wel29

 
ၾကိဳဆိုတုန္းဘဲ

နံမယ္ေက်ာ္ႏိုင္ငံေရးသတင္းေထာက္စာေရးဆရာBertil Lintner 
 ကေျပာတယ္၊လူမႈအခြင့္အေရးနဲ႕ဒီမိုကေရစီအေရး
ႏွစ္ရပ္ ဟာ အေမရိကန္ရဲ့အဓိကအေရးေတြမဟုတ္ပါ၊(ပထဝီႏိုင္ငံေရးပါ) အာရွမွာ စစ္ေအးတိုက္ပြဲအသစ္
တရပ္ဝင္ေနတယ္၊တခ်ိန္ကရန္သူဗီယက္နမ္ကိုစည္းရုံးျပီးတ႐ုပ္ကိုဝိုင္းရံ ( Contain) ဘို႕လုပ္ေနတယ္၊
ကခ်င္ ေဒသခံေတြဆႏၵျပတာကိုေငြေတြနဲ႕ေထာက္ပံ့ခဲ့တယ္။ (တ႐ုပ္လုပ္တာကိုေကာင္းတယ္လို႕ဘယ္ေျပာမလဲ?)
အေနာက္မီဒီယာနဲ႕ ဩဇာခံေတြ NGOေတြ ကျမစ္ဆံုေရကာတာမေကာင္းေၾကာင္း ရးတာေတြကိုဆန္းစစ္ရမွာပါ၊
 (ဖီလစ္ပိုင္သမတသစ္လို)ကိုယ့္အတြက္အက်ိဳးရွိဘို႕ကပိုအေရးၾကီးတယ္၊
fig4fig5
‘There is a New Cold War in Asia’: Bertil Lintner
Do you think the US’s engagement in Burma has more to do with countering rising Chinese influence than anything else?
We have to bear in mind that human rights and democracy are not the two most important issues that determine US foreign policy.

There is a new Cold War in Asia with an increasingly assertive China on one side and a loose alliance of the US, India and Japan on the other. In May this year, the US announced that it would lift its arms embargo against Vietnam, hardly a democratic nation that respects human rights, but a very useful ally against China.


ထြက္လာတဲ့လွ်ပ္စစ္ ၉၀ % ကိုတ႐ုပ္ဆီပို႕မယ္ဆိုတာကိုကြက္ကြက္ျပီးေျပာၾကတယ္၊
ဆင္တေကာင္နဲ႕မ်က္ကန္း ၆ ဦးနဲ႕တူေနတယ္၊
က်န္တဲ့ေရာင္းရေငြအေသးစိတ္ကိုခ်န္လွပ္ၾကတယ္၊စာၾကည့္ပရိသတ္ကိုမေပးသိေစလိုတာပါ၊

 ဒါကထိန္ခ်န္တာပါ၊

fig1


——-

သတင္းသမားတိုင္းမွာလိုက္နာရိုေသရမဲ့က်င့္စဥ္ Professional Ethics ဆိုတာရွိပါတယ္၊
ပရိသတ္အတြက္ အမွန္အကန္နဲ႕ျပည့္စံုေအာင္ ေရးေပးတင္ျပဘို႕ပါ၊
သိေအာင္လဲေဖာ္ထုတ္ရတယ္၊ဟုတ္မဟုတ္လဲစီစစ္ရတယ္၊မွားယြင္းသြားမိရင္ သိသိ
ခ်င္း ထပ္ျပင္ျပီးေထာင္းပန္ရတယ္၊

eledonfatcat2

၁၀ % ေပးျပီး ၉၀ % ယူသြားတဲ့သေယာင္ေယာင္ ဆိုတာ ေျပာင္ခ်သလိုဘဲ၊ ၁၀ % ကအခမဲ့
၉၀ % က ေငြေပးျပီးဝယ္တာ၊အခြန္လဲေကာက္ အျမတ္ထဲကထပ္ခြဲယူ၊ေနာင္အပိုင္ရမယ္
လူေတြသင္ၾကားေလ့က်င့္ေပးမယ္၊.
ျမန္မာက ၆၀ % အႏွစ္ ၅၀ က်ရင္ ျမန္မာက ၁၀၀ % ကိုမေရးပါ၊ ပဌမ ႏွစ္ ၅၀ မွာ $ ၅၄ ဘီလွ်ံ billion
ေနာက္ ၅၀ ႏွစ္မွာ $ 90 billion      $   ၉၁ ဘီလ်ံ      စသျဖင့္ရမွာကိုမေရးပါ၊

