Ever since the news of China building the Zangmu hydel project on Yarlong-Tsangpo (as the Brahmaputra is known in Tibet), and its plans to divert its water toward north started filtering in more than half a decade back, disquiet has been growing in the downstream Indian states of Assam and Arunachal Pradesh (AP) about its consequences. The 510 MW Zangmu dam, a part of the Zangmu hydel project, is incidentally the first to be constructed on the Brahmaputra.
Later, mainstream Indian media also became quite vociferous on the issue which demanded response from the Government of India (GoI) on this. The latter’s persistent refrain, however, was that it had no information about any such Chinese design. While the Chinese response has been always typically reticent or non-committal, now it has become clear that the Chinese have reached an advanced stage of building the dam on the Brahmaputra in Tibet. According to recent reports, the first section of the Zangmu dam has already begun generating power. Naturally, communities in downstream areas of Northeast India are concerned, as the damming of the Brahmaputra in Tibet may seriously affect their life and livelihood. The report that building of more dams is proposed under the same project on the Brahmaputra has indeed become a source of serious trepidation among these communities.
The lifeline of the downstream areas
The Brahmaputra is one of the world’s largest rivers. It is an international river which originates in southern Tibet, enters India via Arunachal Pradesh, and then flows through Assam before finally merging into the Bay of Bengal. Throughout its long course, the Brahmaputra receives numerous tributaries with their own idiosyncrasies. Therefore, the significance of the Brahmaputra can be understood only together with its tributaries – as a river system. The Brahmaputra river system along with its major tributaries in Arunachal Pradesh, such as the Siang, Dibang, Lohit, Subansiri, Kameng, etc., is not only critical for the ecology and livelihood of the indigenous communities of Arunachal Pradesh, this river system is also inextricably linked with the floodplain ecology of wetlands (beels) and grasslands in the Brahmaputra Valley. These linkages, for example, are clearly visible in the world-renowned ecosystems such as Kaziranga, Manas and Dibru-Saikhowa National Parks in Assam.
It is a truism that the Brahmaputra river system is the lifeline for livelihoods such as fishing and agriculture of local communities in its floodplains in Northeast India (and also Bangladesh). The unique ecology of the river determines the livelihood patterns, customs, food habits, music, religious beliefs, etc., of the indigenous communities of the region. Briefly speaking, the very socio-cultural identity of the indigenous people of the valley is closely intertwined with this river system.
The Brahmaputra river system also serves as an ecological and socio-cultural commons for the people of the Brahmaputra valley in Assam, the most densely populated and economically, the most important part of the Northeast region of India. These commons constitute the river, the beels, the chaporis (riverine islands and tracts), the grasslands and forests of the Brahmaputra floodplain. For example, the beels and the tributaries serve as fisheries, and there exist a number of communities in the valley traditionally identified as fishing folks. The chaporis serve as critical sites of livelihood for the people in the winter season. The chaporis which are exposed in winter are used both for agriculture, and cattle grazing and rearing purposes by local communities. A number of communities have been traditionally using the chaporis for dairy-related activities too. They are used extensively by wildlife as well. During the rainy season, the flood water of the Brahmaputra and its tributaries fertilise the agricultural field with their fertile silt contributing to the productivity of the soil.
Again, driftwood collection in the flowing rivers becomes an important activity for the local communities, and it plays a critical role in complementing their livelihood. These rivers also facilitate river transportation which is a traditional source of livelihood for the local communities. Similarly, in the winter season, sand and gravel mining in the rivers become two other important sources of livelihood for the latter.
Cultural significance
The Brahmaputra and its tributaries are also considered sacred by the indigenous communities, tribal and non-tribal, in the region. Their cultural and spiritual significance can hardly be over emphasised. Parasuram Kund, one such site in AP on the river Lohit is of extremely important cultural significance for various communities in the region. For the Mishmi tribe of AP and the Deori tribe of Assam and AP, the Parasuram Kund is the most revered religious and cultural site. It is also a much revered pilgrimage site for millions of Hindus around the world who visit and take bath at the Kund during Makar Sankranti every year. While dams can be located at different sites on a river and its tributaries, the existing cultural heritage sites such as Parasuram Kund cannot be relocated. It is crucial that effort is taken to properly understand the ecological and the socio-cultural commons of the people of the Northeast before implementing major development projects such as large hydropower projects. Otherwise, we will be building one kind of infrastructure while dismantling the natural infrastructure which supports the livelihoods and cultural-spiritual existence of the people of the region.
