
Not our finest hour: When Britain's allies put their lives on the line, we abandoned them – and hushed it all up
Students of imperial history will recall the hundreds of treaties signed with local chiefs, kings and leaders that were waved aside in the interests of the empire.
The French call their deep distrust of the Les Ango-Saxons the 'Fashoda Syndrome' – named after a sordid episode of British duplicity which delivered an obscure bit of southern Sudan to the UK in the 19th century - and triggered the enduring distrust of our closest neighbour up to this day.
Now we have the Kabul Cockup. It will inevitably serve to undermine Britain's woeful and feeble international reputation – and drive some of those who have been betrayed into the arms of our enemies.
The disastrous accidental release of 100,000 names and numbers of Afghans seeking safety in the UK, a noble but feeble effort to save some of them, and the desperate cover up using the courts to ensure that the British public knew nothing of the whole farrago, can only be reported today, two years after it was uncovered.
The official reason for a superinjunction to hide the mess was to protect Afghans who wanted to get out of Afghanistan, before the Taliban found and killed them. But their numbers, emails, and names were already in the public domain after the leak.
The Taliban are not illiterate morons. They beat the Soviets, they beat Nato and the US at war. They would have got hold of the list within moments of a clumsy British Ministry of Defence official hitting the 'send' button on an email containing all those sensitive details to sources in, or near, Afghanistan.
Rather than take the lead and act on principle to protect human lives, the British government did what it always does and went into overdrive to protect its own embarrassment and to avoid making the case for, not against, immigration to this country.
Ministers could have stood up and admitted to the leak. They could, and should, have defended the right and need for people who had literally risked their lives to settle into the UK because they believed this is a country of decency as a first principle.
But because British politicians of the two mainstream parties live in fear of Reform, they had already embarked on betraying the soldiers who had given most to the UK in its hopeless war in Afghanistan.
As The Independent has previously reported, Afghan Special Forces teams from task forces 333 and 444 - paid and trained by the UK, who fought alongside the SBS and the SAS for years - were ditched when the Taliban took over Kabul in mid 2021.
Very senior British officers, who knew the capabilities and the loyalty of these men, formally suggested they could be brought to the UK and used as Tier Two special forces operators in the British army. They were sneered away.
Some of those Afghan special forces operators, intelligence sources have told The Independent, are now living in Iran. Imagine their skills put to work for a regime that is planning revenge for the Israeli and US attacks on it recently.
Some have been relocated to the UK after a campaign by this newspaper. But many others were abandoned.
So, when the massive leak of names was reported to the British government, it did set about trying to help some of the potential victims. But it kept most in the dark to hide a British snafu, not to save the lives of loyal servants to the Crown who did not know that the Taliban probably knew who they were.
The Independent's Holly Bancroft uncovered the story in the autumn of 2023, but was unable to report it because of the ongoing evacuation operation.
'In total, 23,900 Afghans linked to the breach have been offered relocation to the UK, with more than 16,000 already in the UK. The MoD says 6,900 of those are people who would not have otherwise been brought to Britain,' she wrote, now that the superinjunction has been lifted.
Why not? Why were these 6,900 Afghans - originally deemed ineligible - suddenly given access to the UK? Could it be because politicians had been reluctant to make the case, moral or economic, for immigration?
It's feeble enough that this government, like the last, continues to campaign against immigration while businesses, led by the Confederation of British Industry, are crying out for skilled and unskilled labour to fuel growth.
It's just as feeble that no matter that although the economic case for rejoining the European common market is overwhelming, no senior politician in government is making the case.
So, if there is no effort to show leadership in areas of clear national self-interest, one should not be surprised that ministers hide in the mob which clings to irrational beliefs fomented by disinformation and extremist populism.
They'd rather just abandon battlefield allies, hide the fact they've been accidentally endangered, and gag anyone talking about it. The first instinct is perfidy and obfuscation, not leadership.
'Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose,' as they'd say next door.
Hashtags

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


BBC News
2 minutes ago
- BBC News
Northumbria Police bans uniformed officers from Newcastle Pride
A police force has banned uniformed officers from taking part in a Pride march after a High Court judge ruled its past participation was Police has told on-duty officers they cannot take part in Newcastle Pride, while off-duty officers will no longer be allowed to wear clothing which identifies them as members of the force during the the force said it would continue to run a community stall at the event, which begins on Police said it believed there was a "legitimate policing purpose" for its engagement at the event as long as it did not "show support" for any political agenda. "We feel the complete withdrawal of Northumbria Police engagement from such events would be a retrograde step and damage trust and confidence amongst members of LGBTQ+ community," a spokesperson force said its attendance at events such as Pride allowed it to build trust among minority communities, provide advice about its response to homophobic and transphobic hate crime, and promote recruitment opportunities. New Pride policy During the judicial review, Northumbria Police said it planned to scale back its involvement in Newcastle Pride this year, but had planned to allow off-duty officers to wear a T-shirts which identified them as members of The National LGBT+ Police Smith, the claimant in the initial legal case, threatened the force with further legal action if it did not cancel its plans. The force has now issued new rules which state on-duty officers and staff will only be permitted at the Pride march as part of an "official policing response" and must be in officers are allowed to attend, but must not be identifiable as a police officer or member of staff. Under the new policy, they must not wear clothing, carry flags or use accessories which link them to the police or express support for political aims or opposition to other lawful views. Ms Smith, a lesbian who describes herself as having "gender critical" views, argued during the judicial review the force would not have been able to remain impartial if a dispute between those with similar beliefs and transgender rights supporters had broken out."The impartiality of the police is vital in ensuring these events can take place in a way that does not restrict free speech," she said."My hope is my case will have brought the Northumbria Police and other forces back to their core responsibility of policing without fear or favour." The LGB Alliance, a charity which supports lesbians, gay and bisexual people who do not wish the category of "sex" to be replaced by "gender identity" in law, welcomed the force's change in policy. The charity's CEO, Kate Barker, said: "We will continue this work until the UK's remaining 42 forces follow the lead of their colleagues in Northumbria, and stop endorsing a movement they do not understand." Ste Dunn, the director of Northern Pride, which runs the Newcastle event, said he was "very disappointed" by the High Court's judgement."We are today even more saddened to hear that Northumbria Police have made the decision to withdraw from the march tomorrow," he said. "Whilst we understand there are ongoing challenges and opposing views associated with police presence and participation in Pride, we believe it's deeply important the police are present at Pride festivals."As well as acknowledging those working in the police force who were part of the community, it would help officers "listen and learn" from lived experience, he added. Follow BBC Newcastle on X (formerly Twitter), Facebook and Instagram.


