Nepali citizens express concerns about agreements with India (with full text)

Releasing an appeal on Thursday civil society members in Kathmandu said that Dahal-led government is attempting to undermine the country's independent and sovereign status.

NL Today

  • Read Time 2 min.

Kathmandu: Amid concerns raised from various quarters that the Puspha Kamal Dahal-led coalition government might sign controversial deals with India during the visit of Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar to Kathmandu, eminent citizens in Nepal have issued a warning to the government asking it to exercise prudence in signing agreements that may harm national interests of Nepal.

Jaishankar is in Kathmandu to participate in the Joint Commission meeting during which, various deals, including that of power export to India, are expected to be signed.

Releasing an appeal on Thursday, Suryanath Upadhyay, Dr Renu Adhikari, Hira Bishwakarma, Kanak Mani Dixit, and Sushil Pyakurel, have said that Dahal-led government is attempting to undermine the country’s independent and sovereign status.

They have expressed the concern about the government allowing the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu to spend up to Rs 200 million rupees by using its discretionary power. They have said that the agreement to this effect may impact Nepali politics.

The civil society group has also raised objections to an agreement guaranteeing 10,000 megawatts of hydropower for the Indian market, asserting that it could affect Nepal’s irrigation water. They demand a comprehensive national discussion, parliamentary debates, and consultations before concluding such an agreement, considering the critical role of hydropower in Nepal’s water resource utilization.

Nepali citizens should not be subjected to agreements that could significantly impact the country, they have said. Furthermore, they have expressed concerns about longstanding issues in Nepal-India bilateral relations, including the 1950 treaty, border demarcation (including Limpiyadhura-Lipulek-Kalapani and Susta), and the Eminent Persons Group’s report.

Read full text here: