Plight of the Gurkhas and Movement Against Discrimination

Ramnarayan Kandangwa (M.A. Political Science)

Introduction

When the British East-India Company was politically settled in India, it commenced a tenacious effort to establish diplomatic and commercial ties with Nepal by realizing its strategic and trade importance. Both British-India and Nepal were then heavily engaged in expanding and consolidating their territories. British-India took Nepal's expansionist policy as a potential threat to them. On the other hand, Nepal apprehended and was cautious of the growing power of British-Raj and adopted a policy of indifference. However, a war between these two independent nations broke out. In that devastating Anglo-Nepal war the intrepid Gurkha soldiers displayed indomitable valour, discipline and loyalty. In spite of it British-India gained victory over Nepal particularly due to overwhelming number and more modern weaponry on their side. At the same time the British officers were immensely impressed with the valour and discipline of the finest hill infantrymen. Hence, as per the brainchild of General Octerloney Sirmoor Batlalion was formed on April 24, 1815 from Gurkha prisoners of war. But it was a unilateral decision of British-India made in the battle ground. Ever since the recruitment practice of Gurkha youths has been continued till date. During that long passage of time, Gurkha soldiers really rendered an untainted and loyal service to the British crown especially to protect and promote the growing British empire. In the first and second world wars, hundreds of thousands of Gurkhas were recruited, who gallantly fought in several battle fronts in many parts of the world from the side of British allies. During these wars thousands of Gurkha soldiers lost their lives, while thousands of others were wounded, maimed and disappeared also. On the eve of India's independence, a long and grave discussion was held with regard to the division of Gurkha soldiers. Ultimately, it led to conclude a tripartite treaty on November 9, 1947 between Nepal, Britain and India. According to this treaty, four Gurkha regiments were transferred to Malaya under British government and other six remained in India. In Malaya also, Gurkhas were used to the maximum extent . Thus Gurkhas have rendered a constant, untainted and loyal service to the British government for the last two centuries. During this period, Gurkhas have indeed tolerated much hardships and sufferings. But British government has treated them discriminatorily in matters of pension, promotion, salary and other facilities. It has not given any pension and compensation to their survivors those who were killed, maimed and disappeared in actions. It is a direct violation of the treaty of 1947. Such treatment of British government ignores the equal status of the Gurkha Brigade which has been relegated to "Mercenary Soldiers". Hence with a view to eliminating such age-old unjust and discriminatory treatment, the retired British Gurkha soldiers' organization (GAESO) has launched a movement for the last almost ten years. Recently, it has filed cases against British government in the British High Court.

The objectives of this paper is to find out the genesis of Gurkha recruitment, the pain and plight they suffered during the loyal service and the discriminatory treatment rendered by the British government upon the Gurkhas. Since there is dearth of literature in this regard, it will mainly be based on documents published by GAESO.

Genesis of Gurkha Recruitment

The history of the age-old ties of Nepal and Britain contains both sweet and bitter memories. A devastating war broke out in 1814 in the process of establishing a diplomatic and trade relations with Nepal. In the Anglo-Nepal war, despite the indomitable valour and discipline of the Gurkha soldiers, the British-India defeated Nepal owing due to overwhelming number and more modern weapon. Then Nepal was compelled to conclude the unequal and disgraceful treaty of Sugauli on March 3, 1816 which even relegated the sovereign independent status of Nepal to protectorate until 1923. On the other hand, the British officers were immensely impressed with the indomitable valour and discipline displayed by the finest hill infantry men during the war. So, Octorloney, on the advice of British officers, unilaterally decided to recruit Gurkha youths in the British armed forces. To begin with, they raised Sirmoor Battalion (later 2nd king Edward own Gurkha Rifles) from Gurkha prisoners of war. The British government considers April 24, 1815 as the starting point of the Gurkha recruitment, the day when Octorloney's request to establish Sirmoor Battalion was approved by the Governor General. The same year in Sauthu of Simla two other battalions were organized and they were soon put together and named as the "First Gurkha Rifles". The trust upon the hill infantrymen further strengthened as they displayed tremendous military capability and loyalty to the British in several battles such as the Maratha battle of 1817, the Bharatpur battle of 1825 the Sikh battle of 1845-46 and also in the decisive battle of the Sepoy mutiny. Hence, the British by fully realizing the efficiency of the gallant Gurkhas raised further 10 regiments though the Nepalese authorities were strongly opposed to their illegitimate practice. Jung Bahadur Rana also did not favour the Gurkha recruitment. As Bir Shumshere emerged in the politics of Nepal, the situation took a different turn. He permitted the recruitment of Gurkha youths in the British-India army. He even issued decrees and made clear that "If anybody wants to be recruited in the British-India army, he shall be allowed to do so". Henceforth, no control has been exercised over this practice in any period of history.

The number of Gurkhas recruited in the British-India army from 1886 to 1904 was 27,428 and reached 128,770 during 1904 to 1,915. The total number recruited during the first world war alone was 114,565 men, the annual peak being 18,296 in the winter of 1915-16. In addition to the total, 200,000 men mobilized in the Indian army, Chandra Shumshere, another staunch supporter of the British, provided 16,000 men of Nepal's own army to garrison the Indian frontiers. The involvement of Gurkha soldiers during the Second World War further increased. Ten new battalions and two paratroops battalions were mobilized in addition to the twenty existing battalions in the British service and the final strength expanded to forty five battalions. In the Second World War 250,000 Gurkhas were mobilized. Among them 7,544 were killed in action, 1,441 were missing, presumed dead and 25,655 were wounded. But this is the version of British government. Several other sources assume that a more larger number than this were killed, maimed and wounded. Moreover, Gurkhas were extensively mobilized while they were based in Malaya. First of all they were mobilized to subdue the Malayan communist revolt from 1948-56. Secondly, to suppress the internal rebellion of Brunei, which broke out in 1962, and thirdly, in Indonesian war from 1963-65. Although no assessment whatsoever has been made about those who lost their lives in these incidents the British side has claimed that about 600 Gurkhas had lost their lives. Besides, British government used the Gurkhas in the conflicts of Falklands, Gulf, Kosovo, East Timor, etc. Though there had been no any formal treaty until 1947 the British government monopolized the use of Gurkhas in a numerous battle fronts and always reaped immense benefits to their side. Even after the treaty of 1947, no change has come in her monopolization.

Plight and Movement

The legend of Gurkha bravery emanated from the 1814-16 Anglo-Nepali confrontation that soon percolated into the higher echelons of the Honourable East India Company. Then it started to raise Gurkha regiments through clandestine recruitment and tenaciously maintained this practice until Bir Shumshere allowed to do so. In the last almost two centuries, untainted and loyal service, the United Kingdom used the Gurkha force to the maximum for the attainment, protection and strengthening of her world wide empire. During this horrible passage of time, the gallant Gurkhas really endured much hardships and sufferings both mentally and physically. In spite of that, Britain did not respect the contribution of even those who became handicapped, lost their lives and disappeared. On the contrary, as soon as her cause was served, she sent the Gurkhas back home empty handed. Be it in the First or Second World War or be it after the suppression of revolts in Brunei or Malaya each time she terminated the Gurkhas without pension and reasonable compensation under redundancy. As a result, those thousands redundant in the remote hilly regions of Nepal have been starving to death. They are compelled to work in the fields at the age of 70s even though they are maimed or amputated by the blast of bombs or wound of bullets. Since the economic condition is below the poverty line, their offspring are undernourished and illiterate. The survivors of those who lost their likes in skirmishes live further worse poverty-stricken life and have fallen victims to deculturisation as a result of being neglected and jobless. Many family members of the Gurkhas who have disappeared in the jungle of Malaya, Borneo and Africa have still been waiting for their fathers and husbands. The manner in which the kingdom gives them retirement without pension or reasonable compensation after having used the Gurkhas is particularly extremely unjust and against the spirit of human rights. Even if pension is given, the state of affairs is nonetheless unjust and discriminatory, especially the policy regarding the terms of reference by which the kingdom has drawn a line of discrimination between the Gurkhas and British counterparts on racial grounds is condemnable. There are further pitiable pain and plight associated with the Gurkha romance. Although it was emphasized that only volunteers were to be taken, there seems to have been considerable forced recruitments. Chandra Shumshere even ordered those Gurkhas who were on leave in Nepal to go to join their respective regiments and the one who disobeyed this order would be punished even to the extent of death. Thus, death seemed impossible to escape for them whether they stayed in Nepal or was to join their respective regiments.

When anthropologist Mary Des Chene was researching Gurkha recruitment in Kota, a village in central Nepal, one Gurung woman, born in 1898, recalled the First World War in the following words: "Now it is different, but in my time everyone who left was lost. They walked out of our Gurung country and got lost. My father, I never knew him. He was coming home, we heard, but then he died, too. My elder brother, my younger brother, my father's sister's son, all died. Many, many others too, so many". The above statement makes amply clear how the entire villages of the-then Nepal were made almost youthless by the recruiters and contractors by taking them to join British-India army. This even reduced the-then population and negatively affected the socio-economic development of Nepal. With regards to the plight of the Gurkhas which is all the more pitiable, emotional and terrible, according to Prem Uprety, is like this: "The faces of many Gurkhas who had been wounded in World War first were disfigured due to the loss of noses and eyeballs; in one case the forehead had been damaged so badly that "both the eyeballs were protruding out like that of an unearthly creature". General Babar Shumshere, after an inspection tour of the wounded, wrote "how could life linger on in such desperate souls". Thus, two-century old Gurkha romance is indeed heart-rending and frightening as well. In fact, the entire romance is not only full of such incidents but also some of them are beyond explanation and perception. In the First World War, the second battalion of the 8th Gurkhas was mobilized in France where this battalion on 30 October 1914 alone lost more than 600 men in an assault by the Germany. In this context one hospitalized Gurkha in London wrote a letter to his friend to India. This letter runs thus; "it is not a war but the divine wrath of God. In a few days several hundreds of thousands men have been destroyed. The shells of the cannon have been flying about like rain in the rainy season ... . The men who survive and go back to India should consider it as a new life. Perhaps the German will be beaten. They attacked in three lines. Two lives were blown away. When the Brigade attacks, the Gurkhas and Sikhs go first and the white troops are put in the second line. The piles of the killed on both sides were like heaps of slaughtered goats. But no one asks about the dead. All the hospitals in England are full.

