Nazira and Charaideo in upper Assam are once again facing the devastating consequences of a major flood. Homes have been damaged, agricultural land submerged, livestock lost and livelihoods disrupted. For many families, years of savings and hard-earned possessions have disappeared within days.
The scale of the crisis is grave. As of August 10, 100 people had died in Assam’s floods, more than 700,000 people had been displaced and around 49,000 remained in relief camps.
The Assam government has pointed to exceptionally heavy rainfall. There is no question that the rainfall was extreme. But Assam is a flood-prone state, and extreme weather cannot be treated as an entirely unforeseeable event. The real question is not whether the government could have stopped the rain. It could not. The question is whether it could have reduced the suffering caused by the rain.
The government initially described the event as a cloudburst in neighbouring Nagaland. Subsequent reporting, citing India Meteorological Department officials, indicated that the rainfall did not technically meet the IMD’s definition of a cloudburst.
That distinction raises a larger question about preparedness.
The BJP’s 2021 Assam election manifesto promised a “Flood-Free Assam” through Mission Brahmaputra. Its 2026 manifesto has renewed that commitment through a “Badh Mukt Assam Mission”, proposing more than Rs 18,000 crore over five years for flood control.
That naturally raises questions about the effectiveness of previous flood-control spending.
I am not suggesting that the proposed Rs 18,000 crore has disappeared or that the government could have prevented every aspect of the present disaster. The government should simply tell the people: How much has already been spent on flood control? Where was the money spent? Which projects were completed? Which remain incomplete? And, most importantly, what measurable protection have these investments provided to communities living in flood-prone areas?
For people living in vulnerable areas, promises matter only when they translate into protection on the ground.
Dikhow cannot be ignored
Former Assam Leader of the Opposition and former Nazira MLA Debabrata Saikia had raised concerns years ago about alleged illegal and uncontrolled sand and stone mining along the Dikhow River. The issue reached the Gauhati High Court in 2019.
During the present crisis, Saikia has again raised concerns about the river and called for a Special Integrated Dikhow River Basin Rehabilitation Project.
Whether mining contributed to the severity of the present flooding must be established through scientific assessment. It would be premature to draw a direct causal link without such evidence. But the concerns themselves are not new.
That makes it legitimate to ask what preventive action was taken after those warnings.
Were vulnerable stretches of the riverbank properly assessed? Were embankments and other critical flood-control structures inspected and repaired before the monsoon? Were mining activities adequately monitored and regulated? Were flood forecasts sufficiently accurate and timely? Did early-warning systems provide vulnerable communities with enough time to evacuate? Was rescue equipment pre-positioned in areas known to be at risk?
These are not unreasonable questions after a disaster of this scale. They are questions of governance and public accountability.
Government could have prepared better
No government can control extreme rainfall. It can, however, reduce the consequences.
For a state that has lived with floods for generations, preparedness cannot begin after the waters rise. Pre-monsoon inspection and maintenance of embankments and flood-control structures, scientific monitoring of rivers, stronger regulation of mining, improved river-level forecasting, village-level early-warning systems and pre-positioned rescue equipment can all help reduce the human cost of flooding.
The challenge is becoming even more urgent as extreme weather events become more difficult to predict and manage. Assam therefore needs a flood-management strategy that goes beyond announcing large financial allocations. It needs transparent planning, scientific assessment, regular maintenance, monitoring and public disclosure of outcomes.
And despite the shortcomings of the system, there is something deeply encouraging about the response of ordinary people.
Young people have rescued stranded families. Volunteers have delivered food and medicines. Neighbours have opened their homes to people who lost theirs. Communities have once again demonstrated their ability to come together when institutions are under strain.
It brings to mind Bhupen Hazarika’s enduring words:
Manuhe Manuhor Babe.
That spirit of solidarity is Assam at its best.
But public compassion cannot replace institutional responsibility.
The BJP has once again promised a flood-free Assam, backed by a proposed Rs 18,000-crore mission. The scale of the proposed investment is significant. So too must be the scale of accountability.
The people of Nazira and Charaideo deserve more than another promise. They deserve transparency about how flood-control funds have been spent, preparedness before the monsoon, effective early warnings, functioning infrastructure and accountability when systems fail.
The BJP could not stop the rain.
But the people have every right to ask whether the government did everything within its power before the waters rose.
Barnali Phukan is a Senior Spokesperson of the Congress party. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Northeast Now.