Infection Among the Elite and Disease Burden on the Poor

In January 2020, a German tourist vacationing in the Canary Islands became Spain's first COVID-19 case. This individual had been in contact with a Chinese businesswoman infected with the virus in Germany before flying to the archipelago. This event foreshadowed a pattern that would persist throughout the pandemic: pathogens travel quickly along the routes of wealthy tourists, businesspeople, and the international elite.

In the early months of COVID-19, the virus was often linked to the movement of the elite: ski holidays, business trips to Wuhan, and luxury cruise ships became vectors for transmission. According to scientist Bjorn Thor Arnarson in Scientific Reports, "transport is what it takes to distribute the virus to new places." Those able to cross borders most easily are largely from the wealthy class.

This dynamic created strange perceptions among the public. In Mexico, Governor Luis Miguel Barbosa made a controversial statement: "If you are rich, you are at risk; if you are poor, you are not. We poor people are immune." Though absurd, this remark reflected a real phenomenon: many of Mexico's wealthiest bankers returned from a ski trip in Vail, Colorado, carrying the virus. When health authorities tried to contact some in the group, many did not respond.

However, diseases linked to elite travel rarely remain confined to them. Public health officials quickly observed a familiar paradox: wealthy travelers often accelerate the international spread of disease, but it is the poor who suffer the most when outbreaks occur. During the COVID-19 pandemic, affluent families retreated to second homes, worked remotely, and isolated from sources of infection, while the working class continued to labor in crowded cities, factories, and used risky public transport. The rich carried the virus across borders, and the poor bore the consequences.

This raises an uncomfortable political question: Should wealthy societies bear greater responsibility for the epidemiological risks arising from elite mobility? This issue surfaced with the MV Hondius incident—a luxury cruise ship that left the port of Ushuaia, Argentina, on April 1, carrying 88 passengers and 59 crew from 23 countries, with some paying up to €18,000 ($21,000) for the trip. When the ship approached the Canary Islands in May, Spanish authorities initially refused it permission to dock due to concerns about hantavirus (linked to seven confirmed cases, two suspected, and three deaths). After passenger protests, a compromise allowed the ship to anchor off Tenerife. Canary Islands Governor Fernando Clavijo justified the precaution, noting that infected rodents on board could transmit the disease to the mainland—a stark illustration of how wealthy travelers can bring pathogens to places where local communities must bear the consequences.

Ultimately, the MV Hondius incident highlights a familiar reality of globalization: the elite remain the world's most mobile group, but they rarely face the consequences of their travel. The wealthy are repatriated for medical monitoring and treatment, while at-risk regions must cope with uncertainty and danger on their own.

This article reflects the author's views and does not necessarily align with the editorial stance of Al Jazeera.