 


 ေရကာတာျပိဳမယ္ျပိဳမယ္နဲ႕လိုက္ေခ်ာက္ေနတာ (အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံေရကာတာ ေသာင္းခ်ီက်ေတာ့
ဒီလိုနဲ႕တခြန္းမွမေျပာပါ)

 

elepa    fatcat1a

အေဝမတည့္ျဖစ္ျပီး လုပ္ငန္းပ်က္ေအာင္ လူေတြကိုစိတ္ကစားသြားတယ္လို႕ယူဆရပါတယ္၊Termination of Myitsone Dam the Only Option, Say Local Kachin
Oct 20 2016
The China Power Investment Corporation is the developer. Under the agreement, China would receive about 90 percent of the power generated.“If the dam breaks, it will sweep away the people to the south of it [downstream of the Irrawaddy River]. This isn’t a wild guess, but an actual possibility,” said Dr. Manam Tu Ja, chairman of the Kachin State Democracy Party (KSDP).—————–

Institute for Security & Development (ISDP)
Concerns Over Impact
Notwithstanding the contested provisions of the “90/10” contracts which were negotiated almost a decade  Jun 5, 2015Myanmar Halts China Dam
elepb
President’s Action Is Seen as Snub to Beijing and Move to Appease Dissidents
WSJ Staff Reporters
October 1, 2011
Around 90% of the power generated by the 6,000 megawatt plant was earmarked to go to China, with state-run China Power Investment Corp. earning about 70% of its profits, according to International Rivers, a Berkeley, Calif., advocacy group. The plant was to go online in 2018.Burma dam: Why Myitsone plan is being halted30 September 2011
. The vast bulk of the electricity generated – some reports say as much as 90% – was destined for export to China.
elepc
တ႐ုပ္ကလွ်ပ္စစ္ေတြႏိုင္ငံျခားကိုႏွစ္စဥ္ပို႕ေရာင္းခ်ေနေၾကာင္း၊
အပိုအလွ်ံရွိလို႕ျမန္မာနဲ႕လာအိုးမွမဝယ္ဘဲေနႏိုင္ေၾကာင္း၊
စစ္အစိုးရကဂတိအမ်ိဳးမ်ိဳးနဲ႕အခါခါေပးျပီးတ႐ုပ္ကိုေရကာတာ
လာလုပ္ဘို႕ဖိတ္တာျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း၊ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံေရးကမတည္
ျငိမ္လို႕တ႐ုပ္ကအစက သိပ္မလုပ္လိုေၾကာင္းကိုဘယ္ေရးမလဲ?
—-
Civil Society Groups Continue to Boycott Myitsone Dam
If the project were to continue as planned, about 90 percent of the electricity generated would be sent to neighboring China while local residents could face possible flooding and environmental degradation.
Termination of Myitsone Dam the Only Option, Say Local Kachin

The China Power Investment Corporation is the developer. Under the agreement, China would receive about 90 percent of the power generated.


တကယ္ေျပာရရင္ အစိုးရနဲ႕လူမ်ိဳးစုအၾကားမွာအေဝတည့္ဘို႕ဘဲလိုတာပါ၊

roos3

 ေရွ႕ေဆာင္းပါး # ၂၈ David Grey ေျပာတဲ့ Brazil က သခၤဏ္းစာကိုညႊန္းလိုပါတယ္၊
Columbia University က Xiao Bao ေရးစာတမ္း က ဒီျပသနာကိုေလ့လာတယ္၊ ၁၉၉၆ မွ ၂၀၁၀ ထိ ကာလမွာ တ႐ုပ္ျပည္က
ေရကာတာရဲ့အက်ိဳးအျမတ္ကို ေဒသခံေတြအတြက္ဘယ္လိုမွ်ေဝေစာင့္ေရွာက္ခဲ့တာကိုေအာက္ပါ စာတမ္းျပဳတယ္၊


ျမန္မာျပည္မွာဒီလိုမ်ိဳးအခ်က္အလက္ရွိႏိုင္မယ္မထင္လို႕ဒီနည္းေတြကလက္ေတြ႕အားျဖင့္မဆီေလ်ာ္ပါ၊

fig6

http://www.columbia.edu/~xb2112/XiaojiaBaoJMP.pdf

Dams and Intergovernmental Transfer – Columbia University
www.columbia.edu/~xb2112/XiaojiaBaoJMP.pdf

Columbia University
by X Bao – ‎2012 – ‎Cited by 1 – ‎Related articles Xiaojia Bao ∗
JOB MARKET PAPER
December 2012

Abstract: Large-scale dams are controversial public infrastructure projects due to the unevenly distributed benefits and losses to local regions. The central government can make redistributive fiscal transfers to attenuate the impacts and reduce the inequality among local governments, but whether large-scale dam projects are Pareto improving is still a question. Using the geographic variation of dam impacts based on distances to the river and distances to dams, this paper adopts a difference-in-difference approach to estimate dam impacts at county level in China from 1996 to 2010. I find that a large-scale dam reduces local revenue in upstream counties significantly by 16%, while increasing local revenue by similar magnitude in dam-site counties. The negative rev- enue impacts in upstream counties are mitigated by intergovernmental transfers from the central government, with an increase rate around 13% during the dam construction and operation periods. No significant revenue and transfer impacts are found in downstream counties, except counties far downstream. These results suggest that dam-site counties benefit from dam projects the most, and intergovernmental transfers help to balance the negative impacts of dams in upstream counties correspondingly, making large-scale dam projects close to Pareto improving outcomes in China.

owl2


Sharing the benefits of large dams

IIED Jamie Skinner

pubs,iied.org/pdfs/GO3181.pdf

A new wave of African dam projects should learn lessons from the past to improve local outcomes.

….Instead of bearing the costs of conflicts – in both money and lost development opportunities – governments could channel a portion of resources created by dams to displaced communities, ensuring local people gain directly from the projects. For example, based on insights from the case studies,


fig2fig7
ေရကာတာက အရြယ္အစား ေသးရင္ လွ်ပ္စစ္အားေရာင္းရေငြပမာဏ ေသးလို႕
၂ % မွ ၃ % ထိ တက္ေပးတာျဖစ္မွာပါ၊စုံစမ္းစရာပါ၊


GWI is now helping Niger authorities design a local development fund
receiving two to three per cent of hydropower revenues at Kandadji.

Over the dam’s 100-year life, this fund can meet the changing needs of local people – such as additional schooling, investments in agriculture or better water supplies – and provide flexible support that reduces dependence on the government to resolve resettlement conflicts. Besides hydropower revenues, shared benefits might include access to irrigated land, a share of electricity, or a structured fishery.roos2


ယူေက အစိုးရကေငြေထာက္ပံ့ျပီး iied အဖြဲ႕ ဝင္ Jamie Skinner ကလဲႏိုင္ငံတကာဆီေရာက္ရွိကာ
ေဒသခံနဲ႕ေရကာတာအက်ိဳး မွ်ယူနည္းအမ်ိဳးမ်ိဳးကိုေလ့လာခဲ့တယ္၊

 

၊http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/17285IIED.pdf

The International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) promotes sustainable development, linking local priorities to global challenges. We support some of the world’s most vulnerable people to strengthen their voice in decision making.
Contact
Jamie Skinner jamie.skinner@iied.org
80–86 Gray’s Inn Road London, WC1X 8NH United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)20 3463 7399 Fax: +44 (0)20 3514 9055 www.iied.org
IIED welcomes feedback via: @IIED and www.facebook.com/theiied
This research was funded by UK aid from the UK Government, however the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of the UK Government.