On the one hand the loyal Gurkhas have rendered such unforgettable sacrifice towards attaining, protecting and consolidating of her world wide empire and to the British sovereignty and people while, on the other hand, British government treats the Gurkhas discriminatorily. In all matters such as salary, pension, promotion, fooding, accommodation and other welfare facilities they are paid and provided dramatically less as compared to their British counterparts. It is only due to the race that Gurkhas have been subject to such serious discrimination, injustice and oppression by the British government. Again, it is a violation of the tripartite treaty of 1947. Because the annexure 3 of the treaty provides that in matters of promotion, welfare and other facilities the Gurkha troops should be treated on the same footing as the other units in the parent army so that the stigma of "mercenary troops" may for all time be wiped out." This annex is one of the important provisions of the treaty which must apply in relation to the Gurkhas in the British army. Padma Shumshere, the-then Prime Minister of Nepal, particularly with much worry, had emphasized on equal status with a view to wiping out the stigma of mercenary. Moreover, the British government in principle accepts the Gurkhas as an integral part of the British National Army. But in practice, it is other way round. In addition to this, the behaviour of British government violates the fundamental objective of human rights. Hence, the Gurkha Army Ex-servicemen's organization has launched a movement for the last almost a decade to eradicate such discriminatory treatment. During the long course of movement, the organization has not left any stone unturned. It even conducted two international conferences in association with national and international professional organizations and other concerning bodies to gain support and cooperation from every walk of life. Desirous support and cooperation is received but still both the governments of Nepal and Britain turned deaf ear to its demands. Therefore, as a final resort, a group of former British army personnel with a panel of advocates led by Barister Cherie Booth (wife of British Prime Minister) and solicitor Phil Shiner have filed on 24 cases of discrimination against Gurkhas such as salary, pension, religion, women, etc., at the British High Court on May 8, 2002. In this regard especially the government of Nepal should be serious and take some diplomatic initiatives for its early solution before it goes beyond control. It is a national political problem related to sovereignty, national independence and integrity. In the last two centuries of "Gurkha Romance", the British government has unscrupulously contracted several battle fronts and mobilized Gurkhas in them for profit, commission and royalties. It has used and sold them as commodities. To take an example, a Gurkha battalion has been rented out to Brunei which accrues one and half million pound commission to British treasury and the total expense of the battalion is incurred to Brunei. In the communist revolts of Malaya, it paid each Gurkha soldier M$ 42 per month whereas an equivalent English soldier was paid M$ 450 per month. But later, it claimed M$ 450 for each Gurkha soldier from Malayan government. From the above fact, it becomes clear that the British government has done good business of Gurkha soldiers, reaped one sided benefit and merely meted out discrimination, injustice and oppression to Gurkhas and Nepal.

Conclusion

During the Anglo-Nepal war the British officers were greatly impressed by the gallantry, discipline and warfare displayed by the finest hill infantrymen. Having realized its usefulness they unilaterally and immediately raised Gurkha battalion of war captives. No any permission was taken from the Darbar of Nepal. Hence, Court of Nepal always remained in opposition of the practice. Even Jung Bahadur Rana, who is said to be a good friend of British, was not in favour of the recruitment. Pressure in this regard was highly mounted from British resident as well as from British authorities. Ultimately, Bir Shumshere allowed to do so and even issued decrees by encouraging Gurkha youths in joining the British-India armed forces. Chandra Shumshere, the most shrewd Rana Prime Minister and staunch supporter of the British, encouraged the tradition of recruitment to maximum extent. Due to this, hundreds of thousands of Nepali youths joined the British. India army who fought in a large number of battle fronts with indomitable gallantry and loyalty from the British side. Thousands of Gurkhas ultimately sacrificed their invaluable lives, thousands of others maimed and disappeared solely for the sake of British empire and sovereignty. In those battle fronts, the Gurkhas could secure the world's most famous and coveted 13 Victoria crosses. Apart from this, the pain and plight they suffered in the last two centuries is another story which cannot be described easily. But the British government has not respected such gallant and loyal service. She rather sent back home empty handed under redundancy as soon as her interests are served. Be it after the Second World War or be it after the suppression of revolts in Malaya and Brunei, it is all the more painful and misleading act. In fact Britain is unscrupulously using Gurkhas for profit, commission and royalty. As far as the discriminating behaviour is concerned, it is so high that a white soldier of the same rank and length of service receives ten fold more (before the 192% increment) than a Gurkha soldier. This practice is prevalent in all other fields of facilities. In such a serious national political issue the democratic government of Nepal including the nine month old UML's government has remained a mute spectator. It sometimes gives lip service and nothing else. Hence, an organization of retired Gurkha soldiers (GAESO), having all other measures failed utterly, has sued cases against British government in the British High Court. In this regard the government of Nepal and other concerning bodies should play a crucial role in giving an easy vent to this long-standing national political problem which is associated with national independence, sovereignty and dignity of the country.

Headline | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past