
The UK's Afghan data leak stinks of another miserable betrayal
Later, he would fight as part of the Northern Alliance against the Taliban, and it's for this reason that I'm not prepared to name him here.
I do know that much of his immediate family were forced to flee shortly after I last saw them in Kabul in 2020, just before the Taliban came to power following the ignominious withdrawal in August 2021 of the US-led coalition forces of which Britain was a part.
READ MORE: Former top judge says court would 'likely' rule Israel is committing genocide in Gaza
My late friend's immediate family are now in neighbouring Iran, where they swapped the dangers of one war and repressive regime in Afghanistan for that of another because they had no choice. To stay would have meant almost certain death at the hands of the Taliban.
I know for sure they are in Iran because one of my late friend's sons with great difficulty got a message to me asking for help to get his family out from Iran to the UK.
His request is not the first I've had from old Afghan friends, and doubtless will not be the last. Another, still trapped in Afghanistan, also managed to contact me a few months ago seeking similar help. I have not heard from him since.
To say I feel a sense of unease at being unable to do much would be an understatement, for friendships run deep in Afghan culture and our bonds were often forged in the most trying times of war, making them all the more profound.
I mention all this right now in the context of the scarcely believable cock-up by the previous Tory government that was disclosed this week over the highly secret Operation Rubific.
For those catching up with the story, in short, up to 100,000 Afghans could have been placed at risk after a British Royal Marine mistakenly emailed a database to multiple wrong contacts. That spreadsheet contained personal data on tens of thousands of applicants to the UK's Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP).
In what ended up on Facebook, names, emails and phone numbers in the leak included up to 33,000 people connected to those who supported British forces.
As the data was circulated even further, fears grew that it could provide the basis for a Taliban 'kill list', and this is where the whole affair gets even more shameful.
For not only did the then Tory government defence secretary Ben Wallace obtain a 'super-injunction' preventing several media organisations who knew of the leak from reporting it, but by doing so added cover-up to cock-up.
In panic, ministers then authorised a covert emergency relocation scheme known as the Afghan Response Route at an estimated cost of £7 billion to the taxpayer. That has now been closed according to current Labour Government Defence Secretary John Healey, who on Tuesday admitted the catastrophic data breach.
Everything about this whole shambolic affair stinks. To begin with, there is the utter incompetence of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and its failure to safeguard all those in the dataset.
READ MORE: 12 countries agree concrete steps to halt Gaza genocide
Then there is the gagging of the press and the fact the super-injunction was allowed to continue to last for so long. All this before the unimaginable fear and pressure it must have placed on countless ordinary Afghans. Hard as it is to imagine, but the entire affair is on a par – if not surpasses – the betrayal meted out to Afghans back in 2021 as they were left to their fate at the hands of the Taliban.
And before anyone simply lays the blame squarely on the previous Tory government, let's not forget that court documents revealed that the current Labour Government continued to defend the injunction after coming to power, citing national security concerns.
What also sticks in the craw is that Healey this week told news outlets that 'most of those names on the list… didn't work alongside our forces, didn't serve with our forces, aren't eligible for the special scheme.'
Healey also had the audacity to argue that their inclusion in the list did not automatically make them targets, citing an independent review which found it 'highly unlikely' that presence on the dataset increased the risk of Taliban reprisals.
Really, Mr Healey, can you be absolutely sure of that? If the threat was so slight why then did both Tory then a Labour government tie themselves in knots adding to the cover-up of the leak?
Are we actually supposed to take the word of UK Government officials – whose ineptitude appears to know no bounds – that they are categorically certain the Taliban did not benefit from the leak and target those inside the country related to those on the list?
Justified as it is to focus on what led to the leak and the question over freedom of the press to report, it's vital to remember that at the core of this whole issue are people's lives and the terrifying threat they face daily from the barbarism of Taliban rule.
Those in Westminster might think that the war in Afghanistan is over, but countless Afghans are still imperilled by its outcome – not least the country's women and girls. Rather than pulling out all the stops to make them safer – the least the UK could do after its earlier betrayal – it instead puts them in even greater danger than before.
