‘Nepal's hydropower can benefit Bangladesh, entire region’

[Saudang]

Yeah but unfortunately India is not a country with win-win mentality.

BD and India will always be neighbors. No reason to be enemy with a neighbour i agree. Otoh India is not a country that have a prosperous BD in its intetest. BD must look to countries like Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan., who managed to build a strong economy despite constrained geopolitical location.

for you to follow the footsteps of S Korea, Taiwan or Singapore, you need a big daddy like the US..

 

[Alter_Ego]

for you to follow the footsteps of S Korea, Taiwan or Singapore, you need a big daddy like the US..

….or just a change of mindset and better governance

 

[UKBengali]

Yeah but unfortunately India is not a country with win-win mentality.

BD and India will always be neighbors. No reason to be enemy with a neighbour i agree. Otoh India is not a country that have a prosperous BD in its intetest. BD must look to countries like Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan., who managed to build a strong economy despite constrained geopolitical location.

For India to faciliate electric power transit to BD from Nepal and Bhutan is a strategic imperative for it. It actually wants a stable and prosperous NE region that includes W Bengal, NE States, BD, Nepal and Bhutan.

Otherwise it will be a lose-lose for both parties as India's NE does not develop properly and becomes less stable, and both Nepal and Bhutan start to steer away from India and towards China.

This refusal would be seen by BD-Nepal-Bhutan as an unfriendly act and also exasperate the NE States and W Bengal. W Bengal is extremely reliant on a healthy BD economy and has a connection with BD due to shared ethnicity.

There is absolutely nothing to gain for India by not being part of this "energy grid" and everything to lose.

As for those countries you mentioned, they prospered as they were "propped up" by the US for strategic reasons.

BD has no "sugar daddy" like these have and so without India not only will its economic development be hampered but its leverage with both US and China will be limited.

Also, all these countries developed by having strong dictatorships who were solely focused on developing their economies and BD at most will have a semi-efficient democratic model from now on. We know that this is not the best model for 3rd world countries to develop.

We need to take the emotion out, accept BD's geopolitical situation with humility and BD can also become a middle income country just like India will probably do so in the 2030s.

 

[Saudang]

….or just a change of mindset and better governance

I wish that were all it took to develop a country; if that were the case, countries like Bhutan or Rwanda would have become first-world nations by now. FYI, both Rwanda and Bhutan are rated among the best-governed countries in the world.

 

[UKBengali]

This is highly unlikely. Even if the price of electricity is low, the political price that Bangladesh will have to pay to Nepal and India will be high. No country will ever feel that there is too much electricity; there are too many ways for electricity to be turned into wealth. If you want to buy power from other countries, then the price to be paid will certainly not be just money.

It will work if BD keeps the proportion of the electricity imports to a low number like say 20% of its total electric usage.

In a worse case scenario, BD can always stop "recreational" usage and fire up older or standby plants.

The benefits of extremely cheap and clean electricity from Nepal and Bhutan are too great for a country like BD to turn down and go for far more expensive domestic capacity.

BD and India will never(almost) ever go to war and so there is no need to worry about what may happen 20 years down the line.

 

[MH.Yang]

For India to faciliate electric power transit to BD from Nepal and Bhutan is a strategic imperative for it. It actually wants a stable and prosperous NE region that includes W Bengal, NE States, BD, Nepal and Bhutan.

Otherwise it will be a lose-lose for both parties as India's NE does not develop properly and becomes less stable, and both Nepal and Bhutan start to steer away from India and towards China.

This refusal would be seen by BD-Nepal-Bhutan as an unfriendly act and also exasperate the NE States and W Bengal. W Bengal is extremely reliant on a healthy BD economy and has a connection with BD due to shared ethnicity.

There is absolutely nothing to gain for India by not being part of this "energy grid" and everything to lose.

As for those countries you mentioned, they prospered as they were "propped up" by the US for strategic reasons.

BD has no "sugar daddy" like these have and so without India not only will its economic development be hampered but its leverage with both US and China will be limited.

Also, all these countries developed by having strong dictatorships who were solely focused on developing their economies and BD at most will have a semi-efficient democratic model from now on. We know that this is not the best model for 3rd world countries to develop.

We need to take the emotion out, accept BD's geopolitical situation with humility and BD can also become a middle income country just like India will probably do so in the 2030s.

Taiwan, Singapore, and South Korea, three countries whose economies did develop under dictators (Chiang Ching-kuo, Lee Kuan-yew, and Park Chung-hee).

