Sir, The British Government does not have any legal obligation towards Iraqi interpreters and hired help (reports, August 7 and 9); but it does have a moral one and a pragmatic one.

In Bosnia our interpreters shared our dangers and also bore the opprobrium of those hostile to the UN. Dobrila Kalaba was killed — shot through the head by a sniper. Suzana Hubjar fared better and, thanks to Winston Churchill, MP, was allowed to finish her medical studies here in the UK. She is now a practising British GP. By and large, the British Forces in Bosnia ensured that their interpreters were looked after. A moral imperative worked around bureaucratic objections.

Ten years on, I hope that the Iraqis who helped the British Forces do not become victims of institutional xenophobia and Nimbyism. If they do, British troops are unlikely to enjoy the selfless support of locals the next time that the Government launches them off on a foreign adventure.

MILOS STANKOVIC, Farnham, Surrey

Hundreds of Iraq interpreters rebuffed by UK

Nearly half of applications to settle in Britain have been rejected by the MoD already despite safety fears

BACKGROUND

• Story of brothers who worked for the British

• I’ve no regrets, says interpreter

• What’s Arabic for ‘we’ll stand by you’?

• Abandoned: the 91 Iraqis who risked all

Sir, How depressing it was to read well-intentioned but naive letters in support of the automatic admittance of Iraqi interpreters to this country (August 8). While some of these individuals may be at risk from acts of revenge as and when the troops withdraw, many will long have taken appropriate measures. One can be sure that a blanket admission based on emotive reasoning will result in the opportunity being taken by most to move to this country, together with, I suspect, a large number of “family members” from surprisingly far afield. I very much hope that the authorities involved investigate closely each and every claim for residence, rather than capitulating in the convenient and blinkered fashion we have witnessed before.

DAVID C. BONNER, London W4

Sir, According to UN statistics, the UK has the worst record of any developed country on Iraqi asylum-seekers. Just 12 per cent have been granted asylum since 2003 compared with 50 per cent before the invasion. I teach English to the local immigrant community and it seems the world and his wife are welcomed here and treated with great generosity – as long as they are not Iraqi.

One of my students, whose husband was kidnapped as punishment for working with the coalition in the hope of rebuilding Iraq, has had to flee in fear for herself and her teenage son. Her claim for asylum, made here in the UK, was refused on the ground that “Iraq is now safe”. It was suggested that she return to Iraq and “make a new life for herself”.

The UK and US have squandered hundreds of billions to destroy these people’s lives. Do they not have it in their consciences to give access to a place of safety to the victims?

JEANNE KELLY, Kingston upon Thames

Sir, The British Army has been in Iraq for more than four years. This is long enough to have trained English-speakers in the Army to speak the languages needed for interpretation. During National Service, the Army trained Russian and Chinese-speakers for such activity. In 18 months the recruits became sufficiently proficient to provide effective services. My husband was among the Chinese-speakers. This avoided the risk to which the present indigenous Iraqi translators are so unfairly exposed.

NINA COLLINS, Leeds

Explore Letters

• Feedback