New Royal Navy chief under renewed scrutiny over Afghanistan war crimes evidence
LONDON: The man chosen as the new head of the UK's Royal Navy was previously accused of failing to report evidence of war crimes allegedly committed by British forces in Afghanistan.
Gen. Sir Gwyn Jenkins, who was appointed on Thursday, also faced allegations this week that he oversaw the rejection of hundreds of resettlement applications from former Afghan special forces members who served alongside British troops against the Taliban, The Guardian newspaper reported.
Jenkins replaces Adm. Ben Key, who stepped down last week over allegations of misconduct.
The new navy chief previously led UK Special Forces in Afghanistan during the war against the Taliban. That conflict is under renewed scrutiny in Britain following recent fresh allegations of war crimes involving members of Britain's elite Special Air Service and Special Boat Service.
In 2023, it emerged that Jenkins had been warned in writing in 2011 that SAS troops had claimed to have executed handcuffed detainees in Afghanistan. Rather than refer this evidence to the Royal Military Police, the BBC reported at the time, Jenkins placed the documents in a safe. However, The Telegraph newspaper reported that Jenkins did pass the evidence up the chain of command at the time.
This week, an investigation by the BBC current affairs program 'Panorama' revealed that Jenkins personally appointed an officer under his command to assess the Afghan resettlement applications. Thousands of former elite Afghan soldiers were rejected, despite credible evidence of their service alongside British counterparts.
The UK's Ministry of Defence said it was 'not appropriate … to comment on allegations which may be within the scope of the statutory inquiry,' referring to a public inquiry underway in the UK to investigate the war crimes allegations.
There was 'no evidence' that Afghan resettlement applications were rejected to prevent the former soldiers from giving evidence to the war crimes inquiry, it added.
Defence Secretary John Healey on Thursday described Jenkins as a 'proven leader with a distinguished career in both the military and at the core of government.'
He added: 'I know he will deliver in this pivotal role, making Britain secure at home and strong abroad.'
Sarah Atherton, a former Tory MP who sat on the Defence Select Committee, told The Telegraph: 'Military personnel, especially senior leaders, are held to high ethical and behavior standards.
'If somebody is facing an allegation … I know it's alleged, but it's just very strange to appoint someone who is in this position, given the circumstances. That is bizarre.'
Jenkins said after his appointment that he wanted to 'accelerate' the Royal Navy's return to a 'war fighting force that is ready for conflict.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
9 hours ago
- Arab News
A British TV art expert who sold works to a suspected Hezbollah financier is sentenced to prison
Oghenochuko Ojiri, 53, had pleaded guilty to eight offenses under the Terrorism Act 2000Ojiri, who also appeared on the BBC's Antiques Road Trip, faced a possible sentence of five years in prison in the hearing at London's Central Criminal CourtLONDON: An art expert who appeared on the BBC's Bargain Hunt show was sentenced Friday to two and a half years in prison for failing to report his sale of pricey works to a suspected financier of Lebanon's militant Hezbollah a previous hearing, Oghenochuko Ojiri, 53, had pleaded guilty to eight offenses under the Terrorism Act 2000. The art sales for about 140,000 pounds ($185,000) to Nazem Ahmad, a diamond and art dealer sanctioned by the UK and US as a Hezbollah financier, took place between October 2020 and December 2021. The sanctions were designed to prevent anyone in the UK or US from trading with Ahmad or his who also appeared on the BBC's Antiques Road Trip, faced a possible sentence of five years in prison in the hearing at London's Central Criminal Court, which is better known as the Old addition to the prison term, Justice Bobbie Cheema-Grubb said Ojiri faces an additional year on license — a period of time after a prison sentence ends when an offender must stay out of trouble or risk going back to told Ojiri he had been involved in a commercial relationship 'for prestige and profit' and that until his involvement with Ahmad, he was 'someone to be admired.''You knew about Ahmad's suspected involvement in financing terrorism and the way the art market can be exploited by someone like him,' she said. 'This is the nadir — there is one direction your life can go and I am confident that you will not be in front of the courts again.'The Met's investigation into Ojiri was carried out alongside Homeland Security in the US, which is conducting a wider investigation into alleged money laundering by Ahmad using shell companies.'This prosecution, using specific Terrorism Act legislation, is the first of its kind and should act as a warning to all art dealers that we can, and will, pursue those who knowingly do business with people identified as funders of terrorist groups,' said Commander Dominic Murphy, head of the Metropolitan Police's Counter Terrorism was sanctioned in 2019 by the US Treasury, which said he was a prominent Lebanon-based money launderer involved in smuggling blood diamonds, which are mined in conflict zones and sold to finance years ago, the UK Treasury froze Ahmad's assets because he financed Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite militant organization that has been designated an international terrorist Ojiri's arrest in April 2023, the Met obtained a warrant to seize a number of artworks, including a Picasso and Andy Warhol paintings, belonging to Ahmad and held in two warehouses in the UK The collection, valued at almost 1 million pounds, is due to be sold with the funds to be reinvested back into the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Home Office.
