User:Zleitzen/Tourism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cuba's tourism policies of the early 90s, which were driven by the government's pressing need to earn hard currency, had a major impact on the underlying egalitarianism espoused by the Cuban revolution. [1] Two parallel economies and societies quickly emerged, their demarkation line was represented by access to the newly legalised dollar. Those having access to dollars through contact with the lucrative tourist industry suddenly found themselves at a distinct financial advantage over professional, industrial and agricultural workers.[1][2]
Barstaff, hotel receptionists and Taxi drivers became the coveted occupations in urban Cuba, and by 2006, permission to operate a private taxi cab service could cost up to $500 in bribes. Musicians have also found a radical shift in their economic status. El Nuevo Herald reported that the $200 a month one band percussionist receives to perform to tourists in Old Havana is more than 30 times what he would receive from the Cuban government for the same work. [2]
The support base of the Cuban revolution gradually eroded as tourism led to increases in crime and prositution, particuarily the form of sex tourism known in Cuba as jineterismo [3] [4] Internationally, the Cuban government appeared to be turning a blind eye in hopes the dollars jineteras earned would help overcome the Revolution's worst economic crisis. [5]
An even graver phenomenon was the appearance of what has been described as a kind of apartheid in Cuban society : Native Cubans found themselves excluded from many activities that were reserved solely for foreigners - a development that inverted the revolutionary ethic proclaimed by the first government of 1959. Restrictions on access to hotels, resorts, beaches, and restaurants allocated for the benefit of tourists also appeared to flatly contradict Article 43 of the Cuban constitution, which guarantees all Cubans, 'without regard to race, skin color, religious belief, or national origin,' the right to 'lodge themselves in any hotel,' 'be attended in all restaurants and establishments serving the public,' and 'enjoy the same spas, beaches, social clubs, and other centers of sport, recreation, and leisure'.[6] The measures, though not explicately defined by the Cuban penal code, were covered by catch-all laws against the 'harassment of tourists'[7] which were familiar to other Caribbean nations such as neighbouring Jamaica.[8]
In 1992, during the early period of Cuba's tourist boom, Cuban President Fidel Castro defended the newly instituted policies in a speech to the Cuban National Assembly. He described the moves as an economic necessity that would need to be maintained for as long as the country had a need for foreign currency and no other means of acquiring it.
According to Castro, the government were "pondering formulas" that would allow Cubans to use some of the tourist facilities as a reward for outstanding work, but believed that giving Cubans access to amenities at the expense of paying foreign tourists would ultimately be a counterproductive move for the economy; "For every five Cubans staying two or three days in one of those hotels, the country would have one less ton of meat to distribute to the people,". [9]
As the policies became more visible to both Cubans and international observers, the term "tourist apartheid" entered common currency. In addition to evidence of the term being used by Cubans, [10] the phrase has been widely used by non-Cuban sources, including the Encyclopædia Britannica, [11] United States Department of State, [12] the United States Agency for International Development, [13] members of the United States Congress opposed to the Cuban government, [14] political columnists, [15] and others. [16] Human Rights Watch condemned the practice, [17] Paul Hare, British Ambassador to Cuba from 2001 to 2004, viewed "tourist apartheid" as a "particularly distasteful" aspect of Cuban society. [18]
In response to the accusations, Cuban president Fidel Castro described such analysis as a "perfidious, perverse, cynical" campaign to present the current situation as "a case of discrimination". [19] Raul Taladrid, Cuba's deputy minister for economic collaboration in 1992, said that the style afforded tourists was "a bitter pill for some to swallow, especially the young," but tourism was being promoted because "we have a high, fast rate of return on our investment. Our biggest difficulty is getting foreign exchange so we can reach a new economic equilibrium."[19]
Dr. Gillian Gunn, former fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies goes further, stating "The exclusion also flatly contradicts Article 43 of the Cuban constitution, which guarantees all Cubans, 'without regard to race, skin color, religious belief, or national origin,' the right to 'lodge themselves in any hotel,' 'be attended in all restaurants and establishments serving the public,' and 'enjoy the same spas, beaches, social clubs, and other centers of sport, recreation, and leisure'
Contents |
[edit] Allegations of tourist apartheid in Cuba
