|
By Dr. Ala Al-Hamarneh
University of Mainz, Germany
a.al-hamarneh@geo.uni-mainz.de
International tourism is an industry that lives on personal contacts and has a message: to enable and facilitate a face-to-face intercultural dialogue. A successful tourism industry needs political stability, peace, security, and the potential for dialogue between different groups of people without mental or physical restrictions. Terrorism against tourists and in tourist destinations aims, among other things, to prevent intercultural contacts and dialogue. It seeks to hinder a possible, better and deeper understanding of the “others”. Terrorism against tourists in general is either a politically or a culturally motivated act.
There are four different messages which terrorist attacks on tourists might want to deliver: First, destabilization of local political systems. The terrorist attacks in Egypt are of this type. They aim to expose the gaps in security in the government’s policy and to challenge it. At the same time, they are hitting one of the most important economic sectors of the country.
Second, they draw attention to the plight of a minority group. The ETA terror in Spain, for example, claims to represent the interests of the Basque ethnic group. Some radical Kurdish groups in Turkey attacked tourist destinations with the declared aim of capturing the world’s attention and highlighting their grievances.
Third, expressing hostility towards the politics practiced in the countries of the terrorists’ origin. The terror attacks in Bali were clearly connected with the post 9/11 situation. Through attacks against Israeli tourists in Mombassa and visitors to a Synagogue in Jerba, the terrorists seemed to express their hostility towards Israel.
Fourth, for financial gain. The kidnapping of European and Australian tourists in Yemen and the Philippines was obviously connected with raising money to finance the parent organizations of the terrorists.
The success of a politically motivated terrorist action can be measured by the long-term effects caused by the attacks and by their media exposure.
Culturally motivated terrorism is not commonplace. Some scholars see the political aims of direct terror attacks on tourists in Arab and Muslim countries as shaped by a cultural “touch.”
In the academic discussions about the terrorist attacks on tourists in Egypt in the 90s, it was suggested by some researchers that cultural elements played an important role. They developed the concept that some radical Islamist activists may feel they need to take drastic action to prevent what they perceive as a threat to their national culture, tradition, and religious beliefs. What is missing in this argument is that the so-called “activists” were and are in radical opposition to the Egyptian government and state policy.
The main aims of such terrorist attacks are; first, to destabilize the central government politically and economically; and, second, to address an international audience. Cultural motivations have been gaining ground again since 9/11. The severity of the attacks, the Muslim backgrounds of the terrorists and the “use” of suicide bombers after 9/11 gave a push to the theories of cultural embedding. Nevertheless, the reduction of ‘culture’ to religion only is a questionable and dubious approach.
The channels of interactive intercultural dialogue are indeed limited, especially where large numbers of people are involved. The most wide-spread channels of dialogue offer either restricted face-to-face interaction, as in the case of information technologies (television, internet), or have restricted accessibility, as in the cases of inter-governmental activities and cultural exchanges. International migration has failed until now to deliver a space of dialogue between the societies and cultures of the new and old countries of residence.
International tourism provides a direct opportunity to visit, discover and get to know the “other” in his/her homeland. Such direct contacts are of great importance if we consider, for example, that millions of Europeans keep visiting Arab countries each year even after the terror attacks in Luxor and Jerba.
It looks as though the terrorists are failing in their ambitions. Despite the direct short-term negative economic and political affects of the terror attacks on tourists, it seems that in the long-term, the radical ideologies connected to terror are rapidly losing popularity. Otherwise how can we explain the direct attacks on Egyptian workers at a bus stop in Sharm el-Sheikh in July 2005. On the one hand, it looks as if the concept of “if you are not with us, you must be against us” is being adopted literally by the terrorists. It suggests that everybody who is involved in the industry of international tourism is against them. This means that terrorism against tourists and tourism is indirectly stimulating discussions on conservatism, liberalism and tolerance in Arab societies.
Most European tourists visiting Arab countries go on package tours. They stay in more or less segregated communities like Sharm el-Sheikh and Hurgada in Egypt, Agadir in Morocco, Port Kantaoui und Jerba in Tunisia and Jumeirah Beach in Dubai, with minimal contact with the local people and indigenous culture.
Unfortunately, after 9/11 the segregation has been increased under the pretext of security. Segregation provides no security as we have noticed in the last three years. On the contrary, alienating foreign tourists through spatial isolation makes them more vulnerable to insecurity and danger, and as a “collateral”. The people working in tourism become alienated as well. Through segregation and manic security measures, a whole industry is alienated.
Intercultural dialogue and direct contacts have the potential to prevent negative and violent developments in the tourism sector. International tourism delivers a model of peaceful coexistence, tolerance and cultural exchange. That is why tourism and tourists are hated so much and attacked by terrorists. | 
.jpg)
.jpg)
