Australia’s travel sector is at odds with the federal government over the current classification of the UAE and Qatar as “Do Not Travel” destinations, with industry representatives arguing the Level 4 designations are creating an insurance blind spot for Australians who transit through Dubai and Doha airports without ever leaving the terminal.
The core concern raised by the Australian Travel Industry Association (ATIA) is not about encouraging leisure travel to conflict-affected areas – it is about what happens to a passenger who sprains an ankle or falls ill during a layover in a Level 4-rated country. Under most standard travel insurance policies, a Level 4 Smartraveller advisory effectively removes coverage for the duration of a traveller’s time in that country. That applies even to those who remain airside, inside the terminal, waiting for a connecting flight to Europe or elsewhere.
Dean Long, chief executive officer of ATIA, put the scenario plainly when speaking to the Today program on June 1, 2026: “Say, for example, you rolled your ankle or got sick and needed medical attention at the airport. In a Level 4 country, you likely wouldn’t be covered by your travel insurance.” Long’s position is that a downgrade to Level 3 – a rating that would still formally discourage tourism to those destinations – would be sufficient to restore insurance coverage for transit passengers, without signalling that the region is safe for holidaymakers. “We don’t want people to holiday in the Middle East, we want them to transit through, with full travel insurance,” he said, as reported by Nine.com.au.
Long also pointed to a volume argument: more than 150,000 Australians had moved through Middle East transit hubs since the elevated advisory was introduced, without reported incident. He characterised the Level 4 designation for transit-only travellers as “unnecessary,” and said it generates anxiety without a corresponding safety benefit. A June 2026 Finder survey cited by Nine.com.au found that 26% of Australians had cancelled or postponed travel because of the Middle East conflict – a figure that reflects the downstream commercial impact of the advisories on the broader travel sector.
Some Australians have weighed the advisory against their own circumstances and continued with existing plans. Tony Sergo, 65, from regional New South Wales, transited through Dubai International Airport earlier in 2026 while travelling to Europe with his wife. “For us to cancel and rebook would have been a huge financial loss, so why do it. The risk to me was small so away we went,” Sergo told Nine.com.au.
Sergo reported that the airport was operating without disruption and that neither he nor his wife experienced any anxiety during the transit. He added that he trusted Emirates to make its own operational safety assessments before scheduling flights through any given corridor. His account is consistent with Long’s data point about the volume of Australians moving through those hubs without incident – though it also illustrates the insurance exposure those travellers are taking on without necessarily realising it.
The Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) declared the Middle East conflict a Significant Event on March 3, 2026. The declaration is a coordination mechanism rather than a coverage expansion – it activates an industry-wide taskforce, triggers claims data collection and analysis, and formalises engagement between the ICA, its members, and federal government agencies. On coverage, the ICA has been consistent: war and armed conflict are standard exclusions across travel insurance products globally, and that position has not changed. The rationale, as the ICA set out in its March 13, 2026, FAQ, is actuarial – the unpredictability and scale of armed conflict make the risk effectively uninsurable at a price point that would be commercially viable for the broader market.
What the ICA has sought to clarify is that the exclusion is narrower in practice than some travellers may assume. Losses that are not causally linked to the conflict – a medical episode from an unrelated condition, lost luggage from a non-conflict-related delay, or a trip disruption caused by something other than the war – remain subject to individual assessment and may still be covered depending on the policy terms. Several ICA member insurers have also extended policy end dates for travellers caught up in airport and airspace closures, meaning coverage does not lapse simply because a disruption pushes a trip past its original scheduled return.
On the question of whether a Do Not Travel advisory automatically nullifies a policy, the ICA’s position is nuanced. “Being in a ‘Do Not Travel’ country due to a diverted flight or unplanned stop won’t automatically invalidate your cover. Whether a claim is paid depends on the cause of the loss. If it’s directly linked to the conflict, it’s likely excluded, but losses unrelated to war and conflict remain covered. Every claim is assessed individually,” the ICA stated in its March 13 FAQ.
The ICA has advised policyholders not to cancel bookings unilaterally before speaking with their airline or travel agent, as doing so may affect their entitlements to refunds or rebooking credits. Travellers in affected areas have been directed to the Smartraveller website and encouraged to register with the Australian government’s crisis page. For those uncertain about whether a claim would be paid, the ICA’s guidance is to lodge regardless. “Contact your insurer and lodge a claim even if you’re unsure of your coverage,” the council stated, noting that all claims are assessed on individual merit. The ICA has also addressed the question of future premium impacts, noting that war exclusions have long been a feature of travel insurance products. On that basis, the council said the current conflict is unlikely, on its own, to translate into across-the-board premium increases – though it acknowledged that the longer-term effects of the situation remain uncertain while the conflict continues.
