According to Jawaharlal Nehru, large-scale hydropower and multipurpose river valley projects are the “temples of modern India,” a monument to progress, irrigation, electricity, and national development. In Arunachal Pradesh, the Upper Siang Multipurpose Project (SUMP), a 11,000 MW hydropower megaproject, is envisioned as a transformative national infrastructure project in India’s northeastern region, with dual objectives in hydropower management.
Harnessing the Siang River (the vital tributary of the transboundary river system that originates in the Tibetan Plateau known as Yarlung Tsangpo), the project’s geostrategic positionality is crucial to its dual function in clean energy production and geopolitical water security management.
Specifically, it aims to serve as a strategic necessity and a counterbalancing measure against China’s upstream hydropower dam, the largest infrastructure development of its kind globally, known as the Medog Hydropower Station (60,000 MW, valued at USD 167.8 billion), thereby engaging in hydro-strategic risk mitigation against Chinese dominance.
Moreover, according to the National Strategy Forum (NatStrat-2021), this project is set to yield significant economic benefits to the state, estimated to boost state revenue by ₹3,384 crore annually. The Siang project acts as a hydraulic buffer (with its 9 BCM), regulates flows, and supports the water grid.
This will enhance India’s water diplomacy. A significant developmental asymmetry persists: China will complete almost 80% of its projects this year, while India’s projects will remain under 10%. This deficit undermines its strategy.
The disparity is further intensified by a predicted 15% dry-season water deficit, which risks exacerbating cross-border friction. The oversight of shared water resources has become a critical determinant of regional security, with historical flashpoints underscoring the increasing securitisation of water resources.
In contrast to Nehru, writer and activist Vandana Shiva has criticised large dams, asserting that “These projects flood our lands, displace our people, and destroy our rivers, all in the name of progress that benefits only a few.” The scale of SUMP has raised major concerns.
These include ecological fragility, involuntary displacement, indigenous alienation, and wider Brahmaputra Basin dynamics.
With its rich natural resources, Arunachal Pradesh is fast becoming the renewable energy powerhouse of India’s clean energy (hydropower) revolution. The state’s vast potential is bolstered by the riverine geomorphology of Kameng, Subansiri, Siang, Dibang, and Lohit, whose steep gradients and all-season uninterrupted flows provide conditions favorable for both run-of-the-river and reservoir-based projects.
With an evaluated hydro-energy potential of 50,000–58,000 MW (as per District Shi Yomi, it signifies about 40% of the national total hydro-power potential assessed), the state has been progressively referred to as India’s “hydropower capital.”
Chief Minister Pema Khandu proclaimed the state as the “emerging hydropower capital of India,” spotlighting its significant energy potential and its instrumental role in driving sustainable development, economic growth, and societal upliftment.
In a post on X, he stated: “Arunachal is rising, not only as the hydro capital of India, but as a beacon of how natural beauty and progress can walk hand-in-hand.” During his recent visit to the state, PM Modi also highlighted Arunachal Pradesh’s crucial role in India’s ambition to achieve 500 GW of renewable energy capacity by 2030.
The State Cabinet, headed by Chief Minister Khandu, has declared the Hydropower Development Plan 2025–2035 as the ‘Decade of Hydropower’ to harness the state’s potential to generate 58,000 MW of electricity.
He also underscored the transformative economic potential of the state’s hydropower projects, framing them as crucial for regional growth and the country’s energy security. According to the state government’s “Economic Projections for Hydropower,” these initiatives anticipate ample revenue and capital investment, driving fiscal growth through job creation, infrastructure development, and equitable growth.
Official projections estimate annual revenues of up to ₹4,525 crore starting in 2035, derived from the state’s 12% royalty power share from each HEP, with an additional one percent allocated to LDF.
Major undertakings include the 2,000 MW Lower Subansiri Hydroelectric Project, in the final stages of development with NHPC, balancing power generation with environmental and community considerations.
The 2,880 MW Dibang Multipurpose Project is expected to revolutionise Dibang Valley through economic growth and infrastructure boost-up. Ambitious ventures like the 3,097 MW Etalin and 11,000 MW Upper Siang projects endeavour to exploit the state’s 50,000–58,000 MW hydropower potential, with Upper Siang classified as a scheme of national significance for its strategic role, job creation, and infrastructure development.
Geo-Political Imperatives
The Upper Siang Multipurpose Project is understood not only as an infrastructure and energy initiative but as a key geopolitical tool connecting border politics and the hydrology nexus of the eastern flank of the Himalaya.
India’s rekindled ambition for a massive reservoir and electricity complex on the Siang is a response to reliable reports of China’s rapidly advancing hydropower dams (60,000 MW capacity) and water-diversion ambitions on the upstream Brahmaputra (known as Yarlung Tsangpo).
These are developments that Indian analysts and policymakers interpret as potential threats to downstream water security and seasonal flows. This strategic context reframes the project simultaneously as an energy project, a flood-control measure, and a geopolitical hedge.
From a national security standpoint, such a large Indian reservoir upstream of the Brahmaputra offers the operational capacity to regulate and attenuate extreme downstream flows.
It can create strategic buffer storage and assert sovereign dominion over transboundary water resources, which are attributes valued in a contested hydrosphere where diplomatic options for water-sharing with China are nonexistent. Many advocates thus claim SUMP strengthens India’s capacity to withstand unilateral upstream manipulations and strengthens its bargaining position in future river diplomacy.
