UK spent over $1.1 billion on importing Afghans
In February 2022, an unnamed MoD official mistakenly emailed a spreadsheet containing sensitive information on up to 33,000 Afghans. Many had collaborated with British forces during the NATO-led invasion and had applied for asylum after the Taliban seized power.
The breach went unnoticed until 2023, when some of the leaked data – including names, locations, and personal information about applicants and their families – surfaced on Facebook, raising fears that as many as 100,000 individuals could face retaliation as traitors.
To contain the fallout, the UK government imposed a 'super-injunction' under the codename Operation Rubific and quietly launched an emergency relocation initiative, the Afghanistan Response Route (ARR), aimed at helping individuals who would otherwise have been ineligible for entry to the UK.
British Defence Secretary John Healey appeared to downplay the incident, stating that only around 900 principal applicants and 3,600 family members had been relocated to Britain 'at a cost of £400 million.' He added that the government would still honor invitations extended to another 600 individuals and an unspecified number of their relatives before the ARR was discontinued – bringing the total cost of the emergency scheme to approximately £850 million.
However, a military review cited by The Times revealed that nearly 24,000 people affected by the breach have been resettled in the UK, many through other existing programs.
Altogether, various Afghan relocation efforts could cost British taxpayers up to £6 billion, with £2.7 billion already spent. A pending lawsuit by those affected is expected to cost at least another £250 million.
Healey issued 'a sincere apology today on behalf of the British Government' on Tuesday, after a court lifted the reporting restrictions in response to legal challenges demanding greater transparency. 'This serious data incident should never have happened,' Healey told MPs, stressing that it occurred 'three years ago under the previous government.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
41 minutes ago
- Russia Today
US could slash troop presence in Europe
The US could cut its troop presence in Europe by up to 30%, Politico reported on Monday, citing sources. The reduction could be announced as early as September as part of a Pentagon-led reassessment of military deployments called the Global Force Posture Review. Since taking office, President Donald Trump has accused European NATO members of not paying their fair share of defense costs, while his administration has hinted that the US may reduce its military footprint on the continent. In February, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth urged allies to boost defense spending, warning they cannot assume 'America's presence' in Europe 'will last forever.' Reports indicate European leaders have been unsettled by potential drawdown plans, though neither their scope nor timeline has been defined. Aylin Matle of the German Council on Foreign Relations has predicted a roughly 20% troop reduction possibly this fall, most likely involving the removal of about 20,000 troops deployed under Joe Biden in 2022 after the Ukraine conflict escalated. She said even such a cut 'would still leave a substantial American footprint,' noting current US troop levels fluctuate between 90,000 and 100,000. Matle further suggested that the cuts could be lower, as US forces in Europe are used for regional defense and 'projecting power into the Middle East and, to some extent, Africa.' The report notes that Germany, which hosts the largest US contingent in Europe of around 35,000 troops at 35 sites, is particularly alarmed by the potential cuts. Berlin's concerns come amid the EU's broader militarization drive, including the €800 billion ($930 billion) ReArm Europe initiative and a recent NATO pledge to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP, both citing Russia as a threat. After meeting Hegseth earlier this month, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said he pressed Washington for a roadmap, warning of 'dangerous capability gaps' if US forces withdraw faster than Europe can replace them. Moscow has rejected claims it poses a threat, calling them 'nonsense' and accusing the West of using such rhetoric to justify expanding military budgets.
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
US trade deal will fuel EU's ‘deindustrialization'
The new US-EU trade agreement threatens to accelerate 'deindustrialization' in Europe by redirecting investment to the US and increasing the bloc's dependency on American energy exports, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. On Sunday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and US President Donald Trump finalized a controversial deal that allowed the EU and US to avert a full-scale trade war. Under the deal, the US has reduced its proposed 30% tariffs to a flat 15% on most European exports. The EU has committed to purchasing $750 billion worth of US energy, primarily liquefied natural gas and nuclear fuel, and agreed to invest around $600 billion into US industries. The bloc has also undertaken to increase imports of US-made weapons. Speaking at the 'Territory of Meanings' forum on Monday, Lavrov described the arrangement as 'clearly leading to further deindustrialization of Europe and capital flight.' He added that rising energy prices and investment outflows will strike a 'very hard blow' to European industrial and agricultural sectors. According to Lavrov, von der Leyen was apparently 'boasting' about the EU's willingness to carry additional costs. 'People like Ursula von der Leyen literally take pride in this path: yes, we will be forced to spend more money, yes, we will probably have fewer resources to address social problems, but we are obliged to defeat Russia.' He stressed that the trade deal is 'obviously damaging for the Old Continent – it doesn't even need to be analyzed.' Lavrov's stance was echoed by several EU politicians and the business community. Marine Le Pen, a key figure in France's right-wing National Rally party, denounced the agreement as a 'political, economic, and moral fiasco' detrimental to the EU's sovereignty. French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou concurred, calling it a 'dark day' for the EU. German business leaders also voiced alarm. Wolfgang Niedermark, a member of the executive board of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), said the EU had sent a 'fatal signal' by accepting high tariffs. 'Even a tariff rate of 15% will have immense negative effects on the export-oriented German industry,' he warned.
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
Trump ‘wiped the floor' with EU
The new trade agreement between the US and the EU is 'completely humiliating for the Europeans,' former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said. The deal, announced on Sunday by US President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, includes a requirement for EU member states to increase imports of American energy and defense products. It also imposes a blanket 15% tariff on EU exports to the US – terms accepted by Brussels to avoid even steeper trade penalties. In a social media post on Monday, Medvedev, who serves as deputy chair of the Russian Security Council, claimed that the terms of the deal meant Trump had 'wiped the floor with Europe.' 'One can only feel sorry for ordinary Europeans,' Medvedev wrote. He asserted that where Trump is seeking economic benefits for American businesses, EU leaders are motivated by an ideological anti-Russian sentiment, as the deal further cements Brussels' intention to terminate all purchases of Russian oil and gas. The Trump administration has used tariffs as a tool to confront what it considers unfair trade practices and chronic deficits in trade with key partners. In the absence of a deal, EU products could have faced tariffs as high as 50%. Last week, Brussels prepared a list of US goods it was ready to hit with retaliatory duties if negotiations collapsed. Medvedev and other senior Russian officials have repeatedly portrayed EU leaders as politically weak and overly compliant with Washington's agenda, often at the expense of their own economic interests. Russia has been especially critical of the EU's break from Russian energy supplies, a move initiated as part of sanctions over the Ukraine conflict. Moscow contends that the resulting shift to more expensive US liquefied natural gas has contributed to the deindustrialization of major European economies.
