Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Cash payment or a life in Britain for Iraqi interpreters
(The Times) - Hundreds of Iraqis who risked their lives working for the British will be given a choice of a cash payment or the chance to live in Britain, David Miliband said yesterday. In a written ministerial statement, the Foreign Secretary fleshed out details of the assistance announced by Gordon Brown on Monday to help Iraqis who have served as interpreters and in other sensitive jobs since the invasion of Iraq.
The policy U-turn followed a two-month campaign by The Times to highlight the plight of Iraqi interpreters, who have been persecuted by insurgents for “collaborating” with Britain. Although details have not been finalised, the plan will probably cost millions of pounds and aid several hundred Iraqis and their families. The offer falls short of a comprehensive deal for all the estimated 20,000 Iraqis who have worked for the British since the invasion of Iraq in 2003. This summer the Danes airlifted all their former Iraqi employees and their families for resettlement in Denmark.
The main beneficiaries of the British scheme will be existing Iraqi staff who have worked for the Ministry of Defence, the British diplomatic missions in Iraq, the Department for International Development or the British Council for at least 12 months up to August 8, when the review was ordered. They will be offered a one-off cash payment worth between six and twelve months’ salary, depending on length of service.
There are currently 500 Iraqis employed by the British in Iraq, mostly working for the Army in Basra. Of those, 280 have worked for 12 months. Their salaries range from £130 to £600 a month. The top payment would be in the order of £7,000. The money would be used to help an employee and his dependants if he were made redundant or forced to resign under pressure. It is intended to help a family relocate to a safer area of Iraq or elsewhere in the region.
Iraqis will also be offered the option of applying to move to Britain. Ministers have created an entirely new “exceptional leave to remain” category for those still in Iraq wishing to come to the UK. They will be allowed to settle in Britain, though it has not yet been agreed for how long. In reality, once they are in the country they will be allowed to remain for good.
The second route is for those already outside Iraq who meet the criteria of having worked for the Government. They will register with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and apply for the Gateway programme that brings a few hundred refugees into the UK each year. They will have to satisfy the Commissioner that there is little prospect of their being resettled in Iraq and may then join the scheme, which has 300 places in 2008 and a further 300 in 2009. On arrival in the UK they will be granted asylum.
The same choice of cash or resettlement is also open for interpreters, translators and other professionals formerly employed by the British in Iraq. To qualify they need to have been employed for one year after January 1, 2005. Before then, it is considered to have been safe to have worked for the British in southern Iraq. Mr Miliband also made provision to help a “limited number of contracted staff”, who worked in sensitive roles such as advisers. He said: “Locally engaged Iraqi staff working for our Armed Forces and civilian missions in Iraq have made an invaluable contribution.”The offer is weighted deliberately in favour of Iraqis taking the cash rather than choosing to resettle in Britain. To do that a former employee would first have to flee the country, as millions of Iraqis have done to Jordan or Syria. They would then need to register with the UNHCR as refugees, a process that can take months to complete.
The policy U-turn followed a two-month campaign by The Times to highlight the plight of Iraqi interpreters, who have been persecuted by insurgents for “collaborating” with Britain. Although details have not been finalised, the plan will probably cost millions of pounds and aid several hundred Iraqis and their families. The offer falls short of a comprehensive deal for all the estimated 20,000 Iraqis who have worked for the British since the invasion of Iraq in 2003. This summer the Danes airlifted all their former Iraqi employees and their families for resettlement in Denmark.
The main beneficiaries of the British scheme will be existing Iraqi staff who have worked for the Ministry of Defence, the British diplomatic missions in Iraq, the Department for International Development or the British Council for at least 12 months up to August 8, when the review was ordered. They will be offered a one-off cash payment worth between six and twelve months’ salary, depending on length of service.
There are currently 500 Iraqis employed by the British in Iraq, mostly working for the Army in Basra. Of those, 280 have worked for 12 months. Their salaries range from £130 to £600 a month. The top payment would be in the order of £7,000. The money would be used to help an employee and his dependants if he were made redundant or forced to resign under pressure. It is intended to help a family relocate to a safer area of Iraq or elsewhere in the region.
Iraqis will also be offered the option of applying to move to Britain. Ministers have created an entirely new “exceptional leave to remain” category for those still in Iraq wishing to come to the UK. They will be allowed to settle in Britain, though it has not yet been agreed for how long. In reality, once they are in the country they will be allowed to remain for good.
The second route is for those already outside Iraq who meet the criteria of having worked for the Government. They will register with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and apply for the Gateway programme that brings a few hundred refugees into the UK each year. They will have to satisfy the Commissioner that there is little prospect of their being resettled in Iraq and may then join the scheme, which has 300 places in 2008 and a further 300 in 2009. On arrival in the UK they will be granted asylum.
The same choice of cash or resettlement is also open for interpreters, translators and other professionals formerly employed by the British in Iraq. To qualify they need to have been employed for one year after January 1, 2005. Before then, it is considered to have been safe to have worked for the British in southern Iraq. Mr Miliband also made provision to help a “limited number of contracted staff”, who worked in sensitive roles such as advisers. He said: “Locally engaged Iraqi staff working for our Armed Forces and civilian missions in Iraq have made an invaluable contribution.”The offer is weighted deliberately in favour of Iraqis taking the cash rather than choosing to resettle in Britain. To do that a former employee would first have to flee the country, as millions of Iraqis have done to Jordan or Syria. They would then need to register with the UNHCR as refugees, a process that can take months to complete.
Labels: asylum, Britain, Iraqi interpreters
Thursday, September 06, 2007
U.S. troops may be sent to Basra if British troops withdraw
Security
(The Times) - The US military has drawn up contingency plans to send American troops to Basra if Gordon Brown decides to pull out the entire British force, an American general revealed yesterday. Britain still had “several missions” in southern Iraq, which the US expected it to fulfil. But if the Prime Minister withdrew all 5,000 remaining British troops, the US might have to “send some forces down there”, said Lieutenant-General Raymond Odierno, the second-most-senior US commander in Iraq.
That is the last thing the Bush Administration would want to do at a time when it faces growing domestic pressure to bring home troops, and the US military is already overstretched. A British withdrawal would be regarded in Washington as little short of betrayal. General Odierno chose his words carefully when asked about Basra, Iraq’s anarchic second city. He said he was comfortable with the British withdrawal from Basra Palace this week, noting that the Iraqi security forces had become a “bit more effective” and reinforcements would arrive within 30 days.
But questioned about the implications for the US military if British troops were withdrawn entirely from southern Iraq, General Odierno pointedly listed Britain’s continuing responsibilities there - maintaining a headquarters in the region, training Iraqi security forces, supporting the coalition’s political work, securing supply routes to the rest of Iraq and providing quick reaction forces. “There are still several missions we need them to do down there and we have laid it out for them,” he said.
“We believe right now that the British forces will stay there in some size. That’s what we have been told so far.”
But he acknowledged that a general election was looming, and disclosed that the US had drawn up contingency plans in case Mr Brown decided to withdraw the entire force: “One could be that we do allow the Iraqis to do most of it and don’t send anyone else down there. One could be that we send some forces down there.”
Basra has been unusually calm since the British withdrew from the palace on Monday. A British army spokesman said the city was quiet. Police said there had been no killings or kidnappings. Iraqi security forces are on the streets in large numbers, and the Iraqi police and Army, who usually steer clear of each other, are manning joint checkpoints. Residents said that the only gunfire heard in the city yesterday came from Iraqi soldiers celebrating their takeover of the palace.
General Odierno was speaking just days before General David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, gives Congress his verdict on President Bush’s controversial “surge” strategy, which has resulted in 30,000 extra troops deployed to Iraq this year, bringing the total to 160,000. The idea of expanding US operations further in Iraq would encounter fierce resistance in Washington at a time when Democrats, and some Republicans, are demanding a timetable for withdrawing US troops from a conflict that has cost 3,700 soldiers their lives and $10 billion (£5 billion) a week.
That is the last thing the Bush Administration would want to do at a time when it faces growing domestic pressure to bring home troops, and the US military is already overstretched. A British withdrawal would be regarded in Washington as little short of betrayal. General Odierno chose his words carefully when asked about Basra, Iraq’s anarchic second city. He said he was comfortable with the British withdrawal from Basra Palace this week, noting that the Iraqi security forces had become a “bit more effective” and reinforcements would arrive within 30 days.
But questioned about the implications for the US military if British troops were withdrawn entirely from southern Iraq, General Odierno pointedly listed Britain’s continuing responsibilities there - maintaining a headquarters in the region, training Iraqi security forces, supporting the coalition’s political work, securing supply routes to the rest of Iraq and providing quick reaction forces. “There are still several missions we need them to do down there and we have laid it out for them,” he said.
“We believe right now that the British forces will stay there in some size. That’s what we have been told so far.”
But he acknowledged that a general election was looming, and disclosed that the US had drawn up contingency plans in case Mr Brown decided to withdraw the entire force: “One could be that we do allow the Iraqis to do most of it and don’t send anyone else down there. One could be that we send some forces down there.”
Basra has been unusually calm since the British withdrew from the palace on Monday. A British army spokesman said the city was quiet. Police said there had been no killings or kidnappings. Iraqi security forces are on the streets in large numbers, and the Iraqi police and Army, who usually steer clear of each other, are manning joint checkpoints. Residents said that the only gunfire heard in the city yesterday came from Iraqi soldiers celebrating their takeover of the palace.
General Odierno was speaking just days before General David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, gives Congress his verdict on President Bush’s controversial “surge” strategy, which has resulted in 30,000 extra troops deployed to Iraq this year, bringing the total to 160,000. The idea of expanding US operations further in Iraq would encounter fierce resistance in Washington at a time when Democrats, and some Republicans, are demanding a timetable for withdrawing US troops from a conflict that has cost 3,700 soldiers their lives and $10 billion (£5 billion) a week.
COMMENT: The major players in the power struggle in the south are the Mahdi Army militia loyal to anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and the Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq, the country's largest Shiite political party and the patron of the Badr militia. Security forces in the region are known to be dominated by supporters of the Supreme Council, led by Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, whose family has been locked in a long-running competition with al-Sadr's family over leadership of Iraq's Shiites. Al-Sadr's supporters are primarily poor Shiites who gain from the services offered by the group and obtain a sense of empowerment through membership of the Mahdi Army. In contrast, the Supreme Council is perceived as a magnet of middle- and upper-class Shiites and enjoying the endorsement of the wealthy and traditional clerical leadership. Additionally there is the Shiite Fadhela Party, an Iranian presence and tribal rivalries. Not to mention the vast amounts of money made through theft and smuggling of oil and corrupt dealings. COMMENT ENDS.
Labels: Basra, Britain, Lieutenant General Raymond Odierno, U.S. troops
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
British Cypriot company to bid on $3 bn airport to be built in Karbala
Reconstruction, Business
(Al Mada Newspaper) - 7 May - Yesterday, the Karbala Governorate Council Chief, Abd Al Awl Yassiri, stated that the council has received the necessary approval to construct an international airport in Karbala. Al Yassiri added that a British Cypriot company made a bid to carry out the project while a Kuwaiti investor announced his interest in funding this project which will cost three billion dollars.
The British Cypriot company confirmed that the airport will be prepared to bring the world’s largest aircraft in a year after the project begins. The Kuwaiti investor said that there will be eleven different kinds of fees and taxes at the airport. He wants to receive a portion of these fees for his investment. Muhsin Al Kinnani, a Communications and Transportation Committee member and Al Yassiri discussed with steps to be taken to carry out this project with the PM’s Advisor, Ali Al Sadawi. During the meeting, Al Yassiri requested that the central government should partially fund this project because this project will benefit the entire country.
COMMENT: Karbala is a city in Southern Iraq which houses the tomb of the best-loved martyr, Abbas, who died there with Hussain ibn Ali in the Karbala massacre of AD 680. Karbala is the Mecca and Medina, as it were, of Iraq and thousands of Shia pilgrims travel to there every year creating a spin-off large 'tourism' industry. COMMENT ENDS.
Labels: Abd Al Awl Yassiri, airport, Britain, Cyprus, Karbala, Kuwait
