Some people mainly blame Nepal’s weak diplomacy for the present poor state of the tourism industry. They say that after the declaration of emergency on February 1, the government could not thoroughly acquaint foreigners with the situation in the country, and as a result, tourist arrivals have gone down further. At a programme held in the capital on Wednesday, there was no disagreement over the declining trend among experts and entrepreneurs representing the associations of travel, trekking and rafting agents and hotels, the Nepal Tourism Board, as well as organisations such as airlines. They agreed that an emergency would automatically send wrong signals to foreigners, and therefore they stressed the need for good publicity to create the impression that Nepal was safe for tourists. According to them, political parties, human rights activists and travel advisories issued by a number of governments also contributed to the decline.

Indeed, some of the figures they have presented show a gloomy outlook for the tourism sector—the hotel occupancy rate stands at 15 per cent, the number of trekkers has declined by 75 per cent even in peak season, and tourists visiting Nepal for rafting now comes to only five per cent of past years. But it is not only the tourism industry that has faced a downturn, the economy has gone down as well. That is why it is unlikely to realise the projected growth rates. Garment and carpet industries, the other two sectors that rank with tourism as the three biggest earners of foreign exchange, have also plunged. In the case of tourism, the internal conflict and the political situation are the only main culprits.

Moreover, tourism is a highly sensitive one, which can be affected even by some unfavourable news reports in the foreign press. For example, not long ago, the number of Indian tourists fell sharply because of a false news story in a local tabloid that led to unpleasant events. But Nepal lacks an effective mechanism for countering such misleading reports. The private sector should also do something concrete on their own to counter bad publicity; they cannot totally depend on the government. However, the decline in tourist trade started not just after February 1, but much before, because of the insurgency. The present fall is largely a reflection of that trend. In tourism promotion, positive facts should be emphasised, for example, the fact that no tourist has been attacked. But there are limits to what the government or anybody could do. Foreigners seem to be guided more by their countries’ travel advisories than by what we say, and they have other sources of information that may strengthen their fears. So nothing can be an alternative to peace.