Why is it left to America to help our Afghan war hero?

Editorial: Although the pilot, forced to travel to the UK via irregular means, first made his application for asylum under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy, it is the Americans who are seemingly most likely to grant his obvious case for asylum

The few simple but touching words from President Biden’s press secretary, Karina Jean-Pierre, at the latest White House press briefing, represent the best hope of justice for the airman (AFP/Getty)

“We take care of folks who helped us.” These few simple but touching words from President Biden’s press secretary, Karina Jean-Pierre, at the latest White House press briefing, represent the best hope of justice for one brave Afghan pilot currently living in Britain as a refugee – under threat of deportation to Rwanda.

Answering a query from The Independent’s correspondent Andrew Feinberg about Afghan refugees trapped in limbo in third countries, Ms Jean-Pierre confirmed that the commitment of the United States to its Afghan allies “continues to stand”: “To make sure that we take care of the folks who helped us during the longest war in this country that we have, we have seen that we have supported – and the work continues.”

In dark days for this Afghan refugee, whose cause The Independent has championed, her words gave proof that for America at least, a sense of obligation and of debts unpaid remains strong. There are now, hopefully, only practical obstacles barring the way to resettlement and a new life for this war hero – and, in due course, his family, who remain in hiding in Afghanistan.

It makes for a shameful contrast to the attitude of the British authorities. Although the pilot, forced to travel to the UK via irregular means, first made his application for asylum under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap), it is the Americans who are seemingly most likely to grant his obvious case for asylum.

He fought with the Afghan air force, but alongside British, American and other allied forces during the long, pitiless conflict against the Taliban. He went on missions planned and designed by British and US commanders. He wasn’t wearing an RAF uniform, but he took the same risks and fought the same battles as those who did, and he would have suffered the exact same fate if he’d been shot down or captured.

The Taliban certainly cared to make little distinction between nationalities on the battlefield or in the skies. The difference between the Afghan and a British or American pilot was purely a matter of badges and regalia.

Unfortunately, the United States seems to understand that overriding truth much better than the British authorities. The US has offered to consider his case after his in-country US supervisor made a personal recommendation and described him as a “true patriot to his nation”.

Ms Jean-Pierre’s statement, therefore, marks a moment of optimism – but also one which should trouble the conscience. The British are being shamed in this process, simply because they cannot find a way to cut through the bureaucracy and do the right thing. Or, at least, that is the more generous spin that can be applied to months of inaction.

The veteran is, for example, still waiting for a reply to the open letter he sent to the prime minister at the end of March in which he pleaded: “I trusted the British forces and was proud to work together as we protected each other from our common enemy. I hope you will now reflect on that mutual commitment as you read this letter.”

Some of the most senior figures in the British military have signed up to support the veteran as a matter of honour and natural justice. Even they cannot seem to penetrate the Home Office’s defences.

The government could and should have found a way to accommodate the Afghan veteran in the Arap. If that set a precedent for other Afghan service personnel, then so much the better, for they all deserve to be rescued from near-certain execution.

And so this veteran remains destined for a one-way flight to Rwanda, or else, if that “sentence” runs out of time, to be considered for asylum and leave to remain under the usual protracted procedures.

Be that as it may, the veteran should be able to secure a new life for himself, his wife and their child one way or another in the free world, and at the moment it is America that seems the more promising prospect.

America, not Britain, will lift the threat of his deportation to central Africa, an arrangement that is as ridiculous as it is inhumane. Thus he and his kin may soon have a happy ending to their ordeal.

The more unhappy conclusion to be drawn from this affair is that the British are not very good at taking care of folks who helped us.