Thursday, April 28, 2011

RE: Things to Learn by all from Laos

April 28, 2011
Rabindra Man Shrestha
Nepalconsult (P) Ltd.

Rabindra jee

Thanks but no thanks. Thanks for sharing the document with me, but no thanks as I already am familiar with this project that Laotian people will curse for the life time of this project and many generations to come. ADB ostensibly has implemented this project to reduce poverty. But it doesn’t do any such thing. This project rather enriches the filthy rich and further pauperizes the poor in Laos. However, as Laos is a closed state no opposition is brooked.

There is a parallel between Nepal-India and Laos-Thailand. India wants to build wrong projects in Nepal for their benefit as Thailand has succeeded to do so in Laos. But in Nepal, as we are an open society, there is no restriction in dissent and which has succeeded to forestall Indian design on Nepal’s water resources. Unfortunately, for Laotian people, as no dissent is allowed, Thailand is succeeding in this model. I wonder if you have visited Laos! One can understand this only after looking at things first hand. If Laos continues with this type of “development” model, they will have to continue as a nation in medieval state for ages to come.

Therefore, we definitely could learn things from Laos that we shouldn’t be building projects like NT 2 in Nepal.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: Rabindra []
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 16:55
To: 'Ratna Sansar Shrestha'
Subject: RE: Things to Learn by all from Laos

Dear Ratna Sansar ji,

Please read the attached document and circulate as appropriate.


Rabindra Man Shrestha
Nepalconsult (P) Ltd.

Monday, April 25, 2011

Please ask the government to invest money in building hydro power projects

April 25, 2011

Damodar jee

I wish the government would listen to me. However, it’s not because I have not “asked” the government. Time and again I have laid down the vision for the optimum exploitation of Nepal’s famed water resources for the benefit of Nepal and people in Nepal. I agree that the electricity is basic need for the country and I have time and again reminded them that exporting it will not solve electricity crisis in Nepal. Then there is more important issue of irrigation during dry season which will ensure food security in Nepal such that no Nepali will have to die in famine; nor would Nepali youth need to go overseas in search of employment merely to be exploited financially, physically and even sexually.

Maybe the government will listen if people besides me also were to voice it in unison. Therefore, Damodar jee I urge you and your near and dear ones to add to my voice.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: Damodar
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 22:49
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: Re: Happy New Year

Dear sir

Please ask the government to invest money in building hydro power projects. Make a policy, the electricity as the basic need.


Saturday, April 23, 2011

RE: FW: Risks of provincialization on ethnocentric lines

April 23, 2011
Dear colleague
Good to hear from you. Thanks for your suggestion regarding publication of this article in "national paper". Looks like you didn't read the article fully. Because at the end of the article I have mentioned that it was published in national daily Gorkhapatra of 5th Baisakh.
Only ignoramuses will make negative comments about "opinion poll survey" (janamat sarbekshan) because if it is properly structured and effectively implemented, it can effectively depict what people feel about a specific issue like a few drops of blood can tell what is happening to all the blood in a person's body.

In the 3 provinces that I have proposed each province will have Himal, pahad and tarai and will also include many more things. Most importantly, state restructuring on these lines will ensure that Nepal isn't embroiled in ethnic dispute/wars that ethnocentric provincilization of Nepal will entail.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

-----Original Message-----

Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 10:06
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: Re: FW: Risks of provincialization on ethnocentric lines

Dear sir,

I just read your article, its really important and represents view of intellectual nepali peoples.
Why not to publish it in national paper so everybody sould read it.
Little comments though i am not even like nursary class...

- "Ganamat Sangraha" may not be digestive to very political minds before Jestha 14, 12PM. Unfortunately, peoples may start to smell something else in this though it's very rational. More sweet : may be something like this...."Janamat Sangra bata aayeko jasto ta hoina..."

- The last part of the artical about the states based on River basins and hydropower resources like Koshi, Gangaki, Karnali may not be complete in all aspects as there are other resources also like Himal, Pahad, tarai, I think its time to unite nation not to divide on any reasons, but restructing is required, so a common rational guideline of restructuing regions could be

- Rational distribution of resources
- Equal footing for all casts
- Equal ground for all migrants and non-migrants
- Controlable from the infrastructrure and land connectivity and land resources
- what else

Sir, just take it as a case study what comes in the perception of a child mind like me.


On 4/18/11, Ratna Sansar Shrestha wrote:

> Dear Colleague
> I have ventured to write an article on the captioned subject which can be accessed by clicking the link below:

Friday, April 22, 2011

RE: BBC Sajha Sawal on "energy crisis"

April 22, 2011
Bihari K Shrestha

Cc: Dipak Gyawali; Narayan Shrestha


I am delighted to learn that you were able to watch the captioned program, notwithstanding the “energy crisis”; most of my friends and family were unable to do so due to the very “energy crisis.”

Actually, in this instance I don’t blame the moderator, rather I appreciate that he didn’t “edit out” that particular portion because the theme of the program was energy crisis which is very wide and open ended and he did have to cut out a number of other bits.

I triggered the discussion on this vein by pointing out the foolhardiness of the provision to shoot people (with bullet, not camera!) if anyone was to obstruct the efforts of the members of the proposed commission to curb electricity theft in a country where death penalty has been abolished. I had pointed this out in the very beginning of the program and drew attention of the people towards the potential abuse of this provision to “eliminate” the likes of this scribe and DipakG (I did offer to be at the forefront when they start shooting pursuant to the provision of the proposed). When the discussion again focused back on this issue and NEA people were trying to lamely justify this provision, I used the opportunity to point out that the solution lies in community based electricity distribution. I definitely agree with you that this issue deserves to be intensely discussed because the experiment (I am proud to have been a member of the team that initiated it while DipakG and I were in NEA board) has proved that this is the best way to curb electricity pilferage instead of shooting at people. Besides, this is the best way to spin out various activities of NEA such that element of competition could be introduced in a vertically integrated utility that is hemorrhaging at the cost of national treasury which deprives the people without access to electricity from funding for the essential services and much needed infrastructure.

I am sending a copy of this email to Narayan Shrestha, moderator of the program.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: Bihari Krishna Shrestha []
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 18:06
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Cc: Dipak Gyawali
Subject: Sajha Sawal

Dear Ratna jee,

Your attempt to bring in the Community Electricity Cooperative in the BBC-run Sajah Sawal debate in Kantipur TV last evening was very apt. But unfortunately, probably due to the moderator's insufficient familiarity with the concept and the institutional arrangement, it did not receive proper coverage during the discussion. The subject, however, deserved to be more intensely discussed at the session, because, given the present state of misgovernance and lawlessness in the country, the locally owned coops would be the only viable mechanism to restore order to power distribution particularly in the rural communities, and resolve the problem of the electricity pilferage that is taking place in the country on a very large scale. Under this system, as we have seen, although on a limited scale, it is the community leaders themselves who have the legitimacy and unavoidable responsibility punish the pilferers, because failing to do so would lead to the transfer of the cost to the honest member-customers as well as loss of income to the coop, neither of which conditions the larger membership of the cooperatives would be willing to condone. This is what has been at the heart of the success of community forestry in the country. It is the user groups that managed their forests most optimally, and due to appropriate legal provisions in their favour in the Forest Act, the forest bureaucracy, which otherwise sucked up the forests to the point of near-desertification by mid-80s, remains constrained to contribute to the capacity building of the former. Therefore, the sooner the NEA and the Energy Ministry begins to realise the wisdom that inheres in this approach, the quicker would be the respite for the NEA, its customers and the country.

