The Nepali side, which was excited by selling electricity to Bangladesh as a third country for the first time last year, is in confusion this year. As per the agreement, Bangladesh has not yet opened the Letter of Acceptance (LC) even though 40 MW electricity is to be sold from June 15 (June 1). When opening an LC, you have to keep three months of money to pay to Nepal. It is a matter of doubt not to open an LC that is helpful for transparent and safe business and also ensures payment.
He has not paid the arrears of electricity exported by Nepal in the previous year, which has increased the suspicion even more. Intensive dialogue with Bangladesh is the only option to resolve this. The experience gained from the dialogue and conclusions with Bangladesh can be useful in making electricity trade that extends to third countries reliable and also to other countries. Therefore, according to the agreement, Nepal should present its diplomatic capabilities to facilitate and regularize the electricity export and payment to Bangladesh from June 15 to November 15.
Homework for the export of electricity from Nepal to Bangladesh, which lasted for almost 6 years, was concluded last year. The two countries signed a memorandum of understanding on energy cooperation on July 25, 2075. On October 17, 2081, Nepal Electricity Authority, India's NTPC Electricity Trading Corporation (NVVN), and Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) signed a tripartite agreement, and the possibility of electricity export came closer. Nepal has an agreement to export electricity to Bangladesh from June 15 to November 15 every year until 2029. Last year, electricity was exported only on the last day (November 15) because the process was completed at the last moment. On that day, 470,000 units of electricity were sold through India's transmission lines. 30 thousand 80 dollars was earned from this. According to the agreement, there is confusion that exports should start again from June 15 (June 1).
Power sale agreement and execution was not a common subject for Nepal. Firstly, the electricity produced in Nepal was sold only in India, but it reached third countries. It was a strong basis for the acquisition and expansion of this market for Nepal, which has a lot of potential for electricity production. At a time when the import-oriented economy was stuck, it was a matter of export confidence. Nepal used to earn about 1 billion annually by exporting electricity for five months. Even if it was a small amount, it would have helped to reduce the ratio of trade deficit. There was an agreement that Nepal would be paid in US dollars from the sale of electricity. This was another notable aspect from the point of view of dollar reserves or utilization. Similarly, it also created a basis for increasing business cooperation between Nepal, India and Bangladesh. It also strengthened regional benefits, prosperity and companionship. As a whole, the sale of electricity to Bangladesh was not a simple matter like the sale of other regular commodities and the income derived from them. There was additional discussion on this as it was a topic of multi-faceted benefits. But if the electricity sales process is not regular, the mentioned positive potential will become relaxed.
Not only the sale to Bangladesh, Nepal and India have also signed an agreement to export 10,000 megawatts of electricity in 10 years. Regarding electricity sales, first of all, we need to increase our own production. On the other hand, identification of alternative markets for electricity exports is essential. Sales to India and also to Bangladesh have given a positive signal. But the confusion that is seen in the case of Bangladesh at the moment also shows a faint fear that there may be a disruption in the sale of hydroelectric power produced by us with priority in the future. Therefore, our initiatives should be carried out with sustainable and long-term thinking. Since the trade between the two countries is based on an agreement, the issue of electricity exported to Bangladesh is linked to international credibility. Therefore, it can be believed that Bangladesh will stick to its agreement and both sides will get maximum positive benefits. What we need to acknowledge and improve in this context is the poor performance of our diplomatic initiative. It seems that there is no improvement in the old style of reaching an agreement on a matter but not communicating continuously, not following up to ensure one's interests. In this regard, we need to improve as much as possible.
