You are on your own

[reohn2]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brit ... -99gscp5kt

[pwa]

Even the USA cannot exert all that much leverage on malign states such as Iran, who jail people for political reasons. Are we meant to dig out some Nineteenth Century gunboats to go and give them a jolly good thrashing? Or are we meant to be nice to these states and hope they respond to our nice friendly tones? That doesn't seem to have much effect on the murderous Saudis. There is a limit to what we can do when foreign regimes behave that way, and usually it is very little. The fact is, and has long been, if you go to a state with a dodgy government and they lock you up for no good reason, there is not much the UK government can do to help you. That is just a fact. We don't do the gunboat thing these days.

[simonineaston]

So this is what we do with sovereignty, once we've decided that it's so important to us...

[pwa]

So this is what we do with sovereignty, once we've decided that it's so important to us...

Sovereignty counts for nothing beyond your own borders. On someone else's patch, they call the shots.

[reohn2]

So this is what we do with sovereignty, once we've decided that it's so important to us...

Sovereignty counts for nothing beyond your own borders. On someone else's patch, they call the shots.

Diplomacy can help even in despotic countries.
It's all very well to write off innocent people so long as it's no one in your own family or anyone you know.As for the government's response,IMO it's abandonment of it's citizens is almost as despotic as the countries those people are held in.

[Jdsk]

So this is what we do with sovereignty, once we've decided that it's so important to us...

Sovereignty counts for nothing beyond your own borders. On someone else's patch, they call the shots.

Diplomacy can help even in despotic countries.

Yes, it can. And it's generally more effective when countries work together.

Jonathan

[pete75]

So this is what we do with sovereignty, once we've decided that it's so important to us...

Sovereignty counts for nothing beyond your own borders. On someone else's patch, they call the shots.

The French take a different view on such matters. I can remember a few years ago a couple of thousand French and Belgian civilians were being held hostage in Zaire and some were being killed. Around 800 Foreign Legion paratroops were dropped into the area. They rescued over 2,000 hostages, killed 4 or 500 hundred of the troops holding them and lost less than 10 of their own men. If the same thing happened again I doubt the French would wash their hands of it and say, as the Foreign Office has, the people held have no right to the government’s assistance or protection.

France also takes better care of it's citizens in other ways. A French citizen cannot be extradited for trial in another country.

[Ben@Forest]

The French take a different view on such matters. I can remember a few years ago a couple of thousand French and Belgian civilians were being held hostage in Zaire and some were being killed. Around 800 Foreign Legion paratroops were dropped into the area. They rescued over 2,000 hostages, killed 4 or 500 hundred of the troops holding them and lost less than 10 of their own men. If the same thing happened again I doubt the French would wash their hands of it and say, as the Foreign Office has, the people held have no right to the government’s assistance or protection.

France also takes better care of it's citizens in other ways. A French citizen cannot be extradited for trial in another country.

The French government also repeatedly pay terrorist organisations or 'quasi-governments' for the release of its citizens, which not only increases terrorist coffers but increases hostage taking. Comparatively the USA forbids the paying of any ransoms to terrorist organisations whether by government or private individuals. The British government also does not pay ransoms.

This is taken from a (much longer) 2014 Guardian article, but nothing has changed and the French should not be held as a model of dealing with terrorism.

But the New York Times suggested that France had in fact paid a total of €43m (£34m) in ransoms since 2008 through French companies and other firms. The German magazine Focus claimed the French government paid $18m (£10.8m) for the release of four journalists abducted in Syria. Focus cited Nato sources to report that the French defence minister had sent the money to Turkey, where it had been handed over to the kidnappers by Turkish secret service agents.

[Syd]

So this is what we do with sovereignty, once we've decided that it's so important to us...

Sovereignty counts for nothing beyond your own borders. On someone else's patch, they call the shots.

The French take a different view on such matters. I can remember a few years ago a couple of thousand French and Belgian civilians were being held hostage in Zaire and some were being killed. Around 800 Foreign Legion paratroops were dropped into the area. They rescued over 2,000 hostages, killed 4 or 500 hundred of the troops holding them and lost less than 10 of their own men. If the same thing happened again I doubt the French would wash their hands of it and say, as the Foreign Office has, the people held have no right to the government’s assistance or protection.

France also takes better care of it's citizens in other ways. A French citizen cannot be extradited for trial in another country.

The Zaire incident was in very different circumstances. The hostages were taken by invading rebels into Zaire and not by the Zaire government or its forces.

[pete75]

The French take a different view on such matters. I can remember a few years ago a couple of thousand French and Belgian civilians were being held hostage in Zaire and some were being killed. Around 800 Foreign Legion paratroops were dropped into the area. They rescued over 2,000 hostages, killed 4 or 500 hundred of the troops holding them and lost less than 10 of their own men. If the same thing happened again I doubt the French would wash their hands of it and say, as the Foreign Office has, the people held have no right to the government’s assistance or protection.

France also takes better care of it's citizens in other ways. A French citizen cannot be extradited for trial in another country.

The French government also repeatedly pay terrorist organisations or 'quasi-governments' for the release of its citizens, which not only increases terrorist coffers but increases hostage taking. Comparatively the USA forbids the paying of any ransoms to terrorist organisations whether by government or private individuals. The British government also does not pay ransoms.

This is taken from a (much longer) 2014 Guardian article, but nothing has changed and the French should not be held as a model of dealing with terrorism.

But the New York Times suggested that France had in fact paid a total of €43m (£34m) in ransoms since 2008 through French companies and other firms. The German magazine Focus claimed the French government paid $18m (£10.8m) for the release of four journalists abducted in Syria. Focus cited Nato sources to report that the French defence minister had sent the money to Turkey, where it had been handed over to the kidnappers by Turkish secret service agents.