However, I gather that, despite its demonstrated effectiveness, the coop approach enjoys no real priority in the NEA, apparently due to mundane considerations. Therefore, an occasion like the Sajha Sawal discussion with its large army of devoted viewers, would have been a real platform for building public pressure on the largely unaccountable NEA, the political parties and their leaders too. From this perspective, I felt that the session was a very valuable opportunity that was lost particulary for instituting a system of electricity management under which the NEA would be forced to act professionally and accountably. This was exactly the kind of transformation that the Forest Ministry had to go through in restoring Nepal's forests.

To conclude, your message about the need for a holistic approach to energy planning and the building of hydro projects in Nepal was loud and clear.

Unfortunately, I did not take down Sajha Sawal's email address. If you think fit, please pass this on to Narayan Shresthajee of the programme.

Warm regards


Thursday, April 21, 2011

RE: Risks of provincialization on ethnocentric lines

April 21, 2011
Dr Dhrubesh C Regmi
Programme Director

South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics & Environment

Dhrubesh jee
Good to hear from you. Namaste.
I am delighted that you agree with me. The challenge lies in making politicos understand this for which purpose all of us will have to say it in unison to make it loud and clear to them. Therefore, I urge you and your near and dear ones to speak up before it is too late.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: Dhrubesh Regmi []
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 15:12
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: Re: Risks of provincialization on ethnocentric lines
Dear Ratna Sansar Ji,


As always, I really enjoyed reading your article. You have depicted very clearly with facts and examples about the negative implication of Federalism and to divide country on the basis of racism. Again, I agreed and endorse your suggestion regarding division of the country on the basis of Koshi, Gandaki and Karnali river. If we have to save our country, this is the only solution at this moment. Lets hope these stupid "so called political leader" will re think and exercise on these kind of crucial issue very seriously and accept brilliant suggestions made by scholors and researchers like you.

Warm regards,


Dhrubesh Chandra Regmi
Programme Director
South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics & Environment\
P. O. Box: 19366
Tukucha Marg, Baluwatar
Kathmandu, Nepal
Ph: 00 977 1 4444438; 4424360
Fax: 4444570

----- Original Message -----

From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 7:46 PM
Subject: FW: Risks of provincialization on ethnocentric lines

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Re: Risks of provincialization on ethnocentric lines

April 20, 2011
Bihari K Shrestha

Bihari jee

I am attaching a map delineating 14 provinces which will provide you with not only the names of the proposed provinces but the area proposed to be covered by these provinces, pursuant to your request.

Yes, the unelected interim parliament didn’t have right to declare it and Supreme Court has aggravated the problem by declaring that the federalism is “unalterable.”

Even Maoists didn’t understand the manifestations and ramification of declaring Nepal a federal state at the time they forced other political parties to do so. Now, during informal discussion, many of them, at higher echelons of the party, have admitted as much. The idea of restructuring on ethnocentric lines has now become an albatross in their neck and many of them have confessed to it. But publicly they are unable to back out for two reasons. This has become a prestige issue for them (loss of face involved) and after having raised expectation of people clamoring for restructing on ethnocentric lines they are too far inside a one way street with not much latitude to back out. We will need to help them back out from the impossible situation with as little loss of face for them as is humanly possible.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: Bihari Krishna Shrestha []
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 16:05
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: {Disarmed} Re: Risks of provincialization on ethnocentric lines

Dear Ratnajee,

It worked. Thank you. Do you have the list of 14 provinces that you have referred to in your article? I would appreciate receiving it.
Your contention that the unelected parliament that enacted the interim constitution just did not have the mandate to declare Nepal a federation is indeed very strong. In Europe, they go for referendum even for deciding whether they should adopt Euro as their currency. Here! They could not care less about the sanctity of democratic practices. As it was, Maoists imposed federalism as one of the conditions, and the other parties, basically struggling to survive, found their security in quickly agreeing to it. Where was the people's wish in it?

Warm regards


----- Original Message -----

From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
To: Bihari K Shrestha
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 6:06 AM
Subject: RE: Risks of provincialization on ethnocentric lines

Monday, April 18, 2011

जातिय आधारमा प्रान्तियकरणको जोखिम

पुरानो नेपालमा धेरै बिकृति बिसंगति समस्या छन् र नयां नेपाल निर्माण गर्ने आवश्यकता निर्बिबाद छ । तर यसको लागि समस्याको ठीक पहिचान गरेर समाधानको उपायहरु पहिल्याउन र कार्यान्वयन गर्न आवश्यक छ । अर्थात रोग ठीक निदान गरेर मात्र पुग्दैन आवश्यक ओखति र मात्रा अनि सेवन गर्ने उचित तरीका यकीन गर्न जरुरी छ । औषधी ठीक भएतापनि परिमाण सेवन गर्ने तरीका ठीक भएन भने रोग निको हुनुको सट्टा बल्झने मात्र होइन बिरामीको मृत्यु नैं हुन सक्छ । तर अहिलेको नयां नेपालको नारा नयां सिसिमा पुरानो रक्सी समेत नभएर पुरानै सिसिमा पुरानै रक्सी र लेबल मात्र नयां टांसिएको अवस्था छ ।

पुरानो नेपालको समस्या समाधानको लागि संघियतालाई उपाय मानिएकोछ । संघियताका राम्रा पाटाहरु पनि छन् तर बहिस्करणमा परेका सीमान्तकृत उपेक्षित उत्पिडित पाखापारिएका र पछाडी पारिएकाको समस्याको समाधान आत्मनिर्णयको अधिकार सहितको जातीय प्रान्तियकरणबाट हुने देखिन्न ।

जातिय आधारमा प्रान्तियकरण
यस पंक्तिकार पहिला नेपाली अनि मात्र नेवार हो र जातिय आधारमा नेपाललाई प्रान्तियकरण गरेर उपेक्षित उत्पिडित आदिको समस्या समाधान नहुने र बरु नेपालको अखण्डतामा आंच आउने सम्भावना देखेकोले जातिय संघियताको पक्षमा उभिन सक्दैन । किनभने संघियताको नाममा नेपालको बिखण्डिकरण गरेतापनि हरेक प्रान्त एकात्मक नैं रहनेछ र समस्या यथावत रहेनछ ।

सांच्चिकै उपेक्षित उत्पिडित आदिका समस्या प्रान्तियकरणबाट समाधान हुने भए दोहरै उपेक्षित उत्पिडित ५० प्रतिशत भन्दा बढीको संख्यामा रहेका महिलाहरुको लागि छुट्टै प्रान्त घोषणा गर्न जरुरी हुन्छ । तर समस्याको समाधान महिलाहरुको लागि छुट्टै प्रान्त निर्माणबाट हुन्न । बरु जीवन उराठ लाग्दो मात्र हुन्न श्रृष्टि नैं रोकिन्छ ।

जातिय प्रान्तियकरणको विभिषिकामा परेर विश्व मानचित्रबाट युगोस्लाभिया हरायो र त्यहि कारणले सोभियत रुस बिखण्डणोपरान्त सानो रुस मात्र बांकी छ । नेपालले पनि यो बाटो पछ्याएर इतिहांसबाट पाठ नसिक्ने महाभूल गर्नु हुन्न ।

