Q&A: Greenpeace is not an anti-corporate body

BANGALORE: Even the biggest corporates wince ever so slightly at the mention of Greenpeace. For, this international NGO has focused on their lack of concern for the environment. Lalita Ramdas, the first Asian woman chairperson of Board of Greenpeace Inter-national, talks to Smitha Rao about her concerns and priorities:
In its decade-long presence in India, what have been Greenpeace's achievements?
We've had success in two or three different areas.Environmental degradation has been acknowledged at the policy level. We have to interact with legal, financial and governmental entities. Our priority areas are toxics, nuclear disarmament, sustainable agriculture, climatic changes. Last year's campaign on Clemenceau had a lot of impact, nationally and internationally. There is lot of ongoing work on chemical waste, mercury dumped in the Nilgiris. We have also fought against industrial waste in Andhra Pradesh, focused on vanishing turtles on the Orissa coast. Our recent campaign in Mumbai on switching to CFLs was impactful.
Greenpeace seems to be assiduously cultivating an anti-corporate image. Is this a conscious attitude?
That's not a fair description. We don't take funds from the corporate sector and governments and these two have created the bulk of problems by not adhering to environmental norms. Electronic waste is amongst the many problems that corporates have contributed to but they are becoming conscious of this. When Greenpeace confronted Wipro it, like a responsible company, was willing to see inwards. We are not anti-anybody, we are for things which will make for a cleaner, safer planet.
How do developed nations perceive India's role in bringing about sustainable development globally?
We are at a very hazardous crossroad. As a nation, we have chosen to ignore Gandhi's message of evolving a self-sustainable method. Our political leadership is only looking at GDP as a factor of economic growth. Are we looking at people's livelihood? We need to achieve that balance. The SEZs are the most dangerous and dama-ging development; we are putting in place islands of privilege instead of developing infrastructure. An SEZ is really like setting up a new form of zamindari system.
As an Indian woman heading an international board, how do you envisage your role?
Many emerging concerns and issues are sometimes convergent and tackling these would be among my challenges. We have 44 national regional offices around the world, I want to collate their concerns and place them on the inter-national environmental table, be it the Kyoto Protocol or Alang shipping yard or GM (genetically modified) food.