Telegraph
2 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Lib Dem MP tried to put half pint of cider on expenses
A Liberal Democrat MP tried to charge taxpayers for a £1.85 half-pint of cider, despite earning a salary of more than £91,000. Racael Gilmour, who represents Tiverton and Minehead, was also successful in claiming expenses for golf club hospitality and birthday cards. Ms Gilmour submitted the £11.81 claim in December 2024 for a pub meal, which included chips, a halloumi wrap, a hot drink, and a half-pint of Thatchers Haze cider. The claim for alcohol was flagged by Parliamentary authorities and rejected. However, the MP did succeed in claiming £5.50 for 'beverages', £2.75 for hospitality at Tiverton Golf Club, and £5.50 for a birthday card, all of which were reimbursed on expenses. Ms Gilmour, who previously made headlines after taking an evening fall in Parliament, has drawn criticism from campaigners, who have called for her to pay back the money. James Wright, a Conservative campaigner, said: 'At a time when families are being squeezed by rising bills, people will rightly ask why a Liberal Democrat MP is attempting to expense cider and claiming drinks at the golf club. 'Like Labour, the Lib Dems are good at spending other people's money. If Rachel Gilmour respected her voters, she'd pay it all back.' A Labour source said: 'This shows the Lib Dems love a bit of wining and dining, and comes in the same week they joined forces with the Tories in Parliament to oppose Labour's measures to make workers' rights in hospitality more secure.' It is not known whether any of the approved claims have been voluntarily reimbursed. Ms Gilmour has previously faced criticism for allegedly swearing at security guards during a visit to Hinkley Poin t, and for employing her son in her taxpayer-funded office. At the time she referred herself to the parliamentary watchdog saying: 'This was an honest mistake. Henry was assisting me with the setting up of my office in a voluntary capacity.' At the time of the Hinkley Point incident, Conservative MP Ben Obese-Jecty took to Twitter/X saying: 'Anybody who's seen Rachel Gilmour around the Parliamentary Estate, or in the bar, won't be surprised by reports of this behaviour.' Legacy of frittering Ms Gilmour denied the reports of the 'language used' at the time. MPs are permitted to claim reasonable costs for meals, travel and office administration, but alcohol, personal gifts and leisure expenses are explicitly discouraged. A spokesperson for Rachel Gilmour said: 'Within the role of a Member of Parliament, there are many expenses which would be considered reasonable to claim for, as per IPSA [Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority] guidelines. 'Rachel Gilmour has accurately logged her expenses with IPSA, and where appropriate those have been paid. 'Conservative Party commentators are in no position to criticise hard-working MPs with their legacy of frittering away taxpayers' money by the Conservative Governments of Johnson and Truss.' In 2023 some 46,562 beers were consumed at parliamentary bars. It is not clear whether these were pints or bottles. MPs have access to several bars across the Parliamentary Estate, where drinks are cheaper than nearby central London pubs.


Daily Mail
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Bryson DeChambeau backs Donald Trump's Turnberry for Open return as talks over bringing a major back to iconic course emerge
Bryson DeChambeau has backed Donald Trump to make the Open great again if it returns to the US president's course at Turnberry. R&A chiefs revealed earlier this week they held a 'really good discussion' with Trump's family over whether their course could stage another Open. Chief executive Mark Darbon met with the president's son Eric to talk about the improvements Turnberry would need to host the event for the first time since 2009. DeChambeau famously played a round with golf-obsessed Trump for the two-time major champion's YouTube channel for a video that racked up 15million views and believes the President would make the tournament special. 'Oh, yeah, I think he would,' said DeChambeau after his incredible round of six-under turned around a horror opening loop yesterday to likely make the cut at Royal Portrush. 'He'd still probably respect the R&A and what they're trying to accomplish. 'I can't speak on his behalf, but what I can say is knowing him, he'll do his best of a job as he possibly can, and I know they won't let him down. 'I look at it as a golf course. It's one of the best golf courses in the world, and I'd love for it to be a part of the rotation, albeit I haven't played it, I've heard so many great things about it, and anytime you get to play a special historical golf course like that, I think it's worthy of it for sure.' Darbon has not long succeeded previous chief executive Martin Slumbers, who had suggested taking the Open to Turnberry would take the focus away from golf and be too toxic, but has loosened the R&A's stance on the matter. 'I met a couple of months ago with Eric Trump and some of the leadership from the Trump golf organisation and from Turnberry, said Darbon. 'We had a really good discussion. I think they understand clearly where we're coming from. We talked through some of the challenges that we have so we've got a good dialogue with them.' Reports in February claimed White House officials had asked Prime Minister Kier Starmer about the Open returning to Turnberry during his visit to Washington while King Charles also mentioned the course in a letter inviting Trump on a state visit. 'We've been extremely clear on our position in respect of Turnberry,' said Darbon. 'We love the golf course but we've got some big logistical challenges there. You see the scale of their setup here and we've got some work to do on the road, rail and accommodation infrastructure.'