If the UK government does not fund Trident replacement, it will be a great injustice to the 3,640 personnel in the Brigade of Gurkhas and their dependents. Gurkhas have served the British Army for almost 200 years. They became an integral part of British forces in 1815 when the then East India Company signed a deal allowing it to recruit Nepalese soldiers. The valiant Gurkhas fought in two world wars and played a significant role in the defense and expansion of the British Empire. Back home, the cost will be much dearer, given Gurkha soldiers’ contribution to the economy. According to a recent report released by the central bank, Nepal received over Rs 24 billion in army pensions, the bulk of which comes from the British Gurkhas.
The current debate in the UK is whether the Gurkhas should be retained on sentimental grounds, given their past contributions, or there should be reduction depending on the Gurkhas’ perceived future role in the British Army.
Defense experts have said that the high-profile campaign last year by actress Joanna Lumley for settlement rights in the UK for the Gurkhas actually backfired as that has made them expensive, thereby defeating the original cost advantages in taking them into the army.
The authorities are now questioning the increasing cost of running the Gurkha Brigade and the very raison d’etre for recruiting them in the first place. However, the British government cannot just brush aside the historic contributions made by the Gurkhas regiment. That consideration should supersede other logic and no Gurkha should be penalized for no fault of his. As far as the requirements of the British Army are concerned, the brigade has time and again been squeezed, whittling it down to a mere 3,640 personnel. The British government must contemplate a just solution, bearing foremost in mind the proud history of the British Gurkhas.
Related story
-1200x560-1779450784.webp)
