ÂÜÀòÊÓƵ

The reverberations of the Western forces’ withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 keep on being felt in many nations, years after Taliban turned the page on 20 years of failed attempts by the US, UK, NATO and others to democratize the country.

The recently exposed leak of data about thousands of Afghans who had worked with British forces presents several unanswered questions, as well as billions of pounds in costs. Then there is the vetting process that remains less than comprehensive, to say the least, and open to abuse, especially as the Taliban have repeatedly claimed that they have not pursued or targeted those who cooperated with the pro-Western regime in Kabul or its many Western allies.

So, is it possible that the Afghans have been overexaggerating the level of threat to their safety for other reasons? Or has the West again been a victim of its oversensitivity to the protection of human rights, freedom of expression and women and other minorities from potential abuse by regimes such as the Taliban?

In less than a month’s time, on Aug. 15, it will be four years since Kabul fell back into the hands of the Taliban. The US-led Western troops’ pullout, negotiated by the first Trump administration and executed by the Biden administration, ended up being one of the most chaotic and humiliating withdrawals since American troops pulled out of Vietnam. Whatever the reasons behind the speedy collapse of the pro-Western government in Kabul, it showed once more that the Western efforts to supplant democracy and nation-building were flawed from the beginning.

The story for the UK of repatriating Afghans who had worked with its forces began then and continued under different Conservative governments. But the 2022 data leak did not come to public attention until a high court judge this month lifted a gagging order that was put in place in 2023, when the breach first came to light.

In brief, the story goes back to February 2022, when the personal data related to nearly 19,000 Afghans who had applied to be repatriated to the UK after the Taliban seized power was leaked. The Conservative government under Rishi Sunak first learned of the breach in August 2023, when some of the details appeared on Facebook. A special resettlement scheme was set up at speed and more than 4,500 Afghans have since arrived in the UK.

But the existence of the leak and subsequent relocations were kept secret after the government obtained a superinjunction banning their disclosure. This was because the data contained the names, contact details and family information of people who had cooperated with the UK and could potentially be at risk of reprisals from the Taliban.

The secret scheme, known as the Afghan Response Route, has already cost the UK £400 million ($541 million). And it is expected to cost a similar amount again, if not more, if the UK is to honor its pledge that 600 more Afghan soldiers and 1,800 of their relatives who are still in Afghanistan will be moved to Britain.

More dangerously, the leak also revealed the details of more than 100 British officials, including members of the special forces and the intelligence services.

The data leak was a catastrophe and it exposed vulnerable Afghans, adding to the risk they faced. The government’s decision to try to protect them was right. But it is also fair to question how those risks were assessed and whether the secrecy and lack of public scrutiny improved the situation for those involved.

The Taliban’s swift takeover of the country surprised the Western powers for sure, but it did not come as a total surprise for a majority of Afghans. Throughout their country’s history, they have been capable of sensing the winds of change and maneuvering themselves to lean as necessary. Amid the hasty evacuation of tens of thousands of Afghans who had worked for the Western powers, not all of them were necessarily in imminent danger, but many also saw an opportunity to live outside Afghanistan.

The existence of the leak was kept secret after the government obtained a superinjunction banning its disclosure.

Mohamed Chebaro

The question that has remained unanswered since 2021 is whether there was a genuine case for repatriation or if it was pure opportunism and freeloading. And though human rights groups routinely speak of threats to some people who dwelled in the public sphere, from security to education and women’s rights, the dangers faced by those asking for asylum and evacuation remain unclear.

Afghanistan is no different to any other nation that has frequently suffered internal strife and wars between its various ethnic and religious constituents. The rush to leave the country as the Western troops withdrew was a natural reflex for humans fearing the worst or sensing an opportune moment to change their lives.

As a reporter who covered various parts of the Afghan story, it was possible to notice a trait of Afghans holding the stick from the middle and never burning their bridges with any clan that could be a foe.

If anything, the UK data leak highlighted how a poorly-thought-out intervention and poorly executed state-building project, followed by a poorly orchestrated withdrawal, caused damage to the West’s standing and reputation. Such poor efforts at the craft of state-building were especially likely to fail in a uniquely tribal and linguistically and ethnically diverse country such as Afghanistan.

• Mohamed Chebaro is a British-Lebanese journalist with more than 25 years’ experience covering war, terrorism, defense, current affairs and diplomacy.