India Clears $12.5 Billion Great Nicobar Project as Shompen, Forest Risks Intensify
Updated
Updated · ABC News · Jun 5
India Clears $12.5 Billion Great Nicobar Project as Shompen, Forest Risks Intensify
2 articles · Updated · ABC News · Jun 5
Summary
India’s environmental court let the $12.5 billion Great Nicobar project proceed in February, rejecting challenges despite warnings over the isolated Shompen tribe and the island’s fragile ecosystem.
The three-phase plan is central to Narendra Modi’s Indo-Pacific strategy: a $5.5 billion port, airport, roads and expanded dual-use defence facilities near the Malacca Strait, where about 30% of global trade passes.
Nearly one-fifth of the 910-square-kilometre island is slated for clearance, with the government estimating 711,000 trees cut and conservationists warning the true toll could run into the millions.
Critics say the works could expose roughly 300 uncontacted Shompen to disease, disrupt waterways they depend on, and damage a key leatherback turtle nesting beach in a region with only 1,000 to 3,000 turtles.
The project would recast Great Nicobar from an island of about 9,000 people into a logistics and tourism hub of 336,000 by 2055, underscoring how strategic rivalry with China is reshaping remote frontier regions.
In a tsunami-prone zone, what unseen disaster risks does this $12.5 billion 'unsinkable carrier' project face?
Is securing a strategic edge over China worth the potential extinction of the isolated Shompen tribe?
With record turtle nesting in Galathea Bay, why was its wildlife sanctuary status revoked to build a port?
India’s $9 Billion Great Nicobar Project: Strategic Ambitions Collide with Environmental and Human Rights Concerns
Overview
As of June 2026, the Great Nicobar Project faces major legal and public challenges. The Calcutta High Court’s Port Blair circuit bench is actively hearing Public Interest Litigations filed by Meena Gupta, a former Secretary of the Ministry of Environment and Forests. The court allowed these PILs to proceed, rejecting arguments that the issues had already been settled by the National Green Tribunal, since those involved different petitioners and subjects. This decision highlights that even large national projects must follow environmental and social safeguards set by Parliament, reflecting growing scrutiny and the importance of legal compliance in development projects.