EAC holds meeting on Polavaram–Banakacherla Project
The committee is led by Professor Chakrapani, and the meeting was held in virtual mode from the Ministry's office in New Delhi. As part of this meeting, the committee is reviewing the proposal submitted by the Andhra Pradesh Government and will evaluate the environmental impact of the Banakacherla project.
The Water Resources Department officials consider the meeting of the EAC as a major milestone in the approval process. The committee is now assessing the likely environmental consequences of undertaking the project.
Based on the committee's report, subsequent permissions will be considered. Recognising the importance of the moment, the A.P. Government is treating this meeting with utmost seriousness.
The A.P. Government would be asked to conduct the environmental impact, studies, etc. The EAC, at present, is studying the Pre-Feasibility Report (PFR) of the Godavari-Banakacherla Link project proposed by Andhra Pradesh. The EAC's evaluation report will play a critical role in determining the project's future permissions. At a later stage, the Detailed Project Report (DPR) would be prepared.
The EAC meeting assumes significance in the wake of the Telangana Government's serious objections to the project. Telangana Irrigation Minister Uttam Kumar Reddy has written a letter to the EAC, urging it not to grant any approval and to outrightly reject the Banakacherla Project.
He stated that the Andhra Pradesh Government was moving ahead with the project without prior consent or notification to Telangana. The project seeks to divert the Godavari waters to the Krishna basin, which he claims will result in violating Telangana's legitimate water rights. He strongly urged that no environmental clearance be granted to the project.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
13 hours ago
- NDTV
Trade Deals vs WTO: Is Trump Hastening The World Trade Organization's Demise?
The World Trade Organization (WTO) is a key institution of global governance that was founded in 1995 as a successor to the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), established in the wake of World War II. The period just before the Second World War was an era of protectionism that saw high tariffs imposed by the US, and the GATT was signed by 23 countries in 1947 to tackle the tariff barriers and facilitate international trade. The current Trump tariffs may not be mimicking the pre-WWII period, but they are certainly reminiscent of that. The world has witnessed the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of the 1930s. So, the question that arises is, why would US President Donald Trump tread a similar path a century later? There is a growing viewpoint that the Trump administration is using tariffs as a negotiating tool to pressure countries to strike bilateral trade deals with the United States. While sovereign nations are free to decide what works in their interest, America's stress on bilateral deals is a more nuanced move. At the heart of this move is a strategic shift that risks rendering the World Trade Organization irrelevant. This is because one of the basic principles of the WTO is non-discrimination - Most Favoured Nation (MFN) and National Treatment (NT). That means member countries need to extend similar concessions to all members in the WTO. So, if President Trump strikes trade deals with a few countries and drops the tariffs for them, for example, on steel and aluminum, while continuing with high tariffs for some other countries, it would be flouting the WTO principle. In essence, any preferential treatment emerging from the deals would undermine the MFN concept - even though the cover that the US could use is one of the two exceptions under MFN - that Free Trade Agreements are valid if they are comprehensive. Political scientists like Timothy Sinclair, Margaret Karns, and Karen Mingst stress that the power of a high-profile subset of key intergovernmental organizations - like WTO - rests on mutual benefits from conformity to the system. The US is clearly deviating from conforming to a system of which it was at the forefront of building. At this moment, it appears that President Trump is the executioner-in-chief of this strategy of deviation; however, one of the first steps towards weakening the WTO was taken during the Obama administration and later followed up by the first Trump administration. The Dispute Settlement System (DSS), a vital organ of the trading system, is being virtually strangled due to a lack of quorum in its Appellate Body (AB). Through three US administrations, starting with President Barack Obama's, Washington has accused the WTO's Appellate Body of overstepping its boundaries, making new trade rules in its decisions that were not negotiated by the WTO's 166 member economies. In 2016, the US blocked the reappointment of a South Korean judge to the Appellate Body. In 2018, the Trump administration blocked the reappointment of two other judges, rendering the Appellate Body non-functional. Conservative US think tanks have alleged bias by judges in the Appellate Body, demanding that the US completely withdraw from the WTO. A write-up in the Heritage Foundation by Andrew Hale in March 2024 said that judges had repeatedly shown bias against the US and in favour of their home countries. 'These biased judges have ruled against the US at least partially in 90% of cases, and the US became the most sued-against country at the WTO, despite the fact that we arguably have the freest trade system in the world.' This is not just the Conservative viewpoint, it seems to have bipartisan support despite not being entirely rooted in reality. Late last year, the then-outgoing American ambassador to the WTO, Maria Pagan, had warned that if the world wanted the US to be part of the international rules-based trading system, then it should 'take us seriously". The United States, which had emerged as the strongest economy after World War II, was the driving force in the international trade regime back in the day. 'Nothing of consequence was achieved without US leadership. Today, this is no longer the case,' said Keith M. Rockwell in Postcard From A Disintegration: Inside the WTO's Fraying Seams. The US is now the world's second-largest trading nation, pushed behind China. Rockwell believes that the Cold War mentality gripping Washington stems from its anxiety over China. The US believes 'China has somehow rigged the multilateral trading system, shirked its responsibilities, and gamed the dispute settlement function". Hence, it appears that the US stand on the Appellate Body is either to destabilise the WTO leading to its demise or to use it as a lever to negotiate on its terms on contentious issues like self-designation of developing countries, agricultural subsidies and Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS) - all of which have seen a pushback from the Global South in the past. In an article titled The Global South in the WTO: Time to Go on the Offensive, published by Foreign Policy in Focus, Walden Bello says that as resistance by developing countries under the leadership of India, Brazil, and China to attempted restrictive moves of the US in the WTO grew, 'the United States began to move away from a strategy of multilateral trade liberalization via the WTO". In fact, Professor and Canada Research Chair in Global Policy, Kristen Hopewell, wrote in 2023 that China and India formed a surprising alliance at the WTO that has been highly successful in bringing an end to American dominance and sharply curtailing the ability of the US to set the rules of global trade, which has resulted in a 'vertical forum shifting' by the dominant power; it is now at the brink of abandoning the WTO and pursuing bilateral trade more actively. This is underway with President Trump's multiple trade deal dialogues currently - from India to Canada and Indonesia. The US has trade relations with more than 200 countries, territories, and regional associations around the globe. With over $7.0 trillion in exports and imports of goods and services in 2022, per the Office of the US Trade Representative, the significance of the US participation in a rules-based trading system cannot be overstated. But with nations being compelled to seal bilateral deals with the US in a hurry, they may end up collectively helping the US write the WTO's epitaph.
New Indian Express
16 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Banakacherla Link Project goes against Bachawat Tribunal Award: Telangana
HYDERABAD: The Telangana government informed the Ministry of Jal Shakti that the Polavaram-Banakacherla Link Project (PBLP) is against the Bachawat Tribunal Award. In a letter to the secretary of Jal Shakti, Telangana Irrigation principal secretary Rahul Bojja said on Thursday: 'The present proposal of PBLP diverting Godavari Water to other Basins via Krishna Basin without supplementing water to Krishna Basin areas contravenes KWDT-I Award'. The Telangana government sent its comments on the pre-feasibility report (PFR) on Andhra Pradesh's PBLP. The main purpose of this diversion project is to stabilise the existing projects in the Pennar basin spanning the Rayalaseema region, and western parts of Prakasam and Nellore districts that depend on inflows into Srisailam reservoir on the flood based project. Stabilisation to above projects is considered at 50% of its water requirements. New Irrigation potential is about three lakh hectares including taking up Nagarjunasagar Project (NSP) Phase-II, new command between Bollapalle reservoir and Banakacherla Regulator, Orvakallu Lift Irrigation Scheme (for western parts of Kurnool district), Gandikota LIS, Gandikota-CBR Lifts 1 to 6, Somasila high level canal LIS Ph-1, GNSS lifts and Badvel lifts on Telugu Ganga Project (TGP). The share of the new ayacut is 60 tmcft. The stabilisation ayacut of 9.14 lakh hectares and as well as the contemplated ayacut of three lakh hectares do not come under Godavari river basin and it entirely covers the regions of Krishna/Pennar basin which needs to be relooked, the Telangana letter said. As per the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal Award (GWDTA), there is no clause for allocating the floodwater among the basin States.
The Hindu
a day ago
- The Hindu
V.S. Achuthanandan, the man of the masses
Communist veteran V.S. Achuthanandan was 101 when he died early this week. He had been away from public life for six years, confined to his son's home in Thiruvananthapuram after suffering a stroke in 2019. But the outpouring of grief on the crowded streets of Kerala, as his funeral cortège travelled the 150-kilometre distance to his hometown Alappuzha, revealed that he was never out of the public mind. The young and the old, who made a beeline to the hearse for one last glimpse of their beloved comrade, with 'Kanne Karale VS-ey (V.S., our sight, our heart)' rending the air, had an unmistakable emotional connection to him. It is not every day that thousands of people across age groups tear up or wail inconsolably for a political leader not related to them. V.S. belonged to that rare breed of politicians whose moral compass was shaped by the stifling social conditions of the pre-Independence era. Orphaned at a very young age, he dropped out of school after Class 7. He was at the forefront of agitations at the age of 17, mobilising coir workers to fight for their rightful wages in 1940. The days he spent organising peasants and paddy workers of Central Travancore to stake claim to their rights were marked by intense spells of starvation and toil, which made his life spartan. He would wash his only pair of clothes, a typical white jubba and mundu, and wear it before drying to avoid creasing. It was because of V.S.'s care for paddy and agricultural land that his government enacted the Kerala Paddy and Wetlands Act, 2008, to restrict the indiscriminate conversion of land. His development vision was tempered by his love for agriculture and nature, which got him brickbats. If the media flayed him for his vettinirathal samaram, an anti-paddy land reclamation drive in the late-1990s, in early 2002, media persons accompanied a resurgent V.S., then 78, as he undertook an arduous trek to the hills of Mathikettan in Idukki to inspect for himself the extent of forests occupied by encroachers. Senior journalists who accompanied him said later that encroachers attempted to waylay him, but he was determined to proceed. The journalists, most of them young, couldn't keep pace with the septuagenarian Leader of the Opposition. He shared his food packets with everyone and asked them to catch their breath as he resumed the hike. Mathikettan Shola was subsequently declared a national park. Those who worked with him closely vouched for his deep empathy and his ability to compensate for his incomplete schooling by keenly listening to experts. This led him to play a key role in the people's planning (decentralisation) programme, the introduction of free and open-source software, the expansion of the IT sector, the development of the national waterway-III, and the like. But it was his interventions for gender rights, secularism, environment, and against sex crimes and corruption endeared him to the masses. He was accessible, unostentatious, and grounded, while he lived a disciplined life personally. With Pinarayi Vijayan emerging as a new power centre in the CPI(M) in Kerala, allegations arose of a 'media syndicate' tacitly supporting V.S. But V.S. himself had previously complained of the selective leaking of inner-party happenings to the media at the 2005 Malappuram State conference. He knew the power of the media and possessed inimitable presentation skills to gain media attention. A close confidante of his told me years later that V.S. never encouraged any activity against the party which he co-founded. 'He was of unimpeachable integrity. This was why he was described as the conscience-keeper of the people. He was a Communist till the last breath,' he said. Had it not been for V.S., many cases and issues deserving public attention and debate would have easily gone under the carpet. A journalist can vouch for that. anandan.s@
