Why do British nationals expect to be evacuated from places like Sudan ?

[QuickGuide]

By the British government?

Those who are there at the request of/working for the British government, of course you'd expect them to be looked after, but people who've gone for their own reasons, tourism or private work, surely the risks of going to an unstable region are considered before you go? People went, presumably, for some sort of personal gain, why is it the government's (taxpayer's) job to reduce them? Why not their employers or their personal insurance, or themselves?

I'm obviously wrong, as it's so accepted that government should, but why?

I was in an evacuation convoy from Uganda in 1985, we were taken to Kenya. It wasn’t free, I had to pay for the bus journey! If you didn’t have the cash on you you had to sign promising to pay the High Commission before you left Kenya.

If we carry the OP's principle to its limits, then people who rock climb and get injured should not be entitled to NHS care. They knew the risks but did it anyway. that's just silly. People who climb Mnt Snowdon aren't up there against FCO advice, and whilst their rescuers do put themselves at risk, they aren't at risk of being murdered or kidnapped when trying to rescue you.

“But with all embassy staff and families evacuated that contract is pretty meaningless isn't it ?”

it’s certainly harder to coordinate

Should firefighters not rescue arsonists, then?

it's a choice they made, knowing the region was unstable.

While Sudan clearly isn’t Canada or Singapore, there were no FCO warnings for a large area of the country around Khartoum until fighting began. I know this because I was planning to go to Sudan as a tourist on a trip organised by a UK company (one that is risk-averse in my experience) and had read up on it.

You have a point re visiting regions that the FCO advises against - and going to them will invalidate many insurance policies - but it isn’t irresponsible to go somewhere showing as green in their travel advice. The whole purpose of that advice is to allow people to make safety assessments.

People caught out as tourists or visiting family did not knowingly put themselves in harm’s way and this is absolutely nothing like visiting known conflict zones for thrills.

@Augend23 I was meaning more post conviction, but thinking about it more, you are right. Unless citizenship is revoked, they should provide help in all circumstances.

This.

The lack of empathy is staggering

As for ‘what on earth is there to see?’, why not Google it and find out?

Lazy assumption that the only possible draw is danger.

No, not really, when it comes to non-permissive evacuations it's all "friendly" countries that are covered, and EU is only one part of that - Commonwealth and NATO and individual bilateral agreements all play a role. PP was correct in saying it's historic links based on former colonial rule, and the numbers who need retrieving vary depending on who that was.

It's an emergency. Conflict. War.

It's not like they can just book on to the next easyJet flight.

It's a matter of life and death.

Frankly surprised this is even being questioned.

Nimbostratus100
Brexit .......
other countries are taking all EU citizens

France has airlifted people from 24 non-EU countries;

France has airlifted 491 people from 36 countries, including 12 EU nations, to Djibouti since Sunday, according to the ministry, Agence France Presse (AFP) reports.

Your right, bit more of a breakdown here from French Diplomatic sources..

https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/country-files/sudan/news/article/sudan-continuing-operations-to-evacuate-nationals-24-april-2023

"The evacuation operations launched in Khartoum are continuing. Two more return flights from Khartoum to Djibouti were provided by the Air and Space Force late on 23 April and then in the morning of 24 April, each with some 100 people on board.

These round trips enabled 388 people to be evacuated, including those French nationals who so wished and a significant number of citizens of other countries, particularly in Europe (Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom) but also Africa (Burundi, Ethiopia, Lesotho, Morocco, Namibia, Niger, Rwanda, Sudan, South Africa and Uganda), [North] America (the United States and Canada) and Asia (India, Japan and the Philippines)."

It's part of the contract of being a citizen.

War has kicked off very suddenly and without warning.

Are you saying someone with Sudanese heritage should never return to their home country ever because there's a remote risk of armed conflict?

OP. You seem to not realise there is now a WAR in Sudan. There will be few, if any, civil flights and regular aircraft won't be flying there. It's either be rescued by your home country or stay and wait to die. I expect you'd be wanting a flight out as well.

The main issue is, many other European countries have rescued their citizens, as have US. Why is it so difficult for us? Why are we yet again hearing of Cobra meetings after the fact.

My father worked in Khartoum for many many years. A job where he was making a real difference to hundreds of citizens. It wasn't charity work, it was paid work. A culmination of 40 years experience and personal growth that enabled him to do some really really good work. He worked all over the world.

Actually was evacuated from Kuwait once!

A really good man, one our country IS proud of.

Ahhhh but f* him. Leave him to die. It's his own fault. Should have stayed home. He should only be helping "us" not "them".

Get a grip. Of course he should be rescued

Because they are British and with nationality comes a sense of belonging and safety? Because that is the point of sovereignty and being part of something?

The main issue is, many other European countries have rescued their citizens, as have US

US special forces also evacuated about 70 American staff from Khartoum on Sunday but Washington has so far said it remains too dangerous to carry out a government co-ordinated mass evacuation of citizens.

https://www.forces.net/africa/ben-wallace-praises-dangerous-and-precarious-military-operation-evacuate-british-diplomats

Who the hell goes to Sudan for a holiday… like all those people escaping persecution and want to claim asylum, then travel home for a holiday( yes it happens)!

@Throwncrumbs really ignorant and naive comments showing that you aren't very well travelled (and no I don't mean Spain and your gap year in Thailand)

If the same happened while you were holidaying in Sharm El Sheik or Cairo (remember the Arab spring uprisings in Egypt not too long ago!) for example, I bet you'd be the FIRST to expect to be evacuated by the British government & wouldn't be making these not-so-clever comments 😩

People suggesting people should jump on a commercial flight.

Gosh it's scary if MN is indicative of average intelligence in the population!!

I'm sure BA is landing there tomorrow 😂

An EU spokesperson on R4 said yesterday that Brexit has made co operation between EU UK harder.

It has to be asked "why hasn't the UK used the facilities in Ethiopia?" have they even asked?

If France can get out its diplomates and 100s of other French citizens out, why hasn't the UK ?
Its highly probable that many of the 2000 UK passport holders there would stay.

This just looks to me like an anti EU UK Govt being very keen not to be seen to be relying on Eu countries for help, the Tories have been very keen to make sure we not involved in anything with an EU tag on it.

Terrifying ignorance on this thread. Although I'm undecided whether it really is ignorance- after all, why would you want to brag about it? - or plain, nasty viciousness just for the fun of it. Whichever, I'm very glad I'm not sharing the authors brain space. Imagine having to live with such unpleasantness in your own head all the time. Awful.

From earlier in the thread:

These <French> round trips enabled 388 people to be evacuated, including those French nationals who so wished and a significant number of citizens of other countries, particularly in Europe (Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom ) but also Africa (Burundi, Ethiopia, Lesotho, Morocco, Namibia, Niger, Rwanda, Sudan, South Africa and Uganda), [North] America (the United States and Canada) and Asia (India, Japan and the Philippines)."

Yes the EU as an institution might find it a little harder to deal with non-members.

But individual countries seem to be managing co-ordination just fine.

@meditrina The UK has taken out not a single British Nation.

Why?