No To Bhutan’s Energy Development Model
Rabin Subedi
Some so-called pundits of Nepal claim that selling electricity to India is the panacea to the development of this country. They argue that Nepal can earn huge amounts of money in royalty, and after a couple of decades (let’s say 30 years), the ownership of all the projects will be handed over to Nepal. So we should approach India and invite as much as foreign investment as possible so that we can sell electricity and earn money that will not only make the country rich, but also reduce the trade deficit with India.
Different cases
They further opine that Bhutan has become rich following this method. They give the popular example of the ‘Chukha’ project built by India, whose electricity is supplied to India. However, be reminded that India has bought the electricity at approximately 9 cent per unit and has given very good free equity to Bhutan in the project, which is definitely more than the equity promised by Indian companies in the Upper Karnali and the Arun III hydropower projects of Nepal. In Arun III, West Seti and Upper Karnali, the rate expected is about 4-5 cent per unit, which is lower than what India has now been paying Bhutan. Moreover, Bhutan has given permission for an Indian battalion for the security of the project and, of course, India has de facto control over Bhutan, especially over security issues.
The case of Nepal is, however, different. Most of the projects that have been already signed and others that are under consultation are not similar to Bhutan. Unfortunately, it would be no wonder if these pundits recommend inviting the Indian army for the protection of the projects built by India in the future in the name of security. The obvious fact with Bhutan is that it has already kicked out more than 47 per cent of its citizens who are of ethnic Nepali origin, and that is the best way to increase the per capita income of the people. Geographically also Bhutan is different than Nepal. Bhutan does not have plain land, and does not need water for irrigation and for other purposes. However, Nepal has the Terai, and it needs huge amounts of water and electricity in comparison to Bhutan.
Unfortunately, these same pundits are advising the Maoists. These are the same people who destroyed Girija Prasad Koirala’s Nepali Congress and Madhab-Oli’s UML government in the past. Now they are injecting slow poison to the Maoists. These days, we get to hear Maoist leaders and ministers, including the prime minister, talking about building mega power projects and making the country rich in some 10 years by selling electricity to India. However, this is not the genuine voice of the Maoist party and its leaders, rather it is the voice of those pundits who have been able to convince them to build mega hydro power projects. And, of course, they are trying to convince the Maoists to accept the Bhutanese model. Their main interest is to provide regulated water to India free of cost to realise the Indian River Linking project. If we look at the West Seti Agreement, it is silent over the regulated water which could be a good means of income.
The Maoists must also be able to understand that people of the world are against mega dams. In some places, decommissioning of those dams already built is also being considered. Sustainable development calls for a development model that is not only for this generation but also for generations to come. Let’s take the example of the Koshi disaster that occurred some months back. The people who signed this treaty are now no more, however, their immature act has posed huge problems for the people. The agreement on the West Seti dam is silent on who should take up the responsibility if a disaster strikes. The same thing is going to happen with the Karnali Chisapani dam and the ridiculous Koshi High Dam, though these have yet to be finalised. Agreements will be signed on the model of the Koshi so that should a disaster occur, it will be easy to blame the other party.
The Maoist should answer the people as to why the government does not give priority to projects that generate cheap electricity. Why does the state or the government not think about generating cheap electricity to industrialise or build railway lines? Why are export-oriented projects being finalised first? Why is there no national priority? Why are projects not being built on the Upper Tamakosi Model? Why does the government not have community electrification, which is very reliable and cheap for the people? In recent times, some pro-Indian nationals and Bhutanese have established an online journal to promote various hydropower projects. They call themselves the Hydropower Team, but no one knows who they are. They have pirated photos from others’ websites. We need to identify who these people are.
Long-term vision
The Maoists need to understand that Nepal must be self-reliant and independent in terms of energy. They should be able to have a long-term vision that electricity must replace oil, which is expensive. And in harnessing the rivers for hydropower, we must be able to secure our interest and sovereignty. If there is a strong necessity for a mega hydropower project, then there should be national consensus, and should be agreed upon only after necessary assessment and respecting the rights of the people. (Subedi is an advocate and currently studying at Columbia University in New York city)
Source: The Rising Nepal, 30 January 2009
Some so-called pundits of Nepal claim that selling electricity to India is the panacea to the development of this country. They argue that Nepal can earn huge amounts of money in royalty, and after a couple of decades (let’s say 30 years), the ownership of all the projects will be handed over to Nepal. So we should approach India and invite as much as foreign investment as possible so that we can sell electricity and earn money that will not only make the country rich, but also reduce the trade deficit with India.