Conclusions
The variety of schemes used around the world shows that there is no one blueprint for benefit sharing. The common thread is that hydropower investments generate significant financial flows.
Different countries have tried a range of regulatory mechanisms to redistribute those financial benefits and to alleviate — sometimes retroactively — the unexpected impacts from dam construction. Regulation helps to ensure a consistent approach is followed, not only by public and private sector hydropower projects, but also by existing and new projects.

——
အေပးအယူ ညွိႏိႈင္းရာမွာ လက္နက္တန္ဆာပလာသဘြယ္ (နည္းလမ္းေကာင္း)တခုျဖစ္တယ္၊
မလိုအပ္တဲ့ အျငင္းပြါးမႈ အေျခအတင္ ေတြသက္သာျပီး ေရအားလွ်ပ္စစ္ကို ေရရွည္ခံစားႏိုင္ၾကမယ္၊

——-

It is a tool that can empower local communities in their negotiations on project benefits and reduce the risk of unnecessary controversy that would undermine public confidence in sustainable hydropower.

When regulatory measures are informed and governed by affected communities, directly addressing specific impacts, they can help manage the social and environmental risks of large-scale hydropower.

—-

(ဒီလိုနည္းလမ္းေတြကို)က်ယ္က်ယ္ျပန္႕ျပန္႕က်င့္သုံးႏိုင္ေလ၊ကမ႓ာ့အရပ္ရပ္ကေရအားလွ်ပ္စစ္ထုတ္ျပီးဖြံ႕ျဖိဳးေအာင္ၾကိဳးစားတာက
ေအာင္ျမင္ေလပါဘဲ

——

Spread more widely, they will support global efforts to make hydropower a sustainable development technology.

http://services.iriskf.org/data/articles/Document1362006580.2282373.pdf

==========

owl4fig3
စဥ္းစားစရာ

၁။ ေဒသခံလူမ်ိဳးစုအက်ိဳး

ေရအားမွလွ်ပ္စစ္ထုတ္ႏိုင္မဲ့ေနရာေတြကလူမ်ိဳးစုတို႕ေနထိုင္ရာေဒသေတြမွာတည္ရွိပါတယ္၊
ေဒသခံ လူမ်ိဳးစုေတြနဲ႕မွ်မွ်တမွ်ျဖစ္ေအာင္ညွိယူရပါ့မယ္၊
လူမ်ိဳးစုအတြက္ဘာတခုမွမေပး၊လိုက္ေမာင္းထုတ္ေနလို႕မွ်တမွာမဟုတ္ပါ၊
ကမ႓ာမေၾကတဲ့ရန္ျဖစ္လာမွာကိုေျပာဘို႕မလိုပါ၊
ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ေျပာသလို ဗမာတက်ပ္ ကခ်င္တက်ပ္ ခ်င္းတက်ပ္ ရွမ္းတက်ပ္ သာတူ
ညီမွ် ေအးအတူပူအမွ် မူကဘဲေကာင္းပါတယ္၊
ဧရာဝတီနဲ႕သံလြင္ျမစ္ကေရကာတာေတြကအက်ိဳးအျမတ္ေတြကိုဘယ္လိုခြဲေဝမယ္၊
လူမ်ိဳးစုေဒသ ေဒသခံေတြဘယ္လို ဖြံ႕ျဖိဳးေအာင္ ရံပံုေငြေတြခ်မွတ္ခြဲေဝေပးမယ္ဆိုတာ
သက္ဆိုင္ရာေဒသခံနဲ႕ၾကိဳတင္ေဆြးေႏြးျပီးေၾကျငာသင့္တယ္လို႕ယူဆရတယ္၊
ေက်ေက်နပ္နပ္ရွိရင္ေဒသခံေတြကကန္႕ကြက္မွာမဟုတ္ေတာ့ပါ၊

