Latest news with #OperationRubific
The Sun
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Sun
Conservative ex-ministers at war as Afghan data leak sparks furious blame game
FORMER Tory ministers have turned on each other as a blame game erupted over the Afghan data leak. Former PM Liz Truss accused ex-Defence Secretary Sir Ben Wallace of a ' huge betrayal of public trust '. 4 4 She said she was 'shocked by the secrecy' of Operation Rubific, which brought 4,500 Afghans to Britain after their details were leaked. And she demanded those responsible in governments and the bureaucracy needed to be held to account. But Sir Ben hit back by claiming Ms Truss — Foreign Secretary under Boris Johnson in February 2022 — approved the plan in office. He replied to her X post: 'Oh dear Liz. Not quite. You were part of the Cabinet that approved the relocation of Afghans and the wider Home Office refugee scheme.' He also defended his actions, writing: 'I make no apology for applying to the court for an injunction at the time. "Imagine if the Taliban had been alerted to the existence of this list.' Sir Keir Starmer said both former ministers had 'serious questions to answer' about the airlift that may ultimately cost an estimated £7billion. Ex-Tory MP Sir Jacob Rees Mogg also called on Sir Grant Shapps, who was Defence Secretary when the injunction became a superinjunction, to speak out on the revelations. And Reform UK's Zia Yusuf has called for a judge-led inquiry into the operation. 4
The Irish Sun
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Irish Sun
MoD braced for £1billion compensation bill after 100k lives put at risk of Taliban death squads by Afghan leak scandal
DEFENCE chiefs are braced for a £1billion compensation bill over a data breach which revealed Afghans who supported UK forces. Around 100,000 were put at risk of Taliban death squads when their names or loved ones' were revealed in 2022 — with the blunder then 'covered up' by a UK gagging order. Advertisement 7 Evacuation of Afghans in 2021 after the Taliban took control - ahead of the Conservative Government's 2023 secret airlift, codenamed Operation Rubific Credit: Getty 7 The Taliban has stated it is actively hunting those revealed on the leaked list Credit: AP 7 Around 100,000 Afghans were put at risk of Taliban death squads when their names or loved ones' were revealed in 2022 Thousands could sue the MoD after the leak was made public this week. Almost 900 Afghans on the 'kill list' email leak are ready to sue — with lawyers saying thousands more are poised to join them. Legal sources claimed victims whose lives were endangered could be entitled 'to five-figure payouts'. Adnan Malik, at Manchester firm Barings Law, which is representing nearly 900, said: 'The victims have been exposed to not just financial harm, but the real threat of violence and death. Advertisement READ MORE ON AFGHAN DATA LEAK In some cases, these threats have been tragically carried out. Monies claimed will vary substantially between claimants, we would expect sums upwards of five figures for each person affected.' That could see the overall compensation bill pass £1billion. The February 2022 leak was caused by a Special Forces soldier who accidentally shared a list of 18,714 people who had applied to flee to Britain in the wake of the Advertisement Most read in The Sun The list included their last-known locations, how they served British forces, and in some instances who supported their claims — including MPs, Special Forces and spies. The leak, which included details of a 'secret route' for some of those affected to come to the UK, was only discovered when excerpts were put on Facebook in August 2023. Taliban warns thousands of Afghans secretly airlifted to UK 'we will HUNT you down' The next month, the Tory government used a superinjunction to stop journalists reporting the breach. It was extended until being lifted by a High Court judge this Tuesday. A defence source said yesterday: 'People on that list had fought with British forces in Afghanistan. Advertisement 'They fought against the Taliban. First of all we let the Taliban take over, and then when these people came to us for help we put their lives in even more danger.' The potential huge bill emerged as Nigel Farage claimed 'convicted sex offenders' are among the The Reform UK leader said the rescue of almost 20,000 Afghans is a risk to women's safety — triggering a row with Labour and the Tories. Defence Secretary John Healey insisted everyone had been checked 'carefully' for any criminal records. And he said if Mr Farage had any hard evidence, he should report it to police. Advertisement Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride also said Mr Farage should provide evidence for his claims. PM Sir Keir Starmer said the previous Tory government had serious questions to answer over the leak. Hunting people down Sir Ben Wallace, Defence Secretary at the time, insisted there was not a cover-up and the gagging order was to protect at-risk Afghans, and he made 'no apology' for doing so. Sir Ben also said he applied for a four-month injunction and did not know why it was converted into a superinjunction in September 2023, when Grant Shapps had taken over as Defence Secretary. Advertisement 7 The list contained the details of 20,000 Afghans whose country had been taken over by the Taliban Credit: Alamy 7 The leaked list also included the names of UK sponsors and MI6 spies who could have become targets of the Taliban in Afghanistan Credit: Getty Ex-Tory MP Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg said Mr Shapps had questions to answer. Mr Shapps has yet to comment. Meanwhile, Zia Yusuf, head of Reform's Department of Government Efficiency, has launched a petition calling for an independent, judge-led inquiry. Advertisement He said: 'We want to know who made these decisions.' Lawyers insisted the injunction was necessary to protect the lives of people who were named and It included hundreds of Afghan Special Forces who had served in units known as the Triples, alongside Britain's SAS and SBS. The Triples conducted thousands of night raids against senior Taliban leaders and counter-narcotics operations. Advertisement Last night, Taliban sources claimed they have had the list for years — and A Taliban official said: 'We got the list from the internet during the first days when it was leaked. 'A special unit has been launched to find them and make sure they do not work with Britain. We've been calling and visiting their family members to track them down.' 7 The potential huge bill emerged as Nigel Farage claimed 'convicted sex offenders' are among the Afghans secretly airlifted into the UK Credit: PA Advertisement 7 Defence Secretary John Healey insisted everyone had been checked 'carefully' for any criminal records Credit: PA In 2023, the Government launched a secret airlift, codenamed Operation Rubific, to smuggle around 4,500 people on the list to Britain. They are among 34,000 Afghans who have been offered new lives in Britain since the Taliban takeover. That number is expected to rise to 43,000 and the Government predicts the total cost will be £7billion. An MoD spokesman yesterday insisted a £1billion compensation bill was 'pure speculation'. Advertisement He said: 'The Government inherited a deeply complex situation and since taking office, have taken appropriate action in line with the level of risk these individuals faced. 'We will do everything possible to defend against any compensation claims and any we do get, we will fight them hard.' MINISTERS' BLAME GAME FORMER Tory ministers have turned on each other as a blame game erupted over the Afghan data leak. Former PM Liz Truss accused She said she was 'shocked by the secrecy' of And she demanded those responsible in governments and the bureaucracy needed to be held to account. But Sir Ben hit back by claiming Ms Truss — Foreign Secretary under Boris Johnson in February 2022 — approved the plan in office. He replied to her X post: 'Oh dear Liz. Not quite. You were part of the Cabinet that approved the relocation of Afghans and the wider Home Office refugee scheme.' He also defended his actions, writing: 'I make no apology for applying to the court for an injunction at the time. Imagine if the Taliban had been alerted to the existence of this list.' Sir Keir Starmer said both former ministers had 'serious questions to answer' about the airlift that may ultimately cost an estimated £7billion. Ex-Tory MP And Reform UK's Zia Yusuf has called for a judge-led inquiry into the operation.