According to Uttam Kumar Sinha, an analyst on transboundary water issues, SUMP is a crucial response to China’s hydropower ambitions, which pose grave risks to water security in downstream Northeast India and Bangladesh.
He argues that China’s dams enable one-sided manipulation of river discharge, risking triggering flash floods or dry-season water scarcity, and emphasises the need for India to develop comparable storage capacity to forestall such risks.
A massive reservoir would not only facilitate flow augmentation, reducing flood intensity, but also enhance India’s bargaining influence in hydro-diplomacy, fostering data-sharing mechanisms and joint monitoring.
In addition, geostrategist Brahma Chellaney depicts SUMP as a defensive “shield” against China’s “hydro-hegemony” (a doctrine of weaponising water in geopolitical contests).
He also links the project to broader territorial disputes, including China’s claims over Arunachal Pradesh (as “Southern Tibet”), noting that the Medog mega-dam could trap sediments crucial for downstream fertility and severely harm agriculture and aquatic life in India and Bangladesh. While endorsing SUMP for restoring the river’s flow and averting ecological breakdown in the Brahmaputra basin, he cautions against escalation, advocating multilateral transparency to avert “water wars” amid seismic vulnerabilities.
Why Many Are Not Convinced
The state’s Vision 2030 envisions comprehensively utilising the region’s calculated hydropower capacity potential to secure one of the “world’s highest per capita incomes.” Proponents, notably the political leadership, underscore its role in enhancing geopolitical leverage to counter upstream Chinese mega-dam projects and generating substantial economic progress, with projections of up to ₹10,000 crore in the state’s annual revenue.
Chief Minister Pema Khandu highlighted possible benefits: free power to the state, an infusion of ₹735 crore for infrastructure developments, livelihoods, and welfare, and generating ₹1,884 crore annually in dividends — a “game-changing” stimulus for the state’s economy. He also envisions this clean energy focus stimulating employment generation and balanced development, positioning Arunachal as a national model for sustainable growth.
Energy policy analyst Anil Gupta views the 11,000 MW SUMP as a vital impetus for India’s energy self-sufficiency and industrialisation of the region. He stresses, however, that the project’s efficacy is conditioned on exercising political dexterity through confidential trilateral dialogues with China and Bangladesh.
Arundhati Roy, in her essay The Greater Common Good (1999), critiqued large dams, stating: “Big dams are to a nation’s ‘development’ what nuclear bombs are to its military arsenal. They’re both weapons of mass destruction.”
Frequent and repeated protests have flared up in the state of Arunachal Pradesh against various hydropower developments (mega-dam projects), particularly targeting the Upper Siang Multipurpose Project (SUMP) and Dibang Valley projects, with prior resistance against Lower Subansiri and Tawang dams.
These were mostly driven by anxieties about displacement, indigenous rights, ecological concerns, socio-cultural dimensions, perfunctory engagement with local communities, and the looming threat of the “resource curse.” These campaigns highlight profound grassroots resistance to large-scale proposed hydropower projects.
Employment assurances are unsubstantiated. The SUMP promises around 1,500 jobs, but past examples such as the Ranganadi Hydroelectric Project reveal significant discrepancies, with only 30% filled by locals and specialised roles primarily filled by non-locals.
HR activist and Chairperson Ebo Milli has called for a full-scale review of the state’s hydropower policy, highlighting dangers to ecosystems, risks of Glacial Lake Outburst Floods (GLOFs), and the destruction of native livelihoods.
Similarly, the Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF), led by President Tasik Pangkam, rejects mega-projects outright in the absence of true permission, warning that they would leave tribal inhabitants without title to their soil, and engagement has been minimal and inadequate.
Arunachal Pradesh Congress Committee President Bosiram Siram has warned that SUMP might forcibly relocate nearly 150,000 natives and permanently submerge over 27 villages, posing existential threats to ecology, heritage, and sacred sites in a seismically vulnerable zone.
In contrast, Rural Development Minister Ojing Tasing vigorously states that a majority (about 70%) of the populace favours the project.
Transboundary water expert Mirza Zulfiqur Rahman challenges the project as a geopolitical gambit, cautioning that it poses profound, permanent ecological degradation to the Himalayan bioregion and draconian community impacts on local communities (affecting the Adi and Galo tribes’ cultural tapestry, from sacred groves and oral traditions to ancestral farmlands), potentially risking social fragmentation.
Instead, he calls for inclusive governance through holistic ecosystem evaluations, community veto rights under UNDRIP, and India-China data exchange accords to prioritise equity over rivalry.
In addition, compensation has been patently unsatisfactory, with precedents like the Kameng Hydroelectric Project showing that only 65% of affected families were compensated by 2023, intensifying indigenous resentments.
To address this deadlock and reconcile state priorities with the needs of indigenous/community rights, inclusive consultative processes, transparent grievance redressal, and procedures adhering to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent-compliant processes are indispensable to ensure Arunachal’s hydropower trajectory ensures justice and sustainability.
Conclusion
While large dams can, to some degree, be seen as testaments to upheaval (submerging territories, displacing communities, and inflicting significant ecological harm), they remain essential drivers of progress, tapping into nature’s energy to provide sustainable water resilience, contribute to robust energy independence, safeguard geopolitical priorities, and address contemporary demands.
Consequently, comprehensive environmental impact assessments and multilateral riparian agreements with China and Bangladesh are critical for fair and enduring prosperity.
Views expressed are that of the author and do not reflect EastMojo’s stance on this or any other issue. The author is a Independent Researcher.