Latest news with #UKSF
Telegraph
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
The MoD has not – as it would have you believe – acted in the interests of transparency
I received a call from a journalist at The Telegraph on Tuesday, as the Afghan data leak story was breaking. They had a sniff that there was more to this spreadsheet. That unbelievably, the names of more than 100 MI6 and Special Forces operators were on the spreadsheet, but the MoD was denying it. I had seen the list. I didn't know what to say. I knew the names were on the list. It has names and email addresses of protected UK individuals, who could supposedly vouch for the credibility of some of the applicants on the spreadsheet. Even on Tuesday, whilst decrying the use of super-injunctions, the Government applied for another super-injunction to prevent this information from coming out. I love the people in the MoD. I admire UKSF – from where this leak emanated. But a rot has set in that is so deep, it is hard to see how we repair it. A culture of immunity, of unaccountability runs so deep, that the untold damage it does is barely recognised from within the organisation. Often it is when you get out, that it comes sharply into view. When I was trying to fix failing resettlement schemes for the last prime minister, I could not believe we had by that stage settled around 20,000 Afghans in the UK, but I was still being contacted by bona fide Afghan special forces who were having their families hounded yet remained in Afghanistan. The MoD assured me, and Parliament, it was not blocking their approval for coming to the UK. I wrote to the deputy prime minister to say I did not believe them and this would represent huge problems when it was revealed. I subsequently had a terse meeting with Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, Tony Radakin, the Chief of the General Staff, and the current director of Special Forces. The director claimed he was 'offended' by my assertions, and that I was just 'wrong'. In the course of this injunction being lifted of course, it transpired one UKSF officer alone rejected 1,588 applications from members of Afghan special forces. The MoD, in court, admitted this was 'unprofessional' and 'slack'. Either the director lied directly to my face or had so little grip on his organisation or care for the fate of the Afghans that he didn't know. It's time to stop being dishonest. The MoD has not – as it would have you believe – decided to lift the injunction in the interests of transparency, particularly when it applied for another one the very same day. It was lifted by a judge who ran out of patience. Although I have huge issues with the way the whole thing was run by Tory ministers in the MoD, this is not a 'Tory' lying problem – Labour reviewed and extended the injunction multiple times in the past year. It is an institutional failure the state has to grip, not play politics with. In my view, clear criminal negligence has been displayed by some ministers and officials since the evacuation of Kabul ended. I saw ministers walk into Cobra meetings and tell mistruths or read from pre-prepared incorrect briefs before being slapped down by serious folk like David Cameron, who tried to get a grip of it when he was Foreign Secretary. I have no sympathy for the plight of the MoD at all; their position throughout this farce has been unforgivable. Once people start being honest, we can start to really understand how this happened, why it happened, and how we can prevent anything so terrible happening again. Without that, there's not much hope of doing so.
Telegraph
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
British spies and special forces exposed in Afghan data leak
The identities of British special forces and MI6 operatives were in a leaked database that is thought to have fallen into the hands of the Taliban, it can be revealed. Scores of special forces personnel and spies' identities are understood to have been included in a spreadsheet containing the names of almost 25,000 Afghan soldiers, government workers and their family members. They had applied to be moved to the UK after the Western military withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, but found themselves in potentially more danger of Taliban reprisals after the list was published online. Among the United Kingdom Special Forces (UKSF) personnel named are reported to be senior military officers including a major-general and a brigadier. Identities of spies and special forces soldiers are among the British state's most closely guarded secrets. One of the most damaging leaks of classified information in history, the scheme to relocate around 24,000 Afghans to Britain will cost up to £7bn. Johnny Mercer, the former Conservative veterans' minister who served in Afghanistan, said it was 'gut-wrenching' to learn that the identities of UKSF soldiers and MI6 agents had likely fallen into the hands of the Taliban. Mr Mercer said: 'I fought in Afghanistan to defeat the Taliban. It is gut-wrenching, after all that blood was spilt, that this database may have fallen into their hands. 'I don't disagree with the decision to get the injunction when this first came to light but it was mad that it went on for so long. 'Now people need to be able to protect themselves. And we must look after these Afghan Special Forces properly.' Mr Mercer believes that members of the so-called Triples – Afghan special forces who worked with British personnel – should all be brought to the UK for their own safety. Ministry of Defence (MoD) lawyers applied for a last-minute injunction banning the press from reporting the detail, even as they accepted that a super-injunction blocking any mention of the Afghan data leak would be discharged. After that super-injunction was lifted, The Telegraph was able to report on Tuesday that Taliban sources claimed to have obtained the spreadsheet in 2022 – potentially more than a year before the MoD knew it had been accidentally leaked. The fact that the leaked database included details of MI6 operatives and UKSF personnel was reported by the Sun and the Daily Express on Wednesday and Thursday, yet the MoD insisted for most of Thursday that those facts could not be reported by press outlets that were subject to the original super-injunction. It can also be reported now that James Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, asked in Parliament about whether 'an apparent third party who obtained some of the data was engaged in blackmail' against the MoD.
The Independent
08-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Hundreds of Afghan special forces wrongly rejected for sanctuary due to poor MoD decisions, High Court judge finds
Defective decision making resulted in hundreds of Afghan special forces who served with the British being wrongly rejected for sanctuary and abandoned to the Taliban, a High Court judge has found. Afghan commandos, who served alongside the UK special forces in Afghanistan, were left behind after the Taliban takeover in 2021 and received blanket rejections by the MoD to their applications to resettle in the UK. Thousands of applications by these fighters, who were trained and paid by the British, are being reviewed after the government acknowledged failures in how they were processed. The Afghans are known as the Triples because of the names of their units, mainly Commando Force 333 and Afghan Territorial Force 444. Now the High Court has found that there were numerous defects in the way their cases were handled. In a judgement published on Tuesday, Lord Justice Dingemans found that MoD caseworkers had failed to properly interpret the criteria required for UK resettlement - leading to the Afghans' wrongful rejections. Caseworkers, and the liaison officer from the UK special forces who was assisting them, 'were not given access to relevant records relating to payments' and so didn't know that these Afghan fighters had received direct pay from the British. MoD officials were also 'overly reliant' on UK special forces (UKSF) personnel for input and 'placed too much weight on personal knowledge and judgement', Lord Dingemans found. One UKSF liaison officer, who was tasked with investigating applicants links to the special forces, would refuse applications if the relevant UKSF unit failed to respond to his inquiries, the judgement found. A push to 'sprint' through applications in the summer of 2023 also led to 'a lack of real consideration of the applications', with many Afghan commandos receiving rejections during this time. Lord Justice Dingemans has also ordered the MoD to correct the public record after then-armed forces minister James Heappey gave incorrect information to parliament about the scope of the government's review. Announcing the MoD's review of cases in February 2024, Mr Heappey told MPs it would cover 'all eligibility decisions made for applications with credible claims of links to the Afghan specialist units'. The government told the court that this was in fact incorrect and the review only covers applications from Afghan commandos which had been forwarded on to a UK special forces liaison officer for input. Justice Dingemans said that the government's evidence showed that 'more than a credible claim of links to the Afghan specialist units was needed to be in the scope of the review'. He added: 'There had to have been a reference to the UK Special Forces or a reference from certain other government bodies and parties'. He concluded that 'given the critical importance of the review to those who have made applications' and the evidence that showed that 'the Taliban have tortured and killed members of the Triples it would be to publish accurate information about the scope of the review'. The judge has ordered that a 'transparent and accurate statement about the scope of the Triples review' is published. The High Court has also ruled that a redacted version of the government's caseworker guidance is published so that Afghan applicants can understand what will qualify them for resettlement. Around 600 Afghan allies, whose applications were among the initial 2,000 re-examined, have been granted approval to come to the UK. On top of the 2,000 applications, up to 2,500 extra cases have been identified for review after the MoD realised the significance of rediscovered payroll data. Daniel Carey, partner at DPG, the law firm acting on behalf of the former Triples, said: 'Our client had to fight very hard to obtain basic natural justice in this case: for his soldiers to be told whether they were included in the government review; the decisions in their cases, and the rules that were being applied. 'We are pleased that he has succeeded. Serious concerns had already been raised about the denial of Arap protection to thousands of Triples who served closely with UK Special Forces. It was vital that the review process itself was not hidden behind a veil of secrecy.'
The Independent
24-05-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Government ‘must speed up relocation of Afghan heroes after blunder'
The British government faces pressure to expedite the relocation of hundreds of Afghan commandos to the UK after failures by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) left them vulnerable to the Taliban. Thousands of sanctuary applications from Afghans with credible links to UK special forces (UKSF) were initially rejected, with one UKSF officer overseeing the blanket rejection of 1,585 cases in the summer of 2023. Ministers initially denied that the Afghan commandos, known as the Triples, were paid by the UK government but later backtracked and announced a review of 2,000 applications, with approximately 600 Afghans approved to come to the UK. Government lawyers have identified an additional 2,500 applications for review after the MoD rediscovered payroll data, potentially paving the way for more Afghans to be brought to safety. A High Court case revealed that there was a "blanket practice of automatic refusal" of applications, with a UK special forces officer's decision-making approach described as "lax and unprofessional" by the MoD.