Asharq Al-Awsat
10 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Three Iranians in UK Court Accused of Assisting Tehran Spy Service
Three Iranian men appeared in court in London on Friday accused of assisting Iran's foreign intelligence service and plotting violence against journalists working for a British-based broadcaster critical of Tehran. The three men - Mostafa Sepahvand, 39, Farhad Javadi Manesh, 44, and Shapoor Qalehali Khani Noori, 55, - have been charged with offences under Britain's National Security Act, brought in to give the authorities new powers to target threats from foreign states. They are accused of "engaging in conduct likely to assist a foreign intelligence service" between August 2024 and February this year, and police have said that it related to Iran. Sepahvand is also charged with carrying out surveillance in preparation to commit serious violence against a person, while Manesh and Noori were charged with surveillance with the intention that serious violent acts would be committed by others. The men appeared by videolink on Friday for a brief hearing at London's Old Bailey court during which their lawyers said all intended to plead not guilty to the charges. Prosecutors told a hearing last month that the allegations involved the targeting of journalists based in Britain connected with Iran International, a broadcaster critical of the Iranian government. They were remanded in custody until a formal plea hearing on September 26 and they are due to go on trial in October next year. The suspects were arrested last month on the same day counter-terrorism police detained five other men, including four Iranians, as part of a separate operation. Those men were later released without charge.
Arab News
15 hours ago
- Arab News
‘One hell after another': US travel ban deepens despair for Afghans awaiting visas
KABUL: Mehria had been losing hope of getting a visa to emigrate to the United States but her spirits were crushed when President Donald Trump raised yet another hurdle by banning travel for Afghans. Trump had already disrupted refugee pathways after he returned to power in January but a sweeping new travel ban on 12 countries, including Afghanistan, will go into effect on Monday. The ban changes little for most Afghans who already faced steep barriers to travel abroad, but many who had hung their hopes on a new life in the United States felt it was yet another betrayal. 'Trump's recent decisions have trapped not only me but thousands of families in uncertainty, hopelessness and thousands of other disasters,' Mehria, a 23-year-old woman who gave only one name, said from Pakistan, where she has been waiting since applying for a US refugee visa in 2022. 'We gave up thousands of hopes and our entire lives and came here on a promise from America, but today we are suffering one hell after another,' she told AFP. The United States has not had a working embassy in Afghanistan since the Taliban ousted the foreign-backed government in 2021, forcing Afghans to apply for visas in third countries. The Taliban's return followed the drawdown of US and NATO troops who had ousted them two decades earlier in response to the September 11, 2001, attacks. The Taliban government has since imposed a strict view of Islamic law and severe restrictions on women, including bans on some education and work. Hundreds of thousands of Afghans have applied for visas to settle in the United States, either as refugees or under the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program reserved for those who aided the US government during its war against the Taliban. Afghans with SIV visas and asylum cases will not be affected by Trump's new order but family reunification pathways are threatened, the Afghan-American Foundation said in a statement condemning the ban. Some 12,000 people are awaiting reunification with family members already living in the United States, according to Shawn VanDiver, the president of the AfghanEvac non-profit group. 'These are not 'border issues'. These are legal, vetted, documented reunifications,' he wrote on social media platform X. 'Without exemptions, families are stranded.' Refugee pathways and relocation processes for resettling Afghans had already been upset by previous Trump orders, suddenly leaving many Afghans primed to travel to the United States in limbo. The Trump administration revoked legal protections temporarily shielding Afghans from deportation in May, citing an improved security situation in Afghanistan. 'We feel abandoned by the United States, with whom we once worked and cooperated,' said Zainab Haidari, another Afghan woman who has been waiting in Pakistan for a refugee visa. 'Despite promises of protection and refuge we are now caught in a hopeless situation, between the risk of death from the Taliban and the pressure and threat of deportation in Pakistan,' said Haidari, 27, who worked with the United States in Kabul during the war but applied for a refugee visa. Afghans fled in droves during decades of conflict, but the chaotic withdrawal of US-led troops from Kabul saw a new wave clamouring to escape Taliban government curbs and fears of reprisal for working with Washington. Pakistan and Iran have meanwhile ramped up deportation campaigns to expel Afghans who have crossed their borders. The Taliban authorities have not responded to multiple requests for comment on the new travel ban but have said they are keen to have good relations with every country now that they are in power — including the United States. Visa options for Afghans are already severely limited by carrying the weakest passport globally, according to the Henley Passport Index. However, travel to the United States is far from the minds of many Afghans who struggle to make ends meet in one of the world's poorest countries, where food insecurity is rife. 'We don't even have bread, why are you asking me about traveling to America?' said one Afghan man in Kabul. Sahar, a 29-year-old economics graduate who has struggled to find work amid sky-high unemployment, said the new rules will not have any impact on most Afghans. 'When there are thousands of serious issues in Afghanistan, this won't change anything,' she told AFP. 'Those who could afford to travel and apply for the visa will find another way or to go somewhere else instead of the US.'