Allegations that Cuban policies towards its citizens are comparable to those of apartheid era South Africa are captured in the popular terms [20] tourist apartheid, tourism apartheid, and sometimes economic apartheid. [21] Human Rights Watch states "Cuban nationals are routinely barred from enjoying amenities open to foreigners. In a phenomenon popularly known as 'tourist apartheid,' the best hotels, resorts, beaches, and restaurants are off limits to most Cubans, as are certain government health institutions," and contrasts this practise with the Constitution of Cuba, which "bars discrimination based on 'race, skin color, sex, national origin, religious creeds, and any other type [of discrimination] offending human dignity.'" [22] Dr. Gillian Gunn, former fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies goes further, stating "The exclusion also flatly contradicts Article 43 of the Cuban constitution, which guarantees all Cubans, 'without regard to race, skin color, religious belief, or national origin,' the right to 'lodge themselves in any hotel,' 'be attended in all restaurants and establishments serving the public,' and 'enjoy the same spas, beaches, social clubs, and other centers of sport, recreation, and leisure'." [6]
In response, Cuban president Fidel Castro has described Cuba's tourism policies as an economic necessity and such analysis as a "perfidious, perverse, cynical" campaign to present the current situation as "a case of discrimination." [23]
[edit] Origins
This policy was precipitated by the economic crisis known in Cuba as "the Special Period" which began in the early 1990's, and the government's resulting need to earn hard currency to make up for lost economic aid from the Soviet Union. [24] According to Dr. María Dolores Espino, professor of Economics at St. Thomas University, the phrase arose in Cuba itself as a result of the tourism policies of the Cuban government, and its efforts to isolate citizens from the resulting dichotomy of enclaves of capitalism within the larger framework of Cuban communism. "To further isolate international tourism from Cuban society, tourism was to be promoted in enclaves where, as much as possible, tourists would be segregated from Cuban society. The growing dichotomy was not lost on the average Cuban citizen, and the government tourism policy soon began to be referred to as 'tourism apartheid.'" [25]
In 1992, as Cuba entered the period of severe economic austerity, Cuban President Fidel Castro defended the newly instituted policies in a speech to the Cuban National Assembly. He described the moves as an economic necessity that would need to be maintained for as long as the country had a need for foreign currency. According to Castro, the government were "pondering formulas" that would allow Cubans to use some of the tourist facilities as a reward for outstanding work, but believed that giving Cubans access to amenities at the expense of paying foreign tourists would ultimately be a counterproductive move for the economy; "For every five Cubans staying two or three days in one of those hotels, the country would have one less ton of meat to distribute to the people,". [26]
[edit] Broader implications
In addition to evidence of the term being used by Cubans, [27] the phrase has been widely used by non-Cuban sources, including the Encyclopædia Britannica, [28] United States Department of State, [29] the United States Agency for International Development, [30] members of the United States Congress opposed to the Cuban government, [31] political columnists, [32] and others. [33]
[edit] Sociological aspects
Paul Hare, British Ambassador to Cuba from 2001 to 2004, sees tourist apartheid as part of a larger system of "systematic elitism" in Cuban society, which includes special clinics and foreign trips "offered by the communist party and military to its own", though he describes tourist apartheid as "particularly distasteful". [34] Tourist apartheid has been closely linked with jineterismo, the tourist sex industry in Cuba; [35] [36] according to Elisa Facio, the government "appeared to turn a blind eye in hopes the dollars jineteras earned would help overcome the Revolution's worst economic crisis. [5]
Some Cubans appear to have negative feelings about the policy. According to Facio:
Some Cubans feel that this "tourism apartheid" subverted the whole purpose of the revolutionary state, which is to promote equality. Others counter that unlike other countries, tourist income in Cuba does not go into the hands of a few wealthy business tycoons but goes to keep up the health care system, the schools, and the food supply. But many Cubans who understand this argument are nevertheless highly bothered when they see the island's best resources going toward coddling foreigners while their own lives are plagued with serious daily difficulties. Second, with the inception of tourism there has been an increase in crime. [5]
According to Gunn:
