Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 672–689, 20110160-7383/$ - see front matter � 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Printed in Great Britain

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2010.12.005www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures

TOURISM AND THE MILITARYPleasure and the War Economy

Adam WeaverVictoria University of Wellington, New Zealand

Abstract: This paper argues that market forces have driven the means by which themilitary-industrial complex in the United States has increasingly shaped the tourism industryin recent decades. A business-oriented military entity that creates enormous destructivepotential has had an influence upon the provision and character of tourism. Examiningcertain aspects of the tourism industry reveals a sometimes paradoxical, and yet ultimatelyprofitable, blending of pleasure-oriented consumption and the by-products of a permanentwar economy. The tourism industry and military-industrial complex may seem to possessqualities that are contradictory in nature but they are also complementary in various ways.Commerce supports and encourages profitable antagonisms; it is guiding the interplaybetween tourism and the military sphere Keywords: military technology, security, consump-tion, political economy. � 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION

The role of the military-industrial complex in the United States inshaping modern-day tourism is significant but heretofore unexplored,perhaps because the two spheres seem antithetical at first glance. Toappreciate the linkages between tourism and this complex, one needsto outline how the latter has become an intrinsic part of US society andculture since the Second World War. The military-industrial complexembraces a constellation of for-profit contractors and organizationsthat support the military and have a vested interest in high levels ofmilitary spending (Melman, 1974; Turse, 2008). Even in the absenceof actual conflict, there have been ongoing processes of preparationfor war and the reorientation of civil society to support military activi-ties. A permanent war economy has emerged that is the product of asizeable and established armaments industry that is also responsiblefor medical, psychological, and social science research programmesthat have received an enormous amount of funding during peacetime(Gailbraith, 2004; Melman, 1974; Turse, 2008).

Adam Weaver is Senior Lecturer in Tourism Management at Victoria University ofWellington (P.O. Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand. Email <adam.weaver@vuw.ac.nz>). Hisresearch interests include cruise tourism, the relationship between the tourism and creditcard industries, tourism marketing, and social theory. He has published a number of works ina range of tourism and hospitality journals. Future research will examine the marketing ofnon-tourism products using tourism-based imagery.

672

A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689 673

Military institutions and civilian-military collaborations exist aroundthe world, but the focus of this paper is the US military-industrial com-plex. Developments in the US, the world’s dominant military power,typically inform practices and policies in a number of other countries.The military-industrial complex has embedded itself deeply into variousdimensions of the US’s post-Second World War economic and socialfabric (Leslie, 1994; Lotchin, 1992; Sherry, 1995; Turse, 2008). Innova-tion and production tied to the military did not fade away with the endof the Cold War. The military-industrial complex simply reorganized it-self; in fact, it is more efficiently structured than ever before (Turse,2008). The business-military relationship has become institutionalized.

This paper avoids a focus that examines the discrete events of warand, instead, draws attention to broader connections between tourismand the political economy of US military preparedness. The military-industrial complex is a commercial-military alliance that has influencedtechnologies oriented around mobility and movement, security prac-tices within the tourism industry, and certain types of tourism-orientedconsumption. Technologies created by this complex have facilitated—and are a response to—forms of mobility related to contemporary tour-ism. Faster and safer modes of transport, sophisticated systems thattrack the movement of mobile and dispersed consumers, and portabledevices that provide entertainment and process economic transactionswithin tourism-oriented environments demonstrate the commercialapplications of technologies derived from military sources. The militaryhas therefore contributed to the evolution of space-shrinking, safety-re-lated, consumer-friendly, and surveillance-based technologies that areinextricably linked to the efficient operation and coordination of spa-tially dispersed economic activities such as tourism.

Militarized approaches to security have entered the civilian realm be-cause of efforts by the defense industry to behave more entrepreneur-ially, the movement of highly-skilled experts between the military andnon-military domains, and the widespread view that terrorism is a majorthreat to tourism for which the US must constantly prepare. Opera-tional strategies that are designed to enhance security, combat terror-ism, and protect zones of comfort and consumption involve thedeployment of military-derived machine systems and personnel withmilitary expertise. Through a range of activities, including tourism,the military-industrial complex has become the ‘‘common sense’’ ofmany US citizens who unreflectively inhabit a militarized reality. Certainforms of tourism have become a vehicle for military patriotism and rein-force existing power relations. Although various tourism-related experi-ences and events—for example, cultural festivals—are tied to thepromotion and celebration of national identity, the way in which mili-tary symbols and images showcased through tourism contribute to thenormalization of military institutions and foster escapist fantasies hasnot been studied.

Technology, security measures, and consumption associated withtourism are interwoven through a potent combination of market-dri-ven logic and faith in the need for constant military preparedness.The military-industrial process has driven the trajectory of US technol-

674 A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689

ogy and shaped contemporary mobility. This mobility—and the com-merce that underpins it—is accompanied by an approach to securitythat attempts to protect tourists and their purchasing through effortsto control space and risk. Much tourism occurs within places that arenot immune to the threat of terrorism and where US visitors are notnecessarily welcome because of perceptions of their country’s foreignpolicy. Tourism—aided and abetted by the national security state—has the potential to shape citizens’ understandings of war and securityas well as the discourses of US military readiness. As a result of the nor-malization of military patriotism, cultural symbols incorporated intotourism-oriented consumption help to buttress the ethos of war pre-paredness, perpetuate the demand for elaborate security measures thatreflect US anxieties, and ensure that the activities of the military-indus-trial complex continue.

TOURISM AND THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX

The relationship between commerce and the military has been ex-plored by some commentators. Mills (1956) identifies strong linksamongst the military, the state, and US corporate interests and outlinesthe symbiotic relationships connecting elites from these three institu-tions. The interlocking concerns of the military, government, and cor-porations mean that they work cooperatively towards a commonagenda oriented around consolidating power and promoting busi-ness-related goals. Melman (1974) further advances the argument thatthe build-up of military arsenals and recruitment of personnel duringtimes of peace has become a permanent feature of the US economyand its explicit aim is to buttress an economic system that would other-wise experience serious crises. It is this state of affairs that Melman(1974) has termed a permanent war economy.

