River dams: Perspectives differently placed

For long, issues related to dams have been played out as ‘political’ and ‘social’ subjects in our State. However, dam as an ‘economic’ subject, for whatever reason, has not been talked about or discussed in detail by any section of society. Contrastingly, rabble-rousing over dams in Arunachal by Assamese activists, intelligentsia and political leaders, as if Arunachal Pradesh is all about dead man’s town, is not without reason and not without plan, for sure. In the garb of political subject, sections of Assam are trying to hijack the ‘economic subject’ of Arunachal.

With election round the corner, political leaders of Assam have become problem hunters and are making a desperate bid to politicize the entire ‘economic subject’ of Arunachal as its own, painting a very grim picture of downstream impacts. Intelligentsias are full of ideas on how to stop dam projects in Arunachal Pradesh with their expert opinions; and one has been witness to such parleys in couple of e-groups and e-mails. There are activists in Assam from all walks of life, who are speaking for Arunachalees or at least pretending to be doing so, without even meeting or talking to indigenous Arunachalees. They have been taking out dharnas, protest rallies in towns of Assam as much as in Delhi. Though Assamese brethren may provide a different shade to their logic but this very paternalistic attitude of Assamese society comprising activists, intelligentsia and political leaders has pained the Arunachalees more than anarchic auctioning that leaders did in the State. Activists from Assam are talking as if core determining factor for construction of dam is ‘downstream’ and Assam is the primary stakeholder in the issues of dams in Taniland, Patkai Range or in Mon region of Arunachal Pradesh.

Would they stick and stand by this same logic on the issue of Tipaimukh project, if Bangladesh raises the issue of ‘downstream impact’? Assam is to Bangladesh what Arunachal is to Assam over the Subansiri project. There is a difference, though: Dams on the Siang and Subansiri rivers in Arunachal are an outcome of long-felt need by Assamese in early and mid-80s. Thus, it is only comical when one finds them opposing it tooth and nail now. Ironically, more progressive Assam has been the biggest beneficiary of setting up of the Brahmaputra Board, National Hydro Power Corporation in this region and even North Eastern Electrical Power Corporation (NEEPCO). Can they deny it?

As a common discerning Arunachalee, one sees the multi-pronged attacking strategies of Assamese society as a conspiracy to derail the great hydro rush which has the potential of bringing about ‘economic’ independence from the shackles of ‘alms in the form of Annual Outlay Plan’ from the Central Government. One sees their attitude as a ‘roadblock’ to perpetuate Assamese-centric economic hegemony, with Guwahati as its hub in the region; and one can perceive it as their attempt to satiate their crave to remain numero uno State in the entire region, with a crab mentality of pulling down the one who is attempting to climb above them on the vertical ladder.

An alternate view from Arunachal is that dam is an internal issue of our State. Secondly, most of them are talking and behaving as if we have no home-grown thinkers, activists and political leaders, who are competent to speak on our behalf. Thirdly, these leaders may vociferously talk about the concept of ‘one NE India’ but fact remains that each one of us are different – culturally, socially and economically – and can never be one. Concept of ‘North East India’, often propagated and popularized by mainland Indians and people from this region, had been a subject of their convenience; and it is a misnomer which does not hold any water even for the sake of unification. And finally, it is highly intriguing to note that whenever there have been problems in border towns between two States, none of these leaders speak out unlike in the case of dams; therefore, one wonders why a different yardstick is used for similar ‘shared’ problems, if at all they think that dams are problematic.

One can see a streak of greater conspiracy behind the facade of downstream story. Historically and geographically advantageous Assam has long survived and flourished on ‘dependency syndrome’ of surrounding States like Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Mizoram, Manipur etc. Dependency syndrome planted the growth of Assamese economy and inflated their ‘big brother’ attitude. With imminent ‘economic independence’ lurking on their face, feeling of insecurity has crept in among the ‘big brothers’ and there are thinkers in Assam who believe that Arunachal is an economic giant that is about to wake up with a little or no dependency on Assam, unlike in the past or the present. With coming up of trans-Arunachal highway as much as dams, it is the most visible sight that international trade routes with neighbouring countries would open up by default and as a consequence Arunachal is bound for greater glories in years to come. But are our political leaders visualizing the gravity of the impact of these two grand projects?

That’s another subject and a million dollar question. Discerning locals have reason to believe that political leaders have not understood the full impact of ‘dam’ as an economic subject; have failed to create a shared vision of economic prosperity that could percolate down to bottom. In last few years, we have only heard about discussion which is limited to ‘upfront money’- that too none has seen or felt; we have heard about employment prospect in most amateurish manner - with no numbers. In other words, what has stopped them from furnishing a comprehensive report on total direct and indirect investment, employment generation potential, economic growth rate and other indirect impact with 5, 10 and 15 years perspectives on hydro-developments? The State government needs to do a course corrections or else face a huge uprising against dams, if linear approach to dam is continued. It is fair enough to muse as to why someone should sacrifice his or her society, culture and ecology at the cost of his or her socio-political identity for the benefit of another person or  society.