सामाजिक संरचना बिथोलिने
जातिय आधारमा प्रान्तियकरण गरे पछि मिश्रित बैबाहिक बन्धनमा भएकाले के गर्ने भन्ने प्रश्न खडा हुन्छ । पारपाचुके गरेर समस्या समाधान हुन्न । युगोस्लाभिया टुकि्रएर बनेको मुलुकहरुमा मिश्रित बिबाह गरेका दम्पत्तिहरुले भोगेको यातनाबाट सिक्न जरुरी छ र यिनबाट जन्मेका सन्तानले भोग्ने समस्या प्रति संबेदनशील हुनुपर्छ । जातिय प्रान्तियकरणोपरान्त बसाई सराईको समस्याले जातीय विद्वेष फैलाउन सक्दछ र भारत पाकिस्तान बिभाजनबाट शिक्षा लिन वान्छनिय छ । यसै पनि यो समस्या अहिले नैं तराईबाट शुरु भई सक्यो र कतिपय नागरिक आफ्नै देशमा शरणार्थी भएकाछन् ।

अग्राधिकार र शासकीय संयन्त्र
जातिय प्रान्तियकरण आफैमा खराब नहोला । तर यससंगै अगाडी सारिएका जातिय अग्राधिकार र शासकीय संयन्त्रमा जाती विशेषको हालीमुहाली रहने प्रावधानले जातिय विद्वेष फैलाउनेछ । किनभने जातिय आधारमा गठित प्रान्तमा एउटा जाती विशेषलाई अग्राधिकार िदंदा त्यहां बस्ने अन्य जातिय समूहहरु दोश्रो दर्जाको नागरिक बन्नेछन् र यसले धेरै समस्या निम्त्याउनेछ ।

यस्तै जातिय आधारमा गठित प्रान्तमा एउटा जाती विशेषले शासकीय संयन्त्रमा विशेष स्थान पाउने व्यवस्था हुने भनिएको छ । तर कुनै पनि प्रस्तावित प्रान्तमा विशेष जातिय समूहको बहुमत नहुनेभएकोले जस्तै प्रस्तावित नेवा राज्यमा नेवारहरु अल्पमतमा छन् मूलत बहुमत माथि अल्पमतको शासन हुने अवस्था हुन्छ जुन लोकतन्त्रिक परिपाटी अनुकूल होइन र कसै गरेर पनि स्वीकार्य हुन्न ।

काठमाडौंको अधिनायकबाद
संघियताका पक्षपोषकहरु काठमाडौंको अधिनायकबादको कारण संघियता आवश्यक ठान्छन् । एकिकरणोपरान्त गोरखाका शाहहरुले शासन गरेको २४० वर्ष मध्ये १०४ वर्ष राणाहरुको अधिनायबाद रहुे बांकी समय थापा पाण्डे बस्न्यात आदिको कुशासन काठमाडौं लगायत सम्पूर्ण देशले खेप्यो । सात साल देखि २०४७ सालसम्म शाहहरु निरंकुश राजतन्त्र र त्यसपछि गोरखाका भट्टराईले २ वर्ष बिराटनगरिया कोइरालाले १२ वर्ष भन्दा बढी अनि महाकालीका देउबा चन्द र धनकुटेली थापाले पालो पाए । संबिधान सभा निर्वाचन पछि कास्कीका प्रचण्ड अनि रौटहतका नेपाल र अहिले इलामका खनालको शासन छ । यी मध्ये कोहि पनि काठमाडौंका होइनन् । एकिकृत नेपालमा काठमाडौंले अधिनायकबाद कहिल्यै लादेको छैन र यहि कारण देखाएर देश बिखण्डित गर्न गर्नु भनेको बांदरले िझंगाको रिसले मालिकको नाक काटे जस्तै हुनेछ ।

१० जातीय प्रदेश<br>
संबिधान सभाको राज्य पुनःसंरचना समितिले पारित गरेको १० जातीय सहित १४ प्रान्तको अवधारणाको सन्दर्भमा संघियतामा गएका मुलुकहरुका प्रान्तहरुको संख्या जनसंख्या क्षेत्रफल आदि दृष्टिगत गरेर मनन् गर्नुपर्छ ।

संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिकामा ५० रुसमा ८० भन्दा बढी प्रान्त चीनमा २० भन्दा धेरै र भारतमा ३० भन्दा बढी प्रान्त हुनाले नेपालमा १४ प्रान्त बनाए फरक पर्दैन भन्दछन् । तर रुसको क्षेत्रफल १ करोड ७० लाख वर्ग किलोमिटर छ र एक प्रान्तमा औसत २ लाख वर्ग किलोमिटर पर्न आउंछ भने संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिकाको क्षेत्रफल ९६ लाख वर्ग किलोमिटर भएकोमा एक प्रान्तमा औसत १ लाख ९२ हजार वर्ग किलोमिटर पर्छ । त्यस्तै चीनको कूल क्षेत्रफल ९६ लाख वर्ग किलोमिटर छ र एक प्रान्तमा औसत ४ लाख ३६ हजार वर्ग किलोमिटर पर्छ भने ३३ लाख वर्ग किलोमिटर भएको भारतको एक प्रान्तमा औसत १ लाख वर्ग किलोमिटर पर्छ । नेपालको क्षेत्रफल १ लाख ५० हजार वर्ग किलोमिटरको हाराहारीमा छ र १४ प्रान्त बनाउंदा औसत १० हजार वर्ग किलोमिटरको एक प्रान्त हुन आउंछ । यस पृष्ठभूमिमा नेपाल जस्तो सानो मुलुक अझ साना साना प्रान्तमा टुक्र्याउनु औचित्यपूण हुन्न ।

जनसंख्याको दृष्टिकोणबाट संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिकाको जनसंख्या २८ करोड छ र एक प्रान्तमा औसत ५६ लाख जनसंख्या बस्छन् भने चीनमा एक प्रान्तमा औसत ५ करोड ८३ लाख भने भारतमा ३ करोड १७ लाख बस्छन् । तर नेपालमा १४ प्रान्त बनाइएपछि प्रत्येक प्रान्तमा औसत २० लाख जनसंख्या पनि पर्दैन ।

माथि उल्लिखित देशहरुमा धेरै प्रान्त हुनुमा समयको पनि महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका छ । संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिकामा ५० प्रान्त छन् त पश्चिमि सीमानामा दिउंसो १ बजेको समयमा पूर्वी सीमानामा सांझको ६ बजीसकेको हुन्छ । त्यस्तै रुसका पश्चिमि सीमानामा दिउंसो १ बजेको समयमा पूर्वी सीमानामा मध्य रात हुने हुनाले ८० भन्दा धेरै प्रान्त हुनु व्यवहारिक हो । तर यी सबै दृष्टिकोणबाट नेपाल धेरै सानो हुनाले यसलाई अझ ससाना टुक्रामा बिखण्डित गर्नु बुद्धिमत्तापूर्ण हुनेछैन ।

१०० भन्दा बढी जातीय समूह
मानवशास्त्रीहरुका अनुसार नेपालमा १०० भन्दा बढी जातीय समूह छन् । तर १० वटा प्रान्त मात्र जातिय आधारमा खडा गर्दा बांकीलाई मान्यता नदिएको ठहर्नेछ र बांकी ९० वटा भन्दा बढी जातिय समूहले मांग गर्ने वित्तिकै यो सानो मुलुकलाई अर्को ९० भन्दा बढी प्रान्तमा बिभाजित गर्नुपर्ने बाध्यता आईलाग्नेछ र यस्तो मांगको उपेक्षा गरिएमा जातिय द्वन्द्व निम्त्याउने काम हुनेछ । यसरी मागे पछि िदंदै जाने गर्नाले टोलटोलमा प्रान्त बनाउनुपर्ने अवस्था श्रृजना हुनेछ ।

जातिय द्वन्द्व
जातिय आधारमा प्रान्तियकरण गर्दा प्रान्तहरुको सीमांकनको विषय पनि जातिय द्वन्द्वको झिल्कोले ठूलै बिनास गर्नसक्ने सम्भावनालाई उपेक्षा गर्नुहुन्न । अहिले नैं नेवा राज्य र ताम्सािलंग राज्य बीच सीमांकन सम्बन्धमा बिबाद छ भने लिम्बुवान खुम्बुवान किरांत आदि राज्यहरु बीच पनि यस्तै द्वन्द्वमय स्थिति देखा पर्दैछ । तसर्थ जातिय आधारमा प्रान्तियकरण गर्ने भनेको जातिय द्वन्द्व निम्त्याउंदै काम हो र यसले गर्दा जातीय बिद्वेष फैलने सक्ने सम्भावनालाई गम्भिरतापूर्वक मनन् गरिनुपर्दछ ।

धेरै वटा प्रान्त बनाउंदा प्रान्तिय राजधानी कहां रहने भन्ने विषय पनि झगडाको बिउ हुनजान्छ । क्षेत्रिय रंगशाला धरानमा कि इटहरीमा भन्ने बिबादमा राष्ट्रिय खेलकूद परिषदमा हात हालाहाल र तोडफोड भयो भने मध्य पश्चिमांचल विकास क्षेत्रमा स्थापित गर्ने भनिएको विश्वबिद्यालय सुर्खेतमा कि नेपालगंजमा भन्ने बिबादले निम्त्याएको झगडामा यो मुलुकले आवश्यकरुपमा धनजन क्षति भोगेको बिस्मृतिमा पार्नु बुद्धिमत्तापूर्ण काम होइन ।

अन्तरिम संबिधान
जातिय आधारमा संघियताको पृष्ठपोषण गर्नेहरु अन्तरिम संबिधानमा नेपाललाई संघिय राज्य घोषणा गरिईसकेकोले संघियताबाट पछाडी फर्कन मिल्दैन भन्ने गर्दछन् । विशेषतः अन्तरिम संबिधानको धारा १३८१ मा पहिलो संशोधनबाट परिवर्तन गरेर यस्तो गरिएकोमा जनताले नचुनेको अन्तरिम व्यवस्थापिकालाई यस सम्बन्धमा अधिकार थिएन । जनताले संघियता के हो यसले के कस्ता अनुकूल प्रतिकूल प्रभाव पर्छ भन्ने बुझ्नु पर्छ र त्यसपछि मात्र निर्णयमा पुगिनुपर्छ । जनताद्वारा निर्वाचित संबिधान सभालाई मात्र यस सम्बन्धमा निर्णय गर्ने अधिकार छ र अझ आवश्यक परे जनमत संग्रहमा जानुपर्छ ।

अन्तरिम संबिधान लेख्नेले र अन्तरिम संसदले गरेकै निर्णय अन्तिम हुने भए दसौं अर्ब खर्च गरेर किन संबिधान सभाको चुनाव गरेको र दसौं अर्ब खर्चमा किन ६ सय १ जना सभासद्लाई पालेको भन्ने प्रश्न पनि खडा हुन्छ । तसर्थ संबिधान सभाका सम्पूर्ण सदस्यहरुलाई जातिय आधारमा गरिने राज्य पुनःसंरचना त्यो पनि जातिय अग्राधिकार र शासकीय संयन्त्रमा जाती विशेषको हालीमुहाली रहने गरेर संघियतामा जांदा देश र जनता माथि के कस्तो प्रभाव पर्छ भन्ने कुरा बोध गराएर मात्र यस सम्बन्धमा निर्णय निरोपण गरिनुपर्छ ।

आर्थिक बोझ<br>
अहिले एक÷एक वटा राष्ट्रपति उपराष्ट्रपति प्रधानमन्त्री र ४०÷४५ जनाको मन्त्रीमण्डल अनि व्यवस्थापिका न्यायपालिका लगायत बिभिन्न आयोगहरुको लागि वार्षिक झण्डै १ अर्ब रुपैयाँ खर्च हुनेगरेकोछ । १४ प्रान्तमा नेपालको बिभाजन पछि हरेक प्रान्तमा गभर्नर तथा मुख्यमन्त्री सहितको २०÷२५ जनाको मन्त्रीमण्डल न्यायपालिका लगायतका विभिन्न आयोगहरुको लागि थप ८÷१० अर्ब रुपैंया खर्च हुने निश्चित छ । स्वच्छ खानेपानी नपाएर झाडापखालाबाट र खाद्यान्न नभएर अनिकालबाट नागरिक मरिरहेको यो देशले यसरी थप खर्च गर्नु औचित्यहिन हुन्छ ।

जलश्रोतको दोहनको हिसाबले संघियता
नेपाललाई जलश्रोतमा धनी मानिए पनि घरहरुमा धाराहरु छन् पानी आउंदैन जलबिद्युत उत्पादनको अथाह सम्भावना छ तर उपभोक्ता लोडसेिडंगको मारमा छन् । तसर्थ नेपाल र नेपालीको सर्बोच्च हितलाई दृष्टिगत गरेर जलश्रोतको अत्यधिक दोहन सम्भव हुने गरेर राज्यको पुनःसंरचना गर्नु उपयुक्त हुन्छ । राज्यले जलश्रोतको अधिकतम दोहन सुनिश्चित गर्ने हिसाबले तीन प्रान्तहरु बनाउन उचित हुन्छ । पहिलो सप्तकोशी-मेची प्रान्त जसमा सिन्धुपलान्चोक जिल्लामा उद्गमस्थल रहेका मेलम्ची लगायतका कोशी नदीको सहायक नदीहरुको जलाधार क्षेत्र देखि पूर्वी नेपालको सम्पूर्ण भेग रहनेछ । मेची नदीको जलाधारक्षेत्र सानो हुनाले यसलाई पनि यहि प्रान्तमा समाबेश गर्नु आर्थिक दृष्टिले उचित देखिन्छ ।

दोश्रो प्रान्त सप्तगण्डकी नदीको जलाधार क्षेत्रलाई बनाउनु पर्छ । यसमा रसुवा जिल्लाको चिलिमे देखि पश्चिम तर्फ गण्डकी नदीको सबै सहायक नदीहरुको जलाधार क्षेत्र समेटिनुपर्छ । तेश्रो प्रान्त कर्णाली नदीको जलाधार क्षेत्रमा महाकाली नदीको जलाधार क्षेत्र समेत समेटेर कर्णाली-महाकाली प्रान्त घोषणा गरिनुपर्छ । महाकाली नदीको जलाधार क्षेत्र नेपालमा सानो हुनाले यो नदीको जलाधार क्षेत्र र कर्णाली नदीको जलाधार क्षेत्रको एउटा प्रान्त बनेमा यी दुवै नदीको अत्यधिक दोहन सम्भव हुन्छ र नेपाल र नेपालीको सर्बोच्च हितमा यी नदीको पानीको सदुपयोग हुनसक्दछ ।

