The Future of the Brigade of Gurkhas

"Gurkhas to Go" – The Independent, Kathmandu, 10 July

 "British Gurkhas to Stay" – British Embassy press release, 24 July

On 4 June, the Ministry of Defence in London announced that the strength of the British armed forces would be cut back by a third by the mid-1990s. This news was cause for immediate concern among the Nepali hill communities which have traditionally sent their boys to enlist in the Brigade of Gurkhas.

The detailed breakdown of the British armed forces, whose strength is to be reduced by 44,000 to 116,000 by mid-decade, was presented in a White Paper submitted to Parliament. The Brigade of Gurkhas is to be reduced from five infantry battalions to two, and the number of soldiers is to be reduced by two-thirds.

The Secretary of State for Defence Tom King stated before Parliament on 23 July : "We intend to retain the Gurkhas within the British Army after 1997; but we believe, subject again to any m ajar change in circumstances, that a smaller force of around 2,500, based on two infantry battalions and support units, would be more appropriate. As a first step two Gurkha battalions will amalgamate in 1992."

In 1989, King's predecessor in office had committed his Government to a plan to retain some 4,000 Gurkhas even after the British withdrawal from Hong Kong in 1997. But according to King, that understanding had been contingent upon "changes in the circumstances, such as the size of the British Army as a whole." The new commitment to maintain a force level of 2,500 is similarly qualified by the phrase in the Minister's statement "subject again to any major change in circumstances."

"Detailed terms will be promulgated shortly and…arrangements will be made to assist former members of the Brigade to prepare for civilian life in Nepal," King said. It is learnt that the plan is to reduce the number of Gurkha soldiers by attrition to 4,000 by 1997, down from the present 8,000. Following the hand-over of Hong Kong, by 1998-1999. the force level will be further reduced to a constant of 2,500 in two infantry battalions.

In Nepal, some parliamentarians raised a voice against the "unilateral action" by London, which they felt should have consulted Kathmandu authorities on a matter of such importance to Nepal. Indeed, it seemed significant that London saw no need to consult Kathmandu given that the Gurkha connection is touted as the bond which strengthens the relationship between the two countries, and also because British Gurkha remittances have a significant impact on the Nepali economy. A courtesy note informing the Nepali Government of the reduction plans was sent to the Nepali Government 24 hours before the announcement, it is learnt.

Strictly speaking, however, there was no obligation to consult the Nepali Government. Nepal did not have a say in the very treaty document on which continuing recruitment is based: the 1947 Tripartite Agreement was primarily hammered out bilaterally between between Great Britain and newly independent India, with Nepal asked to sign on the dotted line.

The British Government seems .to have decided not to heed the advice of the House of Commons' Defence Committee which, speaking for the retention of the Gurkhas "in something like their present numbers" in 1988, stated, "If ain't broke, don't fix it."