There has been intense debate by Nepal

There has been intense debate by Nepal

There has been intense debate by Nepal on the agreement with the US government, the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), to receive a $ 50 million grant to build a power transmission line and upgrade the roads. Nepal's attention came to the attention of critics when US official Yandle Shriver, who oversees the Indo-Pacific security case, and David Panz, another South Asian official, came to Nepal and another US official, Elisa Wells, visited MCC's Indo- Visited Vietnam to pay for Pacific Strategy (IPS). Made it clear that he was an organ.

As the debate has begun, most parties in parliament, including the government and the opposition, are firmly in favor of the agreement. Outside Parliament, a section of communist parties and civil society has come out in sharp opposition. Within the ruling party, there are two sides to the opposition and some leaders in opposition to the agreement have made it clear that 'can the country be sold because of the high standards?'

Whether or not certain points of the agreement are disproportionate and nationalistic, the MCC is under IPS and focuses on assessing the invisible threat facing this threat. An essential question that is missing in the debate is whether Nepal is still on the path to its progress or will it continue with the modification of old ways and structures? Because VS. The path taken by Nepal later is the path of neoliberal economic policy led by the US. While traveling on the same road, spending on subsidies or loans for the same model, Nepal has fallen into disrepair in industrial activities and production, and about a third of the manpower is desperate to leave the country for employment.

This is where the neoliberal economic strategy will take the weak countries. Therefore, the debate should be on what is the way of Nepal today and the answer is how to get grants or loans, how and why. The neo-liberal economic strategies promoted by imperialist nations are the only way to lose sovereignty, and the path to socialism without breaking into socialism. Therefore, today it is necessary to have the courage to fulfill Nepal's ambitious aspirations, whether by the MCC or others, in connection with grants or loans.

Under the concept of helping to weaken terrorism in the wake of the attack on Twin Towers in 2005, the MCC, created in 9th, gives the US the status of a country ready to promote an acceptable model of democracy and economic neoliberal economic policy. This is the main declared policy of the MCC. Therefore, the ideological goal of the MCC is to promote a neoliberal economic strategy in the country or region of the grant, pushing it into the economic cycle of US capital. Despite the slogans of counter-terrorism, human rights, prosperity, the main purpose of today's world capitalism is to forget the fact that how to overcome the weak in our economic cycle of plunder.

Since the birth of the MCC is in the interest of US security, there is no question that the MCC will not use its charity to take over China, which has emerged as a new competitive world power. It is a matter of caution for Nepal, so that the neighboring country is not wrong with China about its land and policy, but it is never a realistic statement to present MCC grants as purely welfare matters. The Indo-Pacific region is very large in terms of population and market. Statistics show that the region consumes about 5 percent of the global market energy. The topic of energy in this area is similar to that of Arabian oil. Therefore, the MCC is motivating and investing countries in promoting the neoliberal economic strategy in the region and promoting the policy of privatization of the energy sector by investing US capital in the energy sector. Even in Nepal, the serious process of privatization of the energy sector has begun, much attention has not been paid to it.

While implementing the rules and models of the MCC, a series of divisions of the Nepal Electricity Authority has already begun in principle. The Electricity Regulation Commission Act-1 has been recently passed to make electricity production, regulation and sales separate. As the Nepal Telecommunication Authority and Nepal Telecom are separated, the private sector is being transferred to private or multinational companies to sell and distribute electricity. It is very uncomfortable to imagine the horrors of Nepal's security situation, and how dangerous the gap between rich and poor will be when Nepal's power, which is considered as the hope of future prosperity, falls into the hands of private and multinational companies.

Yes, the MCC's neoliberal strategy has already begun to pass laws and move in that direction. It has been argued that since the selection of the project, Nepali has done everything. On the one hand, the terms and investment of MCC have been applied in the whole process of project selection, and it is only a matter of logic that Nepali has been selected. One more thing, can't any Nepali expert make a mistake? Is it not the right Nepalese in the past treaties which the Nepalese people have termed as treacherous? Therefore, it can never be right or wrong, it depends on Nepali. $ 50 million is a big amount but it is not a big deal from this angle that the big problem will come to the nation tomorrow. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to consider the need for a holistic solution of MCC.

There are two other questions. Is MCC an IPS org? Is Nepal an IPS Partner? To find out the answers to these questions, it is important to understand what IPS is. Before Trump's arrival in the US, economic, political and military policies implemented in Asia and in the Pacific Ocean were referred to by the US as Asia-Pacific policy. With the advent of Trump, the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) was created by linking the Indian Ocean and the Pacific. Since IPS is not a US organization, it does not matter if its other countries will become formal members. With America's need to compete with China as a frontier country and stick to foreign policy, Nepal cannot be blind to the MCC's contribution to US military strategy. Prior to the concept of IPS, MCC was not born for the reason that US authorities have denied MCC under IPS itself. The latest information about the MCC issued by the US Embassy also shows that the MCC is not affiliated with the IPS. The IPS report clearly states that MCC was taken under IPS, not only verbal but also under IPS. Therefore, the question of whether MCC is under IPS is no longer meaningful.

The question of whether Nepal is a partner in US military strategy like IPS is very serious. It is desirable that in this case the diplomacy of the Nepalese rulers should only be non-profit, as it is never possible to be a partner, otherwise it would be too self-sufficient to invite much evil. After the return of Foreign Minister Pradeep Gyawali to the United States on April 5, an IPS report published by the US State Department on June 29 states that Nepal has been a partner for IPS. After China raised the issue, the Foreign Minister verbally said it was not, but it was not enough.

Earlier it was said that the United States is a partner in its military strategy in joint military exercises, airplane cooperation, but Nepal is not formally withdrawing diplomatic notes by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at least, the situation in neighboring China worsens. Has gone Such diplomatic disagreements shown by the State of Nepal on relative foreign policy and our geopolitical policy should be corrected immediately. Thus all the facts prove irreversibly that the MCC has become part of the IPS to further promote the neoliberal economic strategy in Nepal.

An analysis of the points of agreement with the MCC also sheds light on issues that are unequal, abusive and undermine Nepal's sovereignty. How do you think the MCC originally dominated America in terms of Article 2 (f) of the entirety of intellectual property, which is based on equality both now and then? The schedule of the MCC, which requires the MCC to allow its other agencies to participate in the country to succeed in the project, is self-deprecating for Nepal. Likewise, Article 8 (2) being a major challenge to Nepal's sovereignty as it disagrees with Nepal's national law agreement, the policy of the agreement to operate the project through a different structure will inevitably raise many doubts. While the official structure of electricity and road works in Nepal.

While some are expressing concern over the delay in not approving the agreement from Parliament, the point approved by Parliament should be used in favor of the people of Nepal and Nepal. The law, which is to be approved by Parliament, asserts the natural right to debate and to amend it. When the MCC wants to hear the opinion of Parliament, why should Nepali rulers extend the process by amending the agreement through Parliament so that it does not affect Nepal's sovereignty, unrelated foreign policy and Nepal's geopolitics and inequality, humiliation and fear. Solve? If there is an unavoidable situation in the interest of the nation, there is no way for the US to deny $ 50 million.

But it is possible that the resolution proposed by the resolution or some similar argument that the CPN (Maoist) ordered to be passed may be different, but due to the discipline of the party, the leader of the party bathed in the cold water of the fierce opposition 'Resist! This will happen because that party and its leaders have neither an alternative principle nor policy, nor will, to fight the imperialist neoliberal economic strategy, while alternative directions have become indispensable for future travel to a country like Nepal.