२०६८ बैशाख ५ गते गोरखापत्रमा प्रकाशित
Ratna Sansar Shrestha

Saturday, April 9, 2011

An article on energy crisis

April 9, 2011
Dear Colleague

You are an intelligent person and things will become clearer to you if you were to read my full length paper on Arun III which can be accessed by clicking the link below:

Those who don’t agree with me on this should refute my analysis in a convincing manner. Now we need to guard against new incarnation of Arun III which is equally bad; simply because Nepal is in the midst of load shedding but the power from this project will go to India.
With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst
Sent: Monday, April 4, 2011 10:18
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: Re: FW: An article on energy crisis

Ratna Sansarji,

Thanx for the full version of the article. I am not so convinced that cancellation of Arun_III had actually benefited Nepal. But if you say so I would tend to change my earlier held view that its cancellation had done more harm than good.

Thinking about hydro power development in Nepal I have become more and more pessimistic for a number of reasons:

• no analysis of energy needs has categorized different needs for different sectors. What I mean is energy need for every sector is different: how the domestic demand for lighting purpose only (we will never reach the stage when we will start cooking on electricity) is growing and at what rate every year? how the demand for public lighting (lighting government buildings, street lighting, public monuments) is growing and at what rate every year? how is the demand for tourist industry (mainly hotels) growing? how is our water supply going to be fulfilled (even Melamchi needs lots of power to pump water at certain stages to bring it to Kathmandu) etc. why is this important? because we really need to worry about the growing demand for industries if we are ever to become a prosperous nation.

• Look what alternatives do we have: for domestic lighting purposes we can rely on inverters and energy saving lamps or solar systems, for cooking there is no better alternative than cooking gas or even kerosene. For public lighting the government has already initiated work on solar power and same can be done and has to be done for street lighting at each and every corner. Government has started subsidizing the batteries, solar panels and CFLs and people themselves have worked on alternatives rather than waiting for energy from hydro power.

• the policy change in early 80s to encourage domestic investment for small scale hydro power projects was a good move but it has been grossly misused. Moreover we need 40 small projects of 5 MW each to produce 200 MW and the public as well as the banks do not have that kind of capital to invest in 40 MW projects.

• the hydro power planners have made a cardinal mistake by relying on run off the river project which do not provide electricity when it is most needed.

So on and so forth....Until Fukushina nuclear plant hadn't happened I was more than convinced that Nepal should abandon hydro power in favor of nuclear power to fulfill the energy demand at one go. I am still not 100% against nuclear power because our requirement is not that big as compared to other more industrialized countries.
OK...that's all for today...good luck.

Friday, April 8, 2011

RE: An article on "energy crisis"

April 8, 2011

Paras Kharel

Paras jee

It is beyond my comprehension why did Kantipur behave like this. I wonder why did Kantipur have to go out of the way to “defend” that particular lady! While they have published news stories and articles highly critical of all and sundry; euphemistically from kings to commoners. I wonder what kind of slavishness is this!

This is the way they defend “freedom of expression”!

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: paras kharel []
Sent: Monday, April 4, 2011 16:15
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: Re: An article on energy crisis

Thanks for the alert. I will read it with interest. I myself was taken aback by the call for feeding grass to those opposing pancheshwor and was thinking of writing something on it. i am shocked further to hear that your reference to it was deleted. that certainly raises a lot of questions, including whether freedom of expression in new nepal is not even what it used to be in bad old nepal! may be this is what new nepal is all about.


From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Sent: Mon, April 4, 2011 8:57:23 AM
Subject: FW: An article on energy crisis

Thursday, April 7, 2011

RE: FW: An article on energy crisis - jail opponents

April 7, 2011
Prof Dr Mohan Lohani
Tribhuvan University

Dear Prof Lohani

Thanks a lot for New Year greetings and I also wish you a happy New Year 2068.

The journalists in Nepal practice strange kind of journalistic ethics. If I criticize the incumbent prime minister, they will happily publish such an article. But certain person seem to be “holy cow.” I wonder why!

I have been told that in Pakistan one can criticize ISI and get away with it. But people in Pakistan aren’t allowed to criticize KFC!
With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: Mohan Lohani []
Sent: Monday, April 4, 2011 19:09
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha

Subject: Re: FW: An article on energy crisis

Dear Ratna Sansarji,

Thanks for forwarding the unedited text of your article which is a fitting rejoinder to those who threaten to 'make the opponents eat grass'.The Kantipur has expunged all the phrases and sentences used by you and this is against journalistic ethics.You have once again proved your nationalist credentials and warned those who want to increase or continue the current routine of load shedding by exporting electricity at the cost of national interest.

Wishing you all the best and also wish you a Happy New Year,2068 BS

Tks and regds,

Mohan Lohani

--- On Sun, 4/3/11, Ratna Sansar Shrestha wrote:

From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: FW: An article on energy crisis

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Re: Jain opponents of program to mitigate energy crisis

April 6, 2011
Basanta Nepal

Subject: RE: FW: An article on energy crisis

Basanta jee

Thanks a lot for reverting back with your well thought through comments.

I am particularly enthused by the clarity as to what Nepal needs, what she needs to do and how to do in your email below. I think you should be publishing your thoughts so that more people could be “educated”.

I have no difficulty in saying that the person I was referring to in the opening paragraph is Ms Arju Deuba. I didn’t name names thinking that it will be difficult for Kantipur to publish my article with her name in it. However, I am shocked that Kantipur has even deleted the very paragraph of my article which referred to her without naming names. I wonder if it is slavishness towards the likes of her on the part of Kantipur!

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: Basanta []
Sent: Monday, April 4, 2011 19:43
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: Re: FW: An article on energy crisis

Dear Ratna sir,
Its very nice to read your article as always. But I would like to say to you that in this particular article, you have put some hidden names or arguments, which does not seems easy to me. (The opening paragraph in blog.)

Concerning the jail term for persons causing hindrance for new hydro-power projects, its not the jail terms that will enable the new projects I think. Its the sincerity that government puts forward while implementing the proposed emergency plan measures. In Nepal there is not dearth of good plans but what lacks is the consistent policy and honest execution of those plans and policies. The person who designs the law, is the first who tries to break it or dishonour it. From other countries in world we can see the example that fear of death penalty has not reduced serious crimes in those countries. So, fear of punishment may not prevent this, but good policy and work may be the good solution.

If we see the local support for the project, due to the lack of good investment opportunities we have seen large public who queue up to buy small shares (in Agriculture development bank, Nepal Telecom with premium, etc). Even local people are fighting to put their money for shares on Upper Tamakoshi and Chilime. So, if honest execution of policies can be convinced then even big investors may move to hydro-sector deserting investing further on bank. But big investors in Nepal seems to want quick money, which is not possible by investing in hydro-sector owing to its huge investment sum and long pay-back period. Also, frequent change of policy and dishonest execution adds to the problem for others.

Regarding scrapping export oriented projects and generating power for domestic consumption, there is no a question of debate. If we see the figures of money spent annually on energy import, the policy makers should have understood this. If more electricity is available, this money going out of country can be prevented apart from removing the loadshedding problem. There could be electric vehicles, electric cooking which will drastically reduce our dependency on imported energy and getting more poor. But in times of 14 hours dark each day, this argument may seem to be a joke.

Again, thank you very much for your effort on advocating this agenda sir. Lets hope leaders will not speak about exporting energy and getting rich by keeping Nepalese people in dark and making them consume expensive imported energy.

Best Regards,

Basanta Nepal

On 4 April 2011 06:08, Ratna Sansar Shrestha wrote:

Dear colleague
Kantipur has published an article of mine today

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

RE: An article on energy crisis

April 5, 2011

Bihari K Shrestha

Yes, Bihari jee, Kantipur got my article completely truncated. I wonder why!

On second thought, I am not surprised because the lady that I am referring to in the article must have quite a lot of clout in terms of advertisement revenue and Kantipur didn’t want to antagonize her, being apprehensive that she could make that dry up. I just wonder what kind of free press we have! The press is more or less out of control of government but is now controlled by business community.
Thanks a lot for sending following email.

With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst

From: Bihari Krishna Shrestha []
Sent: Monday, April 4, 2011 16:14
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: Re: An article on energy crisis
Thank you, Ratnajee. I have already read the one in Kantipur which was quite "vegetarian" in its presentation. Now I know that it also had included "non-veg" jibes to those who clearly deserved. I will be reading it with great interest.

Thank you once again.


----- Original Message -----

From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 8:39 AM
Subject: FW: An article on energy crisis

Monday, April 4, 2011

जलबिद्युत आयोजना बिरोधिहरुलाई कैद

जलबिद्युत आयोजना बिरोधिहरुलाई घाँस ख्वाउने प्रस्ताव हालै गरिएको र यस्तो भन्नेहरुको अग्रपंक्तिमा एक भूतपूर्व प्रधानमन्त्रीकी पत्नी (श्रीमती आरजु देउबा) पनि सम्मिलित रहेको समाचार संप्रेषण भयो । नेपाली जनताले के बिसे्रका छ्रैनन् भने डेढ दशक अघि ती महिलाले पनि अरुण तेश्रो (२ सय १ मेगावाट)को सकृयतापूर्वक बिरोध गरेका थिए र बिरोधिले घाँस खानुपर्ने भए अग्रपंक्तिमा यी महिला आफै पर्ने निश्चित छ ।

अरुण तेश्रो
तर यसं पंक्तिकारको विश्लेषणले के देखाउंछ भने अहिले कूल जडित क्षमता ६ सय ९७ मेगावाट हुंदा दैनिक १० घण्टा मात्र बिजुली बाल्न पाइएकोमा अरुण तेश्रो कार्यान्वयन गरेको भए काली गण्डकी (१४४ मेगावाट), भोटेकोशी (३६), खिम्ती (६०), मध्य मस्र्यांग्दी (७०), चिलिमे (२०) र मोदी (१४) आयोजनाहरु बन्ने थिएनन् र यतिबेला जडित क्षमता जम्मा ५ सय ५४ मेगावाटमा सीमित भई ८ घण्टा मात्र बिजुली आउने थियो । किनभने एशियाली विकास ब्यांक र जर्मनीको बिकास ब्यांक (के.एफ.डब्ल्यु.)ले यो आयोजनामा लगानि गर्न नपाएर बचेको पैसाले क्रमसः काली गण्डकी र मध्य मस्र्यांग्दी निर्माण भए । अनि विश्व ब्यांक आफैले अरुण तेश्रो कार्यान्वय सम्पन्न नभएसम्म १० मेगावाट भन्दा ठूला आयोजनामा संलग्न नहुने शर्त थोपरेकोमा यस्तो शर्त बिपरित आफैले खिम्ती र भोटेकोशीमा लगानि गर्ने अपेक्षा राख्नु पनि मुर्खता नैं हुनेछ । त्यहि प्रतिबन्धले गर्दा प्राधिकरणले २० र १४ मेगावाटका क्रमसः चिलिमे र मोदी आयोजनाहरु निर्माण गर्न पाउने थिएन ।

तर शौभाग्यबस् तत्कालिन सरकारले विश्व ब्यांकको शर्त बिपरित खिम्ती आयोजना सम्झौता गरेकोले अरुण तेश्रो तुहिएर नेपाललाई समग्रमा फाइदा पुगेकोछ र यसको श्रेय तत्कालिन जलश्रोत राज्य मन्त्री, योजना आयोगका उपाध्यक्ष लगायत नेपाली कांग्रेसको सरकार र निज पूर्व प्रधानमन्त्री पत्नीलाई पनि जान्छ ।

अझ ७० मेगावाट क्षमताको मध्य मस्र्यांग्दी सम्पन्न हुन तोकिएको भन्दा ४ वर्ष बढी समय लागेको परिप्रेक्षमा २ सय १ मेगावाट क्षमताको आयोजना सम्पन्न गर्न ४ वर्ष मात्र बढी समय लागेको भए यति बेला अझ बढी लोडसेिडंग हुनेथियो । ती महिला लगायतले गरेको बिरोधले एउटा आयोजनाको सट्टा ६ वटा आयोजनाहरु कार्यान्वय गरिएर लोडसेिडंगको अवधि मात्र कम भएको छैन जलबिद्युत क्षेत्रमा निजी क्षेत्रले प्रवेश पनि पाएको छ । यस पृष्ठभूमिमा राम्रा आयोजनाहरु गलतरुपमा संरचना गरिएकोमा बिरोध गर्नु उपयुक्त हो भन्ने सिद्ध हुन्छ ।

घाँस खान तैयार
अहिले पनि माथिल्लो कर्णाली (९०० मेगावाट), तामाकोशी तेश्रो (८००), नयां अवतारको अरुण तेश्रो (९००), माथिल्लो मस्यांग्दी (६००), लिखु (१२०) र बलेफी (५०) आयोजनाहरुलाई निकासीमूलकको रुपमा कार्यान्वयन क्रममा छन् । जसले गर्दा संबिधानको धारा १५६ उल्लंघन मात्र नभएर नेपालको सार्वभौम संसदको अधिकार हनन् हुने अवस्था सृजना भएकोछ । यस्तोमा देशको अस्मीताको रक्षा गर्नको लागि घाँस खानै परे पनि बिरोध गर्नेको कमी हुने छैन । ठूलै परिमाणमा घाँसको व्यवस्था गर्न थाले हुने देखिन्छ ।

हुन त जलबिद्युतको विकासमा सार्वभौमसत्ताको प्रश्न उठाउन हुन्न, नेपालको सेनाको भरण पोषणको जिम्मा भारतलाई दिइनुपर्छ देखि नेपाललाई भुटानिकरण गरेर (प्रतिरक्षा र बिदेश मामिलाको जिम्मा भारतलाई सुम्पेर) जलबिद्युतको विकास गर्नुपर्छ भन्नेहरुको कमी नेपालमा छैन । जलबिद्युत विकासको नाममा नेपालको राष्ट्रियतामाथि नैं आंच आउने काम गर्न तैयार हुनेहरु, नेपालको स्वाधीनता तथा स्वतंत्रता बन्धकी राख्न उद्यत हुनेहरुले कुन आत्मबलले मातृभूमिको अस्मीता रक्षार्थ कटिबद्धहरुलाई घाँस ख्वाउने आंट गर्दा रहेछन् हेर्नै पर्ने हुन्छ । बरु जलबिद्युत विकासको लागि भन्दै देशको सार्वभौमसत्ता गुमाउन, देशको स्वाधीनता तथा स्वतंत्रता बन्धकी राख्न तैयार हुनेहरु, यस प्रकारको विकासबाट शुभलाभ गर्नेहरु, कमिसन, मुनाफा आर्जन गर्नेहरुलाई सपूत मान्न सकिन्न र यिनलाई पो घाँस ख्वाउनु पर्ने हो ।

वास्तवमा कुरा भावनात्मक तथा अमूर्त राष्ट्रियताको मात्र होइन । यी आयोजनाहरुको कूल जडित क्षमता ३३ सय ७० मेगावाट हुन्छ र यी आयोजनाहरुको निर्माणोपरान्त बिजुली उत्पादन हुने बेलामा यथास्थितिमा नेपालको आन्तरिक खपतको लागि मात्रै ६ हजार मेगावाट जडित क्षमता आवश्यक हुन्छ जसबाट सुख्खायाममा २ हजार मेगावाट जति उत्पादन हुन्छ । नेपालको द्रुत गतिमा आर्थिक विकास गर्ने भए यसको दोब्बर परिमाणमा बिजुली आवश्यक हुन्छ । यस्तोमा नेपाललाई अंध्यारोमा राखेर, उर्जाको अभावमा औद्योगिकरणबाट बंचित गरेर, रोजगारीको अभावमा युवायुवतिलाई शारिरीक देखि यौन शोषण सम्म भोग्न बिदेश पलायन हुन बाध्य पारेर, यातायातको लागि शोधनान्तर तथा ब्यापार घाटाको कारक आयातित पेट्रोलियम पदार्थमा निर्भर रहने गरेर, उत्पादित बिजुली भारत निकासी गर्नु कुनै पनि हिसाबले युक्तिसंगत मान्न सकिन्न । यस्तो कुतर्कको बिरोध गर्दा घाँस खान पर्ने डरले पछि हट्ने कुरा हुन्न ।

अझ मननीय कुरा के छ भने नेपालबाट निकासीमूलक आयोजनाहरुबाट प्रति युनिट २ रुपैयाको हाराहारीमा निकासी गर्ने तारतम्य मिलाइंदैछ भने नेपालको उर्जा संकट निरुपण गर्ने नाममा १० रुपैया भन्दा बढीमा भारतबाट बिजुली पैठारी गिरंदैछ । यस्तो अर्ध औपनिवेसिक अवस्थाबाट नेपाललाई उकास्न नेपाल आमाका सपूतहरु (सपूत शब्द पुिलंग भएतापनि यहां यो शब्द छोराहरुको सन्दर्भमा मात्र होइन मातृभूमिको अस्मीता प्रति कटिबद्ध छोरीहरु समाबिष्ट मानिएको छ)ले जतिसुकै परिमाणमा भए पनि घाँस खान वान्छनिय छ ।

५ वर्ष कैद सजाय
हालै सरकारले उर्जा संकट समाधानको सम्बन्धी धारणा र भावी कार्यक्रम घोषणा गरेको छ र उक्त वक्तव्यको दफा १३ (ख) मा बिद्युत उत्पादनलगायतका कार्यमा बाधा अवरोध पुर् याउनेलाई ५ वर्ष सम्म कैद सजायको व्यवस्था गरेकोछ । यो प्रावधानले जलबिद्युत आयोजना कार्यान्वयनमा बाधा अवरोध नआउने र तदारुकताकासाथ लोडसेिडंगको समस्या समाधान हुने आकलन सरकारले गरेको देखिन्छ । यस पृष्ठभूमिमा यो व्यवस्था कत्तिको यथार्थपरक छ भन्ने विश्लेषण गर्न वान्छनिय छ ।

पूर्वााचल विकास क्षेत्रमा ९ सय मेगावाट जडित क्षमताको अरुण तेश्रो (तुहिएको आयोजनाको नयां अवतार) निकासीमूलक आयोजनाको रुपमा कार्यान्वयन हुंदैछ जसबाट १ सय ९७ मेगावाट बिजुली नेपालले निशुल्क पाउने भनिन्छ । त्यस क्षेत्रमा अहिले १४ मेगावाट मात्र जडित क्षमता छ भने तत्कालै उच्चतम मांग २ सय मेगावाट छ जुन दमित बृद्धि दरको आधारमा प्रक्षेपित परिमाण हो । त्यस क्षेत्रका सम्पूर्ण उद्योगधन्दालाई पूर्ण क्षमतामा संचालन गर्न र नयां स्थापना हुन लागेको सबै उद्योगहरुलाई यथेष्ट बिजुली पुर् याउन तत्काल नैं यस क्षेत्रमा ४ सय मेगावाट बिजुलीको आवश्यकता छ । यो आयोजना सम्पन्न हुने समय ५ वर्षमा त्यस क्षेत्रको आवश्यकता बृद्धि भई ६ सय मेगावाट भन्दा बढी हुन्छ । यस्तोमा त्यस क्षेत्रलाई अंध्यारोमा बस्न अभिशप्त बनाएर निर्माण हुने अरुण तेश्रो आयोजनाको बिरोध अवरोध हुन्छ हुनेछ । अझ पूर्वााचल विकास क्षेत्रका जनता मात्र होइनन् अन्यत्रका जनताले समेत उक्त आयोजनाको बिरोध अवरोध गर्नेछन् । तसर्थ सरकारले यस्ता सबैलाई कैद गर्नको लागि ठूला खाले नयां कारागारहरु निर्माण गर्नकोलागि ठेक्कापट्टाको लागि प्रकृया प्रारम्भ गर्नु उचित हुनेछ । ठेक्का पट्टामा केहिलाई शुभलाभ हुने पनि सम्भावना छंदैछ ।

भारतीय सुरक्षा चासो
संबिधान सभाका सभासद् राधेश्याम अधिकारीले "यो साता" नामक साप्ताहिकको जनवरी ५-११, २०१० को अंकमा "भारतले आफ्नो लगानि सुरक्षित गर्न आवश्यक सुरक्षा आफैले गर्नुपर्ने पस्ताव पेश गर्नसक्छ । शक्ति राष्ट्रहरुद्वारा यस्ता प्रस्ताव राख्नुलाई अस्वाभाविक भन्ने गिरंदैन" भन्ने धारणा व्यक्त गरेकाछन् जसले गर्दा यस्ता आयोजना कार्यान्वय गरिएमा नेपालको सार्वभौमसत्तामा आँच आउने हुनाले कुनै पनि किसिमले सार्वभौमसत्तामा आंच आउने काम नगर्ने प्रत्याभूति नभए सम्म कुनै पनि निकासीमूलक आयोजना बनाउन दिन नेपाली जनता सहमत हुने छैनन् । आयोजनाको सुरक्षाको नाममा जबरजस्ती गरिएमा लाखौं लाख नेपाल आमाका सपूतहरुले बिरोध मात्र होइन अवरोध गर्न पनि पछि पर्ने छैनन् । तसर्थ लाखौं नेपालीले अवरोध गर्न सक्ने सम्भावनालाई मनन् गरेर कैद सजाय तोक्ने व्यवस्था गर्नु बेश हुनेछ ।

