By Rashmi Bansal

‘Can Bono save the world’, asked Time magazine, when it named the rocker as its ‘Man of the Year’ in December 2005. Bono shared the honour with Bill Gates and his wife Melinda.

All three were recognised for their efforts towards making the world a better place—the Gates for creating a multi billion dollar foundation which funds projects related to healthcare and education, and Bono for using his star power to raise the world’s consciousness about forgotten problems such as poverty in Africa. For being the “rocker who made debt reduction sexy”.

A similar description could be used today for Aamir Khan. The “actor who made Narmada rehabilitation sexy”. Over the last two days, we’ve seen more of Aamir on television than we have since the release of Lagaan. And we’ve heard more about the cause itself—rehabilitation of those displaced by the dam—than ever achieved by Medha Patkar’s hunger strikes.

On the one hand, you may argue this shows what a shallow nation we are. That the only time we are willing to look at issues in some distant village, which do not impact our life, is when a celebrity decides to speak up. But the point is every celebrity is a citizen of this country as well. And if the voice of a celebrity can make a difference, it is in fact all the more necessary for that citizen to make that voice heard.

Yes, Arundhati Roy, too, has lent her celebrity status to the Narmada Bachao Andolan. But I like the approach taken by Aamir Khan better. He is not—in principle—opposed to construction of the dam. “I lived in Kutch for six months during the filming of Lagaan,” he said in television interviews. “I know the sort of water problems they have. I really wish everyone who needs water gets the water they deserve."

His appeal to the state and Central government is simple. Water from the dam will benefit millions of people. For which a small number must suffer, as their homes and villages will be submerged. Let’s say I am willing to accept this sacrifice for the greater common good. But can you please ensure that these displaced people are resettled with dignity?

Dignity means you give not just a cash handout, but resettle the community. The Supreme Court has already directed the respective state governments to ensure that two hectares land are provided per ‘major sons’ of oustee families. The NBA has alleged that in states like Madhya Pradesh cash is being handed out, instead of ‘land for land’. The concern is that cash is not a substitute for ‘livelihood’.

I do not know the finer details of the case, and neither does Aamir Khan. But going on a fast and burning posters of Aamir’s movies doesn’t say much about the knowledge base of our politicians on this issue either.

Why evade the issue if you have nothing to hide? If your rehabilitation policy is working fine, take the media to the villages where displaced people have been settled and clear all doubts. That, in fact, is where the TV cameras should be headed in any case—in search of the affected people. Forget Medha or Aamir… where in the picture are the people they are claiming to speak for?

Paying the price

Time and again, India and China are spoken of in the same breath. In China, the world’s largest hydroelectric project—Three Gorges Dam—is under construction. It is estimated that this dam has already displaced 1.9 million people. Thirteen new towns have been built to house the evicted families and industries, but NGOs say many are living under poor conditions and have not been adequately compensated.

Similarly, if an urban dweller’s house is coming in the way of development, it will be razed down in China without public debate. An alternative may be provided miles way—and well, this is the price of progress, they say.

Should we, too, go the Chinese way, then? If Narmada oustees must ‘kindly adjust’ then we should also agree to raze half of Andheri (E) to expand Mumbai airport. The displaced people could be provided alternate accommodation in Badlapur. And so on and so forth.

The fact is that a single shanty being bulldozed in the urban areas sees a politician coming to the rescue because slum dwellers are a vote bank. The millions who are thirsting for Narmada waters are similarly, far more valuable to politicians than the few thousand being displaced by the dam.

But surely then it is not impossible to rehabilitate this relatively small number of people? Let the government partner with social organisations and corporates to resettle the displaced families in new townships. If arable land is a constraint let the younger members of the community be retrained and reskilled to take up new kinds of livelihood.

Incentives to industrial houses may make it attractive for them to set up a plant near such a township. Or, families could be assisted to set up small businesses or cottage industries. Sure, these solutions may sound naïve, but we have to move beyond thirsting and fasting and talking on television. Yes, even Aamir Khan.

Because while I do think he’s being sincere and not speaking out for the sake of publicity, the acid test is now. Will he actually be able to “do something”? Or will he, like mere mortals, feel he has done enough by simply standing up and being counted?

“Bono charmed and bullied and morally blackmailed the leaders of the world’s richest countries into forgiving $40 billion in debt owed by the poorest,” said Time magazine. Can Aamir Khan work that kind of magic and steer this fight to its logical finish?

The author is an IIM Ahmedabad graduate, co-founder and editor of the popular youth magazine JAM (www.jammag.com). She can be reached at rashmi@jammag.com.