Scottish Sun
3 days ago
- Politics
- Scottish Sun
MoD braced for £1billion compensation bill after 100k lives put at risk of Taliban death squads by Afghan leak scandal
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) DEFENCE chiefs are braced for a £1billion compensation bill over a data breach which revealed Afghans who supported UK forces. Around 100,000 were put at risk of Taliban death squads when their names or loved ones' were revealed in 2022 — with the blunder then 'covered up' by a UK gagging order. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 7 Evacuation of Afghans in 2021 after the Taliban took control - ahead of the Conservative Government's 2023 secret airlift, codenamed Operation Rubific Credit: Getty 7 The Taliban has stated it is actively hunting those revealed on the leaked list Credit: AP 7 Around 100,000 Afghans were put at risk of Taliban death squads when their names or loved ones' were revealed in 2022 Thousands could sue the MoD after the leak was made public this week. Almost 900 Afghans on the 'kill list' email leak are ready to sue — with lawyers saying thousands more are poised to join them. Legal sources claimed victims whose lives were endangered could be entitled 'to five-figure payouts'. Adnan Malik, at Manchester firm Barings Law, which is representing nearly 900, said: 'The victims have been exposed to not just financial harm, but the real threat of violence and death. In some cases, these threats have been tragically carried out. Monies claimed will vary substantially between claimants, we would expect sums upwards of five figures for each person affected.' That could see the overall compensation bill pass £1billion. The February 2022 leak was caused by a Special Forces soldier who accidentally shared a list of 18,714 people who had applied to flee to Britain in the wake of the 2021 Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. The list included their last-known locations, how they served British forces, and in some instances who supported their claims — including MPs, Special Forces and spies. The leak, which included details of a 'secret route' for some of those affected to come to the UK, was only discovered when excerpts were put on Facebook in August 2023. Taliban warns thousands of Afghans secretly airlifted to UK 'we will HUNT you down' The next month, the Tory government used a superinjunction to stop journalists reporting the breach. It was extended until being lifted by a High Court judge this Tuesday. A defence source said yesterday: 'People on that list had fought with British forces in Afghanistan. 'They fought against the Taliban. First of all we let the Taliban take over, and then when these people came to us for help we put their lives in even more danger.' The potential huge bill emerged as Nigel Farage claimed 'convicted sex offenders' are among the Afghans secretly airlifted into the UK. The Reform UK leader said the rescue of almost 20,000 Afghans is a risk to women's safety — triggering a row with Labour and the Tories. Defence Secretary John Healey insisted everyone had been checked 'carefully' for any criminal records. And he said if Mr Farage had any hard evidence, he should report it to police. Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride also said Mr Farage should provide evidence for his claims. PM Sir Keir Starmer said the previous Tory government had serious questions to answer over the leak. Hunting people down Sir Ben Wallace, Defence Secretary at the time, insisted there was not a cover-up and the gagging order was to protect at-risk Afghans, and he made 'no apology' for doing so. Sir Ben also said he applied for a four-month injunction and did not know why it was converted into a superinjunction in September 2023, when Grant Shapps had taken over as Defence Secretary. 7 The list contained the details of 20,000 Afghans whose country had been taken over by the Taliban Credit: Alamy 7 The leaked list also included the names of UK sponsors and MI6 spies who could have become targets of the Taliban in Afghanistan Credit: Getty Ex-Tory MP Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg said Mr Shapps had questions to answer. Mr Shapps has yet to comment. Meanwhile, Zia Yusuf, head of Reform's Department of Government Efficiency, has launched a petition calling for an independent, judge-led inquiry. He said: 'We want to know who made these decisions.' Lawyers insisted the injunction was necessary to protect the lives of people who were named and at risk of Taliban reprisals. It included hundreds of Afghan Special Forces who had served in units known as the Triples, alongside Britain's SAS and SBS. The Triples conducted thousands of night raids against senior Taliban leaders and counter-narcotics operations. Last night, Taliban sources claimed they have had the list for years — and had been hunting down those on it. A Taliban official said: 'We got the list from the internet during the first days when it was leaked. 'A special unit has been launched to find them and make sure they do not work with Britain. We've been calling and visiting their family members to track them down.' 7 The potential huge bill emerged as Nigel Farage claimed 'convicted sex offenders' are among the Afghans secretly airlifted into the UK Credit: PA 7 Defence Secretary John Healey insisted everyone had been checked 'carefully' for any criminal records Credit: PA In 2023, the Government launched a secret airlift, codenamed Operation Rubific, to smuggle around 4,500 people on the list to Britain. They are among 34,000 Afghans who have been offered new lives in Britain since the Taliban takeover. That number is expected to rise to 43,000 and the Government predicts the total cost will be £7billion. An MoD spokesman yesterday insisted a £1billion compensation bill was 'pure speculation'. He said: 'The Government inherited a deeply complex situation and since taking office, have taken appropriate action in line with the level of risk these individuals faced. 'We will do everything possible to defend against any compensation claims and any we do get, we will fight them hard.'