पश्चिम सेती
पश्चिम सेती आयोजना सम्बन्धमा यस पंक्तिकार जस्ताले दशौं वर्ष अघि देखि यस आयोजनाबाट सुलभ दरमा उत्पादन हुने उच्च गुणस्तरको बिजुली नेपालमा नैं खपत गरिनुपर्ने धारणा व्यक्त गर्दैआएकोमा अहिले आएर सरकारले यो कुरा बुझकोमा सराहना गर्दै बधाई ज्ञापन गर्न वान्छनिय छ । तर अझै पनि यो जस्तो जलाशययुक्त आयोजनामा संचित हुने पानीको बहुआयामिक लाभ लिने सम्बन्धमा मौन रहेबाट नेपालको भूभाग डुबाएर, नेपाली जनतालाई बिस्थापित गरेर निर्माण हुने जलाशयको पानी भारतलाई निशुल्क दिने अभिष्ट रहेको प्रष्टिन्छ । १८ घन मिटर प्रति सेकेन्ड पानी उपलब्ध गराएर दक्षिण अपि्रुकाबाट लेसोथोले वार्षिक अढाई करोड डलर आर्जन गरेको परिप्रेक्षमा ९० घन मिटर प्रति सेकेन्ड पानी नेपालले ८ महिना सुख्खायाममा भारतलाई उपलब्ध गराएबापत वार्षिक पौने ६ अर्ब प्राप्त हुनुपर्छ । तर नेपाललाई यो परिमाणको राजश्वबाट बंचित गर्ने षडयन्त्र भईरहेकोहुंदा नेपाली सपूतहरु हातमा दहि जमाएर बस्ने छैनन् ।

२ वर्षमा संबिधान निर्माण गरेर जारी गर्ने भनेको ३ वर्ष त्यत्तिकै बित्न लागेकोले ५ वर्ष पनि सजिलै बित्ने देखिनाले यस प्रकारका जलबिद्युत आयोजनाको बिरोध अवरोधमा संलग्न हुने लाखौं लाख नेपाली सपूतहरुलाई ५ वर्ष हैन जन्म कैद गरिनुपर्छ । तसर्थ यस सम्बन्धमा निर्माणाधीन कानूनमा तद्अनुरुप संशोधन गर्न वान्छनिय छ । अन्यथा बिरोध अवरोध रोकिने देखिन्न ।

माथिल्लो कर्णाली
माथिल्लो कर्णाली आयोजनालाई ४ हजार १ सय ८० मेगावाट क्षमतामा जलाशययुक्त आयोजना बनाइएमा नेपाल र नेपालीको अधिकतम हित हुने देखिएकोछ । यसो गर्दा सुख्खायाममा ५ सय घन मिटर प्रति सेकेन्ड थप पानी उपलब्ध भएर १५ लाख हेक्टर जमिनमा ३ बाली लगाउने अवसर प्राप्त भएर खाद्यान्न, नगदे बाली आदि प्रशस्त उत्पादन भएर त्यस भेगको कायाकल्प नैं हुन्छ । तर ३ सय मेगावाट क्षमताको लागि इजाजतपत्र दिएर ९ सय मेगावाट निकासीमूलक आयोजनाको रुपमा कार्यान्वयन हुन लागेको बुझिएकोछ । पूर्ण क्षमतामा कार्यान्वयन भएमा सरकारले रोयल्टी मात्रै पनि वार्षिक ४ अर्ब ८४ करोड रुपैया आर्जन गर्नेमा कम क्षमतामा गरिनाले १ अर्ब मात्र रोयल्टी स्वरुप प्राप्त हुने देखिनाले बिरोध अवरोध अवश्यंभावी छ ।

पंचेश्वर आयोजना
नेपालमा उर्जा संकट चरमोत्कर्शमा छ, ठूला आयोजनामा लगानि गर्ने क्षमता नेपाल राज्यसंग नहुनाले बिदेशीका सामु (दातृ निकाय र/वा लगानिकर्ता) हात फैलाउने अवस्था छ । तर एक थरी उर्जाबिज्ञहरु नेपालले १ सय २६ अर्ब रुपैया लगानि गरेर पंचेश्वर आयोजना कार्यान्वयन गर्नुपर्छ र भारतमा बिजुली आपूर्ति गर्नुपर्छ भनेर लागेका मात्र छैनन् । यस्तो अवधारणाको बिरोध गर्नेहरुलाई घाँस ख्वाउने तैयारी समेत गर्दाछन् ।

यो आयोजना कार्यान्वयन गरिएमा महाकाली सन्धी अन्तर्गत आधा पानीमा हक कायम हुने नाममा भारतमा १६ लाख हेक्टर र नेपालमा ९३ हजार हेक्टर मात्र िसंचाई गर्ने व्यवस्था गर्दैछन् । यस पंक्तिकार जस्ता घाँस खान योग्यहरुलाई यो स्वीकार्य छैन । किनभने भारतले १७ अर्ब रुपैया मूल्यको नेपालको हकको पानी निशुल्क उपयोग गर्ने अवस्था सृजना गिरंदैछ, जुन बाढी पहिरो निम्त्याउने वर्षातको पानी होइन । तसर्थ नेपालले बैधानिक हिसाबले पाउनुपर्ने रकमबाट बंचित हुने गरेर आयोजना निर्माण गर्नदिन नेपालीहरु तैयार छैनन् र बिरोध गर्नेहरुलाई घाँस ख्वाए पनि हुन्छ जेल हाले पनि हुन्छ । गुन्टा कसेर तैयार भई बसेकाछन् ।

प्रस्तुत लेख प्रकाशनमा गईसके पछि उर्जा संकट निवाराणार्थ बनाईएको बिधेयकमा बिरोध गर्नेलाई गोलीसम्म हान्ने व्यवस्था भएको सार्वजनिक भएकोछ । जलबिद्युत विकासको नाममा नेपालको सार्वभौमसत्तामा आंच आउने गरेर आयोजना सुरक्षाको जिम्मा भारतलाई दिने, नेपालको सेनाको भरण पोषणको जिम्मा भारतलाई दिने, नेपाललाई भुटानिकरण (प्रतिरक्षा र बिदेश मामिलाको जिम्मा भारतलाई सुम्पेर) गर्ने नेपाललाई अंध्यारोमा राखेर सस्तो तथा उच्चगुणस्तरको बिजुली पंचेश्वर जस्ता आयोजनाबाट भारत निकासी, गर्ने आधाको नाममा नेपालमा ९३ हजार हेक्टर र भारतमा १६ लाख हेक्टर िसंचाई गर्ने, नेपालको भूभाग डुबानमा पारेर नेपालीलाई बिस्थापित गरेर संचित पानी (बुढी गण्डकीमा जस्तै) भारतलाई निशुल्क दिने गरेर आयोजना निर्माण गर्न खोजिएमा बिरोध अवश्य पनि हुनेछ । गोली हान्ने धम्की र कानूनी प्रावधानले बिरोध रोकिनेछैन । गोली हान्न आवश्यक तैयारी गरे हुन्छ । स्मरणिय छ बेलायतको उपनिवेश रहंदा भारतीय माथि गोली हान्नेहरु भारतीय नैं थिए ।

२०६७ चैत्र २१ गतेको कान्तिपुरमा प्रकाशित