Unproven Conspiracy Theory Links Spanish Dams to PSOE

Unproven Conspiracy Theory Links Spanish Dams to PSOE

Would the Government be willing to blow up dams to trigger a catastrophe and perpetuate itself in power? This question, which sounds like a script for a dystopian series, has circulated persistently in Spanish digital circles for months. The trigger is a combination of factors: the actual state of hydraulic infrastructure, the coincidence of severe flooding episodes, and a series of regulatory decisions that critics claim have prioritized environmental conservation over the maintenance of defense works. On this fertile ground, suspicion has grown until it became one of the most repeated theories of the moment: the idea that the Executive is not only negligent but acts with intent.

The core of the matter is not so much the explicit accusation—difficult to fit legally and evidentially—as the climate that makes it plausible for a growing part of the population. Messages fueling the snowball range from technical analysis to the wildest speculation, passing through simple indignation. Some recall that hydrographic confederations have been collecting fees for decades without investing enough; others argue that deterioration is deliberate to force an emergency scenario justifying exceptional measures. And above all, there is a vague feeling that nothing happening is accidental.

State of the Dams: Reports Issuing Warnings

The objective starting point is the technical diagnosis. Engineering associations have repeatedly denounced the grave deterioration of Spanish dams, using qualifiers that admit little interpretation: the situation is aberrant, according to cited professional voices. This diagnosis is not new, but it has become louder as flooding episodes and preventive evacuations succeed each other. The coincidence between the technical warning and the real catastrophe is what has triggered all alarms.

From there, the discussion branches out. One current argues the problem is pure and hard maintenance: if you don't service a car, it breaks; the same happens with dams. Another goes further and points to deliberate dereliction. The most circulating argument is that hydrographic confederations have been collecting fees (including irrigation water charges) for decades without executing necessary works. The novelty, according to this reading, is that now there would also be an attempt to deliberately destroy infrastructure.

2023 Decree and Management of Public Hydraulic Domain

At the center of regulatory criticism appears Decree 665/2023, dated July 18, with which Pedro Sánchez's Government regulated the Public Hydraulic Domain. According to those challenging it, the text focuses on a minimal intervention approach in rivers and ramblas, prioritizing environmental conservation, river continuity, and nature-based solutions over traditional hydraulic actions. For critics, this ideological shift has left Spain without sufficient defenses against extreme rainfall episodes.

The underlying accusation is more serious: that this regulatory framework is not an error, but a piece of a plan. The theory holds that the Executive would need a catastrophic event to justify exceptional measures—a state of exception, suspension of elections, even a confrontation scenario—and that dams would be the instrument. There is no proof of this, and defenders present it as suspicion or probable scenario, not accomplished fact. But the suspicion already has a life of its own.

From Negligence to Conspiracy: How Suspicion Is Built

The leap from technical criticism to conspiracy theory occurs in several steps. First, the confirmation that infrastructure is in poor condition. Second, evidence that there have been serious episodes—floods, evacuations, supply cuts—without accountability being clarified. Third, the perception that the Government acts with impunity and without restraint. And fourth, the conclusion, still without proof, that everything obeys a plan.

In this terrain, hypotheses multiply. Some argue that the ground is being prepared for a repetition of what peine in Valencia, or that the blackout and internet cut were rehearsals. Others point to economic interest: blowing up dams to empty them quickly without using generators so photovoltaic energy can be sold. Some believe full reservoirs are an affront to the official discourse on drought and must be emptied. And some simply do not rule anything out.

Electoral Calendar and Perpetuation Suspicion

One of the most repeated derivatives is electoral. The idea that the president might try to stay beyond his term has a legal argument circulating insistently: the possibility of counting the deadline from the investiture rather than from the elections, which would push the limit to November 2027. Based on this, speculation arises that any catastrophic event—a civil confrontation, a war, a blown dam—could serve to postpone the vote.

There is no official confirmation of any of this, and the very nature of the accusation places it in the realm of speculation. But the fact that it is openly raised, and that it resonates, says much about the level of distrust. The lingering question is no longer whether the Government is incompetent, but how far it would be willing to go.

---

Ultimately, the theory of blown-up dams functions more as a symptom than a diagnosis. No one has presented proof, no one has been charged for it, yet suspicion has settled with the naturalness of a proven fact. Perhaps because, in a country where infrastructure crumbles and responsibilities dilute, the most incredible thing is not the conspiracy. The most incredible thing is that someone believes one is needed.