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 think its more that the UK wishes to make it harder to co op with the EU & is determined to go its own way with its own plans.

I've no idea - just like I have no idea why when Sierra Leone was evacuated the UK did nigh on all of it for any/all foreign nationals.

My guess is that there are still plans in the offing. If so, it would not be prudent to talk about them, because they don't want to make the evacuees an obvious set of targets (remember they will have to get to muster points, and those will not be particularly safe) and will want to avoid British forces needing to open fire.

People like the OP and those who agree with him/her is exactly why the country is as it is. The complete lack of humanity - these are the same people who rather than think the government have a duty to its public, think it's every person for themselves. The OP and those who share this line of thought probably think people who use foodbanks should go look for food in bins or accept being hungry. This 'I'm alright Jack' mentality is why the country will forever remain stagnant without progress because any meaningful progress would face opposition as a result it might make life a bit easier for someone somewhere. The OP would have campaigned against rail travel owing to the fact that if people couldn't walk to their destination they didn't deserve to have an efficient mode of transport.

This government doesn’t give a flying fick about the people who live in this country so it’s hardly going to break a sweat to help those abroad 🙄

No the US has not. It gave advice for days/ weeks to leave on their own, but once evacuated started it was diplomatic staff and family only. Anyone who had not left were told to shelter in place and not try to reach the embassy.

"Why are they our responsibility?"

Because they hold a British passport. Are you really lobbying for citizenship to be meaningless? It's a weak position.

Let us never confuse ignorance with racism.

Noone would have questioned helping British citizens back from Ukraine etc.

@Labraradabrador I stand corrected, on US, in that case.

Totally get all your arguments but every other country is evacuating citizens like Italy, Greece and Ireland who have all been considered not as developed as us. It's not a good look internationally.

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

They would.
There doesn't seem to be a lack of communication here;
Over the weekend, the Prime Minister spoke to his counterparts, including Egyptian President Sisi and the President of Djibouti. The Foreign Secretary was in contact with the Kenyan President, the US Secretary of State and Foreign Ministers of France, Germany, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, Sweden, Turkey, Cyprus and the EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy. The Defence Secretary engaged with counterparts in Djibouti, the US, France and Egypt.
I have spoken to the African Union and the Prime Minister in exile of Sudan, upon whom so many hopes rested.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/minister-mitchells-statement-to-the-house-of-commons-on-sudan-24-april-2023

Why they haven't evacuated is a safety, better to stay covered, and b diplomacy, they are trying to show Sudan they have faith they are close to a ceasefire.

The Foreign Office's moto is "We did advise you not to do that".... but in Latin.

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

We have spoken to neighbouring Djibouti (mentioned above). Although Djibouti is a former French colony (from 1883 to 1967 the area was known as French Somaliland and from 1967 to 1977 as the French Territory of the Afars and the Issas). France obviously has some influence in the area - and 'favours' to call in;

Le Monde February 2023
Ethiopia's prime minister wants Paris to invest...
Abiy Ahmed came to Paris to seek support to finance the reconstruction of infrastructure in northern Ethiopia.

After a long embrace on the steps of the Elysée Palace, Ahmed thanked on Twitter, his "friend" Emmanuel Macron and said that "We very much welcome investments by French companies in Ethiopia."

In Paris, Ahmed also wanted to make progress on another burning issue, that of Ethiopian debt. Suffocating from a lack of foreign currency...Support from Paris would be welcome as France co-chairs, with China, the committee of Ethiopia's creditors.

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/le-monde-africa/article/2023/02/08/ethiopia-s-prime-minister-wants-paris-to-invest_6014945_124.html

When I worked at a solicitors we had clients who were injured in Sudan. They were there working for the British Museum. If they were there now without their injuries id fully expect them to be assisted out by their British employer. Using the government would make more sense because of the resource pooling.

Boomboom22
Totally get all your arguments but every other country is evacuating citizens like Italy, Greece and Ireland who have all been considered not as developed as us.

Barry Andrews (Fianna Fáil) Irish MEP
It would be more accurate to say that they were evacuated ‘by’ France and Spain rather than ‘with the assistance of’ France and Spain.

We continue to rely on the kindness of others as we have no capacity of our own.

Because by right of their British nationality they are protected by the Crown - HM government.

Can't be that friggin hard to comprehend?

Howpo
"why hasn't the UK used the facilities in Ethiopia?"

In fact, the 'facilities' you refer to are in Djibouti - where France has an overseas military base;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_forces_in_Djibouti

Macron called the Ethiopian prime minister for air clearance;
President Emmanuel Macron called his Ethiopian counterpart to request permission for the flights to use Ethiopian air space on their way to Djibouti.

If you have family in Sudan and you work in the UK then you likely have few options except to travel there to see them. Cost, visas, space here to host all mitigate against them coming here. And you also most probably want to go there because it's Home. That should not be difficult to understand unless you've had a total empathy bypass.

No I don't think he was on the Scottish news but will check!

News item now saying British Ambassador to Sudan was on his holidays when crisis started and he cannot get back there so he is staying at home in Wimbledon - but working very hard anyway!

Having had a close family member live and work in tricky areas of Africa for years I can confirm the British High Commission, you don't normally get an Embassy, are the square root of fucking useless. Couldn't even renew a passport?! Is that not there actual job??? Luckily my family member had contacts with the local Irish Embassy who were absolutely amazing. Thank you so much! We would have been frantic otherwise.

My heart goes out to anyone reading this with a family member in Khartoum, it could so easily be me. My thoughts are with you

Because they are British taxpayers and the responsibility of our government.

Stupidity doesn't mean you're stripped of your rights.

goodness me what a lot of embassies and high commissions the UK has scattered across the world https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diplomatic_missions_of_the_United_Kingdom

" providing representation for Britain overseas and is run by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office. It handles political, social and cultural relationships between Britain and its host country, but more importantly, from a traveller’s point of view - it could provide help in a crisis"

Are they really needed ? How much are they costing the taxpayer ?

I’d simply second previous comments, including my own, based on experience that they provide very little support for British passport holders overseas.

They seem very much in place simply for diplomatic and business contact purposes.

Well, the news this morning is that a British evacuation mission has begun.

It's normal not to announce them beforehand, as personnel are going in to a non-permissive environment and no-one in their right mind would give information that would make it possible for potentially hostile factions to target the mission for attack.

Ethiopia is receiving evacuees, but only via land convoy, which is riskier (as the convoy could be targeted at any point). Air evacuations require the airfield to be secured, but the land moves (from muster point to airport) are much shorter, and possibly achievable by the evacuees themselves so no convoy required. Looks as if that's the case, given press footage of the crowds at the airport

This. I would be all for people getting out under their own steam if they could. And as PP have said up above, maybe even paying for their journeys out, but saying that because they went there, they have to stay there and probably die is chilling.