Tourism has seeped in to almost all but the most far-flung and remote cultures of the world.  As London Student Travel Editor I celebrate the fact that it is relatively easy to visit each and every country my itchy feet should take me.  Yet I’ve often wondered if there is ever a time when the conscience should rail-in the wanderlust; is acceptable to visit a country whose government is rife with human rights abuses or corruption?

In spite of lengthy cautions found under the travel advice section of the British and Foreign Office website, Burma is not ‘officially’ off-limits to British tourists.  The most recent figures record that 3,700 British nationals visited the country in 2007.  When asked if visiting Burma was condoning the regime, London Student travel writer Zoë Tipler said, “I don’t think so.”  She added, “To boycott a country and punish its people who have incredible strength and courage in the face of such enormous adversity is not the way to solve a problem.”

Although Lonely Planet (whose majority share-holder is BBC Worldwide) produces a guidebook for Burma, the guide makes a point of not listing any government run transport companies or hotels.  For some however, this does not go far enough and in February 2008 Tourism Concern along with The Burma Campaign UK and the New Internationalist led a campaign to boycott Lonely Planet unless it withdrew its Burma title.   Tricia Barnett, director of Tourism Concern said, “Given the appalling human rights situation in Burma, we don’t believe it is possible for any company, including BBC Worldwide, to adopt a neutral position on the issue of travel to the county.”  She continued, “The BBC should stop sitting on the fence and send a clear message of condemnation to the regime by withdrawing the Burma edition of its book.”

The Burma Campaign UK, an NGO fighting for human rights, democracy and development in Burma enlisted over seventy high profile celebrities and politicians to put their name to the campaign to boycott Burma.  Actress Anna Friel made the statement, “The best role in the world wouldn’t get me to Burma” whilst famous faces such a Sir Ian McKellen, playwright Tom Stoppard and Green Party Leader Caroline Lucas joined the campaign.

But if we choose to boycott Burma and listen to our ethics rather than follow our itchy-feet, at what point do we draw the line?  In August 2008 the Foreign Office lifted its ban on travel to Zimbabwe but should the intrepid traveller feel totally comfortable visiting a country still in the grips of Mugabe‘s dictatorship?  And what of the human rights abuse reported in backpacker’s favourites such as Sri Lanka, China and beyond.  Can the line be drawn there or would some travellers feel they ought even to boycott US states that practice capital punishment or should we give Italy a miss in protest at Berlusconi’s seemingly undemocratic grip on the countries media?

On the other hand some have argued that visiting a country oppressed by its government can not only bring respite to its people, but such travellers can highlight the state of the regime, helping to campaign against the abuses they have witnessed once they return home.  Amnesty International does not actively dissuade travel to Burma or any other country.  Niall Couper said, “Amnesty International will never tell people to not travel to Burma or anywhere. However, if you do want to go to Burma you should try and keep an open mind. There are numerous human rights issues there and a large number of restrictions placed on the Burmese people. Repression is wide spread. Human rights defenders there put their lives at risk every day by challenging the ruling military junta.”  Couper warns travellers, “If you do go be sensible. If anyone does talk about the persecution in Burma they are doing so at a great risk to themselves.”

Tags: Burma

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 24th, 2009 at 18:48 and is filed under Travel. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.