The Gurkha movement for equality, justice, and respect has been ongoing for more than three decades. Despite glaring discrimination against Gurkhas continuing well into the late 1990s, no formal movement had been launched earlier to demand equality. Blatant discrimination existed in nearly every aspect, including salary, pension, food, accommodation, uniforms, family permissions, leave policies, and more. There were gaps of 10 to 15 times between the salaries and pensions provided to Gurkhas and those of their British counterparts. Leave for Gurkha soldiers was sanctioned only once every three years – and even then, it was unpaid. In contrast, British soldiers enjoyed regular paid leave. Another stark injustice was the family policy: Gurkhas were permitted a family tour only once for three years within a 15-year service period, whereas British soldiers were allowed permanent family permission from the beginning of their service.
Realistically, Gurkhas were employed as the cheapest yet most effective infantry soldiers in the world, a notion first implied by Brian Houghton Hodgson, the British Resident to Nepal from 1820 to 1843 and a distinguished scholar of his time. It was Hodgson who persuaded the British government to recruit Gurkha youths – whom he regarded as a martial race – into the British Army, arguing that their service would be immensely beneficial.
For two centuries, the British government confined Gurkhas to institutionalised enclaves, systematically excluding them from rights and benefits granted to their British counterparts.
Throwback
In the wake of the restoration of democracy in Nepal in 1990, retired Gurkhas, taking advantage of the liberal political climate, embarked on a movement demanding absolute equality, justice, and respect. A Gurkha organisation called the Gurkha Army Ex-Servicemen’s Organisation (GAESO) was formed under the initiative of Mr. Padam Bahadur Gurung, who served as its president and led the organisation until the mid-2010s. Under his leadership, some minor pension increments, inter alia, were achieved. However, the most historic milestone was the right of settlement in the United Kingdom a breakthrough that effectively emptied traditional Gurkha colonies such as Dharan, Pokhara, Itahari, and Bhairahawa. As a result, most retired Gurkhas relocated to the UK, and this mass exodus sparked nationwide concern. Many sold their properties and migrated, leading to a significant decline in business activity and social vibrancy in those cities.
Following the secured settlement right, President Gurung abruptly declared the end of the Gurkha movement in 2008 during a program in Pokhara. Since then, GAESO has remained largely inactive. This vacuum gave rise to another Gurkha organisation, dubbed Gurkha Satyagraha (GS). By that time, the British government had adopted a policy of indifference toward any form of protest carried out by Gurkha organisations. The Nepalese government, on the other hand, with democracy progressing only at a snail’s pace, was largely limited to lip service and minimal action. This disappointing state of affairs ultimately compelled the GS to stage a hunger strike unto death.
When Gyanraj Rai, a former British Gurkha soldier, was on the twelfth day of his hunger strike, this writer, along with Surya Nembang, held a dialogue with Rob Wilson, a Conservative MP, in a room at the House of Commons. During the conversation, Wilson stated, “The British government wants to treat the Gurkhas equally, but financially, it cannot afford to.” In response to this discouraging remark, the writer counter-argued that Britain is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, a member of the G7, and still a dominant political power in global affairs. More importantly, Nepal and the Gurkhas have made immense contributions to Britain. Prime Minister Junga Bahadur Rana himself shed a great deal of blood and sweat for the British Crown by going to the rebel-occupied areas with 16,000 Nepalese troops to help suppress thousands of rebels in Azamgarh, Jaunpur, Gorakhpur, Patna, and Varanasi during the First Indian War of Independence (1857-58). During the First and Second World Wars, Prime Ministers Chandra Shamsher and Juddha Shamsher voluntarily wrote letters to the British Emperor, expressing that they would feel honoured if Britain made full use of Nepal’s
available resources.
The injustice
In addition, the Gurkhas’ sacrifices during the World Wars-as well as in the periods before and after-have been no less significant. Today, hundreds of thousands of people from around the world, with no historical ties to Britain, are receiving government benefits. So how is it that Britain cannot afford to treat a mere 20,000 Gurkhas equally? Upon hearing this, MP Rob Wilson was left speechless.
Fourteen days into the hunger strike unto death, the British government was compelled to form the Jackie Doyle-Price Commission to investigate discrimination against the Gurkhas and submit a report. The commission visited Nepal and met with the then Prime Minister, the President, and other senior officials. After nearly a year of investigation, it finally submitted its report to the government. To the dismay of the Gurkhas, the report yielded no significant outcome-most notably, it failed to address the core demand of an equal pension.
Following this, a series of ultimatums were served to the British government, occasionally forcing them to hold talks. Whenever the British representatives ran out of counterarguments, they would typically respond by saying they were unaware such things had occurred. In truth, the Gurkhas came to realise that the British government had pursued a deliberate policy of delay and avoidance for decades.
This persistent inaction by the British government prompted the Gurkhas to initiate another hunger strike unto death in 2021, eight years after the first one. This time, two former Gurkhas and a Gurkha widow staged the hunger strike. The current Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, who was then the Leader of the Opposition, swiftly met the hunger strikers on the third day to express solidarity with their cause. He has since become Prime Minister following the Labour Party’s outright victory in last year’s general election. Several factors – including the Covid-19 pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine war, political instability in both the United Kingdom and Nepal, repeated recalls of Nepalese ambassadors to the UK due to frequent government changes in Nepal, and the British government’s unwillingness – contributed to prolonged delays in addressing the Gurkhas’ valid demands.
Matter of national politics
After much delay, Chandra Kumar Ghimire, the new Nepalese Ambassador to the United Kingdom, arrived in London, and the long-stalled talks resumed on 12 June. This time, discussions centred on the issue of equal pension, which lies at the core of the Gurkha movement.
For the first time in the over three-decade-long history of the movement, the British side has agreed to resolve the matter of equal pension. The dialogue – held at the technical committee level and represented by officials from the British Ministry of Defence, the Nepalese Embassy, and Gurkha representatives – concluded on a positive note, with all parties agreeing to hold ministerial-level talks soon, following thorough preparation, particularly on the pension issue.
It is long overdue to bring an end to this deeply unjust form of discrimination. This is not merely a social or economic issue – it is a national political matter tied to the sovereignty, integrity, and independence of Nepal. Britain, often seen as a beacon of democracy with a tradition spanning nearly a millennium, is, astonishingly, the perpetrator of one of the most blatant forms of discrimination in the modern world.
This stands as a mockery of democratic ideals; democracy and discrimination cannot coexist.
Therefore, at this critical juncture, both the British and Nepalese governments must take full responsibility and make every possible effort to erase this dark stain on human history once and for all. Failure to do so will place both nations on the wrong side of history.
