The Siang dam and a threatened homeland

Why in the News

A process meant to record local consent for a feasibility study on the Siang Upper Multipurpose Project (SUMP) has instead produced allegations that hundreds of signatures were obtained by deceit, force and threats. The Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF) of the Adi community has rejected the Chief Minister’s invitation to talks after a lathi-charge, arrests and a violent march in Arunachal Pradesh.

What is the Siang project, and why is it being pushed?

1. What it is: The SUMP is a planned 11,000 MW hydroelectric mega-dam on the Siang, developed by the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC). It was declared a national project in 2008.
2. The China factor: China has begun its Medog dam on the Yarlung Tsangpo. That river feeds the Siang and the Brahmaputra. The SUMP is pitched as a counter to Medog.
3. Pre-Feasibility Report (PFR): The State wants a PFR, the first study of whether a dam can be built, at three proposed sites, including Parong and Uggeng.
4. Scale of loss: Local estimates say the reservoir would fully submerge 27 villages and affect up to 40.
5. The takeaway: A strategic buffer against China must be built on land a tribe sees as its civilisational home.

Why do the Adi oppose the dam?

1. Livelihoods: The Adi of the Siang, East Siang and Upper Siang regions depend largely on riverbank paddy farming and orange orchards.
2. Ancestral and religious ties: Oral histories say the Siang guided the tribe from Tibet to Riga, its first settlement, now under threat. The river is central to Donyi Polo, the Adi religion.
3. Organised resistance: The SIFF formed in about 2012 to oppose the project. With youth groups, it has declared “collective non-consent” to the dam and the study.

How was consent obtained, according to residents?

1. MoU terms: Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) signed from September 2025 record “irrevocable consent” to the PFR and eligibility for a “special relief package”. They state this is not consent to the dam.
2. Unexplained signatories: One member per village signed the MoUs on the authority of “pro-dam” families. No record shows how they were picked.
3. Alleged deceit: Villagers say signatures came through deceit, force and threats of losing scheme benefits. In Geku, residents say they signed blank papers meant for “development schemes”.
4. Withdrawals: Between 600 and 1,000 signatures appeared on the MoUs, and villages are now organising to withdraw them. Geku residents have sworn affidavits denying consent.

How has the State responded to the protests?

1. Lathi-charge: Elderly protesters at Uggeng were allegedly lathi-charged in October, injuring 54 of them and a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) official.
2. Arrests: Anti-dam activists from Geku were arrested under the Arunachal Pradesh Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 2014. The SIFF’s legal adviser was arrested later.
3. Pasighat march: A youth march in Pasighat, allegedly met with lathi-charge and tear gas, turned violent and mobs burned NHPC premises.
4. Talks rejected: The SIFF youth wing wants detainees released, security forces withdrawn and the Chief Minister to visit the affected areas before any talks.

Challenges

1. Bypassed village process: Officials sought individual signatures instead of holding customary village meetings, so recorded consent lacks community legitimacy.
2. Weak constitutional shield: The vice-president of the People’s Party of Arunachal argues that Article 371(H) lacks the land and resource protections of Nagaland and Mizoram, so Arunachal’s rivers stay open to projects.
3. Trust deficit: Many link the push to a soft loan the State took from NHPC to revive its cooperative Apex Bank.
4. No water treaty: No India-China treaty governs the shared river, so villagers ask why they should bear the cost of that failure.

Way Forward

1. Open village consent: Seek consent through village meetings with every signatory named and recorded.
2. Independent verification: Have an independent body examine disputed signatures and affidavits.
3. Study alternatives: Assess the SIFF’s proposal to dam smaller tributaries, which it says could generate twice the SUMP’s power.
4. Water diplomacy: Seek a water-sharing agreement with China on the Yarlung Tsangpo.

Conclusion

The SUMP’s strategic case now rests on consent the Adi say they never gave, so the dispute is whether the State can claim agreement at all. Watch whether the State pauses the feasibility study for talks or presses ahead.

Back2Basics: Medog Dam

1. Location: At the Great Bend of the Yarlung Tsangpo in Tibet, just upstream of Arunachal Pradesh.
2. Scale: 60 GW planned across five cascading power stations.
3. Start: China broke ground in July 2025.
4. Risk: It sits close to the Paizhen Fault, and China has declined to share key engineering details.

Matching Previous Year Question

“No direct PYQ traced in the provided files. Thematic PYQ: [2010] Which one of the following pairs is not correctly matched ? Dam/Lake River (a) Govind Sagar – Satluj (b) Kolleru Lake – Krishna (c) Ukai Reservoir – Tapi (d) Wular Lake – Jhelum ANSWER: (b)”