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Revealed: How Tories tore themselves apart over Afghan leak
The Home Office tried to stop a £7bn plan to grant asylum to 24,000 Afghans because of fears over national security, The Telegraph has learnt. The Treasury and the Foreign Office were also among several government departments that expressed serious concerns about the secret scheme, but were overruled after defence ministers used 'emotional blackmail' to force through the plan, it is claimed. On Tuesday, a High Court judge lifted a super-injunction that had prevented the media from reporting anything about the asylum scheme for almost two years. The injunction also meant that the row boiling at the very centre of Government over its merits has also gone unreported until now. Sir Keir Starmer has said he was 'angry' when he was told about a data breach that led to the relocation scheme being set up under the Conservative government in 2023. Multiple sources have told The Telegraph that the plan to airlift thousands of Afghans to the UK – codenamed Operation Rubific – caused a major row within government, with senior Cabinet ministers objecting to it on the grounds of security, cost and practicality. Among those who raised objections were Sir James Cleverly, who was foreign secretary and then home secretary during the time the row was raging; Suella Braverman, who preceded Sir James in the Home Office; Michael Gove, the communities secretary, and Laura Trott, the chief secretary to the Treasury, it is understood. The row began in August 2023, when Sir Ben Wallace, the then defence secretary, was told about a data breach that had leaked the names of Afghans who had applied for asylum through the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) for those who had worked with the British Armed Forces during the war in the country. Excerpts of the list of names had appeared on social media. The data was accidentally leaked by a Royal Marine who was working under the command of Gen Sir Gwyn Jenkins, then the director of Special Forces. Sir Ben applied for a High Court injunction to prevent the media – who had heard about the leak – from reporting it, and Operation Rubific was put in place to speed up the process of granting asylum to those whose lives were deemed to be at risk as a result of the leak. He resigned as defence secretary the day before the injunction was granted, and Grant Shapps, who took over the role, delegated the task of running Operation Rubific to James Heappey, the armed forces minister. On Mr Shapps's first day in the job, the injunction was granted by a High Court judge and upgraded to a super-injunction, meaning no one, including the media and MPs, could mention that an injunction existed. Minister's 'emotional blackmail' From the very beginning, Mr Heappey, a former Army major who fought in Afghanistan, clashed with Cabinet heavyweights as he tried to get the secret resettlement scheme up and running. Mrs Braverman, who had been attorney general before her elevation to the Home Office, 'got into serious arguments' with the Ministry of Defence, one source said, telling Mr Heappey she 'just didn't believe' that all of the people on the leaked list were genuine claimants. In common with Sir James, she was concerned about the threat to national security if Taliban members or sympathisers who had applied for asylum were brought to the UK. Ministry of Defence sources insist they set a high bar for eligibility, and that anyone who was known to have Taliban connections 'even decades ago' was crossed off the list. However, one former minister claimed Mr Heappey 'had a religious fervour' about the scheme and would 'constantly try to emotionally blackmail people' by referring to his service in Afghanistan and the need to protect those who had helped British forces. A friend of Mr Heappey defended him, saying he had been 'passionate' about the fate of the Afghans, to whom he felt the UK owed a moral responsibility, and that it was 'sad' if former colleagues regarded that as blackmail. Mrs Braverman was also furious at the suggestion that those brought to the UK would have to be housed in Home Office-funded asylum hotels, as she had managed to shut down about 100 such hotels and wanted to trumpet her success. 