In a message dated 3/3/1999 12:08:30 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Does any of that excuse killing? No, of course not. I just think that
when many of us in the States lobby for preserves, seek to preserve the wild,
there has to be a corresponding concern for those who live among or outside
the wild animals. Yes, of course, the animals deserve protecting, deserve
habitat. It's not an either/or situation. I think it's important to consider
how it can look and feel to those whose narratives (and
lives!) have been surpressed to find that animals--even those whose lives are
endangered, whose numbers are limited--are more valorized (become poster
"children") than the people next to them. >>
Arlene,
Exactly. In one of the articles I read, one of the rebels passed on the
written note of a "war zone". And it seemed exactly an attack geared at
tourists, with the message seeming to be that they didn't want tourism over
their issues. I have talked to one Ugandan woman, in Manhattan for a UN
conference, and her work focus is on the fight of African women against the
impact of economic policies (MAI, debt, world bank). She said that the
murders were horrible, but said she was no more horrified or surprised than
she has been over the past years of violence in the region.
The idea of the untouchable tourist, oblivious to the social situations in a
country - except that it makes for cheap tourism - is a dangerous one and I
urge everyone to get rid of the noble adventurer among the natives image. I
haven't heard anyone wandering around Kosovo to see the birds. What is it that
makes relatively well-educated, well-traveled people go into such dangerous
situations? Tarzan days are over, and the countries are not so directly
subdued by a colonial force as was ideal for safaris. Now that westerners have
died, there will be massive attention and that psuedo-review of Uganda. In the
U.S. this will include maps and historical details that we should have all
gotten in school - and the tragedy will be lifted above the overall tragedy.
Before you travel to spot the big bora bora beetle, review the situation in
that country - read up on recent news reports (make good use of the internet),
don't go into any country and expect whatever the people there are suffering
to not have any impact on you - in many cases tourism supports a corrupt
government and a supressed people. Even in those caribbean locations which
western travelers seem to really believe are happily and fully focus on being
a vacation paradise for them. Other than Disney World and such places, I urge
everyone to not go around the world thinking that you pay your admission and
everyone is at your disposable. (and I won't branch off into a talk about
foreign sex tours and poor women). Too often nations are suffering under the
fully visible hand of being only a tourist playground, but not at all
concerned with the lives of its people. Nations cannot be focused, or even
primarily, run to cater to tourism. Tourism should always be on the side of
national interests, not in the front.
Foreign environmental tourists, and let's just say it directly because really
no one else does this, white environmental tourists need to expand their
thinking on the way they approach such situations. Perhaps in academic
discussion, email list discussions you can dismiss any thought of the people
of a country when you discuss saving "third world" environments, but when you
enter a country you are going to be forced to see them (just as anyone is
forced to considered more than just nature when they enter western countries).
And people are now less likely to be awed by the Great white ones, and more
likely to be angered - especially when you hit such troubled areas.
The Ugandan government will be more than happy to say it was the rebels who
killed the tourists, while the British government says it was that the
tourists got caught in a gunfire between the rebels and ugandan police forces.
The ugandan government wants (1) no blame and (2) the great white west to
swoop down and take care of its rebels.
Note the story in my previous mail about the escaped tourist who talked about
being fairly well treated by her kidnappers? Kidnapping is wrong, but why
would she be surprised that the other tourists were killed if her kidnappers
were so brutal to her? The U.S. has more than one reason to suppress rebels in
Uganda (their own political, economic interests). Will the u.s., and other
countries, use this as a justification to manipulate?
Animals are important, but so are the lives of people - both foreign tourist
and indigenous person. Let's travel with safety, caution and awareness.
Nicole