There is another social problem in Cuba closely related to the Bryden's "demonstration effect": Cuban citizens' resentment at being excluded from the new joint venture hotels, captured in the term "tourist apartheid." The government is aware that such exclusion undermines one of its main claims to legitimacy - egalitarianism - and reminds Cubans of the time when all but the elite were turned away from certain beaches and clubs... The degree of citizen outrage is evident in the remark of a vigorous Castro supporter, who over a three-year acquaintanceship had never criticized the regime. This autumn he remarked that once while jogging on the beach he had been stopped by a guard for a joint venture hotel, who said only foreigners were permitted on the next section of sand. Furious, he told the guard that Cuban beaches are for Cubans, and kept on jogging. [6]
Others concur:
Cuba's swing to tourism is bringing in vital hard currency, but the accompanying bitterness among Cubans denied access to the lures laid out for foreigners has grown to the point that President Fidel Castro is on the stump in defense. The resentment, coming as Cuba's economic crisis deepens and the standard of living drops sharply, has given rise to a new phrase here to describe the gulf that exists between tourists and Cubans -- "tourism apartheid." [37]
Complaints of a tourist apartheid are not unfounded as Cubans are moved off tourist beaches, refused entrance to tourist hotels, and asked to wait in queues while tourists are ushered to the front – even walking the streets with foreign visitors is likely to get a young Cuban pulled over by the police. The health service itself has become an instrument of tourism, luring foreign patients with some of its specialist treatments, whilst transport services deteriorate for Cubans and improve for tourists. With such large numbers of relatively wealthy tourists travelling in and out of the country, Cubans have become more acutely aware of the restrictions on their freedom of movement and material wealth. Interestingly, these frustrations are not vented at tourists but at the government, though almost always behind closed doors. [38]
They rubbed their chins, a common reference to the bearded Castro, and ran a finger across their throats: They are waiting for Castro to die... The cousin and his friends talked about the places they cannot go, the hotels and beaches, the discos that now require dollars. "It's like South Africa," the cousin's friend said. "It's apartheid," the cousin said. [39]
According to Salon.com, other Cubans view it with resignation:
"Tourism apartheid," as its critics call it, is taking hold... Many Cubans, if not most, don't seem to notice the irony of this situation. Iglesias, for example... only shrugged when I prodded him about his feelings on Cuba's economic policies. Castro's form of tourism, which flies in the face of both socialist and free-market ideals, didn't seem to bother him. Like many other Cubans Diana and I spoke to over the course of two weeks, he simply accepted the policy as inevitable. This is apparently quite common." [24]
Still other Cubans see tourist apartheid as a net benefit: "Though these trips appear to fuel the growing 'tourism apartheid' on the island, some Cubans we encountered say conditions would be worse without them." [39]
Tourism remains a key source of income for the Cuban government, [40] and Colin Crawford, of the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies at Georgia State University, suggests that tourist apartheid might become a permanent regression to the pre-revolutionary state of Cuban society. In his view
to the extent that the Revolution committed itself to equality of access to natural resources, the new tourist apartheid could, if it becomes an entrenched feature of the society, become Cuba’s new normal. With only 44 years of socialist government and, before that, a period nearly ten times as long of colonial domination, it is not hard to imagine that this could occur... The modern, post-revolutionary Republic of Cuba perhaps moved too far from the individual autonomy side of the property ownership continuum to the collective end for its property regime to continue effectively. Paradoxically, the example of its new tourist apartheid suggests, it now risks swinging back to its original, equally unstable position. [41]
Others merely describe the situation as ironic: "That tourism has brought exclusive resorts, segregated hotels and a general playground for foreigners swinging through the island looking for Caribbean romance. Ironically, these are precisely the circumstances the revolution worked 40 years to erase." [39]
[edit] Casa particulares
A "Casa particular" ("private house") is a private residence in Cuba converted to allow paid lodging, usually on a short-term basis, they are akin to the Bed and Breakfast residences elsewhere. Casa particulares are typically operated from a single-family residence and are a very popular choice for tourists. Prices can range between 15 and 30 Euros per night, or less for longer stays, and thus the casas provide a more viable option for young or independent tourists. A stay in a private casa allows tourists more opportunity to mix with local Cubans, and engage in Cuban cultural life. This stands in contrast to accommodation in a state-run hotels, where current regulations mean that foreigners are not permitted to invite Cuban guests to hotel rooms.
