It's Dow Or Die

For 17 long years, victims of the Bhopal gas tragedy have been waging an inexorable battle for justice, fighting obstacles corporate power and government apathy have placed in their way. It's this quest that has inspired Justice in Bhopal, a coalition of groups of survivors and their supporters, to wing their way to the US. Their aim: to pressure the new owners of Union Carbide, from whose pesticide plant in Bhopal methyl isocyanate (MIC) leaked to kill thousands, to assume "pending liabilities".

The latest chapter in the Bhopal gas tragedy opened in February 2001, when the Michigan-based Dow Chemical Company merged with Union Carbide Corporation (UCC). Hints of what awaited Dow came through a lawsuit its shareholders filed, accusing its officials of not disclosing significant criminal and civil potential liabilities UCC continued to face in Bhopal.

Embarrassing Dow now is the Justice in Bhopal group, currently touring the US in an attempt to "raise awareness and put pressure" on Dow to assume liability for the continuing health impacts of the disaster. It also wants Dow to be accountable for the loss of livelihood, remove contamination of the ground water and soil in and around the factory site, and ensure that prime accused Warren Anderson, former UCC chairman, is brought to justice.

Representatives of Bhopal survivors aired their grievances at an unscheduled encounter with Dow CEO Michael D. Parker at the company's annual shareholders meet in Midland, Michigan, on May 9. John Musser, communications director (public affairs) at Dow Chemicals, dismissed their claim saying, "The moral responsibility was resolved when UCC stepped forward immediately after the disaster to accept responsibility. And the legal liability was resolved when the Indian government and UCC agreed to a $470-million settlement which was put in a trust. This money went towards the exclusive purpose of managing all claims."

Dow's refusal to assume liabilities in India has several activists fuming. Satinath Sarangi, a member of the Bhopal Group for Information and Action, says Dow's stance on Bhopal is in contrast to its acceptance of UCC's liabilities in Texas, where the company recently settled an asbestos-related litigation. He also thinks the $470-million negotiated settlement is meagre compared to the $5-billion penalty in the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster (involving spilling of 11 million gallons of oil in Alaska) in which no human lives were lost. "It reeks of double standards," says Sarangi.

Agrees Rick Hinds, of Greenpeace's toxics campaign. "If Bhopal had happened in New Jersey," says he, "Dow would have already accepted responsibility." Such hypocrisy is particularly glaring in the failure of both the Indian and US governments to extradite Anderson who resides in Florida.

Bhopal activists are asking Dow to release unpublished medical research on MIC's toxicity, claiming this could facilitate treatment. Says Dr H.H. Trivedi, a former medical professor and survivor of the tragedy, "The incidence of TB is rising in Bhopal. We don't know whether we're dealing with a new strain." Musser pleads ignorance about the line of treatment to be pursued. Instead he offers homily, "No one's saying we forget about Bhopal. As a company we believe our responsibility is to learn from the circumstances that resulted in the tragedy and ensure similar actions don't happen again."

Counters Greenpeace representative Dr Mary Elizabeth Harmon, "Dow's ownership of UCC has neither changed the need for the Bhopal site to be cleaned up nor for survivors to be rehabilitated. US law doesn't absolve responsibility for contamination due to transition of ownership. A lesser standard outside the US is unconscionable."

But Musser cites Indian government studies to claim that the area adjoining the plant site is contamination-free, though he thinks it reasonable to assume the factory site isn't.Says he: "In any event, UCC had to leave the country. Presumably, the trust set up as part of the settlement should be responsible for any clean-up."

Says Amit Srivastava of the California-based advocacy group CorpWatch: "One person is dying every day of symptoms related to the leak. People are still paying the price." So, if the victims continue to suffer, is it moral for Dow to claim it has no liability only because UCC paid $470 million?

Musser replies, "We have tried to identify some humanitarian initiative.... It's a strictly philanthropic activity and shouldn't be confused with any assertion that we were responding to...demands on liabilities." It's precisely such brazen attitudes that Justice in Bhopal hopes to change.