Cairo, February 2011 – a well-known evacuation provider, which I know works with many companies in Aberdeen, advises a client “we don’t evacuate from Cairo”.
Given that until six weeks ago, Cairo and Egypt in general was a popular tourist destination, and not among the “Baghdads, Port Harcourts, or Mogadishus” of this world, I was a little surprised that this was the case but, I must say, it is not unique.
On more than one occasion, my operational colleagues have had to get the clients of other evacuation providers to the nearest safe airfield, sometimes crossing borders to achieve this.
The Egypt incident, however, demonstrates that such a failure could have impacted on any one of us, whether tourist or businessperson, in one of the world’s major cities or tourist destinations, not a war zone or remote wilderness. It also highlights the importance of understanding the terms, restrictions and limitations of policy wordings.
In times as challenging and volatile as we are currently experiencing from a security and political risk perspective – Libya was blowing up as I wrote this – it is important to be confident that, should the worst happen, you will be covered.
If you, your staff and their dependents need to be evacuated and repatriated, it is important to know that your provider can deliver – and that you can be evacuated from your current location, not a neighbouring state. However, evacuation can be an expensive and stressful exercise but can be countered by prior planning and insurance, the value of which has been proven to many in the MENA region in recent weeks.
This said, like any insurance policy, there can be hidden pitfalls. Indeed, the Cairo incident I refer to demonstrates that small print in any policy can undermine crisis response procedures and may shock some reading this into re-examining their own policy documentation.
As an industry, the international energy sector operates in some of the most challenging working environments. Current events across the Middle East and North Africa have rammed this home on a daily basis. They show that planning in advance for the unforeseen is essential.
In the Cairo incident, the stranded personnel were media professionals from a major broadcasting network suffering serious but not life-threatening injuries. We medivaced them to safety, but at a cost they should not have had to bear. This was the result of their contracted evacuation provider’s inability to respond from their location, and an assumption by their employer that Cairo would, in fact, be covered in their agreement.
Evacuation is just one option for those drafting crisis response plans and procedures. While it is sometimes necessary, such as in the case of a medical emergency, it is not always the best solution. Indeed it is not always possible, and sometimes it is best to stay in a secure location.
If there are riots in the streets, and checkpoints being manned by vigilantes, unaccountable community groups and mercenaries, then it can be safer to lock the doors and stay inside with supplies, rather than run the gauntlet in an attempt to get to an airport or border.
Of course, even maintaining the status quo requires substantial planning, and not just from a security perspective.
Planning for crisis and evacuation should always examine every potential means of exit, whether this is by aircraft, vessel or through a land border by vehicle. All will have risks and benefits as situations evolve, but at the planning stage none can be discounted.
At the time of writing, Libya is providing plenty of examples, with the Turkish authorities sending ferries for their personnel, and, belatedly, the UK Government getting its evacuation act together with various aircraft and a warship. Private companies are working with their contracted providers for evacuation through all means, including the neighbouring land borders. Right now, the situation across the Arab world is fluid and volatile; many companies operational in Libya and elsewhere in the region have been caught short, as essentially low-risk environments turned quickly into more challenging areas of operation.
Teams of my operational colleagues are deployed throughout the region, from Baghdad to Aden and Tripoli, to assist our clients in evacuation and the protection of personnel and assets. My colleagues in our intelligence team continue to monitor security and political risks, working closely with our teams on the ground in the region.
They are also watching for the commercial impact on our clients as regimes change, and lucrative contracts with regional governments and national oil companies may be challenged.
By the time this goes to press, the Libya situation could have worsened. Either way, there will remain the premise of pre-planning for events such as Libya, Egypt, Bahrain and other countries within the energy-rich MENA region. Ongoing violence and demonstrations will test foreigners who must ensure they have adequate crisis response planning.
Those without this planning in place will almost certainly need to organise further evacuations as the situation develops.
Join AKE at the Africa Business Centre on March 25 in Aberdeen for a Lunch and Learn session on Unrest in the Middle East.
Contact: claire.fleming@akegroup.com
Claire Fleming, corporate relations manager (and former senior Middle East intelligence analyst), AKE Ltd