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?

Yes, you get billed for the flights and have to either pay or sign a legally binding agreement to pay.

And also you need organised your own onwards travel/accommodation from the safe point where you are dropped off. So for example in Sierra Leone, the Brits were flying people out to Senegal (and then the plane went straight back to get the next lot on the fastest possible turn-around) and those evacuated had to make their own onwards arrangements, though there were consular staff to assist

Wow, this is an ignorant comment. Sudan is a beautiful country with lots of ancient sites and pyramids. I was considering travelling there as an extension of a trip to Egypt a couple of years ago. At the time most of Sudan was on the FCO green list - I.e., considered fine for holidays. Much of the south and some of the coast was red or orange (I.e., def don’t go or try to avoid going) but Khartoum and the north was considered safe.

Agree @mynameisnotkate. My colleague went to see family as anybody might do when living overseas. Obviously the situation was not like this when they left the UK!

We went about 13 years ago. Dd had been learning about Ancient Egypt in Year 3 and we wanted to take her to the pyramids and the Cairo museum.

We went to Egypt first, caught a ferry to Sudan and then travelled by land to Khartoum and then on to Ethiopia.

We'd hoped to see some of the Sudanese pyramids but unfortunately Ramadan was in the middle of the summer holidays that year and we couldn't get a driver to take us.

That’s what I wanted to do. Sounds magical. I didn’t have time in the end.

It depends doesn’t it? As far as I know trouble has suddenly blown up in Sudan. And yes, that area has a rich heritage, all of it does. Holidaying in West Bank or the Donetsk region right now might be an odd choice, and I think it’s fair to query that.

Of course you’d be desperate for help if you’d gone somewhere on holiday and suddenly found yourself in a war zone.

Is there another thread that discusses the humanitarian crisis in Sudan and the very worrying developments about WHO lab with biological materials (AKA viruses, bacteria) being under siege?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-65390285

That's a frightening development.

Also, at least 24 NHS doctors are stuck there. UK won't repatriate them as they are not British, despite work permits. This is tragic.

As an aside, so much for the government's drive to recruit doctors from overseas, as a political move. That's plenty of people who may well not now get NHS treatment this year.

Disgusting not to repatriate NHS drs but not surprising after the way this government let down people who worked for us in Afghanistan.

Not just doctors though, they should evacuate anyone with residency if theres space on the plane.
I would do it -

1. British people and their young children, whether the children are British or not.
2. British residents and their young children.
3. Any other desperate people who've just been bombed out of their homes and are trying to escape.

Seats on escape planes should not be left empty. The profiting of bus owners makes me so angry as well.

I remember watching the desperate scenes from Kabul and thinking they should even just put people in the hold of the planes if they've got a reasonable chance of survival.

And wheres our 'homes for Sudanese' scheme I'd like to know?

@KeKendodd Good points. Totally agree.

So we ARE evacuating people starting with UK citizens, but the US is not but we are the villains again?

If we start saying no british people abroad should be helped by the uk government, we may as well close most of our embassies abroad.
Some people want to turn us into a third world country

“ in the hold of the planes if they've got a reasonable chance of survival.”

I don’t know which planes were used, but holds typically aren’t suitable for humans.

We might as well give up our status as a leading western nation if we don't evacuate our own citizens. Shall we go for the most underfunded shite education system, healthcare system we can get while we're at it? Of course we should evacuate British citizens and have embassies. For a tiny cold rock that can't support it's own population with food you'd think we'd have a slightly more global view....

Actually I think we did vote to give up our seat at the big table with the grown ups. And as for going for underfunded education and healthcare, there was a big X on the voting card for that as well.

I was thinking about evaluating citizens though. It does seem to hark back to some time gone by when there would be a handful of people who had been doing some work in a country that served the UK in some way. This evaluation seemed to be thousands of duel nationals who were there living with their own families in their own country. I did wonder what we'd do if there was some disaster in a country like Australia where millions of people could have a right to rescue.