Can Americans travel safe with so many enemies worldwide?

American citizens once again were provided with the list of dangerous travel destinations. These areas are not forbidden, of course, but trips there are associated with a degree of risk that makes them impractical. The new "dangerous" list compiled by the US Department of State includes the Middle East, Africa and even some Western European countries.

Any country with a worsening internal situation and military conflicts always gets on the list of the countries not recommended for the Americans. For example, what would the Americans do in Somalia other than be captured by pirates? Hence, a recommendation was issued to bypass the black spot by 200 nautical miles. Somali was placed on the list of dangerous countries for the Americans a few years ago, when the pirates in the Gulf of Aden become more active.

The list of areas where Americans are not recommended to travel is updated by the Department of State annually. The list includes one hundred percent of the countries dangerous not only for the U.S. citizens but all foreigners in general, as well as local residents. These are zone of conflict and areas of activity of terrorist or criminal groups. There is no point in looking for other motives, especially political ones. The Department of State, as well as any ministry of foreign affairs, prefers to prevent problems rather than deal with the consequences, and, therefore, warns citizens to the maximum. For the Russians this approach is difficult to understand. First, because Russians in general are unlikely to travel to a place with an ongoing war, or get under the bullets of militants. Foreign tourism in Russia still predominantly works through travel agencies that sell packaged tours that can be adjusted without any lists on the website of the MFA.

In addition, in the United States people rely on the Internet more heavily than in Russia. It became the main source of information and the level of its credibility is higher than that of the media. Naturally, the U.S. officials are using this tool so as to not trouble themselves with the organizational preventive measures. Memos for tourists are written in a very simple language.

For example, the instructions for those who intend to travel to Kazakhstan mention types of fraud one may encounter as a tourist. There is also information about bad roads in certain areas and natural disasters. Positive information is also provided. Kazakhstan, for example, is said to have a better situation with goods and services than the neighboring countries, and Kazakh traffic cops are said to take bribes less frequently.

The Russian Foreign Ministry could not afford to deal with such nuances as the bulk of the population has retained a healthy instinct for survival and has sufficient autonomy to collect information on the point of destination. The Russian Foreign Ministry usually limits the information it provides with bare necessities - contacts for communication in emergencies, checklists for action in emergencies, and advice to travelers in distress.

The Russian Foreign Ministry regularly issues warnings to tourists traveling to one or another country where the situation suddenly became dangerous for foreign tourists. Recently, a statement was issued of the unfavorable situation in Egypt, and tourists were advised not to leave resort areas to avoid problems. Russia's Consumer Protection Society also guards the rights of tourists as consumers of services. Russia's chief sanitary doctor Gennady Onishchenko very meticulously monitors the epidemiological situation in different parts of the world to warn of dangerous travel areas. In addition, the agency entrusted to him helps tourists whose operator suddenly went bankrupt, or in some other way left its customers.

Americans carefully study the information on the country where they are going to travel. Perhaps, they visit the website of the Department of State as well. They pay special attention to safety, a skill that should be learned by the Russian citizens. In the U.S., for example, the "word of mouth" is not considered a trustworthy source of information. The Russians, on the contrary, are used to relying on it when addressing many fundamental issues. However, it is not that difficult to visit the sites of relevant organizations and write down important addresses and phone numbers. Yet, the majority of the Russians still rely on chance. There are other expert lists of dangerous countries in addition to the list of the U.S. Department of State. For example, consultancy Maplecroft annually produces its own version of the list. In 2011 the top ten most unfavorable countries in ters of travel included Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Congo, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Haiti, Mexico, Colombia, and Palestine. In August a new rating will be issued - possibly with modifications.

While the Russians should be paying more attention to their own safety, they should not completely follow the example of the Americans in this respect as the latter are excessively sensitive to certain things. This approach did not appear out of nowhere: the U.S. government is consistently pursuing a policy of intimidation of its citizens to make it easier to manage them. No other country has that many enemies, dangers, pitfalls, and global conspiracies. At the same time persistent care of the Americans seems truly paternal and may confuse anyone. It seems that Americans can travel only according to instructions written by the Department of State, and any kind of initiative is dangerous. The danger, however, is often exaggerated.

If an American gets into trouble abroad, every tool and opportunity will be used for their rescue. As a result, the operation to rescue a U.S. citizen turns into a global show, gets on the front pages of all newspapers, and if there is a need, it becomes an excuse for certain claims against Washington's "at fault" country.

Sergei Vasilenkov

Pravda.Ru 

Read the original in Russian