'Suella basically told the MoD that if they wanted to bring people here, they would have to house them in empty barracks on MoD land,' said one source. Other ministers expressed reservations about housing Afghans on military bases because of the danger that the Taliban might have infiltrated them, and for months there was a stand-off between the departments. In one particularly explosive meeting, Mrs Braverman accused Mr Heappey and his department of being 'totally incompetent', which led to Mr Heappey filing a complaint against her. Mrs Braverman said in a statement posted online on Wednesday: 'In all this disgraceful betrayal of the people by their own Government, I feel only shame. 'I, and a handful of others, fought this, but we failed to stop it.' My statement on the Afghan leak. — Suella Braverman MP (@SuellaBraverman) July 16, 2025 Sir James, meanwhile, was annoyed that the cost of the scheme was being taken out of the Foreign Office's overseas development budget and warned that the scheme was untenable because of the sheer numbers of people involved. In the Treasury, there were concerns about the 'potentially staggering' cost of the scheme. Laura Trott, who was in charge of public spending as chief secretary to the Treasury from Nov 2023 until the general election in July last year, raised objections about the amount of taxpayers' money that was being spent on the scheme, what the final numbers would be once family members were taken into account, and how many of those brought to Britain had genuinely worked with British forces. Ministers were told that if all 18,800 people on the leaked list were granted asylum, the true number requiring asylum would be more than 100,000 once family members were taken into account. In the end, the Government signed off on a £7 billion plan to offer asylum to 24,000 people, with John Healey, the Labour Defence Secretary, saying on Wednesday that being on the 'kill list' did not give people the automatic right to asylum. Mr Gove was concerned about how local authorities were going to find homes, school places, doctors and other public services for so many Afghans and their families. Mr Heappey, one source said, found himself 'in a crowd of one' in high-security Cobra meetings with senior ministers as he tried to persuade them to back the scheme. One source said: 'James had a pretty tough time in Cobra meetings. The other government departments wanted the MoD to have to deal with everything, they didn't want any of it to land on their plate, and ministers were defending their own turf. The Government was pretty dysfunctional over this issue. 'James would respond by saying the MoD wasn't an immigration agency or a social services provider, so it couldn't do it alone. It was all quite toxic.' Sir Ben has defended his decision to seek the injunction, saying in an article for The Telegraph that it was necessary to protect lives. He has also pointed out that he applied for a four-month injunction, and that the day after he left office the High Court upgraded this to a super-injunction, which makes it an offence for anyone to divulge even that an injunction has been granted. The court later extended the injunction. Mrs Braverman, whose husband Rael quit his membership of Reform UK on Wednesday after the party's former chairman blamed Mrs Braverman for Operation Rubific, said: 'There is much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD, both ministers and officials, and the House of Commons is the right place to do so. 'This episode exposes everything wrong with the Westminster establishment. The state apparatus thinks it can hide its failures behind legal technicalities while ordinary people pay the price. I understand your anger, and I share it. The people who have run this country so badly need to take a long, hard look at themselves. Those responsible must be held accountable, and the system that enabled this cover-up must be dismantled.'
