After a tense change of power, a massive contract for an airport in Maldives, the beautiful atoll nation, has become a political and diplomatic football. The contract to modernise the Ibrahim Nasir International Airport in Male, won by Indian infrastructure firm GMR, has led to frayed diplomatic relations between India and Maldives. With the island nation preparing for presidential elections in 2013, there’s also the suspicion that Maldivian politicians are using the issue for political and personal advantage.
The cost of the project is $500 million. The build-operate-transfer contract would translate into the Maldives government receiving $1 billion over 25 years. For a country with a GDP of a little over $2 billion, this is clearly a project that can make or break governments. On the surface, the controversy is about the conditions under which the contract was given out, during the regime of former president Mohammed Nasheed. The present government, under Mohammed Waheed, is accusing the former government of twisting local rules to grant the contract to GMR.
The Waheed administration has raised questions and doubts about the authenticity of the conditions under which the contract was signed. There are allegations of money having changed hands. Of course, the players involved deny this. But it doesn’t help matters that GMR has of late been getting some poor press in India. Most recently, the CAG has castigated the GMR-led DIAL for anomalies in developing the T3 terminal of Delhi airport. Earlier, there were issues with GMR’s Hyderabad airport project.
While there has been no official communication from the Maldives government to the GMR group regarding a rethink on the airport contract, there are reports that political parties are also raising questions about the contract for a strategic asset being given to an “outsider”. That’s potentially bad news for GMR, because even if the contract conditions are positive and secure for the company, the government can, at any time, scrap a contract in the “national interest”. Of the $500 million, GMR has already put in $240 million in the project and paid $130 million to the government.
GMR told Outlook that since the bidding process was monitored by international authorities—the World Bank group’s International Finance Corporation (IFC)—there should be no doubt about its authenticity. Says Siddharth Kapur, GMR’s CFO (airports), “The whole process was handled by IFC and the contract was given in a transparent manner. Why is this being raked up one-and-a-half years later, when no one, not even the other bidders or members of the government, had objections to the process before?”
With elections due in less than a year, Maldives-watchers feel there is increased play by different political groups which want to prove they are “saving” the airport, a precious asset. Raking up an anti-India sentiment is also on the agenda of many politicians. This was apparent when the Maldives president’s spokesperson called Dnyaneshwar Mulay, India’s envoy to the Maldives, a “traitor” and “an enemy of Maldives”, before the government launched a huge fire-fighting exercise to save face.
Says Maldives expert N. Sathiyamoorthy, who is with the Observer Research Foundation, “Waheed, as president, heads a party which does not have strength and needs to create a constituency by creating such sentiments and issues. And the GMR case fits into the issue of the Maldives’ sovereignty.” As no Maldives political outfit would want to antagonise India—which regularly extends a monetary line to the country—larger issues like security and national interest are being constantly raised.
Then there is the China question. Many pro-India politicians are also raising the China bogey, saying that the entire hullabaloo about GMR is basically to ease the Indian company out of the project and bring the Chinese in. A senior member of the Waheed government said on condition of anonymity, “This whole hype about GMR and the anti-India sentiments is done by some in the government who are seeking Chinese favours....The Chinese are keen on competing with India in this part.... They have plans to get the southernmost Gan International airport in Addu too. There is one more airport only a couple of miles from India’s Lakshwadeep borders. China is looking at that too.”
Recently, the Maldives government issued a prime plot of land close to the Indian High Commission in Male to China to build their embassy, a development not seen positively by India. China got the plot within a year of starting an embassy in Maldives. While this could be a serious strategic issue for India, political watchers say it is not unusual for Maldivian politicians to rake up the China issue to get the attention of Indian policymakers and Maldivian leaders. At election time, such games pay off.
As of now though, the fate of GMR’s contract in Male hangs in doubt, with the government yet to take a decision on it. With election fever picking up in Male, the airport issue may decide who rules the country next year. If anti-India sentiments prevail, GMR could just be part of the collateral damage.
Apropos Mayday In Maldives (Dec 3), a large project in the Maldives can impact that country’s diplomatic and strategic interests. The government should screen such ofdi very meticulously in the future.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Unlike GMR which is investing money ( probably bribing the local govt. for a favourable deal ), the TATAs have fled with money to the UK - as a patterned transfer of capital funds to Europe from India. While GMR is only trying a venture to get a profit.
So there is a BIG difference. The real owner of TATA is already an Irish citizen and pays tax to Ireland!
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT