Should a Moratorium be Imposed on Fresh Mining in Tribal Areas of the Country? | Current Affairs & Hindu Analysis: Daily, Weekly & Monthly - UPSC PDF Download

–Shantanu Agrawal

Over 65 years have passed since the people of India assumed control of their country. Economic development has been a key priority, with mineral resources playing a crucial role. However, this pursuit of development often clashes with the survival and interests of tribal communities, necessitating a deeper analysis and discussion of potential solutions.

To comprehend the importance of mining in India, we must recognize that the country faces economic challenges such as unreliable service-driven growth and high levels of poverty. To address these issues, India must strengthen its manufacturing sector, create more jobs, boost trade, and improve Human Development Indicators. Achieving this requires increased access to minerals like iron ore and bauxite, as well as continued coal mining for energy generation.

The demand for goods like automobiles and electricity further underscores the significance of mining as an economic driver. However, the majority of India's coal reserves, and other minerals, are located in forested areas inhabited by tribal communities. As a result, expanding mineral exploration and mining leads to extensive deforestation and displacement of these tribes.

Mining also leaves behind a trail of environmental destruction, with altered landscapes, barren land, and pollution of groundwater with toxic metals. The rehabilitation of displaced tribes disrupts their way of life, impacting their livelihoods and food sources, primarily derived from forests. Rehabilitation processes are often slow, leaving tribal people temporarily homeless or excluded due to bureaucratic reasons.

The conflict intensifies when mining ventures clash with tribal religious sentiments, as seen in the case of the Dongria Kondh tribes and the Niyamgiri hills. Furthermore, tribal communities rarely benefit from mining activities; instead, they can become debt-bonded laborers or perform menial tasks for mining companies. The emergence of mining mafias exacerbates the situation.

This raises the crucial question: Should the country prioritize economic development over tribal religious sentiments? Striking a balance between controlled mining and respecting religious sentiments is challenging in practice. Tribal communities are often the prime targets of development-induced displacement due to their geographical and social discontinuity, leading to frustration and even extremist movements like Naxalism and Maoism.

Additionally, mining introduces alien cultures to tribal areas, significantly altering their way of life and increasing threats to tribes, especially tribal women. So, can a moratorium offer solutions to these issues?

A moratorium, in this context, does not mean a complete ban on mining, as India cannot afford such a step. Instead, it implies a legally authorized postponement to fulfill certain obligations, like empowering Gram Sabhas in decision-making and ensuring complete rehabilitation of affected people. Critics argue that these obligations are time-consuming, and mines take years to become productive, thus delaying the process and stalling mining projects.

Proponents of the moratorium stress the importance of tribal regions for these communities, which cannot be ignored until alternative means of survival are ensured. They advocate for social and environmental rehabilitation before mining commences. Both sides present valid arguments, but finding a definitive solution remains challenging.

Learning from past mistakes is essential. Existing laws and regulations, such as considering Gram Sabha's views before awarding contracts in Schedule V areas, must be implemented rigorously. The government should apologize and provide alternate means of survival when it fails to fulfill promises. Conflicting claims over land ownership should be addressed, fostering a sense of co-ownership between tribes and the government.

To reduce the need for new mining operations, India should focus on increasing the efficiency of current mines, proper land reclamation, and developing alternatives like renewable energy. Expanding exports and using foreign exchange to import minerals can also help.

The government has taken steps to address tribal concerns, like Schedule 5, which grants ownership of minor forest and minerals to tribes. However, these policies must be implemented effectively, as seen in the Vedanta-Niyamgiri hills case. Initiatives such as skill development, healthcare, and education facilities in tribal areas aim for decentralized development.

In conclusion, while these approaches may temporarily alleviate the issue, a long-term strategy addressing the alienation of tribal society, both socio-economic and ideological, is essential to fulfill the vision of "Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas" (Together with all, Development for all)."