Afghan Interpreters - let them in the UK? (Poll)

Should Afghans who worked for the British be allowed to live in the UK?

  • Yes - they risked their lives for us - let them, and their families in

    Votes: 58 32.8%
  • Maybe - those who can prove intimidation should be allowed to the UK

    Votes: 28 15.8%
  • No - give them support to stay and build up their own Country

    Votes: 28 15.8%
  • No - they knew the risks, took the money, and are trying it on via UK Lawyers and gullible Brits

    Votes: 63 35.6%

  • Total voters
Isn't the act of the government granting them asylum here a clear indicator from the men at the top that they know Afghanistan is going to implode after the troops leave & has been a waste of blood & treasure trying to create a safe Taliban free country for Afghans? Just my £0.02...
I worked with some of the better ones due to my role on H15 and they were outwardly polite and loyal. We did have a lot of issues with corruption and intimidation within the terps own peer group but it could be argued (and proved) that Afghan society as a whole is run on that principle.
The biggest problem was that their loyalties were to themselves and the highest bidder, in that order. If they could find a way to collect from both parties they would.

Overall, those that have a proven threat to life might have a claim to protection, however they all knew the risks and were quick enough to take the extremely generous wage from the brit taxpayer. This may, or maynot have been suplimented by the other side too.

I did get some awesome kebabs brought in from down town by my terp though. That alone should be enough.
Isn't the act of the government granting them asylum here a clear indicator from the men at the top that they know Afghanistan is going to implode after the troops leave & has been a waste of blood & treasure trying to create a safe Taliban free country for Afghans? Just my £0.02...

In my view the Government announcement takes the sting out of any liberal media frenzy and in reality very few will get in.
The days of "Thanks for your valuable service mate, now piss off" should be abolished once and for all.
The American system is very different to our stiff upper lip callus victorian attitude.


No, mine was definately spying against us, several more were sacked for fraud. A couple we kept as they had dodgy connections, it was easier to have them next to us than spend days looking for them. I know of only two that I worked with us that were good blokes, however they have a good family life in Northern Province. One more was absolutely loaded.

Do not let them in please. Not racism, no they are taliban in disguise, just that they were downright crooks that could speak english. The two I mention have a better home life than I, cant imagine them moving out of the Kush for a 2 up 2 down in Milton Keynes.

How about housing the soldiers that are on the streets first homeless, cold, and ill.


I've worked with some gleaming terps who did their job well in very dangerous and difficult situations.

However, they knew this risks when they took the job and therefore I voted no.


Book Reviewer
on the immigration side of things afghanistan has been considered safe enough to repatriate for the past 10 years at least
I am against asylum for tadjiman (pashto for interpreter?) . . .
Tarjomaan, or mutarjem.

Vet them. Stringently. But with an open mind. Almost all the Afghans (and natives from other countries) that I've worked with as language instructors have been excellent.
The days of "Thanks for your valuable service mate, now piss off" should be abolished once and for all.
The American system is very different to our stiff upper lip callus victorian attitude.
Aye, that callus Victorian attitude is a bit thick skinned but at least now we'll get them from under our feet with a clear conscience.


Book Reviewer
I think case by case rather than a carte Blanche or a complete no - everyone's circumstances are different do let it be looked at differently.

However, asylum should be restricted to just the interpreter - if it's too dangerous for them to stay in their own country they would have already distanced themselves from wives and families and they would have considered that when they started working with BF.

Possibly if there was a extenuating circumstances for the immediate family on a case by case - but the granting of leave to remain here should not allow them to sponsor or support extended family.
Received this email today:

[TABLE="width: 360, align: center"]
I served in Afghanistan in 2008-2009 and then again in 2010. They were tough days in Afghanistan for all that were there. We relied on the help of local Afghan interpreters who were with us on every patrol and became an integral part of our platoon.
The interpreters took great risks to help us, putting not only their lives but the lives of their families in danger of Taliban reprisals. Now the UK Government has turned its back on the interpreters. It is refusing to give support or resettlement to interpreters who completed their duties between 2006 and 2011.
My great-grandfather Winston Churchill, who spent a large part of his career in the army, would have been shocked by the way our government is treating men who risked their lives to help British forces. By denying our interpreters entry into the UK the government is condemning them to persecution and almost certain death at the hands of the Taliban.
That's why I've started a petition on calling on Foreign Secretary William Hague to review the British policy for Afghan interpreters. Today I'm delivering the petition to Downing Street, click here to add your name.
The interpreter I remember most was Barri. For all sense and purposes he was one of the lads. When we left Afghanistan Barri's father and brother were killed by the Taliban but the UK government didn't help him. His mother and sister died whilst trying to get to western Europe when their boat sank in Mediterranean. For two years Barri and his last remaining brother have been held in a detention centre until they were eventually granted asylum in Germany. Other interpreters are not even as lucky. They have been forced into hiding in Afghanistan or are locked in foreign detention centres, their lives in limbo.
There are certain codes we uphold in the military. Two of those are: "loyalty & honour." So I am appealing to Rt Hon William Hague and Rt Hon David Cameron -- do the honourable thing and remain loyal to those who stood shoulder to shoulder with British Forces.
It is morally reprehensible to force these men to stay in a country that we are counting down the days to finally leaving. By leaving them in Afghanistan the only thing they can look forward to is a life of looking over their shoulders.
Huge public pressure convinced the Government to offer resettlement or support to some Afghan interpreters. We need the same pressure to extend the policy and make sure no interpreter is forgotten.
Please sign my petition and make sure all Afghan interpreters get the support they need.
Thank you,
Alexander Perkins

I think this bloke has gone about it the wrong way. Apart from the fact that I disagree with letting Afghan Interpreters into the country because they did interpreted for us for large amounts of money and despite knowing the risks, I have the following annoyances for want of a better word.

1. I have no idea where he got my email address from. When I find out I shall make my feelings known
2. I really do not wish to receive spam on anything from some ****er I do not know.
3. How on earth does he know how his grandfather Winston Churchill would react to this issue? He should not be using someone he was related too and is long gone to try and bolster his case.

These Afghan Interpreters should be fighting and working to make their country a better place, not bugging out to another country. They knew what they were doing when they signed up to work as an interpreter, they are not some naïve kids thinking that they would be interpreting forever and life would be a bed of roses.
It would be proof that we have been defeated in Afghanistan wouldn't it?
Some were good and some were crap. Some were charging civvies to speak to me and taking a cut of the compo. One went out under fire and dragged an injured Brit into cover. One was so shit I couldn't understand him.

The majority were good blokes. I warned them that the streets of London are not paved with gold.

Let's not make it uber easy, but there are quite a few who in my opinion (gained from experience of working directly with them) have certainly earned the right to live and prosper in peace in our beautiful country.
Yes, provided that:

there is a corresponding reduction in number of immigrants from other bongo bongo lands being allowed in
there is no automatic right to benefits for couple of years
only immediate family accompany them
there is no evidence of security threat or criminal activities
The problem with the Afghans claiming intimidation, is that it is very difficult, if not next to impossible to actually prove. They're not stupid, so as the draw down dates come closer, all they do is every few weeks/months claim they've received a phone call or night letter whilst on leave, or that their family is being threatened. Some may be receiving threats and actually be in danger, but I suspect many are fabricating these claims in order to build up their case for asylum.
On the other hand, if we are going to allow people in from certain parts of the world I'd rather they were individuals who a) have previously shown some form of loyalty to the UK and b) have a reason to be grateful and therefore demonstrate continuing loyalty. Makes a lot more sense than the current situation whereby many of those from the smae parts of the world come here but seem hell-bent on destroying us.
Well, Cold_Collation, a part of me wants to agree with you, but the OP clearly stated that their collaboration was not due to loyalty, but rather because they received quite a lot of money. Of course, this also begs the question of how one tests for loyalty. I don't think it's as easy as going through a questionnaire and ticking off boxes. In my opinion, loyalty can't be bought, and I support Old Snowy's assessment that these translators knew about the potential risks, and still agreed to do the work in return for payment. Thus, I am inclined to say no, there is really no reason for them to seek asylum in the UK. I might alter my stance if they also worked as informants.

P.S. How does one define intimidation? I know people who are intimidated by a sharp glance, whilst others may well be able to keep their cool in genuinely dangerous situations. What qualifies as intimidation? A rude gesture, a verbal/written threat (perhaps spoken in anger), a mystery parcel on the doorstep?

Similar threads

Latest Threads