However, these three dictators had a common characteristic; they controlled the military but were not soldiers and did not have a military government.

If Bangladesh goes for dictatorship now, it is very likely that a military dictator will be born. A military government is the worst option. A military dictatorship is not as good as a democratically elected government.

 

[Alter_Ego]

For India to faciliate electric power transit to BD from Nepal and Bhutan is a strategic imperative for it. It actually wants a stable and prosperous NE region that includes W Bengal, NE States, BD, Nepal and Bhutan.

Otherwise it will be a lose-lose for both parties as India's NE does not develop properly and becomes less stable, and both Nepal and Bhutan start to steer away from India and towards China.

This refusal would be seen by BD-Nepal-Bhutan as an unfriendly act and also exasperate the NE States and W Bengal. W Bengal is extremely reliant on a healthy BD economy and has a connection with BD due to shared ethnicity.

There is absolutely nothing to gain for India by not being part of this "energy grid" and everything to lose.

As for those countries you mentioned, they prospered as they were "propped up" by the US for strategic reasons.

BD has no "sugar daddy" like these have and so without India not only will its economic development be hampered but its leverage with both US and China will be limited.

Also, all these countries developed by having strong dictatorships who were solely focused on developing their economies and BD at most will have a semi-efficient democratic model from now on. We know that this is not the best model for 3rd world countries to develop.

We need to take the emotion out, accept BD's geopolitical situation with humility and BD can also become a middle income country just like India will probably do so in the 2030s.

Would be better for BD to be self-sufficient in electricity production than rely on transit through India. Its a crucial national interest.

Same with river management.

Saying South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore was propped up by United States is talking away the enginuity and hard work of the population in these countries. Yes they benefitted from US assistance but in the end it was the locals who built their nation.

Its best for BD to secure its electricity and food production. These are basic neccestities that shouldnt be negotiated with.

 

[Alter_Ego]

Taiwan, Singapore, and South Korea, three countries whose economies did develop under dictators (Chiang Ching-kuo, Lee Kuan-yew, and Park Chung-hee).

However, these three dictators had a common characteristic; they controlled the military but were not soldiers and did not have a military government.

If Bangladesh goes for dictatorship now, it is very likely that a military dictator will be born. A military government is the worst option. A military dictatorship is not as good as a democratically elected government.

Ironically the ousted Awami League was in the best position to achieve that 1-party ruling system. But they were just a bunch of corrupt violent donkeys. BD unfortunately lacks strong, visionary and wise politicians.

I think a system can only be as good as the people who run the system.

 

[Alter_Ego]

I wish that were all it took to develop a country; if that were the case, countries like Bhutan or Rwanda would have become first-world nations by now. FYI, both Rwanda and Bhutan are rated among the best-governed countries in the world.

Apples and oranges

 

[MH.Yang]

Would be better for BD to be self-sufficient in electricity production than rely on transit through India. Its a crucial national interest.

Same with river management.

Saying South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore was propped up by United States is talking away the enginuity and hard work of the population in these countries. Yes they benefitted from US assistance but in the end it was the locals who built their nation.

Its best for BD to secure its electricity and food production. These are basic neccestities that shouldnt be negotiated with.

The U.S. aids too many countries. For example, the former government of Afghanistan, the former government of Vietnam, the Philippines, Liberia, Haiti, and so on. Most of them failed.

The four success stories of Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and Singapore were successful because the underlying values in those areas were Confucianism.
These four are typical Confucian countries, not European or American countries.

Confucianism is essentially a more inclusive nationalism. It is replaceable by nationalism. Bangladesh needs a party with a nationalist kernel, but it cannot be controlled by the army.
Always be wary of military dictators. A country that forms a military government will find it very difficult to turn back.

 

[UKBengali]

Would be better for BD to be self-sufficient in electricity production than rely on transit through India. Its a crucial national interest.

Same with river management.

Saying South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore was propped up by United States is talking away the enginuity and hard work of the population in these countries. Yes they benefitted from US assistance but in the end it was the locals who built their nation.

Its best for BD to secure its electricity and food production. These are basic neccestities that shouldnt be negotiated with.

I agree that building lots of nuclear power stations would be best but they are extremely expensive as capital costs are huge and even getting loans from Russia are quite expensive with interest rates at commercial rates. BD does not have the money but needs to build electric capacity fast.

Don't believe that BD has lots of spare capacity as these are either old plants and/or ones that require expensive fuels like oil. Using these should be a last resort as the unit cost is high.

Already stated this multiple times but as long as the amount of imported electricity is kept to a low level like 20% of usage then in a worse case scenario BD can manage without harming its economy. Even if BD gets say 10-15 years of cheap and clean hydroelectric power through India, it would be more than worth it as domestic options would be so expensive and take up even more land in land-scarce BD. It can use this time to build up its economy and then maybe build nuclear power plants with its own money.

Yes I agree those countries needed good governance but it also required US help. One without the other would not have worked.

BD does not have a "sugar daddy" and so without trading with India,Nepal and Bhutan it can pretty much wave goodbye to getting out of 3rd world status, at least in the first half of this century.

 

[Hope]

For India to faciliate electric power transit to BD from Nepal and Bhutan is a strategic imperative for it. It actually wants a stable and prosperous NE region that includes W Bengal, NE States, BD, Nepal and Bhutan.

I agree only partially. What India wants a stable , prosperous and FRIENDLY ( or at least non-hostile) NE region.
India most certainly does not want a prosperous and hostile BD that will use its prosperity to destabilise Indian interests . This is the reason that India made a lot more concessions to BD when Sheikh Haseena was in power than to previous governments .

The Indian state has no reason to empower those in Bangladesh who see India as an existential enemy and openly spew hatred against India and Bangladeshi Hindus.

Certainly, India would prefer to partner with BD than isolate it, but not if the government there goes back to giving Pakistan and China free rein to use BD's territory to foment insurgency in India, as previous governments have done.

 

[Alter_Ego]

I agree that building lots of nuclear power stations would be best but they are extremely expensive as capital costs are huge and even getting loans from Russia are quite expensive with interest rates at commercial rates. BD does not have the money but needs to build electric capacity fast.

Don't believe that BD has lots of spare capacity as these are either old plants and/or ones that require expensive fuels like oil. Using these should be a last resort as the unit cost is high.

Already stated this multiple times but as long as the amount of imported electricity is kept to a low level like 20% of usage then in a worse case scenario BD can manage without harming its economy. Even if BD gets say 10-15 years of cheap and clean hydroelectric power through India, it would be more than worth it as domestic options would be so expensive and take up even more land in land-scarce BD. It can use this time to build up its economy and then maybe build nuclear power plants with its own money.

Yes I agree those countries needed good governance but it also required US help. One without the other would not have worked.

BD does not have a "sugar daddy" and so without trading with India,Nepal and Bhutan it can pretty much wave goodbye to ever getting out of 3rd world status at least in the first half of this century.

Not having a “Sugar Daddy” can also be a blessing in desguise. Its an opportunity to learn to live and thrive under constrained environment. Wich also gives greater degree of freedom. Having a big daddy means you must obey when daddy says so.

 

[Afif]

Pakistan has no agency in BD, yet in almost every post some Indians talks about imaginary Pak backed entity or some similar sh*t.

While Pakistan barely surviving on its own, yet still living rent free in their heads. And the problem start there. In their head.

 

[UKBengali]

I agree only partially. What India wants a stable , prosperous and FRIENDLY ( or at least non-hostile) NE region.
India most certainly does not want a prosperous and hostile BD that will use its prosperity to destabilise Indian interests . This is the reason that India made a lot more concessions to BD when Sheikh Haseena was in power than to previous governments .

The Indian state has no reason to empower those in Bangladesh who see India as an existential enemy and openly spew hatred against India and Bangladeshi Hindus.

Certainly, India would prefer to partner with BD than isolate it, but not if the government there goes back to giving Pakistan and China free rein to use BD's territory to foment insurgency in India, as previous governments have done.

I think you are taking the venting here as a representation of the mindset of most BD'shis.

They do not like Hasina and blame India for keeping her in power. Let them say what they want as every BD government since independence has formed close trading links with India.

Believe me that the last thing that a prosperous BD would be would be anti-India and there would be no place in BD for NE insurgents. What happened with BNP-Jammat last time they were in power won't ever happen again as both countries have settled on mutually beneficial co-operation and respect for each other's territorial integrity.

Just wait a little while of some months and then when economic reality hits home. people will go back to trying to survive and stop blaming India for everything wrong with BD. India did not keep Hasina in power as she was able to give BD population enough till recently to at least tolerate her and her party.

BD knows that without India it will stay a 3rd world country and it won't be so stupid to turn India into a hostile country.

Pakistan is not likely to feature much if at all in BD calculus for now, but China will be given more infrastructure projects but India has no need to fear this as this will be purely economic transactions and not BD-China working against India.