A Debt of Honour (Afghan Interpreters)
 

Ladies & Gentlemen,

A few days ago I wrote the letter below to a national newspaper in the UK but it was not published.

As a significant number of people who view/post on this Forum are ex-military and probably believe that you don't abandon those who put their necks out for you, I wonder what others views might be on this 'plea' from me.

I understand that the US allowed many Vietnamese to resettle in the USA when the Vietnam War ran down and I think it goes against the grain not to give sanctuary to those to whom I refer. Incidentally, I proposed that the hijackers to whom I refer in my letter, should have been allowed to stay in UK only after they had completed a tour of duty as interpreters in their own country. My view was treated as heresy and the idea was seen as obscene!


Sir,

Much has been written and said about immigration and the need to control/manage same. This is frequently in the context of those from central European countries and despite assurances to the contrary, is a genuine concern to many.

There is one relatively small group of people about whom nothing is heard and who will probably need and deserve help in the near future: I refer to those employed by the armed forces in Afghanistan, mainly as interpreters. These people will be in grave danger after our departure from their country and will face intimidation, violence and reprisals of many sorts, in a country where a ‘revenge culture’ in endemic.

It behoves the Government to make arrangements for these people to be offered permanent sanctuary here or elsewhere and assisted in their resettlement, if they wish help. It would be morally unacceptable to simply abandon these Afghans to their fate and, given that a bunch of Afghan aircraft hijackers were permitted to remain in this country about a decade ago, there is no alternative.

The outcome for the pet dogs, which squaddies always attract when overseas, does not bear thinking about.

Yours sincerely

Old Duffer

OD, you are absolutely right to raise this issue. It was debated on Radio 4's Today programme a week or so ago and I have recently been talking to my stepson whilst on R&R from Afghanistan. We could not have done our job in Afghanistan without these people and, by being so openly associated with ISAF they have put themselves in great danger - I might say they are facing certain reprisals. If the UK (and other ISAF contributors) fail to offer safe haven, they and their families will suffer.

I hear tales of people claiming asylum in the UK almost daily on the grounds of some threat to their safety in their own country; often associated with their religious, sexual or racial status. None of which is directly resultant from them aiding the UK at personal risk. If we can save them, surely we can do something for those that are at risk as a direct result of their work for us.

I can see a number of counter arguments here, but I see an underlying issue that cannot, morally, be ignored.

Thank you Sun Who, I had not realised that I was siding with the Guardian etc. Perhaps I should withdraw the Thread lest somebody who knows me thinks I'm (as the Dear Dennis character from Private Eye might say) I'm a 'pinko'!!

Nonetheless, the fact remains, these people cannot be left to their own devices and my contention remains valid.

Old Duffer

These interpreters have a right as you rightly point out.

I have noticed how we receive scores of immigrants from every country in which we intervene with virtually no exception. You can even include Poland in that list form many would undoubtedly have come after the war had they been free to so do.

The most recent incomers after the FYR were Iraqis, Afghanis, no doubt Libyans, wait for the Syrians etc.

We are not alone in this, McNab, in a recent book, makes comment about the international aspect of the traders at Fort Bragg with the wry comment that they needed an Iraqi kebab stall.

But as far as I know many of the above immigrants simply claim asylum from potential alleged threats whereas the interpreters are in clear and present danger.

Well done.

Do you really need to worry if the Grauniad happens to share your wisdom?

The generals have made the case loud and clear.

Without firm political direction, the MOD is still quite capable of ignoring such a message from the House of Lords. Presumably the real decision is to be made in the Home Office. I am not clear how the Foreign Office comes into the discussion, but if it gives another excuse for the jobsworths to block entry to these deserving men they will take it.

OB - name your newspaper please. If it was the Guardian or the Times, you were outgunned and both editors might think they had done enough. Any other editors deserve to be a little embarassed in the cause.

No early day motion yet.

Petition - where do we sign ?

Our People
 

This is not about immigration - this is about looking after our people; of whatever nationality.

They provided invaluable support to our guys and gals, without which the whole show would have been so much more difficult and arguably, they saved lives.

But who cares?

Rgds SOS

rlsbutler,

'Twas the Torygraph

OD

21st December 2012...

Labour call for asylum for Afghan interpreters | Liberal Conspiracy

Did we not make a similar provision for those that assisted in Iraq?

PZU - Out of Africa (Retired)

In my opinion it's a case of if they help us we help them. I think we've all read past threads laced with outrage of persons that have actually served in our armed forces being denied the right to remain in UK whilst others who have done nothing for UK (other than hate it in many cases) get their 6 bedroom house and as much in handouts as they can get their sticky paws on.
Rant over

Although usually implacably opposed to immigration, this one sounds good to me.


Thought it meant Hamilton, South Lanarkshire - "Stay whaur yis ur, boys, yer safer there!" ;)
Joking - Nice place; Chatelherault and all that.

OD, small piece in Sunday TG, tucked away in News in Brief on page 9. Mentions the General and Lord Paddy but nothing else that I could see.

I fully agree I think the Government should grant asylum to Afghan terps who assister allied forces during the present conflict. Even the Americans granted certain members of the SS (Von Braun and his crowd) protection after WW2 (or was this different). There seems to be One Rule for some and another rule for another. :mad::mad:The terps all deserve our protection .

Spit, surely not? :{

Now it occurs to me that there is a role for these interpreters in UK and that is in the courts.

We hear how some cases are delayed for lack of interpreters, well given the numbers of other Afghani in the country that might suddenly need interpreters . . .

They might also be useful working for the Border Agency interrogating would be Afg refugees. Double bonus, they would have a vested interest in keeping the bad guys out.

#10. When I saw the title I thought, " 'kin hell, Hamilton, they'd be better off staying where they were." Then I read it's Hamilton NZ and not Hamilton, Lanarkshire. Close one. And Basil, it's not a nice place, it's a s**t hole of the first order. Mind you, my views are probably clouded by the fact it's where my ex hails from. Bad memories.

Had to put that in, just in case they came looking for me :E

Afgan Interpreters Right To Live In UK
 

At last some common sense but why was there ever a question on this?