The International Institute for Peace Through Tourism has chosen 6 outstanding people from the world of travel and tourism to honour as the “Global Ambassadors of Peace Through Tourism” at the World Travel Market, London including Fiona Jeffery OBE, founder, and chairman of Just A Drop.

The event will be held on Monday 06 November at Platinum Suites 3 & 4 from 2.45 to 4.00 pm. and is open to all registered delegates at WTM.

The theme is “Tourism – A Catalyst for Peace” and Dr. Taleb Rifai, Secretary General UNWTO, is the Chief Guest and Keynote speaker. The event will be hosted by Anita Mendiratta, Founder & President CACHET Consulting.

Supported by “Incredible India” and the UNWTO, the Awards are sponsored by Cox & Kings. The “Ambassadors of Peace” awards are being held for the first time at WTM London by IIPT and seek to build on the success of the “Celebrating Her” awards for Empowered Women in Tourism that IIPT India has been conducting at ITB Berlin since 2016.

Fiona Jeffery OBE says, “I’m genuinely honoured to be considered a Global Ambassador of Peace through Tourism, but I think it simply reflects the power of tourism and the paths we walk and how each of us can make a contribution to our industry that perhaps creates a lasting impact and if nothing else hopefully influences how we progress as an industry in the future. The International Institute of Peace for Tourism has trodden a challenging path for the last 30 years and has created meaningful legacies all over the world. I’m delighted to be considered worthy of such an honor.”

Speaking on the rationale of the Awards, Ajay Prakash, Founder President of IIPT India says, “Each one of our Ambassadors for Peace 2017 is an exceptional person who have had an illustrious career in tourism and each one of them embodies the founding principles of IIPT. Tourism and Peace are inextricably linked; such a large industry has the power to shape the world and it is time to focus this power and harness the collective financial, political and moral resources of the travel & tourism industry to make it count. But for this to happen, the concept of tourism as a vehicle for peace has to be integrated into the very core business philosophy of every stakeholder – tourism companies, host destinations, tourists and all service providers. And because tourism is such a people-centric activity it’s important to recognise and felicitate people who have devoted their energies to champion sustainable tourism practices that go beyond the commercial interest and embrace the higher paradigm of tourism – to nurture and save the planet and its people, tapping into the collective resources and social reach of the travel and tourism industry.”

Founded in 1986 by Louis D’Amore, IIPT is built on two very simple but powerful premises: That tourism, perhaps the biggest industry in the world, can become the first global Peace Industry and that every tourist is potentially an Ambassador of Peace. Through global summits, conferences, the global Peace Parks initiative, consultations with governments and the UNWTO and a regular monthly newsletter, IIPT has worked conscientiously over the last 30 to make peace an integral part of the tourism ecosphere.

The IIPT Global Ambassadors of Peace Through Tourism 2017 are:

HRH Princess Dana Firas of Jordan – Chairperson of the Petra National Trust & UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador
Fiona Jeffery – Founder, Just a Drop Foundation
Anita Mendiratta – Managing Director CACHET Consulting, Tourism author & thought leader
Costas Christ – CEO, Beyond Green Travel and Senior Advisor for Sustainable Tourism, National Geographic
Geoffrey Lipman – Director Green Growth & Travelism Institute & Co-Founder SunX Foundation
David Scowsill – CEO EON Reality & Immed. Past President & CEO, WTTC

In addition, IIPT will confer the Lifetime Award on Dr.Taleb Rifai, Secretary General UNWTO as a “Global Man of PeaceThrough Tourism.”

Louis D’Amore, Founder President of IIPT adds, “IIPT is privileged and grateful to pay tribute to Dr.TalebRifai for his global leadership these past eight years. We have been most honored to have Dr.Rifai grace the stage at IIPT World Travel Market events as our featured keynote speaker over the past several years and to have his unwavering support for IIPT initiatives in our mission to make the travel and tourism industry the world’s first global peace industry. We look forward to a continuing relationship with him in the years ahead as we join hands in efforts to promote the transformative role of tourism in ‘making the world a better place.’”

As the UN Year of Sustainable Development through Tourism draws to a close, there is a growing realisation that the work is far from complete. The geopolitical world situation is very alarming in many parts; the threat of imminent climate change is a real and present danger and the burgeoning tourist numbers could pose a serious ecological threat, especially in eco sensitive zones, if not managed correctly. At the same time, the peace accord between the FARC rebels and the Colombian government – after 50 years of civil strife, the increased access to clean water and sanitation for many poor communities and the commitment to the Paris Accord on climate change by all signatories – barring one – are positive developments and reason for hope.

Commenting on the awards, Peter Kerkar Group CEO of Cox & Kings, says “Cox & Kings is extremely proud to be sponsoring the ‘Global Ambassadors of Peace Through Tourism’ Awards and honouring those individuals who have devoted time and energy to promoting goodwill through travel. It is vital that we encourage peaceful cultural exchange and recognise those who have used tourism to facilitate philanthropic activities. These ideals are no better represented than by the IIPT and our ‘Global Man of Peace,’ Dr. Taleb Rifai, Secretary General of the UNWTO.”

IIPT plans to make the “Ambassadors of Peace Through Tourism” awards an annual feature at WTM London.

The Honorable Dr. Walter Mzembi, Minister of Foreign Affairs ZImbabwe provided Worldtourismwire a copy of this Q&A first published in the Zimbabwe Daily News. Minister Mzembi was a candidate for UNWTO Secretary General and served 10 years as the minister of tourism and hospitality for Zimbabwe.

Two weeks ago Mr. Mzembi was appointed Foreign Minister of Zimbabwe.

Question 1.

Congratulations Minister of Foreign Affairs – We are humbled that you agreed to this interview.

I granted you this interview on the back of my strong belief that there is space for independent reporting in this country to the extent that it is humane, truthful and accurate, fair and impartial.

Your story of the 24^th of October 2017, in all fairness, was a breach of these cardinal principles and bordered on malice. However, I must complement you for your sense of self-accountability in granting me this interview which I hope will inform the public correctly.

Question 2.

Are you bitter about the bad press that has given you a bumpy landing in the Foreign Ministry?

Bad press sells. However, there is always the flip side which is the positive in the degree of awareness and free publicity that it brings around issues and personalities. The wiser seize the opportunity to turn that adversity into an opportunity, hence the saying “when given lemons make lemonade”. I have lived this principle in the Tourism Ministry and the results are what you publicly acknowledge as a successful stint.

“When people throw you stones, it’s because you are a good tree full of fruits. They see a lot of harvest in you. Don’t go to their level by throwing them back the stones, but throw them your fruits so the seeds of yourself may inspire them to change their ways.”

On the perceived bumpy landing, quite to the contrary, the landing has been a soft one because my deployment in Tourism has been the forerunner and an extension of foreign relations and diplomacy. My only remaining task is to convert my Tourism legacy into statecraft.

Question 3.

Are you coming up with a new Foreign Policy Whitepaper?

Our Foreign Policy is already in place and the prerogative of the President. He set the parameters of the country’s Foreign Policy way back in 1980 when he enunciated our policy of national reconciliation urging us to “turn swords into ploughshares”.

My favourite Prophet Isaiah, in Chapter 2 verse 4, himself the philosophical source of this prophetic statement by the President says “The Lord will mediate between nations and settle international disputes. They will hammer their swords into ploughshares and their spears into hooks. Nation will no longer fight against nation or train for war any more” This is the basis of contemporary diplomacy.

It is therefore not my duty to invent the wheel, so to speak, but rather to ensure that the wheel can tackle effectively all the different terrain that it must of necessity travel. Consequently therefore, it is incumbent upon my ministry to ensure that Zimbabwe’s Foreign Policy is implemented effectively in the given atmosphere and in realising our national interests.

As is the case in other countries, Zimbabwe’s Foreign Policy seeks to advance the country’s domestic policy objectives on the international stage. To that extent, our Foreign Policy is an extension of our domestic policy.

The tenets of our national interests are self-preservation, the protection and enhancement of the country’s image, the prosperity and welfare of our people, preservation of peace and national cohesion, and peaceful good neighbourliness.

My mandate is therefore to advance the country’s Foreign Policy that has been enunciated by the President, and agreed to in Government. There is no “Mzembi Foreign Policy”. The difference is only in style of delivery.

 

Question 4.

You have been a front-line diplomat for Zimbabwe as Tourism and Hospitality Industry Minister for almost 10 years. Can you outline your foreign policy priorities? What will be the key pillars of your diplomacy?

Overall our Foreign Policy will be both dynamic and responsive to the ever changing world. Our thrust would be the opening of new frontiers of diplomatic relations, nursing and nurturing old friendships, rapprochement and robust re-engagement and economic diplomacy. We envisage cultivating support of our diasporans in investment and remittances.

Public diplomacy will take centre stage in particular the need to signpost “zero tolerance to violence” as we approach the 2018 elections. Hate speech now constitutes the major component of violence of citizens against each other, and should be outlawed.

We are looking forward to dialogue with those countries that have disengaged from us, re-forge beneficial relations anew. We also want to reposition the country in order to make it more attractive to foreign investors.

My vision is to see Zimbabwe emerging from the current estrangement both in terms of Government to Government contact and broader economic relations further afield. The key pillars of my tenancy will thus essentially be strengthening relations with old friends, establishing news frontiers of cooperation, re-engagement and rebranding the country to be an attractive investment destination. We must become a better place to invest in than is currently the case.

Achieving these milestones will not be without headwinds.

 

Question 5.

There is a sense that the Foreign Affairs Ministry wasn’t delivering in some key areas? Government owes foreign embassy staff millions in salary arrears, arrears for operational expenses, and school fees refunds for children of staff at the 46 diplomatic missions and consulates. How are you going to help your diplomats around the world?

The national debt issue is a matter of public record. Therefore treating Foreign Affairs indebtedness in isolation could be misplaced as it is a microcosm of the global picture.

The solution to this problem is not only in thinking outside the box but in discarding the box.

We should be exploring other innovative ways of self-sustenance and I have many creative solutions to this problem which cannot be brought into the public domain.

Question 6.

At least 12 of Zimbabwe diplomatic missions have been sued over salary arrears for staff and some have been put under legal notice for eviction over unpaid rentals. The parliamentary committee on Foreign Affairs recently recommended that government reduces the foreign missions to a number it can sustain. Of course the decision to cut the missions can only be made by President Robert Mugabe. What would you say about this recommendation given that government is currently facing a critical funding shortfall?

Reducing the number of our Embassies is a short term kneejerk solution as those Embassies and Consulates were established to serve specific interests. We might decide to close down Embassy “X” only to discover that a few years down the line we would need such an Embassy for strategic reasons.

It is an established fact that where countries in such situations have closed their embassies, the cost of re-establishing them has been greater than the cost of having left them operational.

Our Missions are already streamlined given that we have at least 192 countries and territories that have to be serviced, and what we have is already a small number in this global interdependent world of today.

In fact, quite to the contrary, in line with my policy thrust of reactivating lost friendships and opening new frontiers and in pursuit of our goal in economic diplomacy, there would actually be a case for expansion. The world is bigger than our colonial history. Our current realities far outweigh the spread of our diplomatic missions.

We have zero to minimal representation in some regions such as Latin America, the Pacific, Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Our thrust of economic diplomacy dictates that we open new frontiers of representation.

I shall certainly be recommending a new matrix of representation to the President that may include streamlining in some regions and reinforcing in others as well as opening up new frontiers.

Question 7.

What do you regard as the challenges ahead?

I don’t want to add to the list of cry-babies. The laundry list is the opportunities ahead of us.

 

Question 8.

How did your UNWTO campaign prepare you for this job? You narrowly lost the bid but got a plush job back home.

My tenure at the Ministry of Tourism and Hospitality Industry was a good fortuitous training ground for this new post. I engaged various constituencies during my leadership of the Zimbabwe delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly between 2004 and 2006 when we were fighting the imposition of sanctions on the country by the EU.

Campaigning for the post of Secretary General of the UNWTO enabled me to engage over 80 governments worldwide, during which travels I met Presidents, Vice Presidents, Prime Ministers, and Foreign Ministers as I sought their support.

I have also had the opportunity to interact and exchange ideas with eminent personalities amongst them former Foreign Secretaries of the UK and the USA. (Including Jack Straw and David Milibrand and Hilary Clinton). My conversations with them has enlightened me on opportunities for future mutually beneficial engagements.

This has certainly prepared me for my current post and I am confident that with the support of my experienced Ministry staff, we will achieve our stated goals.

In hindsight, the UNWTO was an exercise in the magnification of my acquired skills which perhaps could have caught the attention of the appointing authority and its attendant Cabinet Commendation.

Question 9.

And then there is this hullabaloo about Montevideo, the rescission of an honour bestowed on President Mugabe to be WHO global ambassador for Africa hardly four days later. What happened in Montevideo?

In brief, African delegates to the Conference, and they included Angola, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mozambique, Niger, Sao Tome and Principe, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Zambia and Zimbabwe requested me to engage the WHO on their behalf and seek the appointment of the President as the Goodwill Ambassador for Africa. I must applaud the WHO Director General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, for the initial bravery which led him after his own internal consultations, to accede to the request which he communicated to the Minister of Health and myself before the commencement of the High Level Forum that he would be announcing the designation of the President to this honorary role.

With all good intentions we informed the President accordingly. Thereafter, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus proudly announced and justified the appointment of the President with the attendant citation. What we perhaps underestimated was the backlash. Little did we know that there were other constituencies with other convictions concerning this issue. The rest is now water under the bridge.

 

Question 10.

Do you feel you were justified to lobby for President Mugabe to be WHO ambassador, what were your reasons?

I was approached by the African constituency at the meeting, and for me, it made sense then and now, and there are no regrets. The President does not require to be bestowed an honour in the pursuit of his principles and convictions. He successfully advocated, lobbied and resource mobilised for the Ebola affected countries in West Africa at the UN in 2015 without this designation. As I speak, he will carry on with his agenda on NCDs on behalf of Africa notwithstanding. It was not about the honour, it was about saving lives in line with SDG Goal 3, target 3.4, which implores us to reduce, by one third, premature mortality from NCDs through prevention and treatment and promoting mental health and wellbeing.

 

Question 11.

Was this a government position or your own initiative? Did you take the Zim delegation into your confidence on this issue?

I am part of government and any action by my Ministry is within the context of a collegiate.

 

Question 12.

Did you discuss with the President that you were lobbying on his behalf for this post?

I have already answered this question. However, let me reiterate that as Minister of Foreign Affairs, I am the lead advocate for my President and country’s brand.

 

Question 13.

With this fall-out, do you think you did the right thing?

Absolutely, any perceived fall-out is imaginary.

 

Question 14.

Presidential spokesman George Charamba has sharply contradicted you on this award. What is your reaction to that?

I am not aware of any contradictions. Mr Charamba was part of our delegation and in fact his media team was responsible for information dissemination from Uruguay which is a matter of public record.

 

Question 15.

Does government genuinely support the fight against NCDs given that Charamba has said we are a tobacco producing nation, and we cannot join the WHO campaign against tobacco, or smoking? Is it government policy to continue producing tobacco because of its foreign currency earning power even though tobacco is killing 7,000 Zimbabweans through NCDS such as cancer every year? 

Zimbabwe is a signatory to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) and its economy is transitioning to alternatives. However, in the interim, we will continue to strictly observe the set guidelines in the production and trading of tobacco. FCTC does not abruptly stop production and trade in tobacco, but puts guidelines for countries like Zimbabwe for which tobacco is part of its economic mainstay.

I urge you as journalists to be fully conversant with this and other international conventions in order to disseminate correct information and facts to your constituency.

Question 16.

It seems government is speaking with a forked tongue on this, what is the problem?

In international relations, forked tongues are a function of national interest in the pursuit of diplomacy. I would urge you to do your own research on forked tongues by some other international players at and within other multilateral agencies (the Paris Climate Change Agreement, NAFTA, Iran Nuclear Deal, UNESCO, just to name a few). You don’t seem to be interested in interrogating the bigger powers at the centre of these Agreements. You undermine your national interest at the slightest excuse.

Question 17.