"Suggested", "Claimed" - come back back when you have some hard eveidence.

The USA government and USA individuals pay ransoms. It also exchanges people with terrorist organisations to release their members held in the USA.

https://warontherocks.com/2019/02/no-co ... l%20groups.

[Psamathe]

Even the USA cannot exert all that much leverage on malign states such as Iran, who jail people for political reasons. Are we meant to dig out some Nineteenth Century gunboats to go and give them a jolly good thrashing? Or are we meant to be nice to these states and hope they respond to our nice friendly tones? That doesn't seem to have much effect on the murderous Saudis. There is a limit to what we can do when foreign regimes behave that way, and usually it is very little. The fact is, and has long been, if you go to a state with a dodgy government and they lock you up for no good reason, there is not much the UK government can do to help you. That is just a fact. We don't do the gunboat thing these days.

I wonder (i.e. don't know) how much of that lack of influence is due to failure to engage and work with over other issues. US (certainly under Trump) as taken a particularly negative attitude to Iran so Iran is never going to do anything interpreted as cooperative with US.

I'd think there needs to me more than a "commercial" trade cooperative relationship where one country is making loads of money selling stuff to another country e.g. UK selling arms to Saudi Arabia (and look how much influence we have over e.g. their military activities).

As others have said, work with a country in a positive manner and have an ongoing relationship and you can have far more influence. Which brings us back to Brexit.

Ian

[Psamathe]

I don't know the details and history of the current Foreign Office failures to help UK citizens so not commenting on them but the level of support the Foreign Office provides must be down to the specifics of the circumstances. When much younger and I once really wanted to visit somewhere in a country the UK had no diplomatic relations with (and has intermitted military fights with). Day before crossing into the country I phoned the UK Consulate (in the country I was crossing from) saying "just to let you know I'm going so if I don't return you'll know ..." to which they said "Don't go. If you don't come back we wont do anything" (I went anyway). Had I experienced problems whilst there it would be reasonable for Foreign Office to decline to provide assistance. But I suspect the circumstances of those currently being let down by the Foreign Office are very different.

Ian

[pete75]

Sovereignty counts for nothing beyond your own borders. On someone else's patch, they call the shots.

The French take a different view on such matters. I can remember a few years ago a couple of thousand French and Belgian civilians were being held hostage in Zaire and some were being killed. Around 800 Foreign Legion paratroops were dropped into the area. They rescued over 2,000 hostages, killed 4 or 500 hundred of the troops holding them and lost less than 10 of their own men. If the same thing happened again I doubt the French would wash their hands of it and say, as the Foreign Office has, the people held have no right to the government’s assistance or protection.

France also takes better care of it's citizens in other ways. A French citizen cannot be extradited for trial in another country.

The Zaire incident was in very different circumstances. The hostages were taken by invading rebels into Zaire and not by the Zaire government or its forces.

Irrelevant. Our government's "You're on your own" attitude means they wouldn't take action in the same circumstances.

[Syd]

The French take a different view on such matters. I can remember a few years ago a couple of thousand French and Belgian civilians were being held hostage in Zaire and some were being killed. Around 800 Foreign Legion paratroops were dropped into the area. They rescued over 2,000 hostages, killed 4 or 500 hundred of the troops holding them and lost less than 10 of their own men. If the same thing happened again I doubt the French would wash their hands of it and say, as the Foreign Office has, the people held have no right to the government’s assistance or protection.

France also takes better care of it's citizens in other ways. A French citizen cannot be extradited for trial in another country.

The Zaire incident was in very different circumstances. The hostages were taken by invading rebels into Zaire and not by the Zaire government or its forces.

Irrelevant. Our government's "You're on your own" attitude means they wouldn't take action in the same circumstances.

Evidence please.

[Ben@Forest]

The French government also repeatedly pay terrorist organisations or 'quasi-governments' for the release of its citizens, which not only increases terrorist coffers but increases hostage taking. Comparatively the USA forbids the paying of any ransoms to terrorist organisations whether by government or private individuals. The British government also does not pay ransoms.

This is taken from a (much longer) 2014 Guardian article, but nothing has changed and the French should not be held as a model of dealing with terrorism.

But the New York Times suggested that France had in fact paid a total of €43m (£34m) in ransoms since 2008 through French companies and other firms. The German magazine Focus claimed the French government paid $18m (£10.8m) for the release of four journalists abducted in Syria. Focus cited Nato sources to report that the French defence minister had sent the money to Turkey, where it had been handed over to the kidnappers by Turkish secret service agents.

"Suggested", "Claimed" - come back back when you have some hard eveidence.

The USA government and USA individuals pay ransoms. It also exchanges people with terrorist organisations to release their members held in the USA.

https://warontherocks.com/2019/02/no-co ... l%20groups.

Interesting article but I'm not sure why your quoted researched journalism is the truth and my quoted researched journalism is not. I am prepared to believe the veracity of both as it happens. In your article it states that:

Thus, the U.S. government’s “no concessions” policy means only this: We will not give our money to a foreign terrorist organization to bring a civilian home. - which is not the complete prohibition of negotiation or even prisoner swaps but there is a policy.

and

Simon reports that the French pay, but often through intermediaries. And he suggests that this has had a Barbary-like effect on future risk: “According to data provided by the French Foreign Ministry, the number of French nationals abducted overseas quintupled from 11 to 59 a year between 2004 and 2008.”

So it's a murky world. Perhaps we should recognise the French are happy just to see it all as business.