Select committee: Defence Committee
Conclusion 2
Fifth Report - Withdrawal from Afghanistan
Published 10 Feb 2023
Paragraph 25
Addressed to Ministry of Defence
Defence Committee Withdrawal from Afghanistan All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
Although the Defence Secretary assured us that he had attempted to find a way to retain a military presence in Afghanistan without the US, we recognise how difficult this would have been in practice. This shows the limits of NATO’s military capability without US involvement.
From: Defence Committee, Fifth Report - Withdrawal from Afghanistan (HC 725), paragraph 25, 10 February 2023
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 28 April 2023 (deadline 10 April 2023).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government's response gives a mixed position: it agrees on the importance of reviewing operations and that the fall of Kabul harmed regional security, but assesses that a further wide-ranging review of the Afghanistan campaign has limited value.
- On the Doha Agreement and the fall of the Afghan Government, the MOD "agrees that the fall of Kabul has had an adverse impact on regional security", adding that this was not an outcome it wished for.
- On the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP), the government notes the Committee's reflections and offers observations, including that the policy was amended to support those who had fled to third countries. It says it is "committed to finding and relocating" the estimated fewer than 620 eligible Afghans remaining inside Afghanistan, and their family members.
- On veterans' mental health, it recognises that the withdrawal had a negative impact on some veterans. It says it "remains open to further engagement and collaboration across the charity sector" and that NHS England will launch a single integrated Op COURAGE service from April 2023.
- On a review of the UK's involvement, it agrees it is "vitally important" to conduct honest, timely and accurate reviews of operations, but assesses that the value of a further wide-ranging review of the whole campaign "is limited".