Former Defence Secretary Sir Ben Wallace has responded to criticism over the handling of the UK’s withdrawal from Afghanistan and the subsequent data leak involving Afghan allies, insisting that decisions made in the summer of 2021 were taken to protect lives, not cover up mistakes.

In a detailed statement published on 15 July, Wallace defended the government’s application to the courts for an injunction to suppress details of the leak, describing it as a necessary measure to prevent further endangering those at risk from Taliban reprisals. He also challenged allegations that the data incident was part of a wider attempt to conceal failures during the chaotic evacuation from Kabul.

Wallace, who served as Secretary of State for Defence from 2019 to 2023, disclosed that he first became aware of the deteriorating situation while standing beside the US Secretary of Defence at a Pentagon press briefing. A journalist’s question about a “secret annex” to the US-Taliban agreement under President Donald Trump led to the discovery of a previously unseen element of the deal, which Wallace described as markedly favourable to the Taliban.

According to Wallace, the annex mandated the release of over 4,000 Taliban prisoners by the Afghan government while effectively grounding US air and special operations support. He characterised the deal as having cleared the way for the Taliban’s rapid takeover of Kabul without any requirement for compromise. Wallace stated: “It was a rotten deal… Trump now tries to blame Biden, but it was his conditions that allowed such a victory.”

As the situation on the ground deteriorated, Wallace and then-Home Secretary Priti Patel secured the support of the Prime Minister and the National Security Council to accelerate the relocation of eligible Afghans to the UK. General Sir Gwyn Jenkins, Vice Chief of the Defence Staff and an experienced Afghan veteran, was sent to assess the security environment. His findings, Wallace said, contradicted more optimistic assessments provided by the Foreign Office and confirmed the likelihood of imminent collapse.

Wallace stressed that decisions on eligibility for evacuation were governed by operational constraints and moral obligations. The UK prioritised those who had worked directly with British forces in recent years, rather than offering a blanket route to all Afghan National Army personnel. “We did not want members of the Afghan army to just cut and run,” he said, pointing to the substantial international investment in their training.

The volume of applications, many of them duplicates or from individuals without qualifying service, overwhelmed the system. Wallace indicated that he personally signed off hundreds of cases. Some applicants were found to have links to Islamic State or al-Qaeda, or had previously collaborated with the Taliban. Processing these cases, he noted, was based on fragmented records and required direct communication with individuals still in Afghanistan.

It was during this chaotic period that a UK official mistakenly shared sensitive data with individuals in-country. Wallace acknowledged the error, stating it occurred “in trying to do the right thing”. The breach went undetected until a year later, when a disgruntled Afghan individual attempted to use the information for blackmail. Upon learning of the incident, Wallace said his immediate focus was safeguarding the individuals potentially at risk.

“There was no evidence then, or now, that the data reached the Taliban,” he asserted. The government’s priority remained the continued evacuation of those at risk, often via alternative routes including land crossings.

Wallace justified the decision to seek a court injunction to prevent disclosure of the incident at the time. “It was not, as some are childishly trying to claim, a cover-up,” he wrote, arguing that publicising the existence of the data leak during the evacuation phase would have alerted the Taliban to the identities of Afghans seeking to flee.

Ultimately, Wallace reported that more than 18,000 individuals were evacuated under the UK’s Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP), a figure he claimed was higher than that of most allies. The then-Opposition and the Speaker of the House were informed, he added.

The disclosure comes three years after the incident in question. A recent court ruling has brought the matter back into the public eye, prompting renewed debate over the conduct of the withdrawal and the UK’s obligations to its Afghan partners.

Wallace concluded by noting the difficult context in which decisions were made and rejected the suggestion that the response had been politically motivated. “My priority was not the UK government, nor politics—it was the veterans and those we needed to get out.”

Sir Ben Wallace, a former British Army officer, served in ministerial defence roles from 2016 and held the position of Secretary of State for Defence during the UK’s final military withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021.