Apparently, it used to be easier to travel the world. That sounds simplistic but I'm finding out how true it is. To me, the ideal way to travel is overland from country to country, rather than flying from city to city, missing entire chunks altogether. Unfortunately, I'm in a part of the world that has lots of barriers. Algeria, for example, is a huge country, stuck between Morocco and Tunisia, that has tight visa restrictions. Libya is also difficult: their visa requires you to have a guide and escort 24/7. As a result, both countries have little tourism and high costs. Fewer visitors mean less tourist infrastructure and less competition for hotels and restaurants so prices are high and the quality is low.
I did look at joining a tour group for Libya. One company wanted $2000 for an 8-night tour, and 5 of the 8 nights were spent camping. Are they kidding? For two grand, I could get a Sudanese garden boy to mow my lawn for the rest of my life. Nuts.
So, inevitably, I skipped Algeria and Libya, and flew to Egypt. I will also have to skip Saudi Arabia (no tourist visas issued) and obviously give Iraq and Afghanistan a pass. This is disappointing: in the 1970's, the common hippie travel route was from Europe, through Turkey, through Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan and into India. It is also more time consuming to have to plan travel around countries rather than through them. I've spent days in internet shops, trying to book flights. But then I'm also not a fan of long distance bus rides with chickens, goats, screaming kids and having your legs wrapped around your head due to overcrowding. Cross-country travel in buses that used to be yellow, have bench seats and once ferried kids to school in Michigan are miserable. Hitch-hiking can be infinitely better.
As I'm finding out in Yemen right now, the presence of 'tribal tensions' is also a big downer. My plan to cross to Oman by land is quickly becoming toast.
