Travel bans are about xenophobia, not public health

Joshua Jahani, The Independent

Where pandemics go, xenophobia follows; Covid-19 has been no different. Even as the virus is slowly brought under control around the world, border closures have no end in sight, despite there being no evidence that these travel bans suppress virus transmissions.

The tourism industry was the first to suffer when the pandemic hit, but it could be one of the sectors that lead the recovery – if we allow it to. However, the real cost is not just economic: open minds require open borders. Less travel will leave lasting scars not only on our economies but on the views and outlooks of our children.

According to one UNCTAD report, the crash in international tourism could cause a loss of more than $4tn (£2.8tn) for the global economy, and over 100 million jobs.

Entire countries depend on tourism for their economic stability. The Turks and Caicos Islands, for example, receives 70 per cent of its GDP from tourism. The border closures have led to a loss in GDP of 9.2 per cent. Aruba has lost 9 per cent, Macau has lost 8.8 per cent and Antigua and Barbuda has lost 7.2 per cent of its GDP.

These are not just economic statistics, they are countless lives destroyed and in some cases even the seeds of social or political upheaval. Things won’t get that bad in the US, for example, which has lost $30bn (£21.6bn). But that is still a completely unnecessary and ineffective sacrifice.

Researchers at Vancouver University reviewed 29 studies and their verdict is unequivocal. Travel bans, at this stage of the pandemic, are pointless. It takes a brave politician to say that publicly, though — which is maybe why no one does.

This error cuts across political divides and defies any scientific logic. An American is free to vacation in the European Union or the UK, and return to the States. But a European or Brit cannot visit the US. This only makes sense if American bodies are less susceptible to being carriers of the virus.

In the UK, Conservative Prime Minister Boris Johnson has a “red list” of banned countries that is 60 names long. 84 per cent of the British electorate believe closing the border is a good idea, so maybe rather than “following the science” we are “following the voters”.

Those voters are (often subconsciously) driven by xenophobia. We gave variants foreign names (until the WHO told us not to) and Donald Trump called Covid “Kung Flu”.

This isn’t new. There was a spike in anti-Asian hate during the 2003 outbreak of Sars. The 2014 outbreak of Ebola led to a rise in anti-African incidents. Covid is no different; hate crimes have been on the rise in America since the start of the pandemic.  We might expect right-wing politicians and voters to support travel bans. The irony is that liberals, who are more in favour of lockdown restrictions in general, also support the “closed border” policy, despite their general support for the free movement of people.

It seems that viruses are scarier than terrorists. Trump’s travel ban on those from several Muslim-majority countries (countries which also have little to no security cooperation with the US government and have been sources, as well as victims of, terrorism) was unacceptable to those same liberals. But Trump’s travel ban at least had some supporting evidence: Syria and Yemen, for example, simply do not have the government infrastructure required for the state department to carry out background checks on visitors or immigrants. Given the security situation in those countries, a ban had some logical benefit.

Covid travel bans, however, make no sense. Bans didn’t stop the virus making it to the US or UK from Wuhan. Bans didn’t stop the Beta variant arriving in London, or the Delta variant making it to LA.