Can you outline your vision for Zimbabwe’s diplomatic engagement with Western countries, recently Lord Soames was here and there is a sense government is seeking rapprochement with its former colonisers, Britain?

This is what the President had to say in April 1980 about Lord Soames, the last colonial Governor of the then Rhodesia, “I must admit that I was one of those who originally never trusted him, and yet I have now ended up not only implicitly trusting but fondly loving him as well”

This is the personal relationship between him and the Soames family. Sir Nicholas Soames himself was tracing the footprints of his father. If this brings us political capital in the direction of political rapprochement and engagement, then it is welcome. Zimbabwe still maintains diplomatic relations with western counties and in fact, going forward, as I have indicated, we will soon embark on robust diplomatic engagement with all countries that we have diplomatic relations with, including western countries.

I shall shortly be meeting all the Ambassadors accredited to Zimbabwe to share my policy thrust going forward and our expectations of them. Equally, I shall engage our Missions abroad with the same objective.

Everything is diplomacy and the diplomacy deficit in our interactions is going to be a thing of the past.

Question 18.

Some people say President Mugabe is a hard-sell product in international diplomacy, what is your take on this?

A “hard sell” does not win elections consecutively every time they are due. This “hard sell”, according to you will break the Guinness Book of Records when he cruises to victory yet again in the forthcoming elections. Our homework is conversion of his domestic and continental appeal into acceptance by specific sections of the international community hence the policy thrust that I have already outlined.

Question 19.

What type of relationship do you have with the President?

The President is the father figure of the entire nation, and that’s how we all relate to him. My colleagues and I in Cabinet feel greatly indebted to the President to continue to serve in this capacity under his leadership which is a rare privilege. No matter how great one was born to be, someone has to release you.

Question 20.

Will your Foreign Policy thrust take him on-board?

There is no Foreign Policy thrust which excludes the Head of State. Do not expect me to park my president at a layby.

 The World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) today announced the election of Christopher J. Nassetta, President and CEO of Hilton, as the Council’s next Chairman.

Mr Nassetta joined Hilton in 2007, bringing with him an extensive background in real estate and hospitality. Since assuming the role of CEO he has transformed the company, bringing Hilton hospitality to 27 new countries by adding 2,200 hotels to a network of more than 5,000 properties in 103 countries and territories. Before taking the company public in 2013, Chris instilled a guest- and employee-focused culture that is recognised today on multiple Great Place to Work lists. He joined Hilton from Host Hotels & Resorts where he was CEO.

Chris has been a Member of WTTC’s Executive Committee since 2011 and Vice Chairman for North America since 2014.

Mr Nassetta will take over from current Chairman, Gerald Lawless, following the Council’s Annual General Meeting, which will take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina on 17 April 2018. WTTC Chairmen are elected for a two-year term.

Mr Lawless, who has been Chairman of WTTC since April 2016, said: “It has been an honour to serve as Chairman of WTTC for the past two years and I am delighted to be handing over to Chris Nassetta to steer the Council into its next phase of development. I am sure that he and Gloria Guevara, WTTC’s President & CEO, will form a strong team to advocate for the economic and social benefits of Travel & Tourism.”

Mr Nassetta said: “I would like to thank Gerald for his tireless advocacy on behalf of the global Travel & Tourism industry. I am also honoured to accept the role as WTTC Chair at a time of amazing opportunity and growth. I believe the Council can play an important role to bring governments and the industry together to deliver smart plans that support both security and international travel. I also believe that the unique scale and reach of WTTC Members can be used to tackle significant global issues, including climate change and global youth unemployment. A Travel & Tourism industry focused on these challenges can deliver great things for this generation and the next.”

Gloria Guevara, WTTC President & CEO commented, “I would like to thank Gerald for his contribution during his Chairmanship and congratulate Chris on his selection. Their guidance is instrumental to continue to position Travel & Tourism as the best partner for job creation.”

WTTC’s latest data shows that Travel & Tourism accounts for 10% of the world’s GDP, contributing over $7.6 trillion. In 2016, Travel & Tourism supported a total of 292 million jobs around the world, 1 in 10 of all jobs.

About WTTC:  The World Travel & Tourism Council is the global authority on the economic and social contribution of Travel & Tourism. It promotes sustainable growth for the sector, working with governments and international institutions to create jobs, to drive exports and to generate prosperity. Every year WTTC, together with Oxford Economics, produces its flagship Economic Impact Report, which looks at the socioeconomic benefits of Travel & Tourism on global, regional and country level. This year the report shows data on 25 regional groupings and 185 countries.

Travel & Tourism is a key driver for investment and economic growth globally. The sector contributes US$7.6 trillion or 10.2% of global GDP, once all direct, indirect and induced impacts are taken into account. The sector also accounts for 292 million jobs or one in ten of all jobs on the planet.

For over 25 years, WTTC has been the voice of this industry globally. Members are the Chairs, Presidents and Chief Executives of the world’s leading, private sector Travel & Tourism businesses, who bring specialist knowledge to guide government policy and decision-making, and raise awareness of the importance of the sector. 

WTTC’s annual Global Summit brings together over 900 delegates to discuss the opportunities, challenges and issues facing the industry, while its Tourism for Tomorrow Awards recognise the industry’s power to be a positive force in sustainability. This year’s Summit will take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 17-19 April 2017.

At the recent UNWTO General Assembly in Chengdu,  China, one discussion point was the acceptance of Palestine as a full member. Backroom diplomacy, pressure by Israel to leave UNWTO and pressure by the United States caused for Palestine to postpone a vote on their full membership to the world tourism body for another 2 years.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has a close partnership with World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). In 2011  UNESCO accepted Palestine as a full member. Palestine applied for full membership in UNWTO.

This triggered a US law which cut off American funding for any organization that recognized an independent Palestine. The US had previously paid for 22 percent ($80 million) of UNESCO’s annual budget.

This seemed strange because UNESCO is such an inoffensive-seeming organization: Its most prominent function is designating and protecting official international landmarks, called World Heritage Sites — places like The Alamo and the Great Barrier Reef, the Grand Canyon. What possible reason could the US have for quitting an organization devoted to culture and science?

The reason is Palestine. The reason is Israel.

First, the US cut funding for UNESCO after Palestine was accepted as a member state, now US President Trump will be leaving UNESCO in 2018, and minutes later this was echoed by Israel. The US voting rights had been eliminated on and off because of the United States falling behind membership fees.

In 1984, the Reagan administration took out its frustration with the UN on UNESCO over accusations of anti-US, pro-Soviet bias at the UN (it took until 2002 for the US to rejoin). It’s also why the Palestinians, frustrated with the failure of US-sponsored negotiations to produce a peace agreement, pushed to be recognized as a UNESCO member-state: It was a venue in which they stood a real chance at gaining symbolic statehood status, and thus, in theory, putting more diplomatic pressure on Israel to sit down and negotiate.

The Palestinians won their 2011 UNESCO membership by at 107-14 margin (though 52 states abstained). However, this has produced little in the way of progress on an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement — and the consequences of the subsequent aid cutoff for UNESCO have been severe. Klaus Hüfner, an expert on UNESCO at the Global Policy Forum, termed it a “financial crisis.”

The United States is not a member of the UNWTO. WOuld this mean the US will never be a member as long as a discussion is ongoing for Palestine to join the tourism body? Palestine is now an observer. Will Israel leave UNWTO? It waits to be seen and it is dirty selfish politics after all.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the US decision to leave UNESCO as “brave and moral”, a statement said.

The head of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) voiced “profound regret” on Thursday over the United States’ decision to withdraw from the agency.

“This is a loss to UNESCO. This is a loss to the United Nations family. This is a loss for multilateralism,” said UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova in a statement.

“Universality is critical to UNESCO’s mission to strengthen international peace and security in the face of hatred and violence, to defend human rights and dignity,” she added, noting that UNESCO would continue to build a more just, peaceful, equitable 21st century.

Ms. Bokova recalled that in 2011, when the US suspended payment of its membership contributions, she was convinced that the UNESCO never mattered as much for the US or vice versa.

“This is all the more true today,” she continued “when the rise of violent extremism and terrorism calls for new long-term responses for peace and security, to counter racism and antisemitism, to fight ignorance and discrimination.”

Ms. Bokova spelled out her belief that the American people support UNESCO’s actions to harness new learning technologies; enhance scientific cooperation, for ocean sustainability; promote freedom of expression, defend journalists’ safety; empower girls and women as change-makers and peacebuilders; bolster societies facing emergencies, disasters and conflicts; and advance literacy and quality education.

“Despite the withholding of funding, since 2011, we have deepened the partnership between the United States and UNESCO, which has never been so meaningful,” she underscored. “Together, we have worked to protect humanity’s shared cultural heritage in the face of terrorist attacks and to prevent violent extremism through education and media literacy.”

The partnership between UNESCO and the US has ‘drawn on shared values’

The Director General gave examples of collaborating during that time, such as launching the Global Partnership for Girls’ and Women’s Education and celebrating World Press Freedom Day in Washington, D.C., with the National Endowment for Democracy.

She also mentioned a long history of joint endeavours, including working together with the late Samuel Pisar, Honorary Ambassador and Special Envoy for Holocaust Education, to promote education for remembrance of the Holocaust across the world to fight antisemitism and genocide today; cooperating with major US companies Microsoft, Cisco, Procter & Gamble and Intel to keep girls in school and nurture technologies for quality learning; and working with the US Geological Survey, US Army Corps of Engineers, and US professional societies to advance research for the sustainable management of water resources, agriculture.

“The partnership between UNESCO and the United States has been deep, because it has drawn on shared values,” Ms. Bokova stressed.

Citing lines in UNESCO’s 1945 Constitution by US Librarian of Congress Archibald MacLeish – ‘since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed’ – she said this vision has never been more relevant, and added that the US helped inspire the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention.

Calling the agency’s work “key to strengthen the bonds of humanity’s common heritage in the face of forces of hatred and division,” she noted the value of World Heritage cites in the US, such as the Statue of Liberty, as being not just as a defining US symbol but that it speaks for people across the world.

“UNESCO will continue to work for the universality of this Organization, for the values we share, for the objectives we hold in common, to strengthen a more effective multilateral order and a more peaceful, more just world,” Ms. Bokova concluded.

The agency is known for designating world heritage sites such as Syria’s Palmyra and the US Grand Canyon.

Unesco head Irina Bokova earlier called the US withdrawal a matter of “profound regret”.

She admitted, however, that “politicisation” had “taken its toll” on the organisation in recent years.

The withdrawal represented a loss to the “UN family” and to multilateralism, Ms Bokova added.

The US withdrawal will become effective at the end of December 2018 – until then, the US will remain a full member. The US will establish an observer mission at the Paris-based organisation to replace its representation, the state department said.

---

One day when historians of the tourism industry write about the first part of the twenty-first century they may view the week of October 1, 2017 as one of the tourism and travel industry’s harder months.
The week began with news of terrorist attacks in both France and Canada and quickly moved onto the tragedy that took place in Las Vegas.

Many people will desire to know the personal history of Stephen Paddock and what motivated him.  In reality, there are other issues more important than his personal history, and the tourism industry needs to be careful not to allow itself to be seduced into spending a great deal of time on irrelevant facts.  Instead, the tourism industry must concentrate on the most important issue: how do we protect visitors, locals, event attendees, employees, and security and law enforcement agents in an age of uncertainty and violence. These questions and the answers we discover are the lessons that can we learn from the Las Vegas attack. What has happened is now history, and it is our task to help the victims heal as best as they can and seek ways in which the tourism industry together with governments and law enforcement can we work together to prevent future tragedies.

Before examining the situation in Las Vegas it behooves us to review and clarify some important facts to consider.

1) There is a difference between an “acts of criminal terror” and a “terrorist act”.  The former is a terrible act that hurts many people but does not have a political motivation. Terrorism, on the other hand, has a clear political motivation.  Terrorism has specific goals and as such deadly acts are used as part of an overall strategy to achieve those goals.  In the case of Las Vegas we know of no overall political goals.  Instead, the perpetrator may well have acted for personal motives or for reasons of insanity but neither of these are political motives.  Assuming that this is not a terrorist act we shall have to see it as a pure criminal act.

As this article is being written, there is no reason to assume that Stephan Paddock was anything other than a highly mentally disturbed individual.  Should we learn that he had other motivations or political ties then a new analysis regarding the politics will be needed but that analysis will have little to do with enhancing both hotel and event security.

2) Hotels, and other tourism locations are soft targets in an age of terrorism.  Even though at the time of this writing (October 4, 2017) it does not appear that Stephen Paddock had a terrorism connection, the fact that hotels are easy targets should become an important risk management issue.  An attack on a hotel, in most cases, will receive a great deal of publicity and potentially cause a great deal of damage to human beings, to a place’s reputation and to its tourism industry.  This may be one of the reasons that terrorists have attacked hotels in multiple cities around the world.  The fact that hotels have been targeted internationally means that no matter what the reason, hotels and other places of lodging are going to have to have to be creative in how they protect their guests and property.

3) In most cases, architects designed hotels in the western nations during periods of less violence.  Many of these hotels are quite beautiful but also difficult to protect.  For example, hotels with rooms overlooking ground floor atriums are challenges for security personnel.  In a like manner, reception or check-in areas were designed not with security in mind but for customer satisfaction and ease of meetings. The same is true of both valet and self-parking areas.  The heightened need for greater security means that many hotels, and other tourism installations such as stadiums, will need to be retrofitted. Remodeling these structures is both a difficult and expensive process and may take some time to accomplish.

4) In our new age, hotels and other tourism industry locations such as stadiums, museums, and transportation terminals must become aware of a whole series of new potentially devastating weapons of attacks.  These include the use of biochemical weapons, drones, and cyber attacks that can literally bring a hotel to a stoppage.  Furthermore, attack weapons continue to be available in smaller sizes, and this “miniturization” means that any of these weapons may be harder to detect.  As we look into the future, hotel security personnel must become aware of nanotechnology and the fact that powerful weapons can be contained in extremely small spaces.

5) No matter what we do, there is no total security. We can lessen the chance of danger, injury, or death, but no matter what we do, there will always be a risk.

Looking to the future

In order to ease public concerns, some immediate steps should be considered. These are not long-term solutions but act as immediate solutions.  Among these are:

• High coordination between law enforcement and hotel security personnel. For example, Las Vegas’ police department (Metro) has extremely close relations with its hotel industry and those relations helped to save many lives. Its officers should be commended for their bravery and the outstanding job which they performed.
• Upgrading the security industry. Security can no longer be seen as merely a great deal of muscle. Security personnel must be trained in a number of psychological and sociological analytics. This means increased budgets, increased attendance at security conferences such as the annual Las Vegas international Safety and Security Conference (to be held in April of 2018), and increase updating of the security issues on both the macro and the micro level.  In today’s world, a criminal or a terrorist can easily slip across borders or travel across oceans.
• Baggage inspection. It may be impossible to inspect every bag, and even hotels can inspect every bag, there is nothing from preventing a guest to bring in a weapon at a later time or simply under his or her clothing.  However, there is much that can be done by using high levels of creativity.  For example, it may be necessary to use trained dogs and obtain other technical devices that “smell trouble”.  The tourism industry should be working with entrepreneurs to create new less invasive methods that permit privacy but at the same time detect threats and potential problems.
• Training hotel staffs to be the front line of security. This training may include everything from questioning why a “do not disturb “ sign is on a room door for more than a few hours to notifying security if some seems or smells amiss. Frontline personnel are the eyes and ears of a tourism entity such as a hotel.
• The tourism and the security industry must be careful not to become overly reactive to the “last” event.  What occurred in Las Vegas is now history.  It is essential to help the victims rebuild their lives to the best extent possible. Tourism officials, none the less, need to prepare for future events and think through how the tourism industry will face future challenges not yet considered.  It would do everyone in tourism to consider how an act of terrorism or a criminal act may impact all sectors of a local industry. The bottom line is that what occurred in Las Vegas can occur in almost any city or resort around the world.  All of us must be careful not to politicize a tragedy but learn from it and then seek to understand future problems and find ways to mitigate these risks with diligence and clarity of thought and purpose.

 

Dr. Peter Tarlow is an expert on tourism security and economic development. He is also a contributor for eTN.His email is [email protected]