.Britain's breach of honour over Iraq interpreters
More than half the Iraqi interpreters who applied to come to live in Britain have had their applications rejected, drawing accusations that the Government is “wriggling out” of its promise to help former Iraqi employees.
The Times has learnt that 125 of the 200 interpreters who took up the offer to resettle in Britain have failed to meet the strict criteria laid down for eligibility.
The revelation challenges Gordon Brown’s pledge in August that the Government would fulfil its “duty of care” to those who had served with British troops.
In three cases seen by The Times, former Iraqi employees were told that they were ineligible because of “absenteeism”
The interpreters claim that they risked their lives to serve the British and are living in constant danger of reprisal from Shia militias. If they did not show up for work, it was because they were fleeing for their lives. They said that they now felt betrayed by the Government.
After a two-month campaign by The Times that highlighted the plight of the interpreters, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, promised to help them under a scheme launched in October.
Last night MPs urged the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to reconsider the decisions. The 200 interpreters are among a total of 600 Iraqis who have applied to come to Britain, all people who have worked for the British and who today face intimidation from Iranian-backed Shia groups.
Safa, 28, one of the rejected interpreters who worked for the British for more than two years, received a letter from the Locally Employed Staff Assistance Office in Basra which said: “We have considered your case very carefully but we are sorry to inform you that, because your service with the British Forces was terminated for absence, you do not meet the minimum employment criteria for this scheme.”
Safa told The Times that he had never resigned but had been forced to stop working after receiving two bullets and a written death threat at his house in Basra in April. Married with one child, he said that he was advised by an army liaison officer and intelligence officials to stay at home until he felt safe.
A few months later the interpreter contacted the military to see if he could return only to be told that he was not needed but would be called if an opening arose.
Safa thought back to when he had stood by the British troops during two and a half years of service since April 2004.
“Was I absent when they needed their lives saving?” he said, recalling the time that he took off his flak jacket and turned his T-shirt and trousers into a makeshift rope to help 12 soldiers out of an irrigation channel. They had been struggling to cross because of the weight of their body armour and weapons.
“Was I absent when the militias were mortaring us all the time? Was I absent when I had to sleep in the cold desert with the soldiers?”
Iraqis employed by the British have to prove “continuous” service for at least 12 months to be eligible to come to Britain. The interpreters have had the highest-profile jobs, but others who have worked at the Embassy in Baghdad, the consulate in Basra and with the Department for International Development have also faced threats.
The MoD yesterday insisted that if an Iraqi could prove that he had been absent from work because of intimidation, then he would still be considered. But it emerged that those who have now been turned down for British residency have no right of appeal.
The FCO refused to discuss individual cases but, in a statement, said: “Staff who terminated their employment as a result of intimidation are eligible for assistance. We fully recognise the difficulties of such staff and do not insist on official or formal notification, or staff working out their notice.”
David Lidington, a Conservative foreign affairs spokesman, said the Government should not try to “wriggle out” of commitments made to former Iraqi employees. “The test should be whether they are in danger because they worked for the British, not their record in the attendance register.”
Lynne Featherstone, a Liberal Democrat MP who has championed the cause of the Iraqi interpreters, said that the Government needed to use its imagination in a difficult case.
“If those Iraqis who have helped us are now being told that they can't come here because their absence was regarded as a resignation, this is the world gone mad,” she said.
Timesonline
The Brits appear set in their colonial ways, and no one is going to convince them otherwise.
The Times has learnt that 125 of the 200 interpreters who took up the offer to resettle in Britain have failed to meet the strict criteria laid down for eligibility.
The revelation challenges Gordon Brown’s pledge in August that the Government would fulfil its “duty of care” to those who had served with British troops.
In three cases seen by The Times, former Iraqi employees were told that they were ineligible because of “absenteeism”
The interpreters claim that they risked their lives to serve the British and are living in constant danger of reprisal from Shia militias. If they did not show up for work, it was because they were fleeing for their lives. They said that they now felt betrayed by the Government.
After a two-month campaign by The Times that highlighted the plight of the interpreters, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, promised to help them under a scheme launched in October.
Last night MPs urged the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to reconsider the decisions. The 200 interpreters are among a total of 600 Iraqis who have applied to come to Britain, all people who have worked for the British and who today face intimidation from Iranian-backed Shia groups.
Safa, 28, one of the rejected interpreters who worked for the British for more than two years, received a letter from the Locally Employed Staff Assistance Office in Basra which said: “We have considered your case very carefully but we are sorry to inform you that, because your service with the British Forces was terminated for absence, you do not meet the minimum employment criteria for this scheme.”
Safa told The Times that he had never resigned but had been forced to stop working after receiving two bullets and a written death threat at his house in Basra in April. Married with one child, he said that he was advised by an army liaison officer and intelligence officials to stay at home until he felt safe.
A few months later the interpreter contacted the military to see if he could return only to be told that he was not needed but would be called if an opening arose.
Safa thought back to when he had stood by the British troops during two and a half years of service since April 2004.
“Was I absent when they needed their lives saving?” he said, recalling the time that he took off his flak jacket and turned his T-shirt and trousers into a makeshift rope to help 12 soldiers out of an irrigation channel. They had been struggling to cross because of the weight of their body armour and weapons.
“Was I absent when the militias were mortaring us all the time? Was I absent when I had to sleep in the cold desert with the soldiers?”
Iraqis employed by the British have to prove “continuous” service for at least 12 months to be eligible to come to Britain. The interpreters have had the highest-profile jobs, but others who have worked at the Embassy in Baghdad, the consulate in Basra and with the Department for International Development have also faced threats.
The MoD yesterday insisted that if an Iraqi could prove that he had been absent from work because of intimidation, then he would still be considered. But it emerged that those who have now been turned down for British residency have no right of appeal.
The FCO refused to discuss individual cases but, in a statement, said: “Staff who terminated their employment as a result of intimidation are eligible for assistance. We fully recognise the difficulties of such staff and do not insist on official or formal notification, or staff working out their notice.”
David Lidington, a Conservative foreign affairs spokesman, said the Government should not try to “wriggle out” of commitments made to former Iraqi employees. “The test should be whether they are in danger because they worked for the British, not their record in the attendance register.”
Lynne Featherstone, a Liberal Democrat MP who has championed the cause of the Iraqi interpreters, said that the Government needed to use its imagination in a difficult case.
“If those Iraqis who have helped us are now being told that they can't come here because their absence was regarded as a resignation, this is the world gone mad,” she said.
Timesonline
The Brits appear set in their colonial ways, and no one is going to convince them otherwise.
posted by madtom at 12:40 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home