THE head of the Foreign Office should resign after leaving Afghan allies and British soldiers “utterly let down" during the withdrawal from Afghanistan.
A new report, published today by the Foreign Affairs Committee found there to be "deep failures in leadership" during the process, which they argue was ill-prepared and should have started earlier.
The committee has called for the top civil servant in the Foreign Office to consider his position, saying they struggled to obtain the facts about what happened with the operation when he was questioned in an evidence session.
They said there was a “determination to avoid unearthing the facts”.
Then-foreign secretary Dominic Raab and Sir Philip’s failures to return from holiday as Kabul fell in August last year marked a “fundamental lack of seriousness, grip or leadership”, the MPs said.
Leaders at the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) were told to be “ashamed” that civil servants had to risk their careers by blowing the whistle to unearth the “appalling mismanagement of the crisis” as the Taliban swept to power.
The MPs also said they are yet to hear a “plausible alternative explanation” to Prime Minister Boris Johnson approving the controversial evacuation for the Nowzad animal charity.
The committee said the withdrawal was a “disaster” and a “betrayal” of British allies that will damage the UK’s interest for years to come.
Ministers were accused of having a “total absence of a plan” for Afghans who supported the British mission, despite knowing for 18 months that the evacuations may be necessary if the US withdrew its troops.
The hasty efforts to select individuals for airlift was “poorly devised, managed and staffed”, with a lack of clarity causing “confusion and false hope among our Afghan partners who were desperate for rescue”.
“They, and the many civil servants and soldiers working hard on the evacuation, were utterly let down by deep failures of leadership in Government,” the committee said.
The FCDO was accused of giving “intentionally evasive, and often deliberately misleading” responses to the committee’s investigations.
Sir Philip “displayed a worrying lack of knowledge of the department he leads” and a determination to avoid unearthing the facts, the MPs said.
Mr Raab was moved to be Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Secretary after the crisis, but the committee singled out permanent secretary Sir Philip for a failure to record the department’s decisions.
“This would be a serious failure at any time, but during the withdrawal from Afghanistan may have led to the loss of life,” the MPs concluded.
“The committee has lost confidence in the permanent under-secretary, who should consider his position.”
Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat, who chairs the committee, said: “The UK’s part in this tragedy exposes a lack of seriousness in achieving coordination, a lack of clear decision-making, a lack of leadership and a lack of accountability.
“While junior officials demonstrated courage and integrity, chaotic and arbitrary decision-making runs through this inquiry.
“Sadly, it may have cost many people the chance to leave Afghanistan, putting lives in danger.”
Shadow foreign secretary David Lammy said the Government had “badly let down Britain’s reputation”, adding that the individuals responsible “for this calamity should be held accountable”.
“This utterly damning report highlights the scale of the Government’s incompetence, laziness and mishandling that likely cost lives and has badly damaged the UK’s international standing,” the Labour MP said.
“It shows how rotten this government is that after skipping the Afghanistan evacuation to sip cocktails on a beach, the Prime Minister rewarded Dominic Raab with the title of Deputy Prime Minister.”
The Government issued a statement defending staff working “tirelessly” to evacuate more than 15,000 people from Afghanistan in a fortnight.
“This was the biggest UK mission of its kind in generations and followed months of intensive planning and collaboration between UK government departments,” a spokesman said.
“We carried out a thorough review to learn lessons from our withdrawal from Afghanistan and have drawn on many of the findings in our response to the conflict in Ukraine, including introducing new systems for managing correspondence and increasing senior oversight of our operational and diplomatic response.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel