E-Paper
Great Nicobar project: Strategic necessity or ecological dilemma?
This article is authored by Shiv Bhagwan Saharan, Ph.D. candidate, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
The Great Nicobar Project has emerged as one of India’s most ambitious and contested developmental initiatives of the 21st century. Strategically located at the southernmost tip of the Andaman and Nicobar archipelago, Great Nicobar Island occupies a geographically significant position near the Strait of Malacca, one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints. A substantial share of global trade and energy supplies passes through this narrow sea corridor, making it central to the strategic calculations of major powers. Against the backdrop of intensifying geopolitical rivalry in the Indo-Pacific, India’s decision to invest heavily in the Great Nicobar Project reflects not only an infrastructure agenda but also a broader strategic vision to ensure that development in Great Nicobar remains sustainable, inclusive, and aligned with national interests.
The project, estimated at around ₹72,000–90,000 crore, seeks to transform Great Nicobar into a major hub for trade, logistics, and strategic operations. Its principal components include an International Container Transhipment Terminal at Galathea Bay, a greenfield international airport with dual military and civilian functions, a hybrid energy system powered by gas and solar resources, and a modern township intended to support large-scale economic activity. Some analysts have argued that the project has the potential to evolve into a future maritime and commercial centre comparable to regional hubs such as Singapore or Hong Kong. However, the project has sparked intense debate, particularly following comments made by Leader of the Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, in the Lok Sabha, regarding whether its strategic benefits justify the ecological, humanitarian, and social consequences of its implementation.
From a strategic perspective, the Great Nicobar Project occupies a central place in India’s evolving Indo-Pacific policy. The island lies roughly 150 kilometres from the Strait of Malacca, a route through which thousands of ships transit annually. This corridor carries a significant proportion of global commercial shipping and energy transportation, particularly for East Asian economies. In an international environment increasingly shaped by maritime competition, India considers proximity to such a strategic passage indispensable for safeguarding national interests and projecting regional influence.
India’s maritime doctrine has progressively recognised the Indo-Pacific as a theatre of strategic contestation, where naval mobility, surveillance infrastructure, and logistical capabilities determine geopolitical relevance. In this context, Great Nicobar offers India an opportunity to establish a forward maritime outpost that can enhance maritime domain awareness and naval readiness. By strengthening its presence in the eastern Indian Ocean, India aims to ensure that it remains a consequential actor in shaping the regional security architecture rather than merely responding to external developments.
The project also assumes significance in the context of China’s expanding influence in the Indian Ocean Region. Beijing’s maritime expansion through the Belt and Road Initiative and its associated String of Pearls strategy has heightened India’s concerns regarding strategic encirclement. Chinese-supported port infrastructure in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, and Djibouti has expanded Beijing’s operational footprint across India’s maritime neighbourhood. Consequently, strategic experts increasingly view Great Nicobar as an essential counterbalance capable of strengthening India’s regional posture and preventing the erosion of strategic space in the eastern Indian Ocean.
The development of a modern port and supporting infrastructure at Great Nicobar has the potential to transform India’s maritime posture from a largely defensive orientation to one characterised by proactive power projection. The island could significantly enhance the operational effectiveness of India’s tri-service Andaman and Nicobar Command, transforming it from a logistical support base into a strategically capable operational centre. Enhanced surveillance systems, improved naval deployment capabilities, and greater logistical efficiency would contribute not only to maritime security but also to humanitarian assistance and disaster response efforts across the Indo-Pacific region.
Yet, despite its strategic rationale, the project raises serious concerns regarding environmental sustainability. The Great Nicobar Island forms part of the Sundaland Biodiversity Hotspot, one of the world’s most ecologically sensitive regions and among the few recognised biodiversity hotspots linked to India. The island has been designated a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve due to its rich ecological diversity, dense tropical rainforests, and unique wildlife habitats. The project’s environmental consequences are substantial. Approximately one million trees have reportedly been marked for felling to facilitate infrastructure expansion. Such large-scale deforestation threatens fragile ecosystems that support hundreds of species of flora and fauna, many of which are endemic and highly vulnerable. Great Nicobar’s tropical forests also perform critical ecological functions, including moisture retention and climatic regulation associated with the southwest monsoon system.
Particularly alarming is the threat posed to marine biodiversity. Galathea Bay, the proposed site for the transhipment terminal, is one of the most important nesting grounds for the endangered leatherback turtle in the Indo-Pacific region. The coral reef systems surrounding the island are similarly vulnerable to extensive dredging and port construction. Environmentalists warn that irreversible ecological degradation may undermine biodiversity that has evolved over thousands of years.
Geological risks further complicate the viability of large-scale infrastructure development on the island. Great Nicobar falls within Seismic Zone V, making it one of the most earthquake-prone regions in the world. In 2004, the Indian Ocean tsunami severely affected the island, leaving lasting memories of environmental devastation and vulnerability. Critics question the prudence of constructing major urban infrastructure, power facilities, and industrial installations in an area highly vulnerable to seismic disturbances and escalating climate risks.
Equally significant are concerns regarding indigenous rights and cultural preservation. Great Nicobar is home to the Shompen, a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG), and the Southern Nicobarese community, both of whom maintain deep historical and cultural ties to the island. The Shompen, in particular, have traditionally lived in relative isolation, relying extensively on forest ecosystems for subsistence and cultural continuity.
The proposed transformation of Great Nicobar into a large urban-commercial centre raises concerns regarding cultural displacement and demographic marginalisation. Large-scale migration, infrastructure development, and ecological disruption could fundamentally alter indigenous ways of life. Environmentalists argue that external interventions may adversely affect isolated communities by introducing diseases, causing social dislocation, and eroding cultural traditions. Historical experiences involving indigenous populations in island regions underscore the irreversible consequences of poorly managed development.
However, the Great Nicobar Project represents both an opportunity and a dilemma for India. Strategically, it has the potential to strengthen maritime power, reduce economic vulnerabilities, and enhance India’s influence in the Indo-Pacific. In a geopolitical environment defined by strategic competition, India’s presence in Great Nicobar may indeed be foundational rather than optional.
Yet, strategic importance alone cannot justify neglecting ecological sustainability and indigenous welfare. The long-term legitimacy of the project will depend not solely on infrastructure expansion or military capability, but on India’s ability to reconcile development with responsibility. A calibrated approach, one that prioritises limited strategic infrastructure while preserving ecological integrity and protecting tribal rights, may offer a more sustainable path forward.
(The views expressed are personal)
This article is authored by Shiv Bhagwan Saharan, Ph.D. candidate, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
