Is the Call for an Olympic Boycott Justified?

By Meghan Nash

If everyone deserves a chance at redemption, this summer just may be China’s golden opportunity.  Granted the honor of hosting the summer Olympics, China also received a chance to transcend memories of a tumultuous past and transform their world image, especially in regard to human rights.  However, whether China is taking the appropriate steps to accomplish this goal is debatable.  For instance, China decided to hold the 2008 Olympic closing ceremonies in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, a location infamous for the massacre of hundreds of student protestors in 1989.  To choose this haunted place to house the finale of a historical event, one created to celebrate the vivacity of the human body, epitomizes the controversy enveloped in this year’s summer games.  China appears unable, or perhaps unwilling, to relinquish their past portrayal as a restrictive communist government, presiding over citizens devoid of civil liberties.  Questionable relations with several brutal African presidents, combined with heavy restrictions on journalists and tourists and currently unsuitable environmental conditions, have resulted in heavy criticism of China having been chosen as the host country, and boycott threats from many countries.  China and supporters of the Beijing games, including U.S. President Bush, argue that the Olympics are meant to remain separate from politics and, therefore, the games should proceed as planned.  But China’s assertions have failed to silence the opposition’s noise, which is only growing stronger as the ceremonial torch draws closer to Beijing.

Critics list China’s international ties as the main source for their opposition.  Recent escalations in several African human rights crises have resulted in closer scrutiny of the relationships between Presidents Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir of Sudan and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, and the rest of the international community.  Bashir was recently indicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide; specifically the unresolved genocide occurring in Darfur resulting in the deaths of over 400,000 men, women, and children at the hands of the janjaweed militia in addition to two million forced from their homes.  China, a state that benefits from close economic ties with the present government of Sudan, attracted more criticism when it denounced the ICC’s decision to prosecute Bashir for these deaths by “expressing grave concern and misgivings about the International Criminal Court prosecutor's indictment of the Sudanese leader.”   However, unwilling to take up a solo crusade against the ICC’s decision this close to the Olympics, China (for the time being) has made no move to interfere.  

Adding fuel to the fire was the concurrent discovery by the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) that China sold weapons, specifically 200-plus army trucks, to the Sudanese government after the institution of an arms embargo in 2005.  Many speculate that China is providing Sudan with illegal military equipment in exchange for the continued outflow of its oil, of which China is heavily dependent.  Frustrated peacekeepers often point to China’s key role as an oil buyer as a potential solution for the Darfur crisis.  If China threatened to withdraw its oil business, the Sudanese government might be pressured into a peace agreement.  So far, China has refused to take that step.

Farther south on the African continent, the presidential election in Zimbabwe resulted in another human rights crisis when the opponents of current president, Robert Mugabe, were brutally murdered in the months preceding the election.  In the presidential primary, which took place in March of 2008, Mugabe’s opponent, Morgan Tsvangirai of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party, secured the majority of the votes.  Determined not to lose in the general election, Mugabe looked the other way, or perhaps even endorsed, the killings of any Zimbabwean citizens who supported the MDC.  As a result, one week before the scheduled general election was scheduled to occur, Tsvangirai withdrew his candidacy, thereby guaranteeing Mugabe’s victory.  The subsequent outcries from civil rights groups and other international governments led to a United Nations investigation on the legitimacy of the election and, therefore, of Mugabe’s presidency.  The proposed sanctions, that included an arms embargo and limiting Mugabe’s travel abilities, were squashed by Chinese and Russian delegates on July 11 when both exercised their Security Council veto.  Less than a month before the commencement of the Olympics, China voted against investigating Mugabe, a man accused of condoning murder and rigging national elections.  China defended its veto, stating that “sanctions amounted to unwarranted interference in Zimbabwe's domestic affairs and would have threatened preliminary talks between Mugabe's government and representatives of his chief political rival, Morgan Tsvangirai, to resolve the country's crisis.”   But, to a world already suspicious of China’s stance on human rights, this veto simply serves as another strike against the country.  One critic stated that “when China was awarded the 2008 Olympics, it was with the hope and expectation that the country would open up to the world and address human-rights issues. China hasn’t kept up its side of this moral contract that was implied by so many countries voting for it.”

A bit closer to home, China also failed in the eyes of the international community to appropriately respond to the crisis in Myanmar in May 2008.  China’s southern neighbor, Myanmar (or Burma) experienced a horrendous cyclone that resulted in the deaths of thousands of its citizens and left thousands more homeless.  The military junta, which has ruled Myanmar since its hostile takeover in 1988, refused outside disaster relief for weeks while thousands of its citizens lay helpless in unreachable areas of the country without medical attention, food, or fresh water supplies.  Yet again offered an opportunity to help those in distress, China neglected to step up to the plate.  As a financial backer of Myanmar’s ruling junta, China could have easily exercised its position of power to convince the officials to allow international relief workers to enter the country.  However, China chose not to intervene and continued to support a government that maintains its power over its people with guns and death threats.  Struggling to survive in yet another country notorious for human rights violations, Myanmar’s civil rights groups frequently plead with the Chinese government for help, but their pleas, so far, appear to have fallen on deaf ears.

