Addressing the ground realities of the Rampal protests

Rubana Huq's article “The alternative road to dissent” published in your paper yesterday raised many troubling questions. The author's apologist stance completely reduces the concern of activists and environmentalists protesting the project to an absurd simplicity.

The author speaks of decorum, and how Al Gore had none when debating about Rampal with our Prime Minister. “Courtesy matters,” she wrote. But the entire article fails to mention even once the treatment of the activists at the hands of the police last week. How can she justify policemen brutally beating up activists and journalists with an anecdote about a senior government official going to visit an activist in the hospital!

She also suggests that much of what is being said about Rampal is for the social media, and lacks “real gumption, knowledge and the courage to share, educate and confront.” She suggests a debate in Rampal between the government and the activists. She seems to forget that the government has from the start refused to have an open debate about the issue, instead resorting to public relations through propaganda.

Her article tries to justify a project which could seriously cause irreparable damage to the Sundarbans. We are entirely in agreement that there needs to be open debate between the activist and the government; but she seems to forget that it is the government who is unwilling to engage.

Mayitree 

By email