As Siang dam protests turn violent, NHPC’s Rs 11-crore PR push faces test

The protests began with a bandh in Geku, where people opposed to the Siang dam demanded that security forces leave and that the project be scrapped. Security personnel fired tear gas shells at the bandh supporters. The response shows how a project dispute had become a direct confrontation over both the proposed dam and the security deployment around it.

By late Friday, unrest had spread to Pasighat. Groups of young protesters took to the streets, and reports described arson and vandalism. An NHPC official said one office was completely gutted, another was partly damaged, and a genset was destroyed. NHPC staff stayed inside their campus and could not immediately assess the damage.

The situation remained tense into early Saturday, with heavy security maintaining an uneasy calm. Chief Minister Pema Khandu later offered talks and called for facts, transparency and open dialogue. The violence came as NHPC was running an extended campaign to build local support for the project.

The Siang Upper Multipurpose Project, or SUMP, is a proposed large dam project in Arunachal Pradesh’s Siang region. NHPC Limited is undertaking it. The article describes it as a multipurpose project and says the Government presents it as a strategic response to China’s upstream dam plans. That framing gives the project importance beyond electricity generation.

The project is also promoted through national messaging about clean energy, water security and national development. Its proposed scale indicates that electricity generation would be a central purpose. However, the article does not provide a detailed operating plan explaining every intended function of the multipurpose project. It does record concerns about submergence, displacement, land loss and environmental damage.

The project remains at the pre-feasibility survey stage. That means the proposal is still being examined before later approvals and construction decisions. Its strategic and development claims are therefore being debated alongside fears about social and environmental costs. The continuing protests show that public acceptance remains unresolved.

SUMP is proposed as an 11,200-MW project, making its scale central to both its national-development pitch and local fears. NHPC has presented it through messages about clean energy, water security and development. Opponents, however, focus on the possible effects of submergence, displacement, environmental damage and land loss.

NHPC awarded Mumbai-based Concept Public Relations a one-year contract worth Rs 8.73 crore in July 2025. Services began the following month. The contract was extended by three months until November 6, 2026, at unchanged rates. Its total value therefore rose to approximately Rs 10.91 crore. More than 30 executives were assigned initially, including staff from Delhi and Kolkata.

Most of that team was withdrawn after the protests turned violent. The campaign’s planned work included community events, media engagements, influencers, stakeholder mapping and crisis response. Its size and cost underline how seriously NHPC viewed the negative discourse surrounding the project. They also show that public persuasion became part of the project’s contested groundwork.

NHPC Limited is the project’s main institutional promoter. It wants to present facts about SUMP, defend its development case and build local support. The state Government, represented publicly by Chief Minister Pema Khandu, has expressed concern, offered talks and called for transparency. Security personnel are enforcing order during the unrest.

Opponents include bandh supporters, young protesters and the Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum. Protesters in Geku demanded the forces’ withdrawal and the project’s scrapping. SIFF had earlier demanded withdrawal of reported NHPC CSR allocations to district administrations, questioning their use for government schemes. The article also records wider concerns about submergence, displacement, land loss and environmental damage.

Concept Public Relations was hired as a professional service provider, not as a project authority. Its role was to communicate NHPC’s position and persuade stakeholders. The agency planned outreach to elders, community leaders, priests, teachers, youth, NGOs, indigenous groups, officials, media and influencers. The dispute therefore involves development claims, local rights, public money and competing ideas of the region’s future.

The article identifies four major concerns around the proposed dam: submergence, displacement, environmental damage and land loss. Together, these point to the possibility that homes, farmland and community spaces could be affected. The text does not give a detailed impact assessment, but it makes clear that these issues are central to the negative discourse around SUMP.

Land loss can threaten livelihoods when people depend on local land and resources. Displacement can break up communities and force residents to relocate. Submergence can remove areas used by people, while environmental damage can affect the surroundings that support daily life. The article does not separately document ancestral-land impacts, but land loss and displacement directly frame that concern.

These fears explain why NHPC’s tender called for persuasion and why opposition has continued despite CSR activities. The project remains only at the pre-feasibility survey stage, so its final effects are not established in the article. Still, the unresolved concerns are already shaping protests, political responses and public debate.

For a controversial infrastructure project, outreach tries to shape both understanding and trust. NHPC’s tender identified growing negative discourse and sought to reposition SUMP as an opportunity for development and improved livelihoods. CSR activities, meetings and communication were intended to show engagement, gather feedback and make the project’s benefits more visible.

The planned mechanism worked at three levels. In the Siang basin, the agency would meet elders, community leaders, priests, headmasters, youth, NGOs and indigenous groups. In Itanagar, it would approach officials, NGOs and media. In New Delhi, messaging would stress clean energy, water security and national development. Influencers, favourable coverage, opinion pieces, site visits and sentiment tracking would reinforce that message.

The strategy has not ended opposition. NHPC sources said CSR activities and professional communication had not stopped resistance. The campaign’s team was largely withdrawn after violence spread. The episode shows that information efforts may create supporters, but they cannot by themselves settle disputes over displacement, land, environmental damage or trust.

A pre-feasibility report is an early assessment of whether a proposed project appears technically, economically and socially workable. It is not the final design or approval. For SUMP, the article says the project remains at the pre-feasibility survey stage. That means major questions about costs, impacts, engineering and implementation are still being examined.

In a hydropower dam, stored or flowing water moves through turbines. The turbines drive generators, which produce electricity. A multipurpose project may also be planned around wider water-management goals, but the article does not give SUMP’s detailed operating design. It does identify national messaging around clean energy and water security.

The same dam can create trade-offs. Reservoir flooding may submerge land, while construction and changed river conditions can damage ecosystems. Relocation can displace people and affect livelihoods and communities. These are not abstract concerns in this dispute: the tender records fears about submergence, displacement, environmental damage and land loss. Further studies and dialogue would matter before decisions advance.