Le Clemenceau Controversy

Le Clemenceau

Controversy

The Clemenceau was the 8th aircraft carrier of the French Navy. From the 60s to the 90s, she was the backbone of the French Navy, along with her sister-ship, the Foch. During her 24 year's in service career, she sailed more than a million nautical miles in 3125 days at sea, on all the seas of the world. She was the second French warship to be named after Georges Clemenceau.

On December 31, 2005 the Clemenceau left the French port of Toulon to be dismantled in Alang, Gujarat, India .In December, before the ship started its sail to India, Greenpeace started protesting against France's attempts to dump the old 27,000-ton warship laden with toxics such as asbestos, PCBs, lead, mercury, and other toxic chemicals on India. It demanded that France should deal with its own toxic waste instead of shipping it to India, where the impoverished workers employed in a poorly managed ship breaking industry would be exposed to these toxic waste resulting in injury and death. Greenpeace tried to block the departure of the ship from port of Toulon. They also said that the transportation of ship is in violation of Basel Convention, that was designed to reduce the movements of hazardous waste between nations, and specifically to prevent dumping of hazardous waste from developed to less developed countries .If Greenpeace was correct then it would mean that the French authorities involved in Le Clemenceau deal had misrepresented facts to both the Egyptian and Indian Governments and also breached various international conventions that governed issues of movement of hazardous waste like the Basel Convention, Rotterdam Convention, and Stockholm Convention.
Ever since the Clemenceau steamed out of the port of Toulon on December 31, it has been the object of a growing international dispute. However, Greenpeace claimed that Le Clemenceau contained approximately 760 tons of asbestos, of which only 115 tons of asbestos was cleaned in France and the ship still contained more than 500 tons of toxic asbestos. Greenpeace also claimed that the ship contained approximately 800 tons of PCB. Greenpeace and several environmental groups argue it carries far more asbestos on board than the 45 or so tons French officials first claimed. Egyptian authorities originally blocked the Clemenceau from entering the Suez Canal en route for India, for fears of its toxic cargo. On January 12 the ship reached Egypt, where it was boarded by two Greenpeace activists. Egyptian authorities denied access to the Suez Canal, asking for a proof that the ship didn't violate the Basel Convention. On January 15 the ship was finally allowed to pass. This decision was heavily criticized by Greenpeace and other environmental groups. On January 6 the Supreme Court of India temporarily denied access to Alang since the ship contained tonnes of asbestos and the Basel Convention on hazardous waste prohibits the transportation of toxic materials from one country to another. Alang, located on the Western coast of India in the state of Gujarat, was one of the biggest ship breaking ports in the world and employed approximately 150,000 workers. Alang had attracted the ire of environmental activists for quite some time due to the working conditions prevalent over there which were below safety standards.

The Supreme Court of India constituted a Monitoring Committee (SCMC - Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes to look into the controversy. The committee submitted its interim report accordingly. Not satisfied with the committee's report, the Supreme Court on 13th February 2006 decided to constitute a new panel to go into the issue. The court directed the Government of India to suggest by February 17 the names of three or four retired Navy officers for appointment of a new panel. On February 15, French President Jacques Chirac ordered the Clemenceau to return to French waters and remain on standby following a ruling by France's highest administrative court, the Conseil d'État . The court acted on a complaint from Greenpeace regarding discrepancies in the amount of asbestos present in the ship, which Greenpeace contended would pose a severe health and environmental hazard in India. The issue now reverts to a Paris administrative court for further deliberations and rulings. The French Ministry of Defense announced an inquiry into the asbestos levels on the ship. This is the third time Clemenceau has been turned back in less than three years. Environmental campaigns succeeded in turning the veteran of the Gulf War of 1991 away from Turkey and Greece in October and November 2003 respectively. It faced a no less furious campaign this time as well. It was the plan for a presidential visit, however, that precipitated the French decision.

What turned Clemenceau back was a worldwide tide of protests. It was a collective victory of activists who demonstrated at Toulon, who boarded the contaminated ship off Egypt, and who dumped symbolic garbage outside the French embassy in New Delhi. The massive campaign should achieve much more than the mere recall of a single toxic ship. The Clemenceau controversy became the icon of toxic trade abuse between the developed world and developing countries. With President Chirac’s decision it now becomes a sign of how Governments, when pressurized by public opinion, can take corrective action.