'Every Afghan hero deserves a UK passport. This country has failed them at every turn'
We owed them our loyalty and their safety.
Thousands of brave Afghans who fought alongside British troops, translated for our officials, and worked for Britain before the Taliban swept back into power.
Instead – having abandoned their country in a dishonourable, chaotic retreat – it can now be revealed that we betrayed our Afghan allies once again. This time when a British military official accidentally disclosed the personal details of more than 33,000 people, putting them at risk of murderous reprisals.
This scandal was covered up by the Conservative government while 18,500 Afghans whose data was compromised were flown to Britain as part of a peacetime evacuation mission. It was the right thing to do to avoid catastrophic loss of life. But, in the wake of disinformation following the Southport murders, men, women and children were then retraumatised by riots sweeping across the country where they had come to seek sanctuary.
These are people whose sacrifice has more than earned them a British passport. But instead of a thank you – they faced petrol bombs, screaming crowds and their accommodation being set on fire in last summer's riots.
During the worst outbreak of racial violence in the UK for decades, we now know areas with larger Afghan resettlement numbers were targeted. Even now, there are fears of copycat rioting greeting the news of the covert operation to bring these people to safety.
The smallest of the lessons we need to learn from this sorry tale is about keeping data safe. We need a new way forward for communities in our country, a properly funded, grown up political strategy that addresses the tensions and division the Tories encouraged to fester. The alternative is rule by a racist mob.
Thousands of Afghans have been living quietly in our country unable to tell their neighbours they had to come to the UK because our government put them in danger.
Today, the super-injunction protecting the story behind the Afghans' secret evacuation has ended – and it is time for Britain to say sorry. Not just sorry for disclosing their identity. Not just sorry for abandoning their country and prioritising flights of dogs and cats while ministers were on a sun lounger.
But thank you for their courage and sacrifice – and sorry for the welcome we gave them.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
an hour ago
- ITV News
PM suggests UK will play role in Gaza aid airdrops amid mounting calls for Palestinian statehood
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has suggested the UK will play a role in dropping aid into Gaza by air, as he faces calls from 221 cross-party MPs to recognise a Palestinian state. Israel said on Friday it will allow airdrops of aid by foreign countries into Gaza to alleviate starvation in the Palestinian territory. Starmer said the UK will 'do everything we can to get aid in via this route'. Meanwhile, he faces growing calls to recognise a Palestinian state immediately. Some 221 MPs from Labour, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, SNP, Greens, Plaid Cymru, SDLP and independents, have signed a letter calling on the government to take the step at a UN meeting next week. France's president Emmanuel Macron announced his nation would formally recognise Palestine at the UN General Assembly in September, leading UK politicians to question whether the British government would follow suit. US President Donald Trump suggested Macron's announcement 'doesn't matter' as he left America for a visit to Scotland. But Sarah Champion, the senior Labour MP who organised the letter by parliamentarians, said recognition 'would send a powerful symbolic message that we support the rights of the Palestinian people'. Other senior Commons figures who signed the letter include Labour select committee chairs Liam Byrne, Dame Emily Thornberry and Ruth Cadbury. Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey, as well as Tory former minister Kit Malthouse, and Sir Edward Leigh – Parliament's longest-serving MP – also signed it. The majority of those who have signed, 131, are Labour MPs. In a video statement released on Friday, Starmer made plain his desire for a ceasefire in the war. He said: 'I know the British people are sickened by what is happening. The images of starvation and desperation are utterly horrifying. 'The denial of aid to children and babies is completely unjustifiable, just as the continued captivity of hostages is completely unjustifiable.' Signalling the UK is willing to help get aid into Gaza via air, the prime minister added: 'News that Israel will allow countries to airdrop aid into Gaza has come far too late, but we will do everything we can to get aid in via this route. 