PARITY AT LAST?

JOHN NARAYAN PARAJULI Saturday January, 29 2005
Source: NATION Weekly

A popular joke out of the Falklands War that was fought in 1982 goes like this: How did the Argentine soldiers know that the Gurkhas had come to fight? Answer: In the morning when they woke up, their heads fell off.

Valor on the battlefield is the Gurkha's hallmark, but their perseverance off the battlefield is remarkable. For 14 years, retired Gurkhas have protested unequal pay and pension rules that make them second-class soldiers in the British Army. Their struggle may finally have paid off. The British government has put aside a longstanding
policy of revising minor aspects of its policy regarding the Gurkhas; something that retired soldiers, now activists, say was a cynical attempt to avoid major revisions. On Jan. 12, British secretary of state for defence, Geoffrey Hoon, made an announcement in the House of Commons: Britain will conduct a wide-ranging review of the Gurkhas' grievances.

Prem Bahadur Bega joined the British Army in 1984 and was given compulsory retirement in 1999 after 15 years of service. A British colleague who was recruited in the same year as Bega was allowed to serve for seven more years before his retirement. The Briton earned several thousand pounds more in a year than Bega and receives far more
in pension—625 pounds a month compared to Bega's 91 pounds. Bega's wife and children were allowed to accompany him for only 18 months out of his 15 years of service: The family of his British counterpart accompanied him throughout his service. "This is gross injustice," says Bega. Many other Gurkha veterans agree.

The Gurkhas want parity with their British colleagues in pay and pension, and also on the prickly issue of promotion. There seems to be a glass ceiling on Nepalis rising to higher ranks. Only three have been promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel, and only one has
commanded a Gurkha battalion. Beyond this, the Gurkhas argue, the terms of service should be equal. Only 25 percent of Gurkhas are entitled to married housing, and the length of time that Gurkha families can stay with soldiers and noncommissioned officers is limited. The grievances of pay, pension, promotion and terms of service form the bulk of the Gurkhas' discrimination case against the British government. For years the British refused hear their pleas. "The British government even didn't bother to respond to our
petitions," says Gopal Siwakoti, popularly known as Chintan, a lawyer who acts on behalf of the Gurkha Army Ex-Servicemen's Organization, the GAESO.

But after the Royal Courts of Justice in London cleared the way in May 2002 for the Gurkhas to sue the British Ministry of Defence, the British government found itself on the legal and moral low road. It has now for the first time conceded that fact. On Jan. 12, Defence Secretary Hoon announced that the government would conduct a "wide-ranging review" of the Gurkhas' pay and pensions. Hoon said that he wants to ensure that the Ministry of Defence is beyond reproach both legally and morally. Hoon's concession raises a few obvious questions: Why did the ministry decide to conduct the review now, and will the proposed review end the unequal treatment regime to the satisfaction of all?

"An ultimatum from us," says Krishna Rai, vice president of GAESO, "prompted the MoD to make the new announcement." GAESO, which is fighting court-battles against the ministry over its unequal treatment, sent the ministry a legal notice on Nov. 19 asking it to address all their grievances within a month or face court action. The Gurkhas see Hoon's announcement as a major victory. GAESO's legal advisers say that their case was strong and that they had collected new evidence that would have brought them a victory in court. The ministry must have found the new evidence damaging, say observers,
because it responded by asking GAESO to wait until January for a major announcement regarding Gurkha pay and pensions.

In a written ministerial statement to the House of Commons Hoon said, "As the House will be aware, our policy is to keep the Brigade of Gurkhas' terms and conditions of service under review, to ensure that they are fair and that any difference from the wider Army are reasonable and justifiable."

As happy as Gurkha activists are with the British action, they are also taking the new announcement with a pinch of salt. They have demanded that the British government make all aspects of the announcement public. In reply Lieutenant Colonel G.R. Harnby, chief of staff of British Gurkhas Nepal, says: "It will be a comprehensive review. It will look into all aspects [and be] sensitive to the Nepali dimension."

A British Embassy statement says that the examination of the terms and conditions of service will be all-embracing and look into the present terms of service for Gurkhas. The review is likely to include their career profiles; length of structures within the Brigade of Gurkhas; pay and pensions; allowances; personal support for soldiers and their families, including pastoral care, education for children, medical provisions and leave arrangements. The Nepali government has already been informed of the review. Hoon told British MPs the review would look at whether differences between the Gurkhas' conditions and those of British soldiers were "absolutely justifiable." But the Gurkhas
have warned the Ministry of Defence not to try to justify any disparity. "We want complete equality," says Chintan. "There can be no justification for any kind of discrimination."

Is British policy racial discrimination? Britain says it's not, but an increasing number of Britons including the wife of current Prime Minister Tony Blair, Cherie Booth Blair, argue that it is a clear case of racial discrimination and a human rights violation.

The argument has merit. Nepalis are treated differently than other foreign nationals serving in the British military. Fijians whom the Ministry of Defence recruits enjoy the same conditions as British troops.

Even the British government's Commission for Racial Equality has supported individual cases filed by some Gurkhas. In the case of Hari Thapa, a retired lance corporal, the commission said that the ministry's responsibilities under the Race Relations Act of 1976
outweigh the terms of the tripartite agreement (refer to Box Story).
Thapa, who lives in Wales, filed a racial discrimination case against the Ministry of Defence in an industrial tribunal after he was given an early discharge from the Army five years ago. During his 15 years in military service, he was paid 43,000 pounds less than his British counterparts.

Growing support among British political parties parallels the court support for the Gurkhas. Opposition Liberal Democrat defense spokesman, Paul Keetch, said that the ministry must recognize that it cannot "treat 21st-century soldiers like 19th-century conscripts." Even the British public seems to care about the Gurkhas. A demonstration of more than 400 retired Gurkhas in Liverpool caught the eye of the press, and the Daily Express ran a campaign supporting the Gurkhas. In a poll of 16,000 people conducted by the newspaper, 99 percent supported the Gurkhas' demand. In October, British Prime
Minister Tony Blair agreed to grant conditional citizenship to Gurkhas.

Gurkhas aren't going to be satisfied with conditions any more. They have called for complete equality with the British soldiers. There is another outstanding issue: more than 10,000 veterans and widows who are without any pension or compensation. In one example, in 1969 some 10,000 Gurkhas were made redundant under a retrenchment scheme. Their British counterparts who were also laid off under the scheme were handsomely compensated; Gurkhas were paid 150 pounds and sent home. In 1986, 111 Gurkhas soldiers on training in Hawaii were disciplined and dismissed en masse for mutinous behavior. Gurkhas said they were sent home without compensation or the right to appeal. When asked if the review would include these two issues, a British official in Nepal says that the review will be forward looking, although he quickly adds that he hopes the reviewers will look into the past and the future before reaching any conclusions.

Some Gurkhas are optimistic that the review will get them equal treatment. "Let's hope the Ministry of Defence will end the discrimination," says retired Lance Corporal D B Bomjon, who receives 71 pounds a month, about Rs.9,000, as pension while his British
counterparts receive 475 pounds.

The money is a big issue, and it is perhaps the reason the British have tried to avoid a full review. Full parity could cost the British government more than 2 billon pounds in total. It may finally be worth the cost to shake-off one of the last bits of the colonial hangover.
And if complete parity isn't forthcoming, the Gurkhas say they are ready to prove their mettle in the courtroom, just as they have in the battlefields.