The Independent
24-05-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
UK urged to bring hundreds of Afghan heroes to safety after major blunder saw them wrongly rejected
The British government has been urged to hasten the relocation of hundreds of Afghan heroes to the UK after Ministry of Defence (MoD) failures saw them left at the mercy of the Taliban. Thousands of applications for sanctuary from Afghans who worked with British troops were rejected despite them having credible links to the UK special forces (UKSF). The High Court heard this week that one UK special forces officer oversaw the blanket rejection of 1,585 cases during the summer of 2023. Ministers had initially denied that Afghan commandos, known as the Triples, had been paid by the UK government, but were forced to backtrack and announce a review into 2,000 applications. Around 600 Afghan allies, whose applications were among the initial 2,000 re-examined, have been granted approval to come to the UK. Now government lawyers have said that a further estimated 2,500 applications have been identified for review after the MoD realised the significance of rediscovered payroll data, paving the way for hundreds more to be brought to sanctuary. Former veterans minister Johnny Mercer has said that he is "shocked and appalled" by the failings in the MoD's initial handling of the applications. Campaigners and former military chiefs called on the government to speed up the relocation of these brave soldiers to the UK. Colonel Simon Diggins, former defence attache in Afghanistan, said that poor records had been kept by the UKSF, impacting the lives of the Triples soldiers. He said: 'We know that these individuals' lives are in danger. There is a real imperative to do something about it and to do it quickly. The accusation of poor data keeping is fair but now we have some records there is also an imperative to come up with a quicker way of dealing with this [Triples' evacuation].' Sarah Fenby-Dixon, Afghanistan consultant at the Refugee Aid Network, said: 'It is vital that the review process for all cases is speeded up, as even after being granted eligibility some people are waiting many months or even years before being transferred to safety.' A former senior member of the Triples, who is now in the UK, has brought the legal challenge against the government's processing of applications, with the case reaching the High Court this week. Thomas de la Mare KC, for the claimant, argued that guidance on how resettlement decisions were made should be made public and likened the failings to 'a crime scene'. In a witness statement to court, a senior civil servant said a new 'phase two' of the Triples review would re-examine 'at least several hundred although this may be as many as c2,500 applications'. The MoD said this would likely bring in soldiers who had served in the later years of the conflict in Afghanistan. Around 130 cases from the initial review will be moved into phase two, lawyers told the court. The High Court heard how the initial review was prompted after senior civil servants became concerned about how resettlement applications were being decided. It has since emerged that there was an effective 'blanket practice of automatic refusal', which left these highly trained Afghan soldiers at the mercy of the Taliban. A particular UK special forces officer was overseeing hundreds of rejections during a 'sprint' in the summer of 2023 to rush through decisions, the court heard. The MoD said that the officer's approach to decision-making was 'lax and unprofessional' and reached 'decisions far too quickly'. MoD caseworkers were also 'overly reliant' on UKSF personnel, and were 'not consistently exercising their own independent judgement', the government found. MPs have previously raised concerns about the potential bias of UKSF personnel having power over resettlement of Afghan allies amid an ongoing inquiry into alleged crimes by the UKSF in Afghanistan between 2010 and 2013. Some of the Afghan commandos who applied for UK sanctuary could be witnesses to the events being examined by the independent inquiry. Mr Mercer, who raised concerns about decision-making with senior civil servants in early 2024, said: 'When I raised what was happening with the most senior officers and civil servants in the UK government, one in particular from UKSF claimed he was offended that I had and it was offensive to the UKSF. He was either lying to my face as a cabinet minister which is serious enough, or is so deeply incompetent he didn't know.' The MoD estimates that around 5,000 people were members of the Triples, working alongside the UKSF, during the Afghan war. General Sir John McColl, the UK's former special envoy to Afghanistan, said he believed the MoD had 'worked really hard to do the right thing for the Triples'. He said it was good that the MoD is re-examining up to 2,500 more cases and pressed for resources to be given to the team in charge of dealing with Afghan cases. He added that the delay in help was 'a combination of the record-keeping not being particularly good and that the withdrawal was as chaotic and fractured as we all recall'. 'We are now nearly four years on since the withdrawal and in that time these people have been in great danger, some of them will have been in harms way as a consequence of the delay, which is very unfortunate', he said. Col Diggins added: 'If there are potentially 2,000 more people, who with their family members could equal up to 10,000 people, that's a big number. We have an obligation to them for their service but we need to think differently about how we do the evacuations. 'We also need to ensure that if we are going to bring people from Afghanistan to this country, there are supported by a proper programme of integration when they get here.'
