Whilst I write this, I sit in a classroom near central Cairo along with a group of 25 mostly Egyptian students. As part of a Model United Nations conference, they are discussing terrorism in Central and Western Africa. They do so not in their native Arabic, but in English – and across the corridor, there is a similar discussion being conducted in French. They have researched the countries they are representating, they are speaking confidently and knowledgeably about the topic, and they show more respect for each other in their debating skills than many of their adult counterparts. Their ages range from 12 to 18.

Many people here are finding the UK’s decision on Sharm el-Sheikh airport a difficult one to follow. They understand the need to protect the UK’s citizens, but are confused by a need to protect their own. Egypt’s economy depends on tourism to a massive extent – from sun seekers in Sharm and Hurghada, to historical voyages to Luxor, Aswan and Cairo itself. The country also has a young population, with an average age of 25, and youth unemployment as high as 1 in 3.

It’s easy, then, to see why the UK’s decision has gone down here as well as a glass of Nile water. But what seems to have been missed – particularly by the insular British media – is the unintended consequences. Already the effects of the mass cancellations forced on the tour operators are showing in hotel prices, with 5* hotels owned by international brands advertising bed & breakfast for as little as £50pppn for this weekend. Inevitably, this means that, if the flight ban is not lifted quickly, the low paid staff in many of these hotels are likely to find themselves out of a job (and potentially out of a home too.)

What will become of these, mostly young, poorly educated workers? Are they likely to find a job quickly, or be able to afford a move to another country where jobs are available? The economic vacuum which this creates – along with the political vacuum which exists in much of Sinai – provides fertile recruiting ground for terrorist organisations in Sinai.

Alistair Carmichael wrote an interesting piece on this site some days ago about the visit of President al-Sisi to London, prior to the announcement of the flight bans. Right now, rightly or wrongly, people here in Egypt aren’t concerned about the points Alistair raised. Instead, they are concerned about security. They want a return to the relative stability that existed for many of the Egyptian population pre-2011. The terrorists – be they Daesh (the Egyptian name for ISIS), Muslim Brotherhood, or other terrorist groups – are not wanted in their country.

In protecting their own people, the UK is indirectly putting at risk the people of another country. We – the UK – have a responsibility to make sure that terrorist groups become less attractive. This may mean temporarily increasing aid to Egypt to go some way to mitigating the lost tourist income; it certainly means working with Egypt (something which is not always easy) to allow flights to start again as quickly as possible to restrict the damage done to Egypt’s economy.

Alistair talked about how the Prime Minister liked to invoke “British values”, although it was something he was uncomfortable with. Since I came here in August, I have been greeted with the kind of welcome which I would argue meets “British values”, although, as an immigrant, the welcoming nature of it probably means the Daily Mail would disagree. But British values certainly mean fair play, and if we are to take an action – justified or not – which directly affects another country, we have a duty to ensure its future, in the shape of the young people sitting in front of me now, does not suffer as a result.

* Keith Legg is a former councillor and activist in Fife, who moved with his family to teach in an international school in Cairo in August. The views above are written in a personal capacity.