Some of the most popular hubs are suddenly empty.


Luxurious and leisurely, perfect for families or fine-diners, the modern Middle Eastern metropolises like Dubai and Doha have long seemed like oases in a dry and volatile part of the world. But in just a few short weeks of hostilities, this carefully crafted image is now suddenly in doubt. Are these pharaonic cities actually just desert mirages?
Right now, the effect of the Iran conflict is obvious in the main travel hubs of the region. It's estimated Dubai's hotel occupancy has fallen to about 20%, Doha's landmarks like the iconic Souq Waqif are eerily quiet without tourists, while Bahrain and Saudi Arabia have cancelled next month's Formula 1 races. The Australian government has issued its highest 'do not travel' advice for 11 countries in the region. Airlines including Emirates, Qatar, and Etihad have cancelled many of their flights.
None of this is too surprising considering the current threat. But the bigger question for the tourism industry is harder: what are the longer term effects after the bombs stop falling? It's probably fair to guess the answer is not going to be good news.
In 1991, when the first Gulf War broke out, I was just a child. But I was a nerdy child who was obsessed with Ancient Egypt. The war had caused an 80% drop in tourism to the country and they were desperate for visitors. When I spotted an airline promotion that offered a 10-day tour of Egypt for just $1 if you bought a flight to London (where we needed to go to see family), it was too good an opportunity to pass up. So that's how nerdy little Michael got to see the pyramids when he was 11.
I bring up this period for some historical comparison. Although the Gulf War was a relatively contained conflict with no fighting anywhere near Egypt, it took at least a year for the country's tourism to recover, including a concerted effort by authorities to stimulate visitation (like my $1 tour!). And in comparison with the current situation, Egypt has a big advantage. It has something that can't be found anywhere else - its ancient heritage that's so iconic it excites little kids across the world.
The problem for places like Dubai and Doha is that the attributes that appeal to visitors could exist anywhere, so they don't have the same kind of emotional draw as many of the world's other top destinations. Don't get me wrong - they're vibrant cities - but luxury hotels, fancy bars, warm weather? You can find them in countless places from Bangkok to Cancun to Monte Carlo. If one city can be built in the desert from almost nothing in 30 years, so can another somewhere else.
Well aware of these issues, the Middle Eastern destinations have spent decades trying to attract tourists by creating and honing their images as safe, fun and luxurious sanctuaries in a region beset by endless conflicts. Being some of the biggest international aviation hubs, with so many people passing through anyway, has made these campaigns even easier. Tourism numbers have continued to increase, with Dubai welcoming about 20 million overnight visitors last year and Doha seeing a 4% increase to 5 million overnight visitors. (For comparison, Australia has about 8 million visitors a year.) It's been so successful, we're now seeing Saudi Arabia trying to replicate the model by investing more than a trillion dollars in infrastructure projects aimed at tourists and expats.
Occasionally cracks have appeared in the glossy facade. There were the Australian women subjected to invasive physical examinations by Qatari officials at Doha Airport, the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and now foreigners in the UAE being charged with crimes for sharing videos of Iranian attacks. But despite the outrage, tourism continued to increase.
This time, things might be different. Why? Because, in truth, those controversies weren't that surprising. Travellers like to pretend these luxurious Middle Eastern destinations are paradises, but deep down we know the only real Shangri-La is the five-star hotel chain. Tourists may not admit it, but there's a tacit acceptance that a pleasant holiday comes with a tinge of human rights concerns.
But geopolitical safety, that was something we thought was guaranteed, as if places like Qatar and the UAE had too much at stake to risk getting involved in war. Now that ideal of peace has been shattered, it's going to be hard to mend quickly.
I've seen lots of interviews with expats in the Gulf countries who say they're not moving, and that makes sense. High wages and a comfortable lifestyle are probably worth it, especially considering the number of attacks are relatively low and there's still an expectation the conflict won't go on for too long.
READ MORE FROM MICHAEL TURTLE:
But tourists are different. They may have a big appetite for buffet breakfasts, they don't have a big appetite for risk. When you're spending thousands of dollars on a holiday, when you don't know what the global political situation will look like when the trip comes around, and you've got a whole world of destinations to choose from, why would you gamble with the Middle East?
Right now, the effect on tourism is primarily physical - flights are limited and people have genuine concern for their safety. But going forward it's going to be more emotional - are these destinations still going to be destinations where you can relax and feel comfortable? There may be incentives in coming months to encourage visitation to the Middle East, like my $1 trip to Egypt, but that may not be enough to counteract other economic effects like higher airfares
So, I suspect tourism to places like Dubai and Doha is going to take a painful hit even after the conflict is officially over. Of greater concern is whether these cities will be a permanent casualty of war.
You can see more on Michael's Time Travel Turtle website.






