Even before the earthquake, HAITI was not a safe travel destination. WIKITRAVEL describes the situation as follows;
While the security situation has improved, political tension remains high and the country is still subject to criminal lawlessness. Looting, intermittent roadblocks set by armed gangs, and violent crime including kidnapping, car-jacking, and assault remain commonplace. With the notable exception of Labadee, travelers to Haiti should remain alert and aware of their surroundings.
Wait a second... with the exception of Labadee? What's Labadee you ask?
Labadee is a private resort leased by Royal Caribbean International (RCI) for use by its Royal Caribbean Cruise Line and Celebrity Cruise linecruise ships. Royal Caribbean International has contributed the largest proportion of tourist revenue to Haiti since 1986. The resort is completely tourist-oriented and safe as there is a personal security force. A controlled group of Haitian merchants are given sole rights to sell their merchandise and establish their businesses in the resort. The site is fenced off from the surrounding area. The cruise ships anchor offshore and passengers are ferried to the resort. Except for some workers and security people, almost no one stays beyond twilight.
And that was during normal, day to day activities... but what about Haiti post earthquake?
The Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines' ship Independence of the Seas went ahead with its scheduled stop at a fenced-in private Haitian beach surrounded by armed guards, leaving its passengers to "cut loose" on the beach, just a few kilometers from one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the region's history. The ship's owners justified it as a humanitarian call, because the ship also delivered 40 palettes of relief supplies while its passengers frolicked on zip-lines and ate barbeque within the 12-foot-high fence's perimeter:
The Florida cruise company leases a picturesque wooded peninsula and its five pristine beaches from the government for passengers to "cut loose" with watersports, barbecues, and shopping for trinkets at a craft market before returning on board before dusk. Safety is guaranteed by armed guards at the gate.
The decision to go ahead with the visit has divided passengers. The ships carry some food aid, and the cruise line has pledged to donate all proceeds from the visit to help stricken Haitians. But many passengers will stay aboard when they dock; one said he was "sickened".
"I just can't see myself sunning on the beach, playing in the water, eating a barbecue, and enjoying a cocktail while [in Port-au-Prince] there are tens of thousands of dead people being piled up on the streets, with the survivors stunned and looking for food and water," one passenger wrote on the Cruise Critic internet forum.
"It was hard enough to sit and eat a picnic lunch at Labadee before the quake, knowing how many Haitians were starving," said another. "I can't imagine having to choke down a burger there now.''
So there you have it... to be fair, the local economy probably could use the money tourists will bring in, and the ship is dropping off humanitarian supplies... but still, right?
Thoughts?
Yeah but without tourist dollars A LOT of developing countries will be way worse off. Like most of the Caribbean for example. I think tourism is ultimately a good thing, as long as local governments resist the temptation of short-term gains over long-term sustainable eco-friendly tourism
Tourism is a double-edged sword as far as visiting developing countries is concerned, in my opinion. Obviously there's a benefit to the economy of these countries, but there's a perverse feeling visiting places that are so poverty-stricken, or in Haiti's case, poverty AND earthquake-stricken.
When I was in Jamaica, I remember these local kids jumping off a high cliff and getting tourists to pay them. This wasn't a safe height they were jumping from either. They were putting themselves at risk, and tourists gave them money to jump anyway. Would any of these people want Jamaican tourists paying their kids to risk their lives?
Like I said, perverse.