and loggers who killed
several thousand forest dwellers around the world for the crime of opposing
the destruction of their forests.
In any event, the TFAP soon became an adjunct to the FAO whose policies had
always been, and still are, inimical to those of forest conservation. The
means used to win over decision makers in tropical-timber-rich countries was
diabolically straightforward. Politicians were the first target. They were
push-overs, since mega-projects and logging operations delivered millions of
dollars into their ever-waiting hands. Senior bureaucrats were the next
target. Few governments looked after these long-serving officers after
retirement, so the FAO and the World Bank began to make it clear to those who
had a couple of years of service left that very, very lucrative consultancies
-- house rents, cars, foreign travel, huge UN salaries -- were available `to
the right people'. They fell like nine-pins (still do). Scientists and other
`experts' were the third target. As a rule these normally introverted people
are under-valued and mistreated by their own governments. The consultancy-
cum-recognition formula was applied to them and very soon hundreds of experts,
including some who had spent lifetimes studying and protecting biodiversity,
were singing praises of monocultures, large dams, highway projects through
rain forests and mines.
The FAO's litany of disasters
How I wish the above accusations were the empty rhetoric of a disgruntled
bunch of malcontents. If that were true, the devastation I describe below
would never have taken place. Read on to discover how carefully woven natural
webs were tattered.
In Cameroon the FAO promoted a 600 kms. highway from the Atlantic to the
Yokaduma forests to access timber for export by multinational companies who
would open up more than 14 million hectares of primary forest. In the Ivory
Coast a joint World Bank-FAO mission advocated that as much as 700,000
hectares of primary forests be opened up to commercial logging in concert with
the UK Commonwealth Development Corporation and the Canadian Aid Agency
(CIDA). In Guyana it proposed that natural forests be replaced by `more
productive' species and planned massive infrastructure. Ultimately the
various project costs planned by the FAO led Guyana deep into debt and did
little for the people. In Peru the FAO proposed through the TFAP that logging
be increased by over 500 per cent by the turn of the century. In the
Philippines, where a mere three per cent of primary forest remained, FAO
`experts' advocated that timber companies be permitted to `self-regulate'
their logging! In Ghana, a country whose ecological foundations have been
shaken by World Bank and IMF policies, the FAO still advocates an annual
extraction of 1.1 million cubic feet.
Jack Westoby, an ex-FAO Senior Director of Forestry aptly described FAO's
commercial forestry projects as "the kind that could pass through the eye of
the World Bank's needle and into the heaven of implementation." And why do
they continue to push for logging and monocultures in the face of overwhelming
evidence that they spell ecological disaster for tropical countries? In
Westoby's words: "the FAO's global studies had shown beyond a shadow of doubt
that rising affluence in Europe, North America and Japan would require an
increasing flow of timber from the underdeveloped world and that the foreign
exchange these exports would generate could not but help the credit worthiness
of the underdeveloped exporting countries."
Following sustained criticism by the NGO community, a review was called of the
FAO's forest policies. Nothing substantial emerged, save for the fact that
the TFAP was now to be "country-driven and process-oriented." Also that the
Tropical Forestry Action Plan be changed to the Tropical Forestry Action
Programme. As for the rest, it was business as usual. India was protected
from such policies all these years because Mrs. Indira Gandhi was convinced
that wanted logging of primary forests was not in our national interest. She,
in fact, went so far as to ban all logging (though we still import logs from
the adjoining forests of Malaysia!). With her death, the rot set in. With
Rajiv Gandhi's death the die was cast. Today the impression given by the
Prime Minister's Office is that conserving forests is little more than a
convenient ploy of developed world to use our nation as a carbon sink... and
to keep us backward. Neither the ruling party, nor opposition parties such as
the BJP even remotely accept that forests are valuable as a means to ensure
our water security, ecological food security, or that they have been the fount
of our rich cultural origins.
The World Bank-FAO-UNDP-ADB hawks, smelling blood, have been descending on New
Delhi in droves over the past two years. Together with the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) this consortium has been able to coerce our government to
make more than 100 key appointments in various ministries, including the
Ministry of Finance. With the help of these insiders (remember the Trojan
Horse?) our defences continue to be breached and the nation left open to
assault.
This modus operandi has worked in every imaginable country including the
Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Nepal, Sri Lanka and, of course, the host of
African and Latin American nations whose ecological roots are now in an
advanced stage of decay. Little wonder that, with venality the order of the
day in Indian politics, the TFAP virus is now taking over the states of West
Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Uttar
Pradesh, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Orissa. If the monster is not curbed now, if
peoples' movements do not recognise the threat to their commons and thus to
self-sufficiency, the TFAP cancer will strike at the nation's vitals within
the next five years. At this point fighting the IMF/World Bank which will
collectively hold the food security of India to ransom, will become a pipe
dream.
Ignorance or avarice?
If I were to be charitable I would say that the diplomats and representatives
of Third World Governments assembled at New Delhi on September 1, 1993, were
not aware of the above motivations, or the consequences of flirting with the
devils of deforestation. Many, I am sure, were cleverer by half. One after
the other, therefore, they read out statements virtually begging for money
from the very funding agencies which had financed the devastation of their
environments over decades. The Sudanese representative said his land was
dying on account of over-exploitation and that he looked towards richer
countries for funds to renew his country. The delegate from Malawi actually
ended his speech by quoting a World Bank executive! The Iranian delegate
reminded us that all countries were part of the human family and must fight
together to save Planet Earth...and that the World Bank should release funds
for environmental protection. Malaysia, predictably, launched a broadside
against the worldwide campaign to ban tropical timber products, justifying
their own cutting of tropical timber. Kenya asked for financial assistance
from development agencies, informing us that the World Bank and Finland were
currently in the process of converting its lands to monocultures!
The case of Ghana was particularly tragic. What I wonder was going through the
mind of Asante Kofi, from the Ghanian Embassy as he looked across the room at
the World Bank staff who were responsible for devastating his country through
their financing of the Akosombo Dam across the Volta River in the 1950s and
1960s? The power generated from the project was bought at a throw away price
by the US owned Vallco aluminium plant and virtually all payments received
were expropriated by the World Bank as loan recoveries. The locals got
nothing. Even alumina was imported all the way from Louisiana and Jamaica as
Ghanian bauxite was `not acceptable'. Politically well connected Ghanians
became millionaires at a horrific cost to their country. One per cent of the
entire population of Ghana was displaced. The reservoir caused endemic
onchocerciasis (river blindness) to set in, causing 70,000 people to be struck
by blindness. At least another 80,000 people were attacked by schistosomiases,
a debilitating disease spread by snails which thrived in the reservoir. Now
the Ghanians were once more on their knees, begging for funds from predators
like the World Bank. Diop Ahmed El Mansur is the Ambassador of Senegal to
India. He too asked for funds from the lending agencies attending the FFDC,
though he must have been aware of an internal World Bank memo in which its
European shareholders were advised in the 1970's that: "Senegal is the closest
country to the European market, where vegetables can be cultivated in the open
without glass or plastic protection during the winter." At the height of the
Sahellian famine, therefore, 60 per cent of the agricultural produce of the
region was exported to feed Europeans.
Future imperfect
As I watched the tragic charade unwind under glittering chandeliers, my
thoughts traveled to the thousands of children with whom I so often interact
at meetings, treks, camps and through the books and magazines which I edit.
How could I possibly break the news to them that while they were learning
about the true worth of India's forests, rivers and soils, powerful forces
ranged against them at the FFDC, were conspiring to usurp their forests
through a set of `Forestry Principles' based on the need to facilitate "open
and free international trade in forest products." (Clause 13a).
