The Fourth Plate

A long-form conversation on the mega project reshaping one of the planet’s most fragile islands

For decades, development in much of the world has increasingly meant something very narrow: the welfare of the already wealthy, the comfort of those in power, and the systematic pushing out of the poor, the marginalised and the ecologically dependent. In the name of “growth”, the vulnerable are made to surrender their lands, their histories, their homes.

Entire landscapes – riverbanks, coastlines, forests, farmland, hills – are turned into zones of extraction for real-estate and infrastructure lobbies. In project after project, profits are prioritised over rights, and the people who have lived in harmony with nature for centuries are expected to quietly disappear.

Great Nicobar Island, tucked deep in the Bay of Bengal, has now become the newest battleground of this model of development.

This remote island, part of the Andaman–Nicobar archipelago, is biologically unique. Its rainforests, coral reefs, mangrove belts, and river systems are unlike any other in India. It is also home to two Indigenous communities – the Nicobarese and the Shompen – whose histories stretch back millennia. Yet today, this ancient ecosystem and its people stand on the verge of irreversible upheaval.

The Indian government’s ₹80,000-crore “Holistic Development of Great Nicobar Island” project proposes a deep-sea transshipment port, a greenfield airport, a power plant, luxury tourism zones, and infrastructure capable of supporting a staggering 3.5 lakh people. The stated goal is strategic and commercial integration with global shipping lines, positioning India as a major logistical hub.

The unstated consequences, critics say, could be catastrophic. Few people understand the islands, their ecological pulse, and their fragile societies better than Pankaj Sekhsaria —researcher, writer, and environmental scholar. 

For three decades, he has studied the Andaman and Nicobar Islands intimately and written extensively on the issues there. Most recently he has edited two important volumes that provide information, perspective and sharp insight on the current developments in Great Nicobar Island. The first titled ‘The Great Nicobar Betrayal – Pushing a vulnerable island knowingly into disaster’ was published by Frontline magazine in 2024 and the second ‘Island on Edge – The Great Nicobar Crisis’ by Westland in November 2025

In this extensive conversation, he speaks with unusual clarity about what Great Nicobar is facing, the contradictions of the project, and the deeper political-ecological questions that remain unanswered.

Q. It has been two years since the initial clearances for the Great Nicobar mega project were granted. Has anything substantive happened since then?

Much has been happening. For one the estimates for the project costs have been going up constantly. The initial cost of Rs. 71000 crore is now being pegged at Rs. 92000 crore, already a 20% escalation in less than four years. This indicates that the planning and the  thinking of the project has been incomplete and incorrect. We don’t know how much more this will go up and this puts serious questions on the economic viability of the project. 

There have also been many meetings between the agencies responsible for meeting the environmental clearance conditions. Disbursal has begun of the 100s of crores to these agencies for documentation and management of the biodiversity that the project will destroy. We know that nearly 260 sq kms of land in Haryana has been earmarked as forest for compensatory afforestation in lieu of the 130 sq kms in Great Nicobar that will handed over for the project and be deforested.  

There is a problem right there: many institutions that have endorsed the project’s environmental clearances are benefiting with getting money and projects for monitoring the same ecosystem and biodiversity. This is a contradiction, and a clear case conflict of interest. There is no way the unmatched biodiversity of Galathea Bay or indeed Great Nicobar can be replaced or relocated. Nor is it clear how they will deal with the Shompen community – one of the world’s most vulnerable Indigenous groups -who continue to live even today as a largely uncontacted group of people. The impact of all this on this community will be devastating.

More recently work has begun on the acquisition of the land of the settler communities who have expressed concern over injustice being done to them and fear that they will not be adequately compensation for their land that is to be acquired. And a new Great Nicobar Development Authority has been created for the implementation of the project.  So the authorities and the government have indeed been very busy…

Q. Supporters of the project say it will bring world-class development and tourism to the island. Why do you oppose it?

First, we must understand the scale of what is being attempted. Some of the last remaining pockets of untouched biodiversity in India—home to ancient forests, rare species, coral reefs, and Indigenous societies that have lived in deep ecological balance—are being opened up to aggressive urbanisation.

What does the island get in return? It risks complete erasure—of forests, coral reefs, wetlands… and crucially, of the Indigenous cultures whose identity is tied inseparably to this landscape.

Also bear in mind that the islands are located in one of the world’s most seismically active zones. As per recent re-classification, the A&N are now in Seismic Zone 6. The islands experience an earthquake once a week on average and the massive earthquake and tsunami of December 2004 happened only about 100 nautical miles from the project site. Even the huge investment is at risk given the regular occurrences of earthquakes and possibilities of a tsunami. 

And are not then also putting at risk the lives of the 3.5 lakh people that the project seeks to bring from outside to the island. Imagine what a disaster that would be. Who will take responsibility for their safety and well-being? 

Q. What exactly is at stake environmentally?

Almost everything. Great Nicobar is an evergreen rainforest island. Its ecological wealth is still not fully recorded. The island supports 100s of species of spectacular wildlife:  giant leatherback turtles, the endemic Nicobar megapodes, saltwater crocodiles, rich marine life, endemic insects and plants. 40 new species of fauna including insects, frogs, geckos, snakes and birds have been discovered in the island in just the last four years. Two significant discoveries – one a snake and another a bird – were reported in just the month of November 2025. This is the classic case of the unknown unknown. The project will ensure the destruction of innumerable species of plants and animals even before we know they exist. 

