NEW BLOW FOR AFGHAN TRANSLATORS AS 600 ‘ARE ABANDONED’
UK unit examining pleas for sanctuary snubs heroes in...
FORMER Afghan translators for British forces face an ‘impossible’ task to prove their lives are in danger from the Taliban when seeking help from the UK government unit that is meant to be their lifeline, a whistleblower has said.
In a damning insight into the Intimidation Investigation Unit (IIU), a Briton who worked with it said translators applying for relocation faced ‘unfair barriers’ and alleged the ‘focus was on putting the claimant under investigation’.
Based in the Afghan capital Kabul, the unit determines whether an interpreter’s life is at such risk that they should receive help and money to relocate at home or be given sanctuary in Britain. The IIU is frequently held up by ministers and officials as proof that Britain i s meeting i ts responsibilities to those who risked their lives for the UK.
But the Daily Mail has learned that while more than 600 cases have been taken to the unit, not one has been deemed serious enough for sanctuary in the UK.
Dozens of translators who have spoken to the Mail’s Betrayal of the Brave campaign have provided distressing details of their cases, claiming they have been shot, stabbed, ambushed by gunmen, and had family members murdered, kidnapped and threatened.
Yet they say they have been ‘dismissed’ by the unit with only basic security advice such as to vary routes home, change mobile phone SIM cards, move areas and not wear ‘flash’ clothes.
As a result, they say the IIU is ‘unfit for purpose’ and is ‘abandoning’ them to the Taliban.
The whistleblower, who served more than six months with the unit, has given weight to the allegations. He said: ‘The claim that the UK is paying exceptional diligence to Afghan interpreters because it has an IIU is absurd. The IIU policy requires claimants to meet what I believe to be an impossible requirement of providing evidence to show that the threat to them existed, was direct, and explicitly linked to UK employment.’
He painted a picture of a badly resourced unit unable to leave the safety of base areas, using poorly kept records, conducting the majority of interviews with translators on an old phone and facing huge difficulties in checking claims.
‘Mostly investigations involved looking into old personal files to try to investigate the claimant, to find reason not to believe their story,’ he explained.
‘The policy was expecting the impossible: That someone who is threatened or even attacked by a member of the Taliban could immediately collect phone numbers of all surrounding witnesses and present a flawless case to the IIU.’
Significantly, two former translators who worked for the IIU and were the l i nk between investigators and interpreters also claimed the way it operated was ‘deeply unfair’. One told the Mail he believed that investigators often began with the position of ‘distrust and disbelief’.
Both translators spoke independently of the whistleblower, who provided his evidence to the Suhla Alliance, a group of former Army officers and academics campaigning for the rights r of Afghan translators.
Major Ed Aitken, who served in i Helmand, said on the alliance’s behalf: ‘It is a deeply institutional injustice that is a reflection of those who make the policies back in London.’
A defence source said: ‘We are currently reviewing our policy in this area to make sure we are doing all we can to protect and support local staff.’ A Government spokesman said: ‘We are committed to supporting individuals with security advice, financial assistance and relocation to safe areas.’
The latest twist in the longrunning saga comes two weeks after three translators were told they and their families were finally eligible for relocation to Britain. It marked a relaxation of the rule that they must have served in Helmand for at least a year.
WHAT price Britain’s vow to give sanctuary to Afghan translators whose lives are at risk because they served our military?
Having set up an Intimidation Investigation Unit in Kabul to identify those in genuine need of being rescued, it found precisely none. Of 600 cases it looked into, not a single one has been successful.
This paper has vividly documented the constant threat these men are under from the resurgent Taliban, who see them as traitors. There have been shootings, stabbings, kidnappings of family members and even some murders. Yet the bar to gaining a new, secure life in this country has been set so unfairly high they can’t clear it.
According to one whistle-b lower, applicants not only have to show they have been attacked but also prove the Taliban was responsible. Short of asking the jihadis to make a declaration, how is that possible? Britain owes a clear moral debt to these beleaguered men and their families. It’s time we stopped quibbling and paid it.