UK Rejects Asylum for Over 2,000 Afghan Commandos Who Served Alongside Forces

Dive Right Into

Key Takeaways

Over 2,000 Afghan commandos tied to UK Special Forces had asylum claims rejected despite credible evidence of their service.
Dismissal of claims may relate to ongoing UK Special Forces war crimes inquiries, raising concerns about withholding witness testimonies.
Many rejected applicants face threats in Afghanistan or harsh conditions in neighboring countries, awaiting resolution as of February 2025.

More than 2,000 Afghan commandos who fought alongside UK Special Forces (UKSF) have had their asylum applications denied. This alarming development, confirmed by the Ministry of Defence (MoD), has sparked widespread outrage and raised major concerns about the UK’s treatment of its former allies in Afghanistan.

These Afghan commandos were part of elite units, known as the “Triples,” which were specifically trained, funded, and supported by UK Special Forces to carry out dangerous missions against the Taliban. The units, including CF 333 and ATF 444, operated under British Army control until 2014. These commandos carried out high-risk operations alongside UK forces, often at great personal risk. Yet, despite their integral role, none of their asylum applications have been approved, leaving them vulnerable in Afghanistan or as refugees in neighboring countries.

UK Rejects Asylum for Over 2,000 Afghan Commandos Who Served Alongside Forces

Rejected Asylum Applications

In 2023, the MoD began processing resettlement applications for 2,022 Afghan commandos under a policy designed to support individuals who worked with British forces. This policy, known as the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP), was meant to offer protection to those deemed at risk of retaliation after the Taliban regained control of Afghanistan in 2021.

However, despite submitting credible evidence of their service, all applications from members of these “Triples” units were rejected. Court documents show the UKSF did not support any of these claims, contradicting previous MoD assurances that there was no blanket policy of rejection. The rejections targeted commandos with direct ties to the UK military, transmitting an unsettling message to those who risked their lives for British forces.

In early 2025, the MoD was still reviewing these applications, despite an initial expectation for processing to take only 12 weeks. While there are reports suggesting that some cases have been approved after reevaluation, applicants have yet to be informed officially, leaving thousands in a state of prolonged uncertainty.

Criticism and Allegations

The mass rejection of these asylum applications has drawn sharp criticism from various groups, including members of the UK’s Parliament and former British military officers. Mike Martin, a member of the Defence Select Committee, has described the widespread rejections as “extremely concerning.” Johnny Mercer, a former Conservative MP and British soldier, expressed frustration, observing that there is a wealth of evidence supporting the asylum applications of Afghan commandos. Critics argue that the decisions against these applications contradict the UK’s moral and strategic obligations to its former allies.

Controversially, some believe the rejections may be linked to an ongoing inquiry into alleged war crimes committed by UK Special Forces in Afghanistan. This inquiry, which holds the authority to summon witnesses in the UK but not abroad, has fueled speculation about possible motives behind the asylum denials. Some argue that this could prevent Afghan commandos from testifying about their experiences, potentially shedding light on these allegations.

Mike Martin suggested a troubling connection between the asylum decisions and the inquiry, noting, “There is the appearance that UK Special Forces blocked the Afghan special forces applications because they were witnesses to the alleged UK war crimes currently being investigated.” He has urged the MoD to provide clarity, stating that if no reasonable explanation is offered, this issue should be examined as part of the war crime inquiry itself.

Lives in Limbo

The consequences of these denied asylum applications have been dire. Many of the Afghan commandos who remain in Afghanistan live in constant fear of persecution and violence. Since the Taliban’s return to power, several have reportedly been arrested, tortured, or killed. Speaking to the BBC, one former officer of the Triples expressed feelings of betrayal, stating, “We worked alongside British Special Forces like brothers… If Special Forces made these rejections, they should say why. They should have to answer.”

Others who managed to flee Afghanistan are now stranded in neighboring countries like Pakistan and Iran, where they face uncertain futures in difficult conditions. These individuals are in a legal and personal limbo, waiting for updates from the UK government as they grapple with the fallout from the rejection of their asylum applications.

Broader Implications

The UK government’s handling of these cases has shone a harsh light on the country’s broader asylum policies. The Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy was introduced as a response to the urgent need to help those who supported British operations in Afghanistan. While this program has provided a pathway to safety for thousands, the wholesale rejection of the Triples units stands in stark contrast to its intended purpose.

The international implications of this situation are also significant. The treatment of Afghan commandos will likely influence the willingness of local forces in other conflict zones to collaborate with Western allies. If individuals who risk their lives to support foreign troops find themselves abandoned during a crisis, future military partnerships could become far harder to establish.

On the domestic front, the MoD has been heavily criticized for its lack of transparency and the delays that continue to plague the application process. Legal experts representing Afghan commandos are pushing for the MoD to provide more clarity around how these decisions are being made. Without a clear explanation, critics argue, the UK’s credibility as an ally is being severely undermined.

Calls for Action

As the controversy intensifies, some UK politicians have demanded a thorough review of this situation. They are calling for expedited processes to reconsider the rejected applications, especially for individuals with clear evidence of service alongside British forces. The primary focus for advocates remains ensuring the safety and well-being of these Afghan commandos who risked their lives on behalf of the UK.

For the thousands of affected Afghan commandos, the issue is more than just legal recognition—it is a matter of survival. Their fate now depends on the UK government’s willingness to reconsider its position and address the failures in its handling of these asylum applications. As of February 2025, these individuals face life-threatening dangers in their home country and ongoing anxieties in exile.

Conclusion

The decision to deny asylum to over 2,000 Afghan commandos who served with UK Special Forces highlights the complex realities nations face in the aftermath of military interventions. While the MoD continues to process applications, the delays and mass rejections have sent shockwaves through both domestic politics and international relations. These unresolved cases are a stark reminder of the commitments that come with military alliances and the consequences of failing to honor them.

For more information about asylum policies and procedures, the UK government provides detailed guidance on its official website. You can find additional resources to understand how claims are processed as well as the eligibility criteria for asylum seekers.

As reported by VisaVerge.com, this ongoing issue has put the spotlight on the UK’s moral and legal responsibilities to those who fought alongside British forces. The coming months will be decisive as the government faces growing demands to resolve this crisis and, ultimately, to uphold its principles of fairness and justice.

Learn Today

Asylum Applications → Requests made by individuals seeking protection in another country due to risks in their home country.
Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) → UK government program aimed at resettling Afghan nationals who assisted British forces against the Taliban.
UK Special Forces (UKSF) → Elite military units of the UK responsible for high-risk and specialized operations, often in international conflict zones.
War Crime Inquiry → An official investigation into violations of international laws during armed conflicts, including civilian harm and illegal conduct by military forces.
Legal Limbo → A state of uncertainty where individuals have unresolved legal statuses, affecting their rights and future decisions.

This Article in a Nutshell

Over 2,000 Afghan commandos who fought alongside UK Special Forces face denied asylum applications, sparking outrage and moral questions. Trained by Britain, these elite soldiers risked their lives but now endure danger and abandonment. Critics highlight broken promises, urging the UK to honor its commitments. Their fate hangs in prolonged uncertainty.
— By VisaVerge.com