Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rcit20
Download by: [202.28.118.241] Date: 27 September 2015, At: 21:59
Current Issues in Tourism
ISSN: 1368-3500 (Print) 1747-7603 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rcit20
The Politics of Tourism in Myanmar
Joan C. Henderson
To cite this article: Joan C. Henderson (2003) The Politics of Tourism in Myanmar, Current
Issues in Tourism, 6:2, 97-118, DOI: 10.1080/13683500308667947
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500308667947
Published online: 29 Mar 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 742
View related articles
Citing articles: 11 View citing articles
The Politics of Tourism in Myanmar
Joan C. Henderson
Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
The relationship between politics and tourism is complex and multi-faceted, and a
subject which is assuming a higher priority in the researchliterature.This articleexamines
the politics of tourisminMyanmar where tourismhas been shapedby internaland
external political forces while also becoming a highly visible and contested political
issue.The political background and its effect onMyanmar’s tourismare explained and
the standpoints of the principal groups involved are discussed, with particular attentiongiven
tothat of the government and its policies. Referenceis alsomade to demands
for a boycott and the ensuing debate about its value. The various parties are seen to
interpret and make use of tourism as a political tool in contrasting ways which reflect
theirown interestsand agendas. Finally, some general conclusions are presentedabout
the linkages connecting the central concepts under reviewand the need to consider tourism
within the framework of prevailing national and international political systems in
order to fully appreciate its significance.
Keywords
Myanmar, politics, tourism
Introduction
This article explores aspects of the inter-connectedness of politics and tourism,
based on the case of Myanmarwhere tourism acquired a heightened political
significance in the closing decades of the 20th century. Myanmar is a
particularly appropriate laboratory in which to study the politicisation of tourism
because of the nature of the regime and the range in forms of political appropriation
of its tourism, discussion of which affords wider insights into the
dynamics of the linkages between the two concepts under review in theory and
practice. A reassessment of the politics of tourism in Myanmar is also timely
given signs of a shift in the political landscapeand news of talks between the military
rulers and opposition which have implications for its future prospects as a
destination.
The aim is to illuminate the political processes underpinning and central to
tourism, showing how political ideologies and events affect tourist arrivals and
the tourism industry and how tourismmay function as an instrument of reform.
After an opening summary of the literature pertaining to the relationship
between politics and tourism, an account is provided of conditions in Myanmar
generally and in terms of its tourismin order to set the scene. The positions of the
various parties involved are then assessedwith emphasis on themilitary regime
and its policies which demonstrate the appeal of tourismto those holding political
power, even formerly xenophobic military dictatorships.Myanmar’s junta is
shown to have chosen to develop tourismin pursuit of a political agenda incorporating
economic and hegemonic goals, a decision strongly challenged by
adversaries at home and overseas. These have invested tourism with different
1368-3500/03/02 0097-22 $20/0 © 2003 J.C. Henderson
Current Issues in Tourism Vol. 6, No 2, 2003
97
The Politics of Tourism in Myanmar Downloaded by [] at 21:59 27 September 2015
political meanings and purposes, some seeking to secure their own aims of
democratisation by calling for a tourism ban. Such demands have been resisted
by certain sections of the travel industry and more friendly nations which
contend that tourism is amechanismfor positive change. The article ends with a
discussion of the effectiveness of the attempted boycott.
The task of researching conditions in Myanmar is hindered by the unreliability
of official statistics, especially relating to economic matters (The Economist
Intelligence Unit (EIU), 2002a) and tourist arrivals (Bailey, 1998). International
agencies have produced a series of reports which contain empirical data,
although there is some variation with regard to controversial topics such as
numbers affected by forced labour and relocation. Parts of the country are also
still out of bounds for the visitor, notably near disputed border areas. The study
is derived fromanalysis of the informationavailable, including that produced by
the regime inMyanmar itself, and observationsmade during a visit to the country.
While acknowledging the limitations of the material, it does allow a picture
to be presented of the politics of tourism in Myanmar and makes it possible to
draw somewider conclusions about the manner in which tourismcan be politicised
both inside and outside institutions of government. Overall, the findings
illustrate the ways in which politics impacts on tourism and how tourism itself
can become a critical political issue with global dimensions. Tourism is, therefore,
best understoodwithin a framework of politics and international relations,
although practitionersmay choose to ignore or distort political realities in accordance
with their own commercial priorities.
Tourism and Politics
Tourism is, without doubt, a highly political phenomenon which extends
beyond the sphere of formal government structures and processes if politics is
conceived as being essentially about power relations, and it is thus an underlying
and indirect theme in much tourism research. Although Brown (1998) agrees
with earlier criticisms about neglect of the topicwithin both tourismand political
science disciplines (Matthews, 1975;Richter, 1983), there has been an increasing
number of studies devoted specifically to it (Hall, 1994) and Cheong andMiller
(2000) argue that the politics of tourismis now a distinct academic subfield. One
principal strand is public policy and planning (Elliott, 1997;Murphy, 1985;Reed,
1997) and Jenkins (2001) describes a growing interest in this question since his
earlier introductory text (Hall & Jenkins, 1995). Political economy and development
is a secondmajor topic (Britton, 1982;de Kadt, 1979; Jenkins &Henry, 1982;
Lea, 1988) and ThirdWorld tourism has generated a substantial volume ofwork
which has evolved in line with development theories (Broham, 1996).
Another critical area of exploration, of heightened relevance since the events
of 11 September 2001 in the USA, is that of political instability and its consequences
for tourism (Pizam & Mansfield, 1996; Richter, 1992, 1999; Richter &
Waugh, 1986; Seddighi et al., 2000; Sonmez, 1998); examination of the American
terrorist attacks is already underway (WTO, 2002). Related to this discussion is
the debate about tourism’s contribution to world peace and improved international
understanding (Brown, 1989; D’Amore, 1994; Litvin, 1998). However,
despite the expanding literature, the interaction between politics and tourismin
98 Current Issues in Tourism
Downloaded by [] at 21:59 27 September 2015
its multiple forms still appears under-researched in comparison to other dimensions
with scope for further scrutiny in pursuit of a better understanding.
Research completed to date reveals that contrasts in political ideologies,
cultures and practices help to determine the prominence given to tourism in
planning, resource allocationand decision-making. Most governments,whether
in the West or East, support tourism primarily because of its economic rewards
(Go & Jenkins, 1997; Williams & Shaw, 1998) and countries which once avoided
contactwith the outside world have embraced the industry; for these, the promise
of financial returns is seen to offset the risks of exposure to potentially subversive
influences (Sofield & Li, 1998). Tourism has become an accepted, albeit
contested, economic development tool that also allows governments to demonstrate
their legitimacy and authority (Hall & Page, 2000;Richter, 1994). It may be
employed in nation-building, tourist representations helping to define national
and cultural identities and to meet other sociocultural objectives (Carter, 1996;
Peleggi, 1996).Many political uses are made of tourism, some ofwhichmight be
more accurately termed abuse when it is harnessed to hegemonic imperatives.
Tourismis thus exposed to and shaped by political forces and its dependence
on security and stability has been well documented. Actual conditions and
perceptions of these inform travel decisions made by consumers, as well as the
industry and investors, who generally look for settled locations where there is
little threat to personal safety andminimal commercial risk (EIU, 1994)These are
not necessarily found in liberal democracies and authoritariangovernments can
‘provide extremely stable political environments inwhich tourism may flourish’
(Hall & Oehlers, 2000: 79), although this is less likely in violent totalitarianstates
(Hall & Ringer, 2000). Tourism’s capacity to stimulate political change in these
extreme circumstances is unproven and there is little evidence of it acting as a
peacemaker in general, although peace must usually exist for it to prosper.
South East Asia affords many interesting illustrations of the connections
between politics and tourism (Richter, 1989), the latter often ‘elite driven…chosen
by the powerful for political and economic advantage on both personal and
regime levels’ (Richter, 1993: 193) with vigorous promotion. Success has been
mixed, however, and the Indochinese countries have been relatively slow to
develop partly because of