UK Special Forces Block Afghan Troops' Resettlement
Explosive revelations have surfaced indicating that UK Special Forces impeded the resettlement applications of Afghan troops they had fought alongside, following the Taliban's seizure of power.
Documents leaked and exposed expose how, despite compelling evidence of joint service with British military units, applications from Afghan commandos were rejected, leaving many vulnerable to Taliban reprisals.
The elite Afghan Special Forces units, CF 333 and ATF 444, colloquially known as the "Triples," stood among the most imperiled groups post-Taliban resurgence, having provided invaluable support to UK Special Forces during the conflict.
Despite their eligibility for relocation under the Afghan Relocation and Assistance Policy (Arap), hundreds faced rejections, with some subsequently enduring harrowing experiences at the hands of the Taliban.
The Ministry of Defense has initiated an independent review of approximately 2,000 applications after acknowledging deficiencies in the decision-making process. Leaked documents, including a Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) document, reveal that UK Special Forces possessed veto power over Triples' applications, raising concerns of a conflict of interest.
Former members of the SAS, the army's elite special forces regiment, expressed apprehension, suggesting the veto may have compromised the integrity of the application process, particularly amidst ongoing investigations into alleged war crimes committed by UK Special Forces in Afghanistan.
Disturbingly, individuals whose applications were rejected reported facing grave threats, with some forced into hiding, separated from their families, and unable to work. Their accounts underscore the dire consequences of bureaucratic inertia and alleged cover-ups within the military hierarchy.
Rejected applicants' evidence, including SAS HQ invitations, embassy correspondence, and British officer testimonials, highlights their extensive collaboration with UK forces, underscoring the injustice they face.
Legal experts and military insiders decry the apparent "blanket policy" underpinning the rejection of Triples' applications, with allegations of a deliberate disregard for the risks faced by these individuals. The Ministry of Defence maintains that final decisions rest with Arap caseworkers, but revelations of UK Special Forces' influence cast doubt on the transparency and fairness of the process.
As the fallout intensifies, questions loom over the accountability of UK Special Forces leadership and the efficacy of oversight mechanisms within the military establishment. With the public inquiry into alleged war crimes in Afghanistan looming large, the urgency of addressing systemic failures and ensuring justice for Afghan allies grows ever more pressing.
