Written by : Annabelle Zehner
Edited by: Penelope Cramer
Often described as “the most alien-looking place on earth,” the relatively peaceful UNESCO World Heritage-listed island of Socotra lies a mere 380 kilometres off the coast of war-torn Yemen and has become a magnet for tourism
While mainland Yemen has been in the throes of civil war since 2014, Socotra attracts a small but steady stream of international tourists drawn to its unique geography and biodiversity, many of whom remain ignorant of the humanitarian crisis to the north. This dichotomy raises a larger question about ethical tourism and the politics of travel.
This division is best elucidated by the concept of passport privilege, which highlights the notable disparity in the number of destinations that holders of Global North passports can travel to without a prior visa, compared with holders of Global South passports. The strength of a given passport depends on that country’s diplomatic and economic relations, which accounts for the advantage of states in the Global North, and contributes to the politicization of movement. Yemenis, for example, can travel to a mere 31 countries visa-free, while citizens of many European countries, as well as Singapore, Japan, and South Korea, have access to upwards of 185 destinations. In this way, colonial legacies are built into the international infrastructure of travel, regulating and controlling movement across borders.
In addition to passport privilege, international visitors to Socotra typically possess high levels of socio-economic privilege, enabling them to travel for leisure. In order to visit Socotra, travellers must go through a tour company, which adds extra expenses on top of standard flight and accommodation costs. As a result, international tourists to the island tend to have significant disposable income. The irony here, as with most modern international tourism, is that travellers spend large sums to experience the conditions of poorer countries.
This dynamic is not inherently problematic, given many tourists’ genuine interest in Socotra’s unique environment. However, what is concerning is the ease with which these tourists can remain comfortable and ignorant, a privilege not afforded to the local people, nor to Yemenis at large. For instance, travellers can choose between hotels, eco-lodges, or camping options based on what they want out of their tour. Regardless of their choice, the structure of organized tours builds in a fundamental level of disconnect between visitors and locals, fostering a colonial mindset of objectification.
This mindset is articulated by Said’s concept of Orientalism, wherein the West imagines and essentializes non-Western cultures and peoples as static and undeveloped. It is this mindset that is particularly worrying when it comes to international travel. It strips autonomy and humanity away from locals of places like Socotra, allowing tourists to ignore the obvious inequality between themselves and these locals. Moreover, Socotra’s geographic separation from mainland Yemen, combined with the fact that most flights arrive from the United Arab Emirates, means that tourists can completely avoid critically engaging with the devastating humanitarian crisis only 380 kilometres away.
The imperative here is not to stop travel to places like Socotra, as travel is the gateway to fostering understanding between groups who might otherwise never interact. Rather, it is to advocate for informed tourism, based on appreciation, learning, and awareness of the systems one is participating in.