'We are already working urgently with the Jordanian authorities to get British aid on to planes and into Gaza.' Children who need specialist medical treatment will be evacuated from Gaza to the UK, Starmer added. He also called for an international coalition to 'end the suffering' in Gaza, similar to the coalition of the willing aimed at helping Ukraine. Starmer had earlier responded to calls for the recognition of a Palestinian state, insisting such a move needed to be part of the 'pathway' to peace in the Middle East, which he and allies are working towards. He added: 'Recognition of a Palestinian state has to be one of those steps. I am unequivocal about that. But it must be part of a wider plan which ultimately results in a two-state solution and lasting security for Palestinians and Israelis.' In a statement released on Friday alongside the leaders of France and Germany, the prime minister urged Israel to stop restricting the flow of aid into Gaza. Charities operating in Gaza have said Israel's blockade and ongoing military offensive are pushing people there towards starvation, warning that they are seeing their own workers and Palestinians 'waste away'. The prime minister will meet the US president during his trip to Scotland, where he arrived on Friday evening. US-led peace talks in Qatar were cut short on Thursday, with Washington's special envoy Steve Witkoff accusing Hamas of a 'lack of desire to reach a ceasefire'. The deal under discussion is expected to include a 60-day ceasefire in which Hamas would release 10 living hostages and the remains of 18 others in phases in exchange for Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Rachel Reeves challenges Cabinet to buy British
Rachel Reeves has challenged Cabinet ministers to do more to buy British as she seeks to boost flagging economic growth. The Chancellor and Pat McFadden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, sent out the message in a letter to the Cabinet. It urged ministers to use procurement contracts, which are in the Government's gift, to help generate jobs in the UK by supporting British companies. The intervention comes amid a consultation about whether rules can be changed to give the Government more freedom to give contracts to UK firms. Each year £400bn is spent in public sector procurement, meaning small changes in approach could have a significant impact. Ms Reeves is facing difficult economic circumstances in her Budget this autumn, with official growth forecasts halved for 2025. New tax rises appear increasingly inevitable given that pressure on the public finances has intensified and the Chancellor will not break her borrowing rules. Excerpts of the letter from Ms Reeves and Mr McFadden were shared with The Telegraph. The pair wrote: 'We want people around the UK to feel the full impact of government spending through investment in skills and high quality jobs. That's why we're going further to ensure public procurement expenditure boosts British industry, jobs, skills, productivity, and expands the supply side. 'Every department needs to be pulling this procurement lever to support economic growth and strengthen our economic security. It is possible to do this within our trade agreements, as other countries do.' They added: 'We are asking all Secretaries of State to satisfy themselves that your department, and arms length bodies, have the commercial capacity and capability to ensure the creation of British jobs, productivity enhancing opportunities, and skills are prioritised in every major contract.' They also told colleagues to 'set ambitious and stretching targets for increasing your procurement spend with SMEs (Small and Medium-sized Enterprises) and social enterprises while stripping away requirements and processes that are barriers to these firms competing with established players'. At one point they wrote: 'Your commercial team is not a back office function – it is a strategic policy lever and must be a priority.' Ms McFadden was once Sir Tony Blair's political secretary and has emerged as a key confidant of Keir Starmer in recent years. As the most senior minister in the Cabinet Office he is overseeing cross-government attempts to tackle Whitehall bureaucracy and make savings in the civil service. Whether the rhetoric of Ms Reeves and Mr McFadden will lead to a step change in procurement approach remains to be seen. During the Conservatives' 14 years in office government ministers often talked publicly about the importance of using the Government machine to support British businesses. A consultation issued by the Cabinet Office is looking at changes to procurement rules that make it easier for the government to boost British industry. It will report back in September.
