Matters of perspective

Matters of perspective

Martin Jenkins, Editor, Danareksa Sekuritas, Jakarta

As a result of the Bali bombings, many countries, including
the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom, have issued
travel warnings to their citizens advising against non-essential
travel to Indonesia. Foreign nationals of some countries are even
being advised to consider leaving Indonesia if their presence is
not essential. But how well founded is this advise? Is it really
true that Indonesia is so unsafe that foreign nationals should
avoid coming here?

Leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
countries, including Indonesian President Megawati Soekarnoputri,
have raised objections to the travel warnings. They claim that
the travel warnings are unwarranted since there is no firm
evidence of further terrorist attacks in the region.

They also claim that ASEAN countries are doing everything
possible to prevent and eradicate all forms of terrorist
activities. Their objections are perhaps not surprising though,
given the important role that tourism plays in many ASEAN
economies.

It should be remembered, however, that the travel warnings
were issued on the belief that threats to Western interests from
terrorism throughout Indonesia remain high. This is
understandable since the terrorists have now demonstrated in such
horrific fashion their ability to stage a massive attack within
Indonesia. As such, further attacks cannot be ruled out.

For this reason alone, it would be foolish for Western nations
not to issue a travel warning -- if a further attack were, heaven
forbid, to take place they would be open to strong criticism from
their citizens if no travel warning had been issued.

But does this mean that foreigners should pay heed to the
warnings? Are foreigners exposing themselves to unacceptable
risks by visiting Indonesia?

First of all, it is important to realize that we face many
other dangers apart from being blown up by a terrorist bomb. Just
by going through our daily routines we expose ourselves to risk.
We could for example, be killed in a road accident.

According to the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, accidents on rented
motorcycles constitute the largest cause of death and serious
accident among foreign visitors to Bali. Nonetheless, Indonesia's
roads are still, surprisingly, safer than many other countries in
the region (according to an Asian Development Bank commissioned
report, Indonesia has six road deaths per 100,000 people vis-a-
vis 31 per 100,000 people in Malaysia).

We also expose ourselves to the threat of crime, and even the
risk of murder. According to a British Home Office survey,
Washington DC has one of the highest murder rates of any
developed country city (with a murder rate of 69.3 per 100,000
population), and is an astonishing 170 times more dangerous than
the Belgian capital, Brussels. Thus judging by this criteria,
should there not be warnings on travel to Malaysia (dangerous
roads) and Washington DC (high homicide rate)?

But what makes the Bali bomb blast different from such risks
is that we cannot measure the likelihood of such an event
occurring again in the future. What we are faced with is
uncertainty.

Risk can be quantified, either from common knowledge (a spun
coin will come up heads 50 percent of the time), or from
empirical data. But because we can quantify risk, we feel more
secure. This explains why tourists still decide to visit cities
with high crime rates such as Rio de Janeiro, or even choose to
drive on dangerous roads late at night in an inebriated state.

Uncertainty, on the other hand, is different. Uncertain events
cannot be analyzed since they are too irregular, or too unique.
As such, we have no way of knowing where or when or by what means
the terrorists will strike again. They may try to use more
conventional methods, such as leaving parcel or vehicle bombs in
public places, or hijacking passenger aircraft. But they also may
try something more grandiose, like the attacks on the World Trade
Center in New York.

This uncertainty scares us. We cannot make rational deductions
about what is safe and what is dangerous, and have nothing to go
on but our own judgment. As such, it is impossible to say that
Bali is now safe. But equally, it is also impossible to say that
anywhere is safe. Is a future terrorist attack more likely to
happen again in either New York or Bali than anywhere else? No
one knows.

However, Bali is not famous for being a safe tourist
destination without reason. Potential visitors should try to keep
matters in perspective -- they are probably far more likely to
get killed in a road accident than by a terrorist bomb. At the
end of the day, tourists should not put off visiting places such
as Bali or New York. Because if they do, they would only be
handing victory to the terrorists. And surely that is in no one's
interest.