Over the next few years, the government proposes to spend over Rs 200,000 crore in building 718 such dams to produce at least 40,000 megawatts of power to meet the country's growing demands. In recent months according to Kolkata-based environmentalists, at least 124 MOUs have been signed officially. Interestingly, 70% of the orders have been given to private parties, with PSUs accounting for 30% of the contracts.

Environmentalists, and spokesmen of the civil society in Assam, Manipur, and Mizoram have protested the centre's moves, as well as almost all sections of public opinion in Bangladesh. If the proposals are translated into action, it may mean the end of the rich bio-diversity of the Indo-Chinese, Indo-Malayan and Indo-Burmese geological belt. It will also displace major indigenous tribes like Hmars, Zeliangrongs, Kukis, Mizos and many Nagas from the region, ending their centuries-long settlements in the politically sensitive region.

Says an environmentalist based in Kolkata, ”It may mean the end of much of the Northeast region as a human settlement, in order to meet the growing industrial and economic demands of other regions in India hundreds of miles away.” He unconsciously echoes similar views expressed by eminent persons of the NE region. Guwahati University Vice Chancellor Amarjyoti Choudhury for instance, recently warned the centre not to proceed with development projects that interfere with the natural flow of major rivers of the area. Most civilizations in the world are river-centric and such experimentation could prove disastrous in terms of human tragedy and historical impact.

However, there are no indications as yet that the Centre, the PSUs or other authorities are listening. From Sikkim to Silchar, organisations like the NHPC, NEEPCo, the Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam, not to mention the state governments of Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh are associated closely with these projects.

At a recent seminar in Guwahati, Assam-based intellectuals and civil society spokesmen from other parts of India voiced their mounting concern over the Centre's proposals. They were worried about the environmental impact on upper Assam and in lower riparian areas like Bangladesh. In any case, asked one speaker, if India itself built so many dams on major rivers, how could it morally challenge China not to build such dams over the Brahmaputra?

Curiously, especially with Bangladesh, India's reply to its neighbour on the question of the building the Tipaimukh Dam in the Barak valley has been rather similar to Chinese replies to Indian concerns on the building of dams on the river Tsangpo (Brahmaputra) in Tibet.

In both cases, concerned Indian and Chinese authorities have never directly denied that the projects will not be implemented or that the dams will never be built. China has assured India that all countries in the region will be kept fully informed about the Brahmaputra projects, that there could be joint studies as to cost benefit ratios and the impact on environment and river flows. Also, it was never China's intention to make things difficult in any way for its neighbours with whom it had political ties going back to centuries.

These are exactly arguments put forward by India to assure Bangladesh over the Tipaimukh barrage and dam project, where private and public sector units are scheduled to work together. However, unlike China, India has allowed expert team visits from Bangladesh and since the Awami league came to power, there has hardly been any work done in the area, unlike what has happened in Tibet. There are plans to generate 1500 megawatts from this hydel project.

However, Bangladesh is not satisfied. From political parties to common people, the grievance is that after the Farakka barrage was built, there has been a 30% reduction of the flow in the Ganga river for the lower riparian country. The experience after the construction of the Gozaldoba barrage on the Teesta river has been no different, as the flow has dropped in upper Bangladesh areas.

The resultant loss to human habitation, irrigation, agriculture, fishing, fisheries and economic development have been disastrous for Bangladesh. Entire settlements have been wiped out, and thousands of climate refugees are currently struggling for bare survival. Climate patterns have changed, rains have suffered, leading to land aridity in many areas and a rise in normal temperature.

In Arunachal Pradesh, former BJP MP Tapir Gaon has been vocal, alleging that most MOUs that have been signed without any kind of scientific study or research into the environmental impact that would follow. Each MOU must be reviewed and re-examined. The authorities have not taken any of the living communities into confidence about what they are proposing to carry out, which is their minimum legal obligation.

The conclusion is obvious, say observers: unless the reckless corporate urge to exploit age-old natural resources even in a highly seismically sensitive region is curbed by restraint, an environmental calamity will surely follow - perhaps political, too. (IPA)