Seeking support from some, any, quarters to counter this blatant attempt to
commercialise endangered forests, I looked around the huge hall for signs that
movements like the Narmada Bachao Andolan, Tarun Bharat Sangh, Vikalp, Chilika
Andolan, Anumukti, Pani Panchayat, and National Fishworkers' Forum had been
represented. There was no one there save for a handful of urban NGOs such as
the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the Centre for Science and
Environment (CSE). The CSE made some valid points regarding north-south
positions, but without a common front and with a status of mere observers,
none of the groups present were equal to the task of turning the massive tide.
Sundarlal Bahuguna, was the lone representative of any grassroots movement,
the Chipko Andolan. This venerable fighter, in the five minutes of time he
was allotted, tried valiantly to counter the reams of propaganda which were
being distributed and the thousands of hollow words being spewed. He spoke
with passion of the ecological role of trees and the spiritual inspiration to
be derived from the wilderness. His message touched some hearts, but in the
end the pocket books won out.
Banking on disaster
After the poor countries and token NGOs had said their bit, Michell Petit from
the World Bank got up to speak. You could cut the silence as everyone
strained to hear his `verdict', the sum and substance of which was that there
was both good and bad news in store for those who had gathered. The good news
was that the World Bank was prepared to increase its forestry allocation,
provided Third World countries could arrive at a consensus on the Forestry
Principles (in simple language: "sign up, or else!"). The bad news was that
funds were scarce with alternative funding sources such as the International
Development Assistance (IDA) and the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) and
that at the risk of sounding arrogant, it would be necessary for countries to
accept World Bank conditionality if they wanted funds. He then went on to
explain that because they wanted programmes to be country driven the Tropical
Forestry Action Programme was now being promoted as the National Forestry
Action Programme (NFAP). He closed by stating that he was passionately
committed to the forestry plan and that for him this was a mission.
When the UNDP spoke, they called the FFDC meeting a turning point and
suggested that they would push for doubling the allocations (heaven help us)
for forestry operations in tropical countries. Delighted that the South was
finally towing the World Bank line, they went on to say how happy they were
that the South was united in their resolve to execute the NFAP proposals which
had so thoughtfully been put together by the FAO.
The Asian Development Bank joint in the lending frenzy by stating that they
were financed monocultures because each hectare thus planted actually saved
2.4 hectares of natural growth. Displaying an amazing talent for co-opting
the jargon of 21st Century conservation they went on to say that, apart from
monocultures (which would amount to over 80 per cent of all their forestry
lending) they were also interested in watershed development, biodiversity,
community participation, and climate change. In any event, the ADB, we were
informed, wanted, little more than to implement Agenda 21... Amen!
Fiddling while fires rage
While activists and groups debate the finer points of capitalism, communism
and socialism at coffee houses, under banyan trees, or street corners, the
Indian nation is being auctioned to the highest bidder. In the guise of
ushering in development, the Ministry of Finance is putting a price tag on
every imaginable natural asset we possess. The colonisation process, of
course, now assumes a different avatar. Mangroves are being converted to
prawn farms and red oil palm plantations. Highways are being readied along
the East and West Coasts of the Indian peninsula, in preparation for the
`development' to follow. Tropical pine, eucalyptus, teak and poplars are to
replace natural forests and grasslands. The Andamans and Arunachal Pradesh
are to be opened up to industry. Chemical plants which are banned in the USA
and the UK are likely to be shipped to our shores. Used lead acid batteries
are being sent here for disposal, as are millions of discarded plastic
bottles. Our genetic wealth is being usurped by the biotechnology industry.
And companies which are not allowed to construct nuclear reactors in their own
countries are fighting to deal with India.
Save for Sundarlal Bahuguna, no one mentioned Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi at
the FFDC deliberatons. No one spoke of the need to curb consumerism. Not one
mention was made of the 28 million trees which would be lost to the nation
thanks to the Narmada Project. Not one tear was shed for the Somalians,
Ghanians and Ethiopians who are starving to death because of the forestry
practices which the FAO and World Bank had insisted on for three long decades.
Instead India prepares to open its doors to these latter day brigands.
Mr. Narasimha Rao, Mr. Manmohan Singh, Mr. Kamal Nath... is this development.
End--