The China angle
The alarm in the downstream areas in Northeast India over the Chinese activities on the Brahmaputra is due to the perception that it will deprive the river of its water flow in a major way, leading to devastating consequences on the ecology of its downstream areas, if not the very existence of the people living in these areas. China maintains that the hydel projects it is building on the Brahmaputra in Tibet are ‘run-of-theriver’ projects that will not hold back water to affect the river flow in the middle riparian areas in India. It has also denied that it intends to divert the Brahmaputra water towards north. However, mere description of the projects as run-of-the-river does not mean much. Experts point out, for example, that most of the run-of-the-river hydel projects being developed in the Himalayan region involve large dams, which divert the river waters through long tunnels, before the water is dropped back into the river at a downstream location after passing through a powerhouse. More importantly, many so called runof- the-river projects drastically alter the river on a daily basis. All these pose a clear threat to riverine ecology and pose a livelihood challenge to the communities in the downstream areas. Further, even if China has denied any plan to divert the Brahmaputra water, experts have expressed apprehension that this cannot be a ground for complacency. They also point out to the Chinese intervention in the Mekong, another international river that originates in Tibet, which has allegedly deprived all the five countries, namely, Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam downstream, of their share of water.
Interestingly, however, the GoI is already either in the process of constructing or giving clearance to a large number of big hydel dams on the perennial rivers in Arunachal Pradesh as part of its policy to turn Northeast into ‘India’s future powerhouse’. This has already led to widespread protests in the region. These protests are based on the apprehension that this ‘development’ initiative of the government would spell disaster to the river ecosystem and the livelihood and cultural heritage of millions of people of the region. The protests are also informed by the fact that the region is characterised by a fragile geography and high seismicity, which might cause catastrophe in case of breakage of any of these big dams. Thus, in so far as the Northeastern region is concerned, these dams will not have any less adverse impact on the region than what the Chinese dams may cause. Despite popular protests and concerns in the region, the government seems to be hell bent on constructing these hydel projects. The recent recommendation for clearance of the 3000 MW Dibang hydel project in AP, the largest dam in India, without addressing the downstream concerns is a recent case in point. It may be mentioned that the foundation stone of this project was laid six years back and the environmental clearance of it was denied twice.
While a section of advocates of the hydel dams in AP are vociferous against the Chinese dams, they stop short of stating that the dams in AP will also have similar effect in Assam and Bangladesh. Besides, India has till now not given due attention to the protests and concerns raised by Bangladesh and by the people of Manipur and Barak Valley of Assam against the Tipaimukh dam on Barak river in Manipur. This background seems to have weakened India’s bargaining position vis-à-vis China. Had India demonstrated necessary sensitivity to the public concerns in the Northeast (and also Bangladesh) regarding the downstream social and ecological impacts of the dam building in the region, it definitely would have enjoyed moral upper hand vis-à-vis China in it s dialogue with the latter on the possible adverse consequences of the dams in Tibet.
The issue of ‘first users’ right’
The pro-dam experts often use the alibi of the provision known as the ‘first users’ right’ for constructing dams in the rivers in AP. They argue that by building dams on transnational rivers in Arunachal Pradesh before China does it, India can deter China from building any major projects on these rivers which might affect India’s use of its water. Indeed, the Helsinki Rules on the Uses of the Waters of International Rivers stated in 1966 that all bordering nations have a right to equitable share to the water resources that cross national boundaries, except where other agreement between bordering nations exists. But the Helsinki Rules never became a Universal Law.
In 1997, the United Nations (UN) adopted the Convention on the Law of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses pertaining to the uses and conservation of all waters that cross international boundaries. But it fell far short of the required number of support from the member countries to make it legally enforceable. In 2008, the UN began reviewing a law proposed by the International Law Commission to serve similar purpose to the unratified document, but was considering adopting the proposal as guideline rather than immediately attempting to draft it into law. This shows clearly that unlike what was being propagated by the advocates of big dams, there existed no legally binding international treaty on the ‘first users’ right’. Only on 17 August 2014, could the treaty muster the support of the minimum of 36 member countries of the UN to make it enforceable. Incidentally, major countries including India and China have not ratified this treaty.
There indeed exists an opposite view that damming on the Brahmaputra in Tibet will not affect the water flow in the river in a very significant way because the main source of its water supply are the tributaries in the AP. As such, the hullabaloo about Brahmaputra drying up is highly exaggerated. However, many experts have debunked this view of seeking to look at a river in a fragmented way. More importantly, there are few takers of this view at the popular level.
Way forward
It is not difficult to understand the critical importance of the Brahmaputra river system to the very existence of the people in its riparian areas. Therefore, the project of damming the Brahmaputra either in Tibet or in Arunachal Pradesh is a matter of grave concern. Experts argue that the natural flow pattern of a river is like its ‘heart beat’, and the alternate starving and flooding of these major rivers on a daily basis due to power generation patterns of the hydel projects will jeopardise the ecological and social security of both the Arunachal hills as well as the Brahmaputra floodplains in Assam and Bangladesh. The inevitable adverse socio-economic consequences of damming rivers in the region might give rise to more socio-political instability in the already troubled Northeastern region.
This warrants that rather than engaging in a race with China to stake its claim on the Brahmaputra water or to emphasise its presence in Arunachal Pradesh, India should enter into a dialogue with China on the conservation, and indeed a sustainable use of the Brahmaputra river system and the riparian ecology. In the absence of any internationally binding law, the best position for India appears to be the moral position which it stands to forfeit by building its own system of dams in Arunachal Pradesh, with serious consequences in the downstream areas both within India and Bangladesh.