You are here: Home > Campaigns > Burma > Not Black and White

Burma: Not Black and White

The issue of whether or not to take part in a tourism boycott by not visiting Burma is a complex one. Some of the most commonly asked questions are given in the following extract from a briefing by Burma Campaign UK (BCUK), along with explanations as to why it is felt such a boycott is necessary.

To see the full briefing, Boycott Burma Holidays: How Tourism Benefits Burma’s Dictators, visit BCUK’s website at www.burmacampaign.org.uk/action_holiday.html.

Doesn’t the tourism boycott hurt ordinary Burmese people?

A very small percentage of ordinary people in Burma benefit from tourism. No one is suggesting that this group is unimportant. However, it has to be emphasised that only a minority of Burma’s 48 million people are engaged in the tourism industry. Around 75% of Burma’s people make their living from agriculture. Of the remaining 25% only a small percentage ever come into contact with tourists.

The greatest obstacle to prosperity for people in Burma is the regime itself. The more revenue it is able to earn from tourism and foreign investment, the longer it will be able to stay in power. Change will only come if international pressure on the regime is maintained to cut its economic lifeline. The Tourism Boycott is part of a short-term strategy to ensure long-term prosperity, security and freedom for all of the peoples of Burma.

Can’t independent tourists avoid giving money to the regime?

The Observer reported that “according to western diplomats in Rangoon, the military junta and their cronies are benefiting directly from recent tourism developments. A list of owners of the hotel plots at the newest beach resort in the country, Ngwesaung, reads like a Who’s Who of generals and their cronies”.

While there has been a recent increase in the number of privately owned services in Burma, this does not prevent funds from reaching the authorities. Given the levels of corruption and cronyism that exist in Burma, it is impossible to know whether services sold to private individuals haven’t in fact been sold to the regime’s own families and business contacts. There is simply no way to operate in Burma or holiday in the country without providing income to the regime. In August 2002 Burma’s Minister of Hotels and Tourism, Maj-Gen Saw Lwin, admitted that the government receives about 12 percent of the income even of private tourism services.

Isn’t it true that people in Burma don’t want a tourism boycott?

Such claims are often made by those who promote tourism to Burma and have spent their time talking almost exclusively to Burmese people working in the tourism industry. They might get a different answer if they talked to those who have been forced from their homes to make way for tourist developments or forced to build tourist facilities.

In a country that has measured the opinions of its people just once in the last 42 years, during the1990 election, there is little to guide us as to what most ordinary Burmese people really feel about the tourism issue. The call for a tourism boycott comes from Burma’s elected leaders. The National League for Democracy (NLD) remains the only party mandated to represent the Burmese people. It is a party that continues to draw the support and respect of people inside and outside the country.

Doesn’t contact with tourists encourage democracy and prevent abuses in Burma more than isolation?

“Burmese people know their own problems better than anyone else. They know what they want – they want democracy – and many have died for it. To suggest that there’s anything new that tourists can teach the people of Burma about their own situation is not simply patronising – it’s also racist.” Aung San Suu Kyi.

Asking tourists not to take a holiday in Burma is not to call for complete isolation of the country. Economic sanctions and diplomatic engagement must go hand in hand. However, the typical tourist on holiday in Burma is there to visit a beautiful country, look at the historic monuments and temples and enjoy a new and exotic holiday destination. But even for those tourists wishing to see Burma’s problems for themselves, there is little opportunity to discover the realities of life in Burma.

Burmese people are not free to discuss politics with foreigners and can face punishment or imprisonment if caught. The military’s tight control keeps genuine interaction between Burmese and visitors to a minimum. In 2001, for example, the Myanmar Tourism Promotion Board (MTPB) issued an order calling on local officials to protect tourists and prevent potential conflicts by limiting “unnecessary contact” between foreigners and ordinary Burmese. Much of the country remains strictly off-limits to tourists, particularly in border areas where drug production and anti-insurgency activities continue.

Can’t foreign travellers bring valuable information to the people of Burma?

In an interview with the BBC in December 2002, Aung San Suu Kyi said:

“I have to say quite frankly that the people of Burma, in general, do not depend on tourists and foreign visitors to bring them information. If they are really intent on getting information about what is going on in the world and what is going on with regard to Burma, then they listen to foreign radio programmes such as the BBC and the DVB, the Democratic Voice of Burma, Radio Free Asia and so on.”

According to Intermedia, a private firm hired by the BBC and Voice of America (VOA) to survey their impact in Burma, 39 percent of the population listen to the BBC and 30 percent to Voice of America.

Don’t we have a right to holiday where we want and not be told where we can and can’t go?

The Tourism Boycott is like any other ethical consumer issue. We inform people about the call for a boycott from Burma’s democracy movement and the impact of tourism in Burma so that people can make an informed choice about whether to visit or not. The fact is, many tourists have decided to respect the wishes of Burma’s democrats and do not go to Burma on holiday, as have most major tour operators.

What about other countries with repressive governments?

It is a rare country that does not have human rights issues but there are many differences between Burma and other countries. Burma is unique because of the scale of human rights abuses directly connected to tourism, because tourism revenue is helping prolong the life of an illegitimate regime and because the country has a democratically elected government which has specifically asked all tourists to stay away.