While China’s international policies have raised concern over the appropriateness of serving as Olympic host, it is China’s recent domestic issues that have resulted in the loudest protests.  As previously mentioned, the Tiananmen Square massacre achieved infamy in June 1989, when pictures of military tanks and Chinese soldiers killing student demonstrators were splashed across televisions around the world.  In addition to the hundreds killed in the square, hundreds more around the country were executed or thrown into prison for “counterrevolutionary activities”- many of whom never received a fair trial and remain in their prison cells to this day.  Director of Asian Advocacy at Human Rights Watch, Sophie Richardson, advocated that “China could replace the image of the lone man blocking the tanks with the image of the Tiananmen prisoners being freed – a truly Olympian gesture.”   At this time, about 130 citizens still serve prison sentences for their supposed involvement in the Tiananmen protests.  China has shown no sign of entertaining this suggestion; in fact many of the Tiananmen participants and victims’ family members are still harassed by the government, along with anyone who challenges the “official” version of the events from those June days.

Harassment of governmental dissenters appears to be a trend with the Chinese government- just ask the tourists and journalists traveling to Beijing for the Olympics.  Tourists are restricted from bringing books or papers that may be considered disapproving of the Chinese government and the specific regions that correspondents are permitted to enter have been severely limited.  In an effort to improve their image before the games begin, Chinese security officials have been detaining citizens they suspect are relaying unpleasant information, specifically about human rights violations, to the outside world.  Some journalists are imprisoned or put under house arrest; Huang Qi, described in the Washington Post how he was “told to read the Communist Party-run newspaper, People's Daily, and forced to watch an endless loop of propaganda video… it was a ‘law study seminar’ intended to correct his misconceptions about the law."   This extreme constraint on the outflow of information is serving as a red flag for many critics- what exactly is China working so hard to hide from the international community, and how can the Olympics be held in a place that demonstrates so much disregard for basic rights, including the freedom of speech?

Recent outbursts in Tibet have also drawn unwanted attention to China’s domestic problems.  On March 10th, 2008 Tibetan Buddhist monks took to the streets of Lhasa, symbolically protesting on the 49th anniversary of the last Tibetan uprising against China’s rule.  Peacefully voicing their economic and social grievances, the protestors were violently attacked by Chinese guards using gunfire and tear gas.  At least five of the protestors were killed and about 30 monks detained by the police.

Not all Olympic concerns revolve around the political policies of the Chinese government though.  Swarms of locusts invaded the northern Chinese countryside by the millions, while the coast of Beijing was engulfed by 154 square miles of algae.  Interpreted by some as prophetic warning signs, these environmental phenomena are likely consequences of China’s high pollution rate.  An anonymous Chinese university biologist stated that the pollution caused by the many factories and fish farms situated on China’s coast has “destroyed the natural balance” of the water, resulting in the massive amount of algae that is obstructing the Olympic sailing race course.  

While the recruited workers have managed to clean up the majority of the interfering algae, the main concern with most Olympic athletes lies with the quality of the air.  Beijing tends to be covered in heavy smog, which is a direct result of the overwhelming presence of factories within the city itself and that fact that China is the world’s largest emitter of carbon dioxide.   The quality of the air is so poor that the government has spent $17 billion on environmental improvements.  Starting July 20th, China has limited the amount traffic by assigning alternate driving days for commercial vehicles and by reducing all industrial traffic by 70 percent.  Also, starting on July 20th all mines, chemical plants, and construction sites have been shut down in an effort to drastically reduce pollution.   However, these restrictions will be lifted following the conclusion of the Paralympics on September 20th and, therefore, serve only as a short-term solution.  China’s blatant disregard for the welfare of the environment has not fared well in a world that is so focused on “going green.”  It seems that China is only trying to reduce pollution and air quality to ensure that they do not lose their position as Olympic host, and not because of a real concern for environmental welfare.

Each criticism of China alone may not be convincing evidence to denounce them as Olympic host, but in combination, one cannot help but question the absurdity of holding such a revered event in such an unstable place.  To move the location of the games would be far too difficult, virtually impossible at this late stage; however a boycott could demonstrate the world’s denunciation of China’s recent actions, or inactions as it may be. 

Several times in Olympic history, boycotts have been enacted to protest the host country’s behavior.  In 1936, several countries declined to attend the Olympics in Berlin, which was under the control of the growing Nazi party.  Boycotters refused to give, what they felt, was their approval for Hitler’s behavior by participating in an event that Hitler himself described as one that “unites the combatants in understanding and respect. It also helps to connect the countries in the spirit of peace.”    Apparently, this feeling of fraternal love and understanding only lasts as long as the Olympics, since Hitler and the Nazis invaded Poland three years later.  Decades following, on March 21st, 1980 65 countries, including the U.S. under President Carter, declared a boycott against the Moscow Olympics in protest of the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.  In return, the Soviets and their eastern allies skipped the 1984 summer games in Los Angeles.

Nonetheless, President Franklin Roosevelt had refused to join the U.S. in the 1936 boycott, clinging to the defense that the Olympics should remain separate from politics.  Current U.S. President Bush uses this same tactic to defend his continued support for the Beijing games.  While the current government of China cannot be compared to the monstrous Nazi regime, supporting China’s role as Olympic host sends the controversial message that finding resolutions for the current global horrors can wait until the battle for national pride is concluded.  The U.S. should be ashamed to endorse this narcissistic attitude that a simple sports competition is more important than peoples’ lives. 

In actuality that is all the Olympics are: a universal sports competition.  A sports competition that offers international prestige and respect to its winners and a chance for its host to make huge revenue, but a sports competition none- the- less.  Winning a few gold medals is certainly not an equal exchange for the lives of hundreds of people in Darfur or Zimbabwe.  Holding the record for the long jump does not compensate for the deteriorating hole in the ozone and the melting ice caps.  China has failed to properly address these problems and yet the world is rewarding them.  When granted the bid to hold the Olympics seven years ago, China swore to the international community it would clean up its act; prove itself worthy of this honor.  China has not fulfilled their promise and the world must hold them accountable.