Don’t ignore exploitation

This is in reply to L B Pun’s response of TKP, 15 Dec, 2000 to Madan Regmi’s article: "Gurkha recruitment must stop".

He has mentioned about the Anglo-Nepal treaty of Sugauli (1816) which led to British annexation of huge Nepalese territory including Darjeeling, Kumaun and Garwal now under Indian occupation. I think this could have been averted if Nepalese, instead of signing the treaty, had resorted to protracted guerrilla war. Similarly if the British Regent Hodgson in 20/21 June 1840 was not saved from William Byrnes fate in Kabul, the British stranglehold on Nepal would have been definitely loosened the British and the subsequent independent India would not have succeeded in destroying Nepal to this extent.

Col Pun claimed that the pension of British Gurkhas soared up by the blessing of the British officials, including Prince Charles. It is jut not true. GAESO has been repeatedly pointing at the continuation of the racist and discriminatory policy of the British government towards the British Gurkhas. It is not money they are demanding but honour and respect. Col Pun’s argument that Regmi is trying to snatch the bread of hundred of thousand Nepalese by opposing recruitment, does not hold any rationale. It is true that most of the Nepalese are poor, but not as poor as the Indians. Majority of the Indian populations live in abject poverty. Thus it is senseless to say that Nepal cannot feed a few thousand of its own population. The Indian economy itself to a large extent is supported by the income of its labour force working in Emirates Arab countries and else where.

As per Britain, the British Gurkhas are just demanding with Britain to abide by the agreement. However the British government appears to be adamant. The British Defence Secretary Geoffrey Hoon during his recent visit to Nepal has given vent to the same ill feeling. He says "furthering of 200 years of marvellous service the Gurkhas have given to Britain." In the context of British Gurkha asking the British government to end its perennial exploitation, the word "service" spelled out by British Secretary of Defence only reminds the imperialistic mindset of the British empire who still takes Gurkhas as unequal. Mr Hoon when said we are the master in the garb of the word service, the HMG must have complied with its usual sycophancy. But our Nepalese government did not have the gut to ask the British officials that how much money the British empire makes from the ex-British Gurkhas? From the ex-British Gurkhas who have joined in the security of Brunei alone the British government extracts millions sterling pounds every year in the name of royalty. Col Pun has ignored this unique way of British exploitation.

Yam Bahadur Gurung
General Secretary, GAESO