Official figures say nearly one million trees will be cut for the project. Researchers have in fact suggested that this number could actually be three times as much if not even more. I cannot even imagine why we would want to do this. And there was one suggestion that this pristine forest be cut and the timber could be burnt to generate power for the island. This is akin to destroying an ancient temple and crushing the stones to lay a road to the very site. This is shocking. 

I have already mentioned the seismic activity. The earthquake of December 2004 resulted in permanent subsidence of about 15 feet of the coastline of Great Nicobar . Imagine putting in so much money and infrastructure in such a volatile system. 

The coastal and marine systems here are similarly undocumented. The EIA report did not even mention the full list of marine species that are found here. The port site has over 20000 coral colonies all of which will be destroyed by dredging and construction activities and shipping when it starts.  And all this in a UNESCO-recognised biosphere reserve.

Q. How does this affect the Indigenous communities?

The Shompen and the Nicobarese are not just “tribes”. They are nations unto themselves, with ancient relationships to land and sea. The Shompen, in particular, are a largely uncontact hunter-gatherer people whom we know very little about. Their exposure to outsiders risks epidemic diseases—and cultural annihilation. Ajay Saini and Anvita Abbi both contributors to our new volume ‘Island on Edge’ have written extensively on this aspect particularly on the aspect of how languages will become extinct and what else will be lost with that. We are barely talking about these issues leave alone taking cognisance of what it means.

Building a port city capable of housing 3.5 lakh people in their homeland is not “growth”. It is extinction. 

Q. Legally, has the process respected Indigenous rights and environmental safeguards?

There are major inconsistencies. Many of the environmental clearance conditions laid down as part of the environmental clearance are a farce and neither implementable or enforecable. There are serious questions on the process followed for grant of forest clearance. The compensatory afforestation proposed in Haryana is, as we have discussed already, one of the biggest farce in India in recent times. Clearances granted under the FRA are another big violation and this matter is being heard currently by the Calcutta High Court.  Coastal Regulation Zone restrictions were altered to enable port construction. Public consultations have only been performative and key reports remain unavailable.

This is one of the most legally grey mega projects India has attempted. Ecology, Indigenous rights, tribal welfare laws—all have been bent or bypassed to serve the project timeline.

Q. What about national security, which the government cites as a justification?

Security is being used as an unquestionable argument. Yes, the island is near crucial shipping lanes. Yes, geopolitics matters. But ecological fragility does not disappear because a region is strategically important. Multiple defence and security experts including very senior former officers of the Indian Navy have questioned the rationale of this project on multiple grounds. Their concerns and arguments are in the public domain. Also keep in mind that this project – roughly 80% and more of the proposed investment is for commercial reasons, not defence or strategic. Only the airport is a dual-purpose entity. A new township and tourism project is coming up over 130 sq kms of land. By what logic is this a strategic initiative? 

Q. Is there any precedent for such a large demographic influx into a fragile island ecosystem?

Great Nicobar’s population is only about 8000 people today. Bringing in 3.5 lakh people here will overwhelm land, water, waste systems, public health, and food supply. Leave alone the impact on the indigenous communities and the local biodiversity, it is doubtful that these newcomers will have a good life. Do bear in mind that the total population of the A&N over 600+ islands today is less that 5 lakh people. Just one island will have about the same population. No one has thought of the implications of this. This is very concerning. 

Q. The government says compensatory forests will be grown elsewhere. Will that work?

Not at all. You cannot replace a 130-sq-km rainforest in an island in Bay of Bengal planting trees 100s of kms away in the Aravallis or central India. These are utterly different ecosystems. The idea is scientifically flawed and ecologically meaningless. Again, the essay in our new volume by forest ecologist TR Shankar Raman and marine biologist Rohan Arthur goes into this is great detailed. They explain very beautifully how the idea is flawed from both an ecological but also an ethical perspective. It is an essay worth reading.

Moreover, some compensatory sites identified in Haryana have simultaneously been opened up for private mining. So “afforestation” is a convenient fiction.

Q. What, then, is the core issue driving your opposition?

It is very simple. Great Nicobar is not just land. It is life—ecological life, cultural life, hydrological life, geological life. And all of this is being placed under the knife for a project that will benefit no one. Given the volatility and the uncertainty of the place even investors are not likely to be benefit. No one will gain anything.

The price will be paid by forests, by species, by coastlines, by Indigenous peoples, by future generations.

Q. How should India think about development in such places?

Not with 20th-century thinking. We must ask:

• Who is development for?
• What does it destroy?
• What cannot be rebuilt once lost?
• Why must remote Indigenous homelands bear the burden of national ambition?
• And why should an island that has survived for thousands of years be
• remodelled for speculative gains?

Development must be rooted in justice, ecology, and long-term wisdom. If not, it is simply extraction by another name.

Q. What do you see happening next?

There has been growing concern —among scientists, activists, Indigenous voices, legal scholars. Even within the system, many admit the project is too destructive. Interestingly there are many voices today who while highlighting the threats to the Aravalis because of proposed change of definition are at the same time arguing we should not forget what is happening in Great Nicobar. 

This moment matters. The Great Nicobar project is not just another development debate. It is a test of what India believes development should mean in the 21st century. Whether we repeat old mistakes—or choose a path that respects both nature and people—will define our future.