former Chief Commissioner of CIAA and former Secretary of Water Resources Ministry
Dear Mr. Upadhyay
It definitely would be appropriate to thrash out “our” differences (if at all it is possible to do so!) in a seminar that you have proposed. I am ready and willing to participate in such a seminar and prepared to put across my concerns (and the concerns of all people in Nepal who love their motherland) from the perspective of Nepal’s interest regarding Mahakali treaty and Pancheshwar project.
You will recall that you had proposed similarly with respect to West Seti project "under development" by SMEC and I had made my reasons clear with respect to why the way that project was structured by SMEC (export oriented hydropower project, instead of multipurpose project to meet Nepal’s need for, more importantly, water and peak-in power) was unacceptable to the likes of me during my presentation in a seminar that JVS had organized in September 2008. Rest is history, including the fact that the license held by SMEC got cancelled after ADB decided to withdraw investment (as a consequence of our success in “dissuading” ADB) and now the project is to be implemented by a Chinese developer as a multipurpose project that will meet Nepal’s need for water and peak-in power.
As regards Chapter 7 of your book entitled “International Watercourses Law and a Perspective on Nepal- India Cooperation” that you have referred to in your email below, which is based on a presentation you made in a seminar organized by Sangam Institute in December 2009, I was present in the seminar personally and have also carefully studied that particular chapter of your book. I did voice my difference of opinion in the seminar itself and there are a number of issues I disagree with your perspective in the book too.
I eagerly look forward to meet all the people that are interested, from whatever perspective, in Mahakali treaty and Pancheshwar project in the seminar that you have proposed. However, I wish that a “scene” similar to the way the seminar re West Seti was organized could be avoided (JVS had organized it with funding from SMEC – an interested party). Even I was offered remuneration by JVS for making the presentation from the fund provided by SMEC, which was reprehensible to me, and, therefore, I had “donated” my “remuneration” to Staff Welfare Fund of JVS.
Thanking you all for taking time to study and also respond.
With best regards,
On Jun 23, 2014, at 12:34 PM, Kalyan Bhattarai
I fully agree with Mt Ratna Sansar JI and in reference to the suggestion of Mr S.N Upadhya for the Modi to implement the 6 issues i do not hope any PM of India will do that because the objective of India is to get the maximum benefits from the water resources of Nepal and it will never think how Nepal will be benefited. the implementation of the "the agreement between Lesotho and South Africa for Lesotho Highland Water project, " as suggested by my friend Ratna Sansar is beyond imagination . India is neither honest with its agreement nor she consider the betterment of its neighboring countries. I am not among those fools who consider the help of India to separate Bangladesh from Pakistan was due to its commitment to wards the democracy, rather it was to weaken its birth time enemy Pakistan. Right from the Kosi to Tanakpur agreement Nepal is being cheated in almost every treaty. just for reference I could not stop the tears in my eyes after reading the agreement the NC minister Laxman Ghiumera made with India for water resources.Present day Nepalese politicians are with slavery mentality and they had a notion that no leaders can be PM of Nepal until India wants-and as long as Nepalese leaders do not get rid of that notion to hope the international standard treaty or agreement and its honest implementation like the "Lesotho Highland Water project"will be only fools dream . Thanks with best regards
Kalyan dev Bhattarai
On Jun 23, 2014, at 9:58 AM, Mohan Lohani
As you explained to me, in some detail yesterday at Lilaji's party, referring to Chapter 7 of your book, I have no intention of entering into a debate on this issue which, frankly speaking, is not my field , although as a citizen of this country I have every right to take interest in and inquire about matters of national interest such as harnessing and utilization of the country's water resources. As regards your chapter on a Perspective on Nepal-India Cooperation, I contributed an article last year to the Nepal Council Of World Affairs Journal.
With warm regards,
Mohan P Lohani
From: Surya Upadhyay
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Cc: Mohan Lohani
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: A Good List! [NNSD] Reflecting on what's happening in the neighborhood
I think the kind of issues that have been raised by some of you needs to be explored and analysed in detail interpretation of the Treaty. We have had several discussion at various level and at various times on this. I have made presentations at various occasions on this matter. I think it would not be possible for debating here on this forum. Lot have been written by our friends also. I can simply refer you Chapter 7 of my book entitled International Watercourses Law and a Perspective on Nepal- India Cooperation to get my view on the treaty.. If some of you want to debate on this let there be a seminar and we shall have sufficient time to debate on this. With best regards
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Dear Prof. Lohani
Yes, that will be just fair. Otherwise, no need for Nepal to suffer from negative externalities of submergence and involuntary displacement, just to provide positive externalities of flood control and lean season augmented flow to India free of cost
With best regards
Ratna Sansar Shrestha
sent from iPad
On Jun 22, 2014, at 16:13, Mohan Lohani
In response to Mr. Upadhyay, you have raised a pertinent question: is India willing to pay $ 216 million/ year to Nepal for 'the lean season augmented flow'?
Post a Comment