Different cases
They further opine that Bhutan has become rich following this method. They give the popular example of the ‘Chukha’ project built by India, whose electricity is supplied to India. However, be reminded that India has bought the electricity at approximately 9 cent per unit and has given very good free equity to Bhutan in the project, which is definitely more than the equity promised by Indian companies in the Upper Karnali and the Arun III hydropower projects of Nepal. In Arun III, West Seti and Upper Karnali, the rate expected is about 4-5 cent per unit, which is lower than what India has now been paying Bhutan. Moreover, Bhutan has given permission for an Indian battalion for the security of the project and, of course, India has de facto control over Bhutan, especially over security issues.
The case of Nepal is, however, different. Most of the projects that have been already signed and others that are under consultation are not similar to Bhutan. Unfortunately, it would be no wonder if these pundits recommend inviting the Indian army for the protection of the projects built by India in the future in the name of security. The obvious fact with Bhutan is that it has already kicked out more than 47 per cent of its citizens who are of ethnic Nepali origin, and that is the best way to increase the per capita income of the people. Geographically also Bhutan is different than Nepal. Bhutan does not have plain land, and does not need water for irrigation and for other purposes. However, Nepal has the Terai, and it needs huge amounts of water and electricity in comparison to Bhutan.
Unfortunately, these same pundits are advising the Maoists. These are the same people who destroyed Girija Prasad Koirala’s Nepali Congress and Madhab-Oli’s UML government in the past. Now they are injecting slow poison to the Maoists. These days, we get to hear Maoist leaders and ministers, including the prime minister, talking about building mega power projects and making the country rich in some 10 years by selling electricity to India. However, this is not the genuine voice of the Maoist party and its leaders, rather it is the voice of those pundits who have been able to convince them to build mega hydro power projects. And, of course, they are trying to convince the Maoists to accept the Bhutanese model. Their main interest is to provide regulated water to India free of cost to realise the Indian River Linking project. If we look at the West Seti Agreement, it is silent over the regulated water which could be a good means of income.
The Maoists must also be able to understand that people of the world are against mega dams. In some places, decommissioning of those dams already built is also being considered. Sustainable development calls for a development model that is not only for this generation but also for generations to come. Let’s take the example of the Koshi disaster that occurred some months back. The people who signed this treaty are now no more, however, their immature act has posed huge problems for the people. The agreement on the West Seti dam is silent on who should take up the responsibility if a disaster strikes. The same thing is going to happen with the Karnali Chisapani dam and the ridiculous Koshi High Dam, though these have yet to be finalised. Agreements will be signed on the model of the Koshi so that should a disaster occur, it will be easy to blame the other party.
The Maoist should answer the people as to why the government does not give priority to projects that generate cheap electricity. Why does the state or the government not think about generating cheap electricity to industrialise or build railway lines? Why are export-oriented projects being finalised first? Why is there no national priority? Why are projects not being built on the Upper Tamakosi Model? Why does the government not have community electrification, which is very reliable and cheap for the people? In recent times, some pro-Indian nationals and Bhutanese have established an online journal to promote various hydropower projects. They call themselves the Hydropower Team, but no one knows who they are. They have pirated photos from others’ websites. We need to identify who these people are.
Long-term vision
The Maoists need to understand that Nepal must be self-reliant and independent in terms of energy. They should be able to have a long-term vision that electricity must replace oil, which is expensive. And in harnessing the rivers for hydropower, we must be able to secure our interest and sovereignty. If there is a strong necessity for a mega hydropower project, then there should be national consensus, and should be agreed upon only after necessary assessment and respecting the rights of the people. (Subedi is an advocate and currently studying at Columbia University in New York city)
Source: The Rising Nepal, 30 January 2009