Spectator
3 hours ago
- Spectator
Lawfare is the SAS's most dangerous enemy
It might at first glance appear odd that this deeply unpopular government is determined to repeal the Northern Ireland Legacy and Reconciliation Act. Britain's armed forces are one of the last institutions of which the nation is overwhelmingly proud. Why pursue its veterans at the risk of making itself even more unpopular? 'We want to be recruiting into the Armed Forces and we have a government who are about to reopen lawfare against our veterans,' remarked shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge. 'It is crazy.' The government say that they will repeal the Act, which was passed by the Tories in 2023, because it is incompatible with human rights legislation. Their other reasoning is that it is opposed by some of Northern Ireland's political parties as well as relatives of IRA terrorists. One of those relatives is the sister of an IRA terrorist who was killed by the SAS at Loughgall in 1987 along with seven other members of a cell that was en route to attack a remote police station. She and other relatives of the dead terrorists met Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn earlier this year and received a 'reassurance' that a legacy inquest will proceed. The Loughgall ambush was referenced by David Davis during last week's parliamentary debate about the intention to repeal the Legacy Act. The Conservative MP (a former SAS reservist) said that Sinn Féin were trying to portray themselves as victims and the British army as villains. 'That is why battles such as Coagh, Clonoe and, very likely soon, Loughgall feature so large in the demands for inquiries and the prosecution of long-retired, innocent British soldiers,' said David. 'All three of those actions were humiliating defeats for the IRA.' All three battles involved the SAS and, according to another Tory, Mark Francois, the possibility of future prosecutions is 'having an adverse effect on morale in the special forces community'. It is unlikely that will much bother the left. In May this year, Richard Williams, who commanded 22 SAS from 2005 to 2008, wrote a piece for this magazine entitled 'The BBC's War on the SAS'. It was a defence of the regiment against allegations of war crimes in Afghanistan. But the 'war' on the SAS isn't just being waged by elements within the BBC; it is part of a wider attack from a British left that has long loathed the regiment. This animosity stretches back to July 1945. Winston Churchill could in many ways be regarded as the founding father of Britain's special forces. It was his idea to raise the commandos in 1940, and he was an enthusiastic supporter of the SAS when they were formed the following year. His son, Randolph, served for a brief spell in the SAS in 1942 and was a friend of David Stirling, the founder of the regiment. When Churchill lost the 1945 general election, the SAS lost their principal backer. Within weeks they were disbanded, despite the best efforts of Stirling and other senior officers to persuade Clement Attlee's government that the SAS had a role to play in the post-war period. There were several reasons for the regiment's abolition: Attlee's naive belief that the future would be largely peaceful, the government's disapproval of the SAS's irregular nature and the fact that many of its senior officers were upper-class conservatives. Three of them, Lord George Jellicoe, Carol Mather and Stephen Hastings, would have distinguished post-war careers in the Tory party. Although the SAS were reformed as a regular regiment in 1952 – the year after Churchill had returned to power – David Stirling never forgave the Labour government for what he regarded as an act of betrayal. His grievance returned when Harold Wilson was elected PM in 1964, and by the time of his second administration in 1974 Stirling was convinced that Socialism was a clear and present danger to Britain. That year he formed an organisation called GB75, what he told the Times was a core of 'apprehensive patriots' ready to defend Britain against the 'chaos' of hard-left trade unionists and other activists. There was uproar among the Labour party and its media supporters. Stirling was accused of raising a 'private army', described by Defence Secretary Roy Mason as 'near-fascist'. Stirling retorted: Our motivation is to reinforce parliamentary authority in the country whereas Mr Mason is associated with a political party, the left-wing of which can be genuinely stated to be thoroughly undemocratic. GB75 was disbanded but the left-wing press had Stirling and the SAS in their sights. The smear campaign against them reached its height in 1978 and 1979, a time when the regiment was fighting a bloody war with the IRA. Time Out magazine, then a radical left publication, described the SAS as 'Pedigree Dogs of War' and accused them of being guns for hire. In March 1979 Major General Peter de la Billiere, Director of the SAS, took the unprecedented step of writing to the Daily Telegraph to defend the regiment. He was 'disturbed' at their media portrayal, 'as if it were some secret undercover organisation'. This is how the SAS is still regarded by some on the British left, whether politicians, journalists or lawyers. As Richard Williams wrote in these pages, 'the SAS is under fire' but not from terrorists or insurgents. Their adversary is 'lawfare' and it might be their most dangerous enemy yet.