.png%3Fwidth%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
‘We failed those who protected us': Independent readers react to UK's ‘shameful' MoD data breach
A catastrophic Ministry of Defence data breach that exposed the details of thousands of Afghans seeking refuge in the UK was kept secret for nearly two years under an unprecedented superinjunction, The Independent has revealed. The leak, which occurred in February 2022, compromised sensitive information about applicants to the MoD's Arap resettlement scheme – a programme for Afghans who had supported British forces and now feared Taliban reprisals. Officials launched a top-secret response, codenamed Operation Rubific, resulting in the covert evacuation of more than 16,000 people to the UK. The government was prepared to relocate up to 42,000 in total at a projected cost of £7bn. The extraordinary cover-up meant MPs, the public and even many within Whitehall were kept in the dark. A court battle led by The Independent and other media finally overturned the superinjunction this week, raising serious questions about transparency, accountability, and the treatment of those who risked their lives for Britain. Reactions from readers have been swift and damning, touching on moral responsibility, government secrecy, institutional incompetence, and the human cost of this breach. Many drew parallels with past scandals, while others demanded consequences and urgent reform. Here's what you had to say: Britain has a moral responsibility It is an expensive programme, that is true, but the problem is a very big one. The whole thing was bungled from the start – remember Dominic Raab staying on his holiday in Crete while Kabul was being evacuated? And the nature of the leak is just incredible. The billions this costs, spread out over several years, are desperately needed elsewhere, but as with the Gurkhas, Britain has a moral responsibility. RegCostello Strain (i) 'Prioritisation of Ukrainian nationals' and (ii) 'drastically increased work-from-home arrangements for civil servants' were the main reasons given for the months-long consular waits for visas and passport processing in 2022 and 2023. I wonder whether this massive evacuation from Afghanistan contributed to that strain, or whether it was all managed by a separate–and–covert department. Either way, covert or not, every resource has its limit, doesn't it? Ever more freely and transparently may truths emerge! IndySpannerPhones Many are still in danger Hopefully the Labour government will quickly step up the process of getting all to safety. It's been over a year, but many are still in danger. The government needs to ensure that 10 per cent of evacuees do not end up homeless, as they suggested could be the case in October 2024. PropagandaoftheDeed A national shame The way we treated these people who helped us at great risk is a national shame. Albert Ginwallah Corruption or shambles? Hmmm... so Britain's security is more at risk from the government and MoD! Well, I for one am not surprised at all. And that goes for the cover-up and lies from successive governments! Look at the Post Office and Horizon, the blood contamination saga. Is it corruption or a shambles? Red Dragon Has the person been sacked? My first question is: has the person who sent the email been sacked and prosecuted for breaching confidentiality as well as costing the country some £400m? If not, why not? TomHawk Spare a thought for Afghan women This was a chaotic Tory mess-up, as is traditional. Against the scale of the issue, this ethical UK response is tiny. Spare a thought for the 450k Afghan refugee women forcibly repatriated from Iran and Pakistan since Jan 2025, who are instantly criminalised for travelling alone back to a medieval regime where women and girls have a value less than livestock. Herbacious Scandal after scandal Is there anything the UK government can run? Scandal after scandal after scandal. Billions upon billions p***** up the wall. A little bridge in a London park, £36 million? Chichee Let's have an expensive public inquiry Wow – a government cover-up. That's a surprise. Let's have an expensive public inquiry at the cost to us taxpayers that will last the next five years, with the familiar outcome stating lessons will be learnt… Once that's out of the way, we can then promote the 'guilty' individuals to the House of Lords. theSpycatcher A get-out clause A "superinjunction" is basically the get-out clause for despotic governments (or in the case of Britain, the rancid ruling class). stonia Keeping the public in the dark How ironic that the British establishment invests huge efforts in keeping the public in the dark about so many things of public interest – and yet is incapable of protecting sensitive data when lives actually depend on it. Danilov How? Data like this should never leave a secure government server. What on earth is it doing being emailed to random people and posted on Facebook? And how do you 'inadvertently share' a file? sj99 Incompetence should have consequences Incompetence on such a massive scale should have consequences; otherwise, it sends the wrong message. It says: don't worry about being diligent, do what you like, it doesn't matter. Sean Shameful As if the data breach itself wasn't appalling enough, the fact that this individual is still employed in another department at the MoD is absolutely shameful. Cyclone8 Only in the UK public sector... Where else but the UK public sector can someone do something that puts people's lives at risk and costs £400m to sort out, yet keep your job and your pension? If there is any better illustration of how we are let down by our public sector, I can't think of it. These days, our public sector is the refuge of those who should not be let loose with a broom, let alone handle sensitive matters. TomHawk We are failing to protect those we put at risk Bloody shambles. We should have offered sanctuary to those who were at risk just because of who their former employer was – the MoD. While the news and politics are all about 'illegal immigrants, ' we are failing to protect those we put at risk. Shameful. Snaughter
