1.Decide for Yourself
2.Bureaucrats, activists vent their anger on PM's "foreign hand" charge

TAKE ACTION: The Citizens of India oppose GM Crops http://t.co/pCHqNZaD If you're an Indian citizen, please sign this petition and pass it on!

NOTE: The most telling comment we've seen about the Indian Prime Minister's charge of a "foreign hand" being behind the strong opposition in India to nuclear power and GM crops, is that for the PM: globalisation means capital and corporate lobbying should be allowed to operate globally but not dissent!
–-
–-
1.Decide for Yourself
Glenn Davis Stone
Field Questions, February 27 2012
http://fieldquestions.com/2012/02/27/decide-for-yourself/

The dust has not settled after India's decision not to approve its first genetically modified food crop.  In fact it has just been kicked up again today, with the prime minister accusing foreign NGOs of meddling and activists responding that the real meddling is by multinational corporations.

This is much more than a local dust-up.  What's at stake is not just whether Indians will have "Bt brinjal" (genetically modified eggplant) on their plates – it's how we even make these decisions.

The decision to deny approval of Bt brinjal (at least until further research is done) was made by Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh.  The Genetic Engineering Approvals Committee normally makes these calls, and it voted for approval, but knowing well that India's first GM food would be a hot potato, it asked Ramesh to decide.

Ramesh organized an unusually open consultation process much more open than any other decision-making process I have ever seen on GMOs.  He solicited opinions from state governments, scientists, farmer organzations, and Indian NGOs.  He held open forums which were well attended; a lot of them are on Youtube and are pretty interesting viewing (Ramesh often challenges anti-GMO claims). 

Ramesh who was moved to a different cabinet post soon after his decision has provided a careful explanation of his decision.

But we live in a world where with one click of the mouse you can see Ramesh's actual report on his decision, and it's an interesting and important document.  Now that the whole decision is being picked apart and spun with headlines and sound bites, it's a wonderful time to click here and read for yourself.  
http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/minister_REPORT.pdf

But I'll provide a few highlights:

*All state governments that expressed opinions urged extreme caution.  One state even asked for a 50-year moratorium;
*There are major unanswered questions about impacts on wild eggplant species (some of which have surprising importance in economy and medicine, the subject of a previous blog);
*The claims that the decision was "anti-science" are hard to reconcile with the report’s reliance on input from top Indian biologists like P. Bhargava and international ecologists like Ellstrand and Snow;
*The release would probably violate the Cartagena Protocol, of which India is a signatory.

There are more points there, all clearly laid out.  Decide for yourself.
–-
–-
2.Bureaucrats, activists vent their anger on PM's "foreign hand" charge
Moneylife, March 7 2012
http://moneylife.in/article/bureaucrats-activists-vent-their-anger-on-pms-foreign-hand-charge/24107.html

Former bureaucrats, activists, write to PM on his "foreign hand" charge against anti-nuclear and anti-GM crop agitations. They ask him to take cognisance of the issues that are being raised by the agitators

The prime minister’s hard selling of the nuclear plants and genetically modified crops hasn’t gone down well with citizens and activists. But now with Dr Manmohan Singh invoking the “foreign hand” to discredit popular agitations against these issues has raised the ire of many former bureaucrats and administrators, who have written to the prime minister, protesting against his remarks. They have asked him to formulate an inclusive policy with participation from activist groups and citizens.

The letter, dated 5th March, says, “We urge the UPA government to initiate a truly inclusive process of deliberations with all stake-holders in civil society to help formulate a rational public policy with regard to both the nuclear power sector and GM crops.”

The letter has been signed by former Supreme Court judge Krishna Swamy Iyer; Dr A Gopalakrishnan, former chairman, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board;  EAS Sarma, former Union power secretary; Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat, former chief of Naval Staff, Mumbai and JM Lyngdoh, former chief election commissioner. Many activists, namely Medha Patkar, Prashant Bhushan, Aruna Roy and Aruna Rodrigues; who has filed a PIL in Supreme Court against BT brinjal, have also shown their support.

The writers have protested against the prime minister's comments on the popular agitations. "You choose to resurrect the old bogeyman of a 'foreign hand', this time pointing to external funding of NGOs to oppose Indian development, as if they are operating to undermine the nation's interest. This we feel, is a highly inappropriate misrepresentation of facts. In reality, what we are all fighting against is indeed is a foreign hand operating at the behest of and from within your government, supported by Indian and foreign commercial entities to corporatize Indian agriculture and the energy sector. Your remarks, in essence, indict every signatory to this letter."

The letter raises several concerns about the GM crops and the nuclear power plants that the government seems adamant on pushing, regardless of protests. The letter has said that the BT brinjal, which has been developed and self-validated by Monsanto, the world's leading agricultural biotech company, needs to be authenticated by an independent authority. The GM crops' introduction is being helmed by KIA (Indo-US Knowledge Initiative in Agriculture).

"India is singled out for the commercialisation of GM crops by the US and Monsanto an objective that is actively facilitated by the Indian regulators. This is well attested to in court documents. The official push for GM in Indian agriculture means that we are the only country extensively testing untested GM crops in open field trials in virtually all our food, with great risk of contamination. In the matter of brinjal, Monsanto stands accused by the NBA (National Biodiversity Authority) of pirating an Indian brinjal gene,” the signatories have said.

Incidentally, studies by the UNO, the World Watch Institute of the World Bank and IAASTD (International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development) have termed GM-crops as ‘insufficient and unsustainable’.

The signatories have also pointed out the safety and environmental concerns that prevail regarding nuclear plants. While most Western countries had started decommissioning nuclear plants after the Fukushima disaster, many countries have announced all existing projects will be phased out and efforts will be directed towards harnessing non-conventional, non-polluting sources of energy; and Germany has been the most notable example. However, the Indian government has been pushing for facilities in Jaitapur and Kudunkulam, and the crackdown on the local people and agitators has been severe.

The writers of the letter have pointed out that there has been no independent environment impact assessment of the projects, and safety issues have been left unaddressed. They have accused the government of failing to evolve any comprehensive energy policy, and of being hand-in-glove with foreign MNCs who have been pushed out of their own country. They have denounced the EIA reports on Units 1 and 2 of the Kudunkulam plant as ‘sketchy’, and have pointed out that the execution of the project is riddled with procedural and contractual flaws.

“By acceding to importing reactors and  fuel on such a large    scale from France and other countries, has the government not jeopardised India’s national, and especially  energy,  security? Evidently, foreign reactor suppliers themselves are not as confident as the PM seems to be of the safety of their own reactors and want the Indian taxpayer to bear what could be an astronomical part of the liability in case of  a nuclear    accident,” the letter says.

The letter has asked the prime minister to take cognisance of the issues being raised; and has asked him to act urgently on the matter. They said, “Several important communications have been submitted to you in writing over the last two to three years, without even the courtesy of an acknowledgement from the PMO. The evidence, which has been offered on the significant  gaps in safety and liability  surrounding both these technologies by well-informed and deeply concerned    individuals and groups in the nation’s interest, has not been seen by you, or else you  would surely have taken cognisance of it.”