၂၊ ျပည္မ အက်ိဳး

တဘက္ကေျပာမယ္ဆိုရင္၊ေရကာတာ လုံးဝ မ စ ခင္ကတမ်ိဳးပါ၊ေလ်ာ္ေၾကးဆိုတာမွမရွိတာ၊
ခုကိစၥမွာတဝက္တပ်က္လုပ္ရင္းကုန္က်စရိတ္ရွိျပီးေတာ္ေတာ္လဲၾကီးပါတယ္၊
ေဒသခံရဲ့သေဘာလိုက္ေလ်ာကာ ေဒသခံကကန္႕ကြက္ရုံနဲ႕ျပည္မကဘဲေလ်ာ္ေၾကးကိုဒိုင္ခံ
ဆိုရင္လဲတရားမွ်တမယ္လို႕မထင္ပါ၊

coord2

၃၊ဆက္လုပ္
၃က၊ ေရကာတာလုပ္လက္စနဲ႕ဆက္လုပ္ရင္ $ သန္း ၁၀၀၀ ($ တဘီလ်ံ)ေလ်ာ္ဘို႕မလို၊
ဆက္မလုပ္ရင္ $ တဘီလ်ံေလ်ာ္ရတယ္,
ဥပမာ ၄ထပ္တိုက္ေဆာက္တာ၂ထပ္လဲေရာက္လို႕စြန္႕ျပစ္ကာကန္ထ႐ိုက္တာကိုေလ်ာ္ေနမဲ့အစားက်န္၂ထပ္ကိုဆက္တင္ရင္အားလုံးအတြက္ေကာင္းမယ္ဆိုတာ ေဗဒင္ဆရာကိုေမးေနဘို႕မလိုပါ၊ ပါရဂူဘြဲ့ရသူသုခမိန္ေတြကိုေမးေနဘို႕မလိုပါ၊


[အေပၚကပံုကိုၾကည့္ပါ၊

“x” မ်ဥ္းေၾကာင္းကေန “၈” 8 ဂဏန္းေနရာ အရစ္ကေလးကိုရွာပါ၊
“၈” 8 ဆိုတဲ့ဂဏန္းေအာက္မွာ အစက္ကေလးက ၂ထစ္ရွိတယ္၊အေပၚကိုၾကည့္ရင္

၄ ထစ္မွာအစက္ေနာက္တစက္ရွိတယ္၊ဒီအစက္၂လုံးကဘယ္ႏွထစ္ကြာသလဲ?  
အေျဖက ၆ ထစ္ (၄ထစ္+၂ထစ္)]


၃ခ၊ ဆက္လုပ္ျပီးလည္ပတ္လို႕အႏွစ္ ၅၀ မွာ၅၄ဘီလ်ံရမယ္၊

 

coord1 
 
(အစက္ “P” က ၅ ထစ္ ျမင့္တယ္၊အစက္ “S” က ေျမေအာက္ ၃ထစ္ ဆင္းရတယ္၊
ဒီ အစက္ ၂လုံးကတည့္တည့္မဟုတ္ေသာ္လည္း “၈” ထစ္ ထက္မနဲကြာတယ္)၊
အလားတူစြာေျပာမယ္ဆိုရင္
ဆက္လုပ္လို႕ အႏွစ္ ၅၀ မွာ $ ၅၄ ဘီလ်ံ ရမယ္လို႕ေျပာရင္ သခၤ်ာ
နည္းအရ သိပ္မမွန္ပါ၊ ဘာျပဳလို႕လဲ ? အရွုံးသက္သာလိုက္တဲ့ေလ်ာ္ေၾကးကလဲ
ထဲ့တြက္ရမွာ၊
———-
စင္စစ္အားျဖင့္ $ ၁ ဘီလ်ံ လက္ထဲကေငြ မထြက္ရတဲ့အျပင္
$ ၅၄ ဘီ လ်ံ ေငြသစ္ေတြကဝင္လာလို႕ $ ၅၅ ဘီးလ်ံ ရလိုက္တာကို
သခၤ်ာနည္းနဲ႕တြက္ရမွာပါ၊
———
ကိုယ့္ေငြလိုသေဘာ ထားရမယ္ဆိုတာမဟုတ္ပါလား?

About Kyaemon

Kyae Mon has written 658 post in this Website..

Likes to post news and educational items.