Daily Archives: May 29, 2018

Afghanistan, Britain, Defence, Government, Military

The betrayal of Afghan interpreters

DEFENCE

British soldiers were aided by Afghan interpreters who were used to help provide intelligence on the activities of the Taliban. But despite the lives of many interpreters’ being at risk from continued reprisal attacks, the British Government has refused to help relocate many to Britain under the intimidation scheme. The defence select committee in Britain has concluded an inquiry into the treatment of Afghan interpreters saying they were dismally failed.

AN inquiry by the defence select committee says ministers have “dismally failed” to protect loyal Afghan interpreters who served alongside British troops from the Taliban. It concludes by stating that “dangerously exposed” interpreters should be given a new life in the UK.

MPs on the committee said the Ministry of Defence’s “intimidation scheme”, under which translators must prove a threat to their life before they are allowed into Britain, had failed to bring a single one to safety in this country.

The explosive report states that claims by the MoD that no interpreters have faced threats warranting their relocation to the UK are “totally implausible”.

It draws on evidence of the threats facing interpreters, and the report says: “We have a duty of care to those who risked everything to help our armed forces in Afghanistan.”

Dr Julian Lewis, chairman of the cross-party committee, said: “How we treat our former interpreters and local employees… will send a message to the people we would want to employ in future military campaigns about whether we can be trusted to protect them.”

The findings will pile further pressure on Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson and Home Secretary Sajid Javid to overhaul current policy on Afghan interpreters. The MoD has said it would now review the report.

There are two schemes under which interpreters who served alongside British troops can be given sanctuary in the UK. The “relocation scheme” only allows interpreters into the UK if they were serving on an arbitrary date in December 2012 and served at least 12 months in Helmand province.

But the report says this scheme had been “generous” in allowing interpreters who lost their jobs when UK forces were withdrawn from Afghanistan into Britain.

This generosity had, however, contrasted starkly with the “total failure to offer similar sanctuary to interpreters” under the intimidation scheme, it says.

This failure comes despite Afghan interpreters and their families having been shot at, threatened and even executed after being branded “spies and infidels” by the Taliban.

The report says ministers must allow interpreters who face “serious and verifiable threats” to come to Britain.

Case-in-point:

AN Afghan translator credited with helping save the lives of dozens of British soldiers trapped for nearly two months by the Taliban has said that their fighters have been trying to hunt him down.

Fardin, 37, said that twice in the past ten days a suspected Taliban fighter had been in his home neighbourhood of the Afghan capital Kabul asking neighbours and shopkeepers where he lives with his family.

“I am terrified,” he said. “My wife is crying constantly. They know what I look like, they know what I did for the British and they want revenge.”

Fardin, who still works with British forces in Kabul, was one of three Afghan interpreters who were the “eyes and ears” of 88 soldiers surrounded by 500 Taliban at the outpost of Musa Qala in Helmand for 56 days.

Despite the fact he has worked with the British for more than a decade, he was told he does not qualify for sanctuary in the UK because he did not spend a full year on the front line.

 

THE excoriating report by the all-party defence select committee, which finds not a single Afghan interpreter has been given sanctuary in the UK – under a scheme to rescue those at risk from Taliban reprisals – is devastating in its conclusions. The inquiry found that ministers have “dismally failed” to protect loyal Afghan interpreters who served with our troops.

Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson must act with all speed to honour our debt to these brave men – before more pay for their service to Britain with their lives.

Standard
Britain, European Union, Government, National Security, Politics, Society

The Galileo satellite project

BREXIT

Galileo is Europe’s Global Satellite Navigation System (GNSS), providing improved positioning and timing information with significant positive implications for many European services and users.

BREXIT talks have turned into an extraordinary row over security cooperation as Brussels accused British negotiators of “chasing a fantasy”.

A senior EU official even threatened to bring talks to a halt due to acrimony over the EU’s Galileo satellite project and a post-Brexit security pact.

Brussels says Britain should not have full access to the £9billion satellite navigation system after it leaves the EU.

Britain has hit back by threatening it could demand the return of £1.2billion of taxpayer investment if Brussels goes through with its threat.

The UK also warned that the bloc’s hard-line approach to future cooperation on crime and security issues was in danger of creating “unnecessary risks to public safety”.

A senior EU official then struck back by warning of a halt to Brexit talks, insisting Brussels “would not negotiate under threat”.

The official claimed that British negotiators were “chasing a fantasy” and ignoring the “consequences of Brexit”.

The comments are likely to have infuriated the Government and Brexiteers, with talks now at a critical juncture ahead of a key summit at the end of next month.

The EU’s approach to Galileo has particularly enraged ministers, because Britain has already invested hundreds of millions in the programme.

Jean-Claude Juncker’s close ally Martin Selmayr is thought to be behind the tough approach, which has caused a split with other EU states that want security cooperation with the UK. Britain wants access to high-security elements of the Galileo programme, started in 2003 to rival America’s dominant GPS system, that have been factored into British military planning.

But Brussels claims that as a non-EU country, the UK should be treated similarly to partners such as America.

Britain warned the bloc that failure to provide the UK access to encrypted parts of Galileo would create an “irreparable security risk” and could cost the EU a total of £2billion.

Brexit negotiators said the EU would face a £880million bill if the UK continues to be frozen out of the programme – as well as a three-year delay beyond its expected completion in 2020.

In a position paper, the UK also said it would seek to claim back its £1.2billion taxpayer investment if Brussels refused to offer immediate unrestricted access. And the Government reiterated that it would push ahead with the development of its own alternative.

The UK’s demands were outlined in a combative paper presented to the EU negotiating team. The UK text said: “An end to close UK participation will be to the detriment of Europe’s prosperity and security and could result in delays and additional costs to the programme.”

The paper suggested that Brussels was deliberately overlooking the UK’s “considerable contribution” to European security.

It added: “The Commission suggestion that UK involvement in such exchanges and discussions ‘could irretrievably compromise the integrity’ of the system risks being interpreted as a lack of trust in the UK.” Brexit Secretary David Davis added: “A relationship based solely on existing third country precedents, as some seem to be suggesting, would lead to a substantial and avoidable reduction in our shared security capability.”

EU officials suggested that handing the UK security codes to the system would give them the ability to turn it off single-handedly while outside the EU.

An official also claimed that UK calls for reimbursement of its investments could breach a so-called “backsliding” clause that could allow talks to be frozen.

 

ARE the bureaucrats running the European Commission determined to damage the continent’s security in the pursuit of their grand project? There is no other way to explain the decision to try and exclude Britain from the Galileo satellite project after Brexit.

If this is an attempt to use Galileo to teach Britain a lesson it’s a mistake. This country’s vast military spending and world leading intelligence services mean the cards are overwhelmingly stacked in our favour. Far too often Britain’s negotiators have underplayed their hand. But rightly they have now issued an ultimatum: access to Galileo or our £1billion investment back, with the threat that Britain could go it alone – or join forces with Australia.

Meanwhile, the European Commission ought to consider much graver threats to the grand projects – Italy, crippled by debt and run by a ragtag coalition united only by loathing for Brussels, and the continuing rise of Eurosceptic opinion across more than half the continent.

Standard