Desperate decisions leading to more desperation

The 30 year old regime in Maldives has continued its deception and still are doing so. Over the years the nation has not seen much development as it ought to have. Yet the failed policies continue and the viosionaries keep on dreaming. While many developing nations are heading for sustainable development we are going backwards and our politicians are doing everything against the sustainable development principles. According to the 1987 Bruntland report sustainable development is "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. We all know the political agenda of the regime has flavoured their decpetion tactics with 2 unachievable visions, i.e population consolidation and mass tourism development. If we look at the 2 terms, growth and development, growth is mostly a quantitative change while development is a qualitative change. Because of high dependency on tourism and lack of natural reosurces we need to develop the tourism sector for the benefit of people. Because of disparity and difficulties and unfeasible economic nature of transport and develpoment in many small islands we need to focus on population consolidation. However the way these things are done currently by the regime undermines the public consensus and the awareness of public on these issues. Since the government has been ruled as a family buisness solely to make profit and to fatten the coffers of "Endheri" and "Kaaminee" clan the whole government and the government revenue is used for profit making. This has undermined the public and the desperations of public has turned in to frustrations. To soothe and calm the public tourism is brought to all corners of the country, undermining the essence of development i.e "More does not mean good". "The complexity of human-ecological systems, and the limitations in our current state of knowledge of the dynamics of these systems, make it hard to predict precisely where critical thresholds lie" (Global Environment Outlook, GEO4). This statement is very true and the vargaries associated with the current policy to develop resorts in the lagoons of some islands by reclamation and population consolidation should be taken cutiously. If there is anything like precautionery principle this is where we need to employ it. Our tourism is dependent on sand, surf and seas and the reefs and the values to which this tourism exist will be cannibalaised by this kind of tourism dvelpment. As more tourists are becoming environmentally conscious and seeking more green tourism, such artificial conditions will upset the current markets. However the "well learned people"believe over time such artificial sand beds will transform into natural islands and again is envisioned by illusions. Currently over 80% of our islands are facing threats of climate change and erosion is a major issue. Hence changing the dynamics of coastal and marine systems for such develpments will surely hamper the worsening conditions. However the magic word EIA is now used as an excuse for each and everything from not providing or not doing to overdoing and over exploitation. Hence or other wise we need to look at concerns of MATI and the government needs to to oblige in sustainable development and resource conservation, as well as environmental protection and maintenance of biological diversity.