Since 11 September 2001, the military in the Western world has be-come a more prominent feature of the cultural landscape, as demon-strated by the various manifestations of ‘‘homeland security’’ (Turse,2008, pp. 255–271). To undertake wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as partof a broader ‘‘war on terror’’, the US spends about 20% of the federalbudget and nearly 5% of its gross domestic product on national de-fense (Leibstone, 2009). Expenditures of this magnitude are boundto generate military hardware and technical skills as well as a culturalpresence for the military that will, by their very pervasiveness and com-mercial value, become incorporated into other areas of the economyand society, including tourism.

Tourism scholars have acknowledged that tourism and war are notseparate, unrelated phenomena, despite strong surface contrasts inthe purposes and predominant imagery of tourism and war. Histori-cally there have been ties. Smith (1998) emphasizes the importanceof the Second World War with respect to the rise of modern tourismand portrays it as a causal agent in the creation of mass tourism. Trans-port technologies from the military shifted to the civilian sphere. Smith(1998, p. 204) observes that the Second World War ‘‘created the tech-

A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689 675

nology for fast, efficient global transit’’—in particular, large aircraft.The notion that one could visit overseas destinations for the purposesof pleasure became feasible for returning soldiers who acquired a wan-derlust and curiosity while in the military.

Tourism is a mechanism by which individuals encounter resolvedconflicts. The commemoration of historic battles through war memori-als, military museums, and battle reenactments makes up a large partof tourism (Henderson, 2000, 2007; Lee, 2006; Seaton, 1999; Winter,2009). A former enemy, Vietnam, has recognized a market amongUS veterans for battlefield nostalgia. There is typically a spatial andtemporal distance between war and tourism; tourist sites cannot beco-present with the immediate danger of an ongoing war. Manymonths or years separate tourists from the wretchedness of wartimeconditions.

In response to the horrors of the Second World War, tourism wasencouraged as a means to greater global understanding and harmony.Visiting other places would enable people to see that what unites themas human beings is stronger than what divides them. This belief is dem-onstrated when tourism, ‘‘the world’s peace industry’’, promotes ‘‘thebonds that people everywhere have with one another’’ (D’Amore,1988, p. 27). Tourism attempts to create global peace by fostering aheightened appreciation of diversity. That tourism may encourageworld peace has been questioned (Litvin, 1998) and it is arguablythe persistent by-products of war, not peace, that have recently playedan important role in reorienting technology, security, and consump-tion in ways that have important ramifications for tourism. Further-more, the nature of this reorientation may not be consistent withefforts to promote more responsible forms of tourism (Bramwell,Lane, McCabe, Mosedale, & Scarles, 2008). Powerful interests are re-solved to maintain existing arrangements rather than promote debateabout the imprint of the military influence and its implications fortourism and society.

Power and expansionism influenced tourism development prior tothe rise of the present-day military-industrial complex. A significantproportion of the world’s tourism infrastructure in former colonies—roads, railway systems, and port facilities—was, in part, created as a pro-ject of empire (Britton, 1982). However, the military-industrial com-plex has become a full-fledged, centrally managed state-capitalistsector (Melman, 1974). Researchers have explored connections be-tween tourism and specific conflicts from the past, but examiningthe extent to which tourism is affected by the political economy ofUS military readiness has not been addressed.

Tourism and Pentagon Capitalism: Contradictory or Complementary?

Commercial spheres that appear to be contradictory in nature, suchas the tourism industry and military-industrial complex, can be comple-mentary. The connections between potentially opposite activities orindustries reminds one that capitalism is far too complex and

676 A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689

adaptable to be viewed as simply a system of separations and incompat-ibilities. However, it is the contradictions of capitalism that are typicallyemphasized. Bell (1976) calls attention to capitalism undermining it-self. The success of capitalism becomes its undoing. New forms ofhedonism, a consumption ethic, and the pursuit of social status arein contradiction with the old values of thrift, industry, and modesty.Contemporary society presents individuals with a paradox: on theone hand, consume and abandon themselves to the pleasures of self-fulfillment and self-indulgence, and on the other, exercise disciplineand restraint, imperatives that Bell (1976) viewed as irreconcilable,indicative of a contradiction inherent within capitalism, and evidenceof a worsening cultural crisis. Contrary to what orthodox Marxists ar-gue, capitalism would not be subverted by its failures but by its achieve-ments and the prosperity it creates.

Contradictions are part of dynamic structures and relationships. Anumber of prominent thinkers—John Maynard Keynes, Karl Marx,Karl Polanyi, and Thorstein Veblen—have acknowledged that con-tradictions and conflicts are unavoidable aspects of capitalism (Jensen,1989; O’Hara, 2000; Stroshane, 1997). However, examining commer-cial spheres that possess apparently contradictory attributes may un-cover integration, conjunction, and complementarities. Capitalism ischaracterized by a range of intrinsic tensions and contradictions of dif-ferent orders of magnitude as well as a profitable and heterogeneousintermixing of diverse activities.

The brand of Pentagon capitalism (Melman, 1970) underpinningthe military-industrial complex has its roots in the dynamics of post-Second World War trends: the US’s fascination with technology, alli-ances between defense contractors and boosters responsible for pro-moting regional development, a growing concern with nationalsecurity and external threats, and large federal expenditures for armsproliferation that fueled economic prosperity but also deepened thecountry’s fiscal crisis (Lotchin, 1992; Sherry, 1995). A build-up of mil-itary might, and the concerns about national security that provoked it,seem to be at odds with the growth and democratization of tourism, anactivity that flourishes when there is an absence of conflict and globalanxieties. The violence of battle and the possession of weapons-baseddestructive power would also seem to separate the military domainfrom tourism.

Tourism is arguably the paradigmatic industry of pleasure and escap-ism while the US defense industry is a symbol of the country’s postwarrealpolitik. The two industries would appear to represent opposite endsof the economic, political, and social spectrum. That tourism has beeninfluenced by the military-industrial complex in a variety of ways testi-fies to the power of the US’s military establishment and the ability ofbusiness entities to profit from potentially antagonistic activities. Apolitical-economy approach—one that considers connections betweenbusiness and power and has been used by other tourism scholars in dif-ferent contexts (Bianchi, 2009; Britton, 1982, 1991; Paradis, 2002)—can be used to interpret a range of relationships and activities. The suc-cess of the rapprochement between the tourism and defense industries

A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689 677

stems from the military-industrial complex’s ability to produce technol-ogies that support both mobility and military interests, remain com-mercially relevant in an era of heightened anxieties about safety, andinspire forms of war-infused consumption.

Examples that illustrate this paper’s central argument were mainlyobtained from articles published in a range of tourism- and hospital-ity-related trade journals. These articles document a number of in-stances where tourism and the military-industrial complex havebecome intertwined. A recently published volume by Turse (2008)—a journalistic expose that highlights close ties between the militaryand US society—was also an important source of information. Theexamples mined from secondary sources demonstrate the far reaching,agenda-setting power of the military and its impact upon tourism.These examples were organized thematically and reflect the variegatedrelations between tourism and the military-industrial complex. A broadreview of secondary sources enables an appraisal of state-of-the-art tech-nologies and practices in a range of tourism-related sectors, and there-fore ensures that attention is not directed at a particular case that maybe idiosyncratic but towards wider patterns and connections.

Technologies of War, Technologies of Tourism

US military policy and power have been defined by a commitment tothe use of advanced technology as a means to secure military superior-ity. Many of the basic innovations that shaped modern US technologyafter the Second World War, and that spread around the world, wereconceptualized and developed as military enterprises (Leslie, 1994).These innovations have moved from behind the walls of secrecy intothe commercial sector over time as defense contractors sought to ex-pand and diversify their markets (Turse, 2008). The tourism industrysupports the military-industrial complex by offering profitable outletsfor the technology it creates. Recent years have seen the emergenceof a more orchestrated approach to technology transfer and diffusionwithin the military whereby a deliberate effort is made to search forcivilian uses for military technologies (Babbin, 1994). The military isattempting to become more entrepreneurial in its approach to tech-nology development.

Technologies that have had a profound impact upon the conduct ofwar have, equally importantly, contributed to the speed and accessibil-ity of civilian air transport (Smith, 1998). The diffusion of technologiesfrom the military to the civilian realm was significant in the early yearsof jet-powered aircraft. More recently, airplanes that were originallymilitary transporters, such as the Boeing 747, have become widely usedas commercial airliners (Ruttan, 2006). Tourism has created an ex-panded market for air transport and, amongst airlines, for aircraft. Re-mote-controlled aerial vehicles, such as the Predator drone, mayrepresent the future of commercial aviation: airplanes without on-board pilots (Higham, 2003). Aircraft technology is recognized as auseful tool in both war and peace.

678 A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689

Technologies developed by the military have also shaped the charac-ter of tourism products and improved safety. Theme-park roller coast-ers have become safer, faster, and more nimble through the use of‘‘military specifications and NASA-quality engineering’’ (Ruben,2008, p. 8). The world’s largest passenger ship, Queen Mary 2, is outfit-ted with ‘‘military technology’’ that makes ‘‘smaller boats visible’’ andthus easier to detect (Mathisen & Mathisen, 2008, p. 9). This traffic oftechnologies from their defense origin into the realm of tourism andtransport has ensured that the manufacturers of military-oriented tech-nologies have a wider client base and that their outputs contribute to asense of progress and betterment on the home front.

In some Las Vegas casinos, patrons can obtain ‘‘iPod-size hand-helddevice[s]’’ that enable them ‘‘to play table games while in restaurants,by the pool, or in other public areas around the casino’’ (Hodl, 2006,p. 40). Encryption technologies originally developed by the US militaryhave made wireless gaming consoles—the source of a new stream ofrevenue for casinos—possible (Hodl, 2006; Holtmann, 2007a).‘‘[W]ith the value of floor space at an all time high’’, casino operatorsusing the Vegas Star Wireless system produced by Shuffle Master Incor-porated ‘‘can increase their available terminals to an unlimited num-ber of remote positions’’ and thus accommodate more customers(Holtmann, 2007a, p. 38). Military technology has fostered the makingof novel and portable types of casino entertainment that can boost on-site spending.

The Navstar Global Positioning System (GPS) has become renownedfor its highly accurate navigation, position, and timing signals, forwhich military and civilian users worldwide have found many applica-tions. This constellation of satellites that orbit the earth has createda ‘‘precision revolution’’ of enormous proportions and generated com-mercial applications valued in the billions of dollars (Rip & Hasik,2002; Strenk, 2009). The military has used GPS technology to guidecruise missiles so that they strike targets with tremendous accuracyand to assist armoured forces with navigating featureless desert terrain.This technology also has significant implications for reconnaissanceactivity and combat-related search and rescue.

Within the civilian sphere, GPS is used for marketing purposes. Per-sonal information and contact details ‘‘gathered via opt-in hotel loyaltyprograms’’ are used in association with GPS technology ‘‘to send textand graphic messages to the phones of club members in a predeter-mined geographic area’’ (Kirby, 2007, p. 56). This ‘‘area can be as wideas a city or as small as the hotel restaurant’’ (Ibid., p. 56). Consumersare identified and targeted in a manner that resembles the way inwhich enemy forces are targeted (Kaplan, 2006). Targeting hotel con-sumers with greater precision is a way of providing them with more cus-tomized marketing appeals as well as steering them towardsopportunities to make purchases. During a short-term promotion,Wyndham Hotels and Resorts offered its guests the opportunity to re-ceive free Motorola cellular telephones with GPS technology that en-abled users to access ‘‘turn-by-turn driving instructions’’ to a rangeof businesses, including the hotel’s own properties (Ostrowski, 2006,

A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689 679

p. 43). Precision-based technologies support ‘‘strategic’’ decision mak-ing within both the commercial and military realms.

The power of pinpoint marketing bears some resemblance to thepower of pinpoint destruction (Weber, 2005). A logic of transparencyand visibility underpins GPS technology. The impulse to create a‘‘God’s eye view’’ of the world and impose a comprehensive methodof seeing is aligned with the goals of the military-industrial complexand contemporary commerce. GPS technology enables corporationsand the military to try to exercise the power they wish to wield. Thistechnology allows those in positions of authority to create new visionsof what constitutes a market, the tourism consumer, territory, and bat-tlefield. Territory and space are transformed into a trigonometric sys-tem from which ‘‘intelligence’’ is generated about specific sites oractivities. Furthermore, the use of GPS technology within the militaryand civilian spheres highlights noteworthy similarities between militaryoperations and tourism: both may involve way-finding and locating spe-cific sites as well as calculating distances and travel times and assessingpotential routes.

Technological expertise as well as technology migrate from militaryto non-military settings. The chief technology officer for the WyndhamHotel Group who was appointed in 2008 worked for many years in theUS Navy and Department of Defense. In the military, he ‘‘was involvedin the development of the Tomahawk cruise missile system’’ and‘‘helped develop software for unmanned [sic] aerial vehicles’’(Ostrowski, 2009, p. 40). His efforts to ‘‘resell weapon systems for othergovernment projects’’ prepared him for the private sector and ‘‘turnedhim into the computer engineer and information technology executivethat he is today’’ (Ibid., p. 40). The military-industrial complex has cre-ated a growing intimacy between arms and commerce that has facili-tated the movement of skilled personnel between the military andthe business world. Knowledge fundamental to managing hotel tech-nology can be sourced through military channels.

Technological spillovers from the military to civilian realms have hadtangible benefits. They can contribute to advancements in safety and tothe development of more innovative experiences for tourists. Construc-tive technological progress has flowed from the military arsenal and aseemingly permanent war economy. However, it is also apparent thattechnology can drive ambitions tied to the development of a surveil-lance-oriented gaze and create new and more invasive ways to moni-tor—and market to—increasingly mobile consumers such as tourists.The conversion of military technologies to civilian uses has not in-creased the transparency of military financing or encouraged greaterpublic debate. Rather, this technology-conversion process has createda type of business-military relationship in which the continued impor-tance of the military-industrial complex is fortified by the widespreadconsumption of transportation, large commercial markets for high-technology products that support mobile purchasing and targeted mar-keting, and the desire to adopt advanced security and risk-control mea-sures in situations where commerce and tourism are potentially underthreat.

680 A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689

Tourism, Security, and the Military

That security measures have become increasingly militarized in thetourism industry may be a response to the desire for safety at a timeof perceived global and national insecurity; there is an unfolding con-text of acts of terrorism directed against mass transit facilities and land-mark luxury hotels in popular tourism destinations (Hall, Timothy, &Duval, 2003; Sonmez, 1998). Rising demand for security has creatednew job opportunities for ex-military personnel. The cruise and casinoindustries routinely hire former members of the armed forces as secu-rity officers (Dworin, 1993; Landry, 2003). Social anxiety associatedwith 11 September 2001 has created an unprecedented sense of vulner-ability, underpinned the desire for greater security, and generatedopportunities for individuals who possess particular skills as a resultof their military backgrounds.

The belief that security threats should be prevented from interferingwith play and consumer spending is widely shared. There has been in-creased use of military-derived surveillance technologies and informa-tion-gathering techniques in order to identify potential menaces totourism-related commerce. Fantasy-driven consumption is seen as vul-nerable to disruption and therefore in need of protection. Withinshielded bubbles, consumers can indulge their tastes while removedfrom potential dangers (Minca, 2000). It is these cloistered spacesacross the globe—for example, gated communities and exclusive holi-day resorts—that provide wealthy consumers with pleasure-filled ref-uges where they can partake in conspicuous consumption. Extremesof affluence may exist alongside poverty. Advanced security measureswithin tourism enclaves enable managers to control within them muchof what would be impossible to control outside of them.

Tourism is complicated by its relationship to violence and conflict(Sonmez, 1998). Insurgency, warfare, and terrorism have serious impli-cations for the mass movement of people around the world (Hall et al.,2003). With the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 and the bomb-ings that took place in Bali, Madrid, and London between 2002 and2005, more attention than ever has been devoted to safety and securityin the tourism industry. Deadly and destructive acts intended to gener-ate fear and turmoil are typically directed at commercially or symboli-cally significant sites; successful and unsuccessful acts of terrorism havebeen widely publicized by the media and can create the impressionthat tourism is under siege. Responses to terrorist and criminal threatsinclude the adoption of practices, innovations, and inventions devel-oped and refined within the military.

Defense technologies have been a source of commercial applicationssuitable for the marketplace, and technology-driven security measuresthat are used to protect corporatized consumption spaces are one suchapplication. Luxury cruise ships are examples of tourism-oriented en-claves that are self-contained holiday environments. Seabourn CruiseLines—a company that caters to ultra-affluent passengers, ‘‘[m]any[of whom] have net worths in the millions’’ (Hannafin & Sarna,2006, p. 304)—has equipped at least one of its vessels with a weapon

A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689 681

recently acquired from the US military. Off the coast of Somalia, pi-rates attempting to board Seabourn Spirit in 2005 were repelled by ‘‘anew, non-lethal, high-tech sonic weapon that sends earsplitting noisein a concentrated beam’’ (Young, 2005, p. 10). The military has exper-imented with weapons that generate a tone capable of incapacitatingthose who hear it. These devices were tested against enemy combatantsin Iraq by US forces (Turse, 2008). Global economic disparities meanthat the managers of sequestered tourism spaces are likely to continueto adopt increasingly sophisticated measures that ensure pleasure-dri-ven consumption occurs unabated.

Not only have the much publicized threats of piracy and terrorismprompted tourism operators to turn to military technology, but surveil-lance equipment has appealed to casino managers who have long beencombating pilfering and surreptitious practices adopted by some pa-trons. RemoteReality Corporation, a Massachusetts-based companythat specializes in the development of advanced surveillance technolo-gies, ‘‘is taking [its] current product sets, which are tailored for militarydefense, government and other commercial applications, and tailoringthem to meet the needs of the casino market’’ (Holtmann, 2007b, p.9). The company’s ‘‘security and surveillance systems provide persis-tent situational awareness in a 360-degree domain’’ and can be usedto monitor a particular situation within a casino and still observe thearray of activities that occur around it. One of the military’s applica-tions of RemoteReality’s technology is the operation of ‘‘remotely pi-loted vehicles in combat zones’’ (Ibid., p. 9).

The same technology has been adapted to observe the actions of ca-sino visitors more closely. Intensified surveillance is used to ensure thatconsumption, pleasure, and revenue generation continue to occur inthe manner envisioned by casino operators. The dissemination of ad-vanced military technologies into the casino industry creates the possi-bility of panoptic spaces where behaviour that could potentiallyinterfere with the smooth functioning of the casino can be quicklyidentified and addressed. Suveillance methods create an area of obser-vation within which an operator seeks to find activities that are out oforder or out of place.

Intensified security measures are not only driven by advances in tech-nology but also by the expansion of a military and surveillance-orientedbureaucracy. An enormous intelligence apparatus—a plethora of dif-ferent agencies and thousands of people—came into existence notonly to ascertain the capability and intentions of the US’s enemiesbut also to combat them, both overtly and covertly, around the world.Individuals who are a product of the military-industrial complex maycreate, once they depart from the military, entrepreneurial opportuni-ties for themselves that are oriented around their intelligence-gather-ing skills. Based in Annapolis, Maryland, iJET assesses potential risksto tourists for corporate clients, including the multinational corporatetravel agency Carlson Wagonlit Travel (Morgan, 2007).

Information about more than 180 countries and 260 cities is col-lected and scrutinized by iJET. Former CIA, FBI, and KGB agents staffthe company’s ‘‘operations centre’’ that has a ‘‘distinctly militaristic

682 A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689

feel’’ (Ibid., p. 22). Tourism would appear to be taking place within anincreasingly volatile and uncertain world; destinations are assessed forrisks and are subjected to a type of scrutiny that is militarized in nature.As a result of the backgrounds of its senior managers and employees,iJET maintains ‘‘a network of contacts still active in the intelligencecommunity’’ and still provides services to the ‘‘odd private military con-tractor’’ (Ibid., p. 23).

Performing tasks similar to iJET is a company called Control RisksGroup, an organization with offices in a number of US cities—NewYork, Los Angeles, Houston, and Washington, D.C.—that possesses‘‘an army of security consultants’’ including ‘‘former intelligence offi-cers, defence engineers, customs agents, forensic accountants, policeand soldiers’’ (Hart, 2004, p. 31). Control Risks Group provides corpo-rate clients with ‘‘extra safety required for travelling in suspect orincreasingly lawless areas’’ (Ibid., p. 31). Intelligence gathering andhighly sophisticated communication and surveillance systems repre-sent the backbone of the modern US military. The military and associ-ated intelligence services have trained a large group of individuals whomay eventually apply their talents to the private sector, including busi-nesses that have a connection with the tourism industry.

A large and readily deployable ‘‘private army’’ with multiple capabil-ities relies upon an abundance of suitably trained personnel. Publicexpenditures indirectly subsidize private security operations when mil-itary experts retire and purse second careers as, for example, civiliananalysts, advisors, and consultants. There have also been direct connec-tions between the mobilization of military personnel and the organiza-tion of tourism spectacles. Military forces have directly participated inprotecting hallmark events from disruption, reinforcing the actions ofcivilian agencies and becoming the adjuncts of law enforcement.

Over 5,000 military personnel helped guard the Olympic Games inSalt Lake City, Utah from terrorist attack in 2002 (Baxter, 2002). TheGames have become a televised global spectacle that steers an enor-mous audience, billions of viewers, towards corporate sponsors thatwish to increase their market share around the world. City boostershave come to view Olympic Games in a promotional light, creatingenthusiasm for large-scale events, attracting the world’s attentionthrough the mass media, and trumpeting the economic growth to begenerated through tourism. The military has traditionally occupied it-self with enemies and threats outside of the US’s borders. However,with more recent terrorist acts has come the realization that externalenemies can attack from within and potentially sabotage methodicallyorganized consumption-driven events.

Efforts to militarize hotel security have been viewed favourably by anindustry observer and security analyst whose recommendations andcommentary have been published in a trade magazine. While stayingat a hotel, he ‘‘saw a [security guard] decked out in a splendid militaryuniform strutting boldly through the lobby’’ (Marshall, 2004, p. 8).This behaviour was considered praiseworthy because guests ‘‘wantthe comfort of seeing and sensing security throughout the hotel’’(Ibid., p. 8). Being more military-like in terms of appearances and

A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689 683

conduct lends a perceived professionalism and credibility to securityendeavours.

It is also recommended that security personnel within hotels be is-sued military-style uniforms. The advice that is offered regarding theappearance of security uniforms is ‘‘the more para-military looking,the better’’ (Marshall, 1998, p. 10). An ideal uniform would consistof ‘‘a military-style light colored shirt with epaulets’’ as well as ‘‘pant-leg piping’’ that adds ‘‘additional command appearance’’ (Ibid., p.10). With ongoing ‘‘wars against terrorism’’ in full force, the fear of at-tack leaves many feeling less secure and gives momentum to the spreadof military symbols and imagery designed to reassure the civilian pop-ulation. The military-industrial complex and concerns about safetycontribute to a normalization of security procedures that adopt a mil-itary ‘‘look’’ or borrow from military practice.

Intensified security measures contribute to a rigid partitioning andcategorization of space, are used to augment control over territoryand risk, and promote militarized means of problem solving. Manytourist bubbles are well-protected zones of comfort and consumptionfrom which tourists can gaze at ‘‘other’’ places. An emerging and mil-itarized security culture within the tourism industry is driven by a gazethat, for tourists, can be reassuring through its ability to identify, clas-sify, and neutralize perceived threats. The prevalence of heightenedsecurity practices may feed into a process whereby visibly militarized ap-proaches to hazard management—and consumable images of such ap-proaches—become well established, customary, and conventional.

Consuming War

While the military-industrial complex has shaped technologicalchange and present-day security measures within the civilian domain,its impact upon US society is also noteworthy. War and the militaryare shaping consumption in the US in deep and influential ways(Turse, 2008). Popular culture reflects and reinforces images of theUS at war: action films with combat themes, military violence on televi-sion and in video games, and children’s toys that resemble weapons.The social militarization that has taken place allows war to appear com-forting, even entertaining and aesthetic. Pleasure for some is found inthe opportunity to participate in a military-action mystique or to playout warrior fantasies (Gibson, 1994). Power is sometimes exercised lessthrough coercion and more through ideological persuasion via play,fantasy, and escapism.

Patriotism through consumption has been encouraged to facilitatethe uninterrupted accumulation of profits. Appeals for people to adapttheir patterns of consumption in a manner consistent with the war ef-fort have been commonplace. During the Second World War, US con-sumers were asked to make sacrifices. Consumers, with the outbreak ofmore recent conflicts, have been implored to spend more (Lipsky,2002). In one sense, it is a pragmatic means of stimulating economicactivity. One could also suggest that its effect is more profound: com-

684 A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689

merce and markets are portrayed as a bulwark against external threats.Tourism, for example, can be viewed as an important manifestation offreedom. The freedom to travel is seen to exist in sharp contrast withtotalitarianism and terrorism.

In 2004, the state of Louisiana dedicated Tourism Week, an eventsponsored by the Travel Industry Association, to people serving inthe US military. The theme of Tourism Week was ‘‘Salute Our TroopsSafeguarding Our Freedom to Travel’’ (Milligan, 2004). US militaryoperations overseas were explicitly tied to protecting ‘‘Americans’ free-dom to travel’’ (Milligan, 2004, p. 12). The Travel Industry Associa-tion’s executive director remarked that

it is the American way to go out the door, hop in your car or on anairplane or cruise ship and go where ever you want. We should lookaround and see how many people in the world don’t get a chance todo that (Ibid., p. 12).

Tourism is explicitly tied to some of the US’s core values.Community festivals and events that reflect local or regional charac-

teristics may be infused with military themes. At the Santa Maria ValleyStrawberry Festival, an event attended by more than 40,000 people in2003, ‘‘several area defense contractors provided exhibits’’ (Zoltak,2003, p. 12). The participation of the aerospace industry was seen bythe festival’s manager as ‘‘a natural given’’ due to ‘‘the area’s proximityto Vandenburg Air Force base, a major launch site for. . .test flights ofmissile defense and other systems’’ (Ibid., p. 12). The nature of this fes-tival contributes to the normalization of military enterprise in thatarmaments manufacturing becomes associated with community devel-opment, civic pride, and celebration.

Acknowledging and honouring the achievements of military person-nel is also seen as a way for tourism operators to attract customers. Themanagers of zoos and aquariums, for example, have been encouragedto offer discounts to members of the armed forces ‘‘in order to estab-lish a good reputation’’ (Adrian, 2008, p. 182). Even when they areconsuming tourism products that are not imbued with military themes,patrons are reminded of war, their civic duty to ‘‘support the troops’’,and the patriotic gestures of tourism providers. Consumption that isdeliberately enmeshed with patriotism is aimed at situating collectivesupport for the military and opposition to terrorism within the sphereof commerce.

Military-themed entertainment is present within a range of tourism-oriented environments. Slot machines that can offer the user moreimmersive experiences have been built, and one particular modelhas been designed to simulate flight in a combat aircraft (Green,2007). ‘‘Extreme motion systems’’ can be found in ‘‘museums as wellas amusement centers’’ (Williams, 2006, p. 66); they have also becomea common fixture within theme parks. Official military training simu-lators are adapted for the purpose of cross over into the sphere of com-mercial amusement. Many of the individuals who develop simulatorsfor commercial audiences have a background in producing similartypes of devices for the defense industry and may choose to apply their

A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689 685

‘‘expertise to the arduous entertainment scene’’ (Ibid., p. 66). Whilesome simulators offer a ‘‘realistic [automobile] racing experience’’,others provide an ‘‘interactive jet combat experience’’ (Ibid., p. 66).Technology originating from ‘‘military training devices’’ has contrib-uted to the development of MaxFlight Corporation’s theme-park flightsimulator, a ‘‘fully networked dog fighting system’’ (Sherborne, 1999,pp. 39–40).

Certain sporting events such as the Super Bowl, the championshipgame of the National Football League, are becoming infused with mil-itary themes—in particular, the glorification of the capacity for vio-lence—as the pre-game festivities routinely include flyovers bymilitary aircraft (Robbins, 2008; Zoltak, 1998). This spectacle dignifiesmilitary ideals by integrating them into the realm of sport and enter-tainment. The incorporation of military themes into tourism- orevent-related consumption may also be part of efforts to recruit newsoldiers. There has been military sponsorship of the National Associa-tion for Stock Car Auto Racing (NASCAR), a sport that has over eightmillion fans at the prime recruiting ages of 18 to 24 years (Murphy,2008, p. 28; Turse, 2008, p. 142). In 2005, the US military spent almost$40 million in taxpayer money to fund various cars that bore the logosof different branches of the armed forces (Turse, 2008). Through tour-ism-oriented spectacles, the military-industrial complex obtains re-cruits that help to perpetuate its functioning. Automobile racing andthe tourism associated with it merge the home front and battlefieldin ways that are designed to be entertaining and to cultivate a dedi-cated fan base.

CONCLUSION

The connection between the tourism industry and military-indus-trial complex can be understood through the prism of political econ-omy. Military enterprise, and not simply war, has shaped the contoursof modern-day tourism. The tourism industry and this complex arenot mutually opposed; they do not only coexist but are complemen-tary. Far from being subverted by oppositional tendencies, capitalismfacilitates integration and possesses a dynamism that encourages prof-itable cross fertilization between different spheres. The economic sys-tem may have a tendency to divorce commodities from the hardrealities of the production processes that create them but it also hasthe capacity to unite different commercial spheres and keep potentialcontraries in a state of non-contradiction through opportunities togenerate profit.

Tourism is part of the intertwined machines of war and business. Thesustained development of technologies that, for example, hasten themovement of people around the world, enhance surveillance and thetracking of mobile individuals, support the flow of encrypted informa-tion, and trickle down into the consumer market are important to theoperation of the military-industrial complex and the tourism industry.Civilian innovations that emerge from military ones strengthen the

686 A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689

argument for the preservation of the complex and demonstrate its va-lue with respect to the US’s international industrial competitivenessand commercial activities increasingly oriented around mobility. Oneway a business-oriented military is driven to sustain itself is to findmeans of converging technologically with the very society—and tour-ism industry—it is obliged to protect.

In addition to advanced technology, the military-industrial complexis powered by an economy of trepidation: the sense that an omnipres-ent enemy could be anywhere and strike at any time. Dangers that maybe encountered on holiday create an eager market for the comfortingmeans of their mitigation. Militarized fantasies, compatible with tour-ism-related fantasies, secure tacit consent for the activities of the mili-tary-industrial complex, promote an approach to security thatinvolves spatial and risk control strategies, and may even bolster mili-tary recruitment. Certain tourism-oriented experiences contribute tothe development of internal solidarities that cohere against externalthreats.

Exploring the relationship between tourism and the military-indus-trial complex prompts one to ask about the social benefits and costsof military enterprise, who profits and who pays, and the ultimate aimsof society. What is also pertinent is the reproduction of a military-indus-trial complex beyond the reach of public scrutiny and possible contes-tation. An impression is created that the products of this complex aresimply no more than the fulfillment of widely held preferences and de-sires. Commercialization has placed militarization into a series ofostensibly apolitical realms: the ‘‘improvement’’ and ‘‘progress’’ thatresult from technological advancements, heightened security measuresfor the sake of public safety, and consumers’ own fantasies that drivecertain parts of the tourism industry.

Issues related to the continued expansion of the military-industrialcomplex have a tendency to be seen as unproblematic. The naturaliza-tion and legitimization of this complex pushes into the backgroundsuch matters as the current scale of military expenditure. That tourismwould appear to be so distant from the practice of military prepared-ness and the commercial-military alliance may also explain the over-whelming absence of debate about the tourism-military interface.The success of the military-industrial complex depends, in part, uponits ability to avoid serious investigation and hide what ought to be dis-cussed. Persistent in peace as well as war, military enterprise becomesaccepted as normal.

Connections between tourism and the military are potentially a con-cern for commentators and scholars who wish to encourage the fur-therance of responsible tourism. It could be argued that the tourismindustry and military-industrial complex are linked to the maintenanceof US hegemony and have symbolized a bellicose, expanding nation inrecent decades and its unsustainable way of life. Relationships andinterdependencies, however, are not always plainly apparent. Regard-less of the connections amongst tourism, the military-industry com-plex, and commerce, the weapons, armed forces, and industries thatare tied to the perpetual preparation for war can appear removed

A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689 687

and distant from the civilian sphere. The military, when war is not tak-ing place, is seemingly invisible because an armed presence is not situ-ated in the foreground, as it often is in conflict situations.

US forces have fought their more recent wars in distant places andcensors and journalists have masked the full extent of war’s suffering(Sherry, 1995). The resulting sanitization has made war more accept-able. Its respectability probably explains the tendency to see the mili-tary as an institution that spearheads technological achievements,acts as the guarantor of the country’s prosperity and security, and isemblematic of national greatness. Nevertheless, the military-industrialcomplex is ultimately intended to wound and kill. Tourism’s connec-tions with this complex may be distasteful to some and contravenethe principles that are seen to underpin responsible tourism.

The manner in which tourism complements activities that appear tocontradict the logic that underpins it is worthy of further investigation.Research could explore in more detail the relationship between tour-ism and wider transformations within US society and capitalism thatare potentially responsible for unanticipated connections amongst arange of social, cultural, and economic activities. The intensificationof commercial imperatives may be driving efforts to forge relationshipsbetween spheres that are typically seen as, or understood to be, unre-lated. In pursuit of profits, boundaries between different domainsare creatively breached. Capitalism is a powerful and flexible wealth-producing system; it promotes convergences that serve commercialends and reinforce the existing state of affairs.

The durability of the military-industrial complex is partly a product ofits entrepreneurialism and adaptability; new and profitable civilian out-lets for military technologies are being found or developed. How is themilitary-industrial complex, including the destructive technologies itgenerates, made to appear as if it is compatible with the values that dom-inate the civilian sphere—and, specifically, the tourism industry? Ratio-nalization, corporate interests, public relations initiatives, and marketingendeavours potentially mask the unpleasant consequences of the mili-tary-industrial complex. The ability to exert destructive power becomesreformulated in symbolic form—through various manifestations of‘‘homeland security’’ and the promotion of military-themed consump-tion and entertainment—and is thus rendered more widely agreeableand palatable by carefully constructed and seductive veils. Efforts topeer behind, slice through, or understand the making of such veils de-serves attention from, and could be led by, tourism scholars.

REFERENCES

Adrian, C. (2008). It’s not just animals that draw the crowds. Tourist Attractions andParks, 38(7), 182–187.

Babbin, J. (1994). Real defense conversion requires tax relief for R&D. AviationWeek & Space Technology, 141(6), 61.

Baxter, S. (2002, February 3). America throws anti-terror net over Winter Olympics.Sunday Times, 28.

Bell, D. (1976). The cultural contradictions of capitalism. New York: Basic Books.

688 A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689

Bianchi, R. (2009). The ‘‘critical turn’’ in tourism studies: A radical critique.Tourism Geographies, 11, 484–504.

Bramwell, B., Lane, B., McCabe, S., Mosedale, J., & Scarles, C. (2008). Researchperspectives on responsible tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16,253–257.

Britton, S. (1982). The political economy of tourism in the Third World. Annals ofTourism Research, 9, 331–358.

Britton, S. (1991). Tourism, capital, and place. Towards a critical geography oftourism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 9, 451–478.

D’Amore, L. (1988). Tourism: A vital force for peace. The Futurist, 22(3), 23–28.Dworin, P. (1993). Eye spy: A candid interview with Mike Wallis. International

Gaming & Wagering Business, 14(5), 46.Gailbraith, J. (2004). The worldly philosophers and the war economy. Social

Research, 71, 293–304.Gibson, J. (1994). Warrior dreams: Manhood in post-Vietnam America. New York: Hill

and Wang.Green, M. (2007, May). Top gun. Slot Manager, 12.Hall, C. M., Timothy, D., & Duval, D. (Eds.). (2003). Safety and security in tourism.

New York: The Haworth Hospitality Press.Hannafin, M., & Sarna, H. (2006). Frommer’s cruises and ports of call 2007. Hoboken,

NJ: Wiley Publishing.Hart, J. (2004). Security pass. Business Travel World, 2(8), 29–33.Henderson, J. (2000). War as a tourist attraction: The case of Vietnam. International

Journal of Tourism Research, 2, 269–280.Henderson, J. (2007). Remembering the Second World War in Singapore:

Wartime heritage as a visitor attraction. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 2, 36–52.Higham, R. (2003). 100 years of airpower & aviation. College Station: Texas A&M

University Press.Hodl, J. (2006). Table technology in demand. Casino Journal, 19(3), 34.Holtmann, A. (2007a). Top 20 most innovative gaming technology products of

2006. Casino Journal, 20(6), 32–38.Holtmann, A. (2007b). RemoteReality, North American Video announce partner-

ship. Casino Journal, 20(5), 9.Jensen, H. (1989). Marx and Keynes: Alternative views on capitalism?. Atlantic

Economic Journal, 17(4), 29–38.Kaplan, C. (2006). Precision targets: GPS and the militarization of US. Consumer

identity. American Quarterly, 58, 693–713.Kirby, A. (2007). Calling for revenue generation. Hotels, 41(9), 53–56.Landry, J. (2003). Safe havens at sea. Successful Meetings, 52(9), 40.Lee, Y.-S. (2006). The Korean War and tourism: Legacy of the war and the

development of the tourism industry in South Korea. International Journal ofTourism Research, 8, 157–170.

Leibstone, M. (2009). It’s the economy, stupid. Military Technology, 33(9), 8.Leslie, S. (1994). The Cold War and American science. The military-industrial-academic

complex at MIT and Stanford. New York: Columbia University Press.Lipsky, M. (2002, January 28). The war at home: Wartime used to entail national

unity and sacrifice. American Prospect, pp. 15–16.Litvin, S. (1998). Tourism: The world’s peace industry? Journal of Travel Research,

37(1), 63–66.Lotchin, R. (1992). Fortress California, 1910–1961: From warfare to welfare. New York:

Oxford University Press.Marshall, A. (1998). Hotel security should wear appropriate uniforms. Hotel &

Motel Management, 213(10), 10.Marshall, A. (2004). The tie that binds (and that can threaten hotel staff safety).

Hotel & Motel Management, 219(8), 8.Mathisen, N., & Mathisen, O. (2008). Many challenges; many solutions. Cruise

Industry News Quarterly, 19(75), 9.Melman, S. (1970). Pentagon capitalism: The political economy of war. New York:

McGraw-Hill.Melman, S. (1974). The permanent war economy: American capitalism in decline. New

York: Simon and Schuster.

A. Weaver / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 672–689 689

Mills, C. (1956). The power elite. New York: Oxford University Press.Milligan, M. (2004). Tourism week focus is freedom. Travel Weekly, 63(19),

12.Minca, C. (2000). ‘‘The Bali syndrome’’: The explosion and implosion of ‘‘exotic’’

tourist spaces. Tourism Geographies, 2, 389–403.Morgan, I. (2007, August). Intelligence ops. Business Travel World, 22–23.Murphy, B. (2008). Racing for recruits. Soldiers, 63(2), 28–30.O’Hara, P. (2000). Marx, Veblen, and contemporary institutional political economy:

Principles and unstable dynamics of capitalism. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Ostrowski, C. (2006). Wyndham marketing toward Generation X with free cell

phone promotion. Hotel Business, 15(11), 43.Ostrowski, C. (2009). Gibson brings new tech mandate to bear at Wyndham. Hotel

Business, 18(12), 40.Paradis, T. (2002). The political economy of theme development in small

urban places: The case of Roswell, New Mexico. Tourism Geographies, 4,22–43.

Rip, M., & Hasik, J. (2002). The precision revolution: GPS and the future of aerialwarfare. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press.

Robbins, J. (2008, February 10). Flyovers: Valuable aids or flights of fancy? OrlandoSentinel, C1.

Ruben, P. (2008). The power of X: Coaster transformation complete. Park World, 8.Ruttan, V. (2006). Will government programs spur the next breakthrough?. Issues

in Science and Technology, 22(2), 55–61.Seaton, A. (1999). War and thanatourism: Waterloo 1815–1914. Annals of Tourism

Research, 26, 130–158.Sherborne, P. (1999). Exchange comes full circle. Amusement Business, 111(17),

39–40.Sherry, M. (1995). In the shadow of war: The United States since the 1930s. New Haven:

Yale University.Smith, V. (1998). War and tourism: An American ethnography. Annals of Tourism

Research, 25, 202–227.Sonmez, S. (1998). Tourism, terrorism, and political instability. Annals of Tourism

Research, 25, 416–456.Strenk, T. (2009). How it works: GPS. Restaurant Business, 108(7), 74.Stroshane, T. (1997). The second contradiction of capitalism and Karl Polanyi’s

The Great Transformation. Capitalism, Nature Socialism, 8(3), 93–116.Turse, N. (2008). The complex: How the military invades our everyday lives. London:

Faber and Faber.Weber, S. (2005). Targets of opportunity: On the militarization of thinking. New York:

Fordham University.Williams, K. (2006). Total immersion: Personal simulation. Tourist Attractions and

Parks, 36(1), 66–70.Winter, C. (2009). Tourism, social memory and the Great War. Annals of Tourism

Research, 36, 607–626.Young, S. (2005). Seabourn Spirit averts piracy off African coast. Travel Agent,

323(5), 10.Zoltak, J. (1998). Super Bowl pre-game show to focus on 150th anniversary.

Amusement Business, 110(3), 6.Zoltak, J. (2003). Strawberries and space tandem: A winner for Santa Maria Valley.

Amusement Business, 115(20), 12.

Submitted 7 March 2010. Resubmitted 27 November 2010. Final version 30 November2010. Accepted 17 December 2010. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: HassoSpode

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com