The MCC has also been criticized for one of its provisions that gives the United States the upper hand on the issue of reviewing expenditures to be made during the implementation phase of the project. The Nepalese government does not have this power, although it also allocates a $130 million grant for compact projects. Another provision of MCC, which has been criticized, was due to the rights the United States has to terminate the project. There is also a provision that India`s approval is a prerequisite for project implementation. All these cords defined in MCC grants give the impression that Nepal`s sovereign rights are being eroded by its ratification. Those considering applying for the MCC program will need to consider the pros and cons of MCC, which will help determine whether MCC will be advantageous or not. The debate on the pros and cons of the pact was summed up in a Pathfinder Foundation public debate entitled « Separating the Baby from the Bathwater: Evaluating the Millennium Challenge Corporation-Sri Lanka Compact ». The discussion took place on Friday, August 9 at BMICH. However, Sri Lanka`s 51-day political crisis last October put the MCC subsidy on hold.
The final agreement was due to be signed on December 17 in Washington DC, but was not signed, as the MCC held it back until political issues in the country were resolved. Last February, an MCC delegation visited Sri Lanka to gather information and assess the current situation and officially resumed the blockade. Before the proposed pact could be advanced, the MCC Board had to review and approve the program. Two months later, a few days after the Easter Sunday terror attacks, the MCC board announced that it had finally approved the five-year pact with Sri Lanka. If the Nepalese parliament ratifies the MCC, which is one of the conditions attached to it, the defined projects will be implemented in crucial sectors for a period of five years from 2020. To facilitate the MCC implementation process, the Millennium Challenge Account-Nepal (MCA-N) office has even been established at the Ministry of Finance in Nepal. The Nepalese government has also released $130 million for compact projects, including the construction of a 400 kv transmission line from Nanglebhare from Kathmandu to Butwal and the maintenance of a 305 km road. However, it is not confirmed whether Nepal would be part of the US military alliance by simply ratifying the MCC, or whether it would oppose any third country. The pros and cons of MCC could have been discussed before the country accepted it. Most skepticism about MCC seems more realistic for domestic consumption.
Nepal must show intelligence, talent and courage to judge whether the MCC is really in the interest of the nation or not. If there were doubts about this, why did Nepal sign an agreement with the MCC? At the initiative of the Government of Nepal, an agreement on improving roads and energy infrastructure was signed with MCC, for which the United States agreed to provide $500 million in subsidies to the country. At a time when the MCC pact was adopted on the 14th The Nepali Congress (NC) government was in power on 27 September 2017 and the maoist party of the time (which later merged with the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) and became the Communist Party of Nepal) was part of the coalition government. At a recent event, U.S. Ambassador to Sri Lanka and the Maldives Alaina B. Teplitz noted that the United States has nothing to gain from the pact other than Sri Lanka`s development as a trading partner and consumer of U.S. exports. Since politicians` opinions on such topics are often determined by partisan positions, the opinions of economists, diplomats, and independent analysts need to be treated more seriously….