READ MORE: At least 20 Palestinians killed in stampede at food distribution centre
Is it really beyond the intelligence of politicians – whatever their stripe – to put the obvious facts together and recognise the real reason why in 2023-24, Afghans topped the list of those trying to make that Channel crossing in small boats?
For the bottom line here is that the UK screws up massively in terms of legal routes for legitimate Afghan asylum seekers to get here, while at the same time making their lives back in Afghanistan more dangerous than ever.
What an indictment we have witnessed this week of the systems that are meant to protect the victims of war and oppression. There now needs to be a full independent inquiry into what by any standards is a scandalous affair on so many levels.
In the meantime, should my Afghan friends once more be in touch seeking help, I will be more bereft than ever of offering any useful reply. I will also be hanging my head in shame at the UK's miserable betrayal – yet again.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mirror
23 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Brits 'not safe' as Putin 'challenges world order', warns ex-NATO chief
Lord Robertson of Port Ellen said the UK was "underprepared" and that citizens in the country were "not safe" amid increased threats coming from Russia and China Britain and its people are not safe amid crumbling army preparedness, a former NATO chief has warned Parliament. Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, who co-wrote the Strategic Defence Review (SDR), said the UK is lacking in ammunition, training, people, logistics, and medical capacity. He told the upper chamber: 'Bearing in mind the difficult world that we live in and have to survive in, this is what I firmly believe: we are underinsured, we are underprepared, we are not safe. 'This country and its people are not safe. The British people are faced with a world in turmoil, with great power competitions spilling over now into conflict, with constant grey zone attacks on our mainland, and with Russia – often with the co-operation of Iran, China and North Korea – challenging the existing world order. 'We simply in this country are not safe.' The Labour peer wrote the review alongside the former commander of the joint forces command, General Sir Richard Barrons, and defence adviser Dr Fiona Hill. Artificial intelligence, drones and a £1 billion investment in homeland missile defence all form part of the review's plan to keep the UK safe in the face of threats from Vladimir Putin 's Russia and the rise of China. As peers debated the review on Friday, Lord Robertson said: 'When we say in the report that we are unprepared, it is an understatement. We don't have the ammunition, the training, the people, the spare parts, the logistics, and we don't have the medical capacity to deal with the mass casualties that we would face if we were involved in high intensity warfare. 'Over the years, and I suppose I must plead guilty to that as well, we took a substantial peace dividend, because we all believed that the world had changed for the better.' He continued: 'Sadly, we were not alone in that. There may have been over-optimism, but at worst wishful thinking, but the brutal, full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Putin's Russia three years ago was a savage wake-up call for all of us. 'This world we now live in has changed out of all recognition, and we have got to change as well.' Lord Robertson told the upper chamber he is 'confident' the review will 'intimidate our enemies, inspire our friends, invigorate our defence industry, and make our country safer'. Conservative shadow defence minister Baroness Goldie pressed the Government to be specific about the amount of money and timing needed for defence spending to reach 3 per cent of GDP. She said: 'In this exciting and brave new world for defence, the elephant in the room is money, and none of this excellent aspiration proposed by the review means anything without attaching pound signs to the proposals. 'Ambition must translate into specific financial commitment." Former military chief Lord Stirrup said the Government's spending would need to be restructured to be 'anywhere near 3.5 per cent of GDP for defence by 2035'. 'There is no sign of any urgency on any side of the political divide on addressing this crucial matter,' the crossbench peer added.


Telegraph
23 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer to unveil new sleaze watchdog
Sir Keir Starmer is poised to unveil his new sleaze watchdog in the coming days, The Telegraph can reveal. Plans are being made to announce the independent Ethics and Integrity Commission before MPs break for the summer on Tuesday. The commission will take over responsibilities for enforcing rules on lobbying for former government employees and overseeing wider standards in public life. It will also enforce the new legal 'duty of candour' for public officials which will be enacted in the Hillsborough law, which has been promised – but not yet published – by the Prime Minister. However, it is understood other bodies involved in political oversight, such as the parliamentary standards commissioner and the independent adviser on ministerial interests, will remain untouched. Labour pledge from 2021 It is unclear whether tougher new powers will be announced alongside the reorganisation, potentially opening up the plans to criticism that it is largely a rebadging of existing bodies. The commission was pledged by Labour in 2021 and was included in the party's manifesto at last summer's general election. It was used by Sir Keir and his front-benchers to argue it was time to draw a line under an era of Tory 'sleaze' seen in the latter years of the Conservative government. The Labour manifesto stated: 'Labour will restore confidence in government and ensure ministers are held to the highest standards. 'We will establish a new independent Ethics and Integrity Commission, with its own independent chair, to ensure probity in government.' But little has been said about the commission in public by ministers since July 2024, leading to speculation about the body's future. Insiders have described to The Telegraph how the new commission will operate, with its areas of responsibility now said to be finalised and awaiting announcement. The advisory committee on business appointments (Acoba), which gives advice to former ministers and senior officials about roles taken after leaving government to ensure no conflicts of interest on lobbying take place, will be folded into the commission. Acoba has long been criticised as 'toothless' since there is no obligation for those who seek advice to follow the guidance issued and it has no ability to issue punishments. Yet it is unclear if the commission will be given much stronger powers over lobbying than Acoba, even while it is taking over its responsibilities. A second body – the committee on standards in public life – is also expected to be incorporated into the new commission. That committee, which advises the Prime Minister on arrangements for upholding ethical standards of conduct across public life, was set up by Sir John Major in 1994. Sir John's premiership was hit by frequent headlines about Tory 'sleaze' before he lost the 1997 general election to Tony Blair. The 'duty of candour' the commission will oversee will be contained in the delayed Hillsborough law, which attempts to correct wrongs revealed in the Hillsborough stadium disaster of 1989. The duty of candour has been described as an ethical and legal requirement for public authorities and officials to act in the public interest with openness, honesty and transparency about their actions. Other bodies or roles involved in ethical oversight in politics, however, are expected to be largely unaffected by the new commission. These include the parliamentary standards commissioners, the Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority and the Electoral Commission. An announcement on the new commission is being prepared to be made before the end of Tuesday, given it is deemed politically wise to unveil plans while Parliament is sitting. 'Current system does not work' But the plan could yet be pushed back if more pressing government announcements or responses to breaking news are prioritised by Downing Street over the coming days. Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, had championed the commission when it was first promised by Labour. Ms Rayner said then: 'The current system does not work and it has failed. It only works where there is respect for the rules and there are consequences for breaking them. 'If you break the rules, there should be clear consequences. Our democracy cannot hinge on gentlemen's agreements; it needs independent and robust protection from Conservative corruption. 'Labour's independent integrity and ethics commission will stamp out Conservative corruption and restore trust in public office.' A government spokesman said: 'This is speculation. This government is committed to establishing the right structures to uphold the highest standards in public life. 'We have already taken steps to improve probity and transparency, including through introducing a new ministerial code which emphasises the principles of public life, by strengthening the terms of reference for the independent adviser, and by introducing a new monthly register of gifts and hospitality.'


Reuters
23 minutes ago
- Reuters
El Salvador to send detained Venezuelans to Caracas in exchange for Americans held in Venezuela, sources say
WASHINGTON, July 18 (Reuters) - El Salvador's government will send detained Venezuelans to Caracas in exchange for Americans held in Venezuela, two U.S. government officials told Reuters on Friday. One of the officials said El Salvador would send 238 Venezuelans held in its maximum security CECOT prison to Caracas and that the Venezuelan government would release five U.S. citizens and five permanent residents to U.S. custody. The second official confirmed the exchange was taking place and said the figures appeared to be close to what was expected. The Venezuelan communications ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The U.S. State Department declined to comment. The White House and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.