The Lens: American woman killed by hippo during safari raises safety concerns

There is currently an ongoing lawsuit against the safari tour company African Portfolio following the tragic death of an American woman in a hippo attack.

I believe that African Portfolio should take some responsibility for this incident. First and foremost, they arranged the walking safari and should have been aware of the specifics of the trip, including potential dangers and the qualifications of the tour guides.

Given the well-documented risks associated with wildlife encounters, African Portfolio should have provided the couple with thorough warnings about possible dangers and outlined the steps to take in case of an accident.

However, it is important to note that African Portfolio is not solely to blame for this tragedy.

As stated by Rodney Gould, the company’s lawyer, they do not have full control over operations in Zambia. Their focus is to arrange lodging, and the owners of the lodging provide the guides. Being based in the US makes it challenging for African Portfolio to ascertain how tour guides are trained and how the animals and tourists behave.

This lack of direct oversight complicates their ability to prevent such incidents.

To minimise risks on future safaris, companies could make it mandatory for customers to remain in a safe vehicle while observing wildlife.

If customers desire closer contact with animals, the company should provide protective gear to ensure safety from potential bites.

Additionally, tour guides should possess proven skills in handling weapons to effectively address emergencies, thereby protecting customers from severe animal attacks.

Read up on the issue in last week’s The Lens

The administration of US President Donald Trump is temporarily suspending US military aid for Ukraine, the White House confirmed last week.

The suspension was announced just days after Trump clashed with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office.

During his election campaign, Trump had questioned the necessity of US aid to Ukraine.

Under Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, the US was Ukraine’s largest supporter in the defensive struggle against Russia.

The United States also split with its European allies last month by refusing to blame Russia for its invasion of Ukraine in votes on three UN resolutions seeking an end to the three-year war.

In the UN General Assembly, the US joined Russia in voting against a Europe-backed Ukrainian resolution that called out Moscow’s aggression and demanded a withdrawal of Russian troops.

The US pushed for a vote on its original draft in the more powerful UN Security Council, where resolutions are legally binding, and it has veto power along with Russia, China, Britain and France.

The vote in the 15-member council was 10-0, with five European countries abstaining.

The duelling resolutions reflect the tensions between the US and Ukraine after Trump suddenly opened negotiations with Russia to resolve the conflict quickly.

In the first vote, the General Assembly approved the Ukrainian resolution 93-18 with 65 abstentions.

The result showed some diminished support for Ukraine because previous assembly votes saw more than 140 nations condemn Russia’s aggression.

The assembly then turned to the US-drafted resolution. The resolution acknowledges “the tragic loss of life throughout the Russia-Ukraine conflict” and “implores a swift end to the conflict and further urges a lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia”, but never mentions Moscow’s aggression.

• What is the role of the United States and President Donald Trump in the UN General Assembly?

• What are the implications of the US stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict?