The Government has accepted privately that interpreters who face persecution and death for helping British troops in Iraq must be given sanctuary in Britain.

Its change of heart follows two weeks in which The Times has highlighted the plight of the interpreters, and expressions of outrage from military leaders, politicians and diplomats at their abandonment.

“There’s an emerging consensus [across Whitehall] that there’s an issue here that has to be dealt with, and it’s difficult to see how a blanket refusal could be a tenable position,” a senior official disclosed yesterday.

Ministers will not take a formal decision until early autumn “but I would be very surprised if that decision is entirely negative . . . There’s a general acceptance that we need to do something and should do something.”

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

Referring to the Danish and American decisions to grant asylum to their Iraqi employees, the official continued: “Is it a tenable position for the Government to take against the back-drop of what the Americans and Danes are doing to say ‘sorry, we don’t accept there’s an argument here and we’re going to do nothing about it.’? I don’t think so, and I don’t think ministers do either.”

He said that the argument within Whitehall was no longer over the principle of accepting the interpreters, but over “scope and scale” – how many Iraqis to accept – and other practicalities. There are only 91 interpreters, but thousands of other Iraqis have helped the British in various ways and could be targeted as “collaborators”.

The Times revealed two weeks ago that the Government had refused to relax its asylum regulations for the interpreters despite personal appeals from senior army officers in Basra. That prompted Gordon Brown to order an urgent review of a policy that had been the subject of bitter squabbling between the Ministry of Defence, the Home Office and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Since then The Times has reported several cases of interpeters and their families being killed, kidnapped, tortured or threatened by Shia militants, who are said to have a hitlist of those who work, or have worked, for the Brit-ish-led coalition in southern Iraq.

The official called those people “unsung heroes” of Britain’s engagement in Iraq. He said that the military, the Foreign Office and other branches of the Government were totally dependent on them in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan, and spoke of an “emerging recognition” across government departments that these people had to be helped.

“There’s a clear moral and opera-tional argument that we must do all we can to recognise the contribution they have made to British interests, and the risks they run by dint of working for us,” he said. “Nobody is seriously disputing that we do have a serious responsibility to these people.”

The debate within Whitehall now centred on which Iraqis should qualify for sanctuary in Britain, he said.

The interpreters and their families would clearly be included, but there are thousands more Iraqis who have helped to build British bases or worked on them in other capacities and would also be regarded as collaborators. Most would would want to bring their dependants to Britain. The Home Office has claimed that 15,000 Iraqis have worked for the British since 2003 and could claim assistance.

“I don’t think even those who have seen the clear, moral argument would suggest it’s feasible to have 15,000 Iraqis set up on Romney Marsh,” the official said.

The Ministry of Defence is said to be concerned that there would be a “rush for the door” by its Iraqi employees. The Home Office is worried about the impact on its asylum policies. It wants to avoid relaxing the rules in a way that would set a precedent – by allowing the Iraqis to apply for asylum from outside Britain, for example. It does not want to open the door to failed Iraqi asylum-seekers in Britain.

Rafiq Tschannen, the chief of the Iraq mission for the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), also told The Timesin an interview that his agency was ready and able to assist Britain with any resettlement programme. “The UK must do something for the people who work for them,” Mr Tschannen said at his offices in Amman, Jordan. “They should take the responsibility and say that if you have risked your life for me then at least I can try to help you.”

Road to sanctuary

August 7 The Times reveals that 91 interpreters have been told they will be left behind. This contrasts with the position of Denmark

August 8 The Prime Minister promises a review of asylum applications lodged by interpreters

August 9 Emerges that an Iraqi translator who travelled to Britain independently was granted asylum

August 12 An interpreter claims that about 60 colleagues have been killed working for the British

August 15 The Times reports the story of two brothers who work as interpreters, one of whom has been killed. The other is in hiding

August 21 A senior diplomatic official tells The Times that the Government accepts it must give sanctuary to Iraqi interpreters

Times Recommends

• Tehran cannot live up to its rhetoric
• The new unicycle that will ‘change the world’
• We cannot wish away Iran’s bomb