Beijing Olympics: Shadow Over a Coming-Out Party
China's human-rights abuses and controversial foreign policy could
overshadow the games
By
PAUL MOONEY
BEIJING: When China’s Communist leadership decided to bid for the
Olympics, the hope was that the games would be the great coming-out
party, a chance to show the world the country’s remarkable economic
achievements and offer final proof, if that was needed, that China is
ready to take its place as a world power.
But with less than six months remaining until the opening ceremony on
August 8, that goal appears distant. Instead the Olympics are becoming
the magnet for unfavorable attention to China’s human-rights abuses at
home and its unseemly collusion with other human-rights abusers in the
world like Sudan.
In theory, it wasn’t supposed to be this way. In 2001, Beijing was keen
to win the bid to host the Olympics and promised a doubting world that
the games would be good for China. Beijing Olympics official Liu
Jingmin won over the International Olympics Committee when he said the
games would be "an opportunity to foster democracy, improve human
rights, and integrate China with the rest of the world."
The opposite seems to be happening. “The preparations for the Games are
proving to have a negative impact on human rights in China,” says
Nicholas Bequelin, a researcher in Hong Kong with Human Rights Watch.
“What we are seeing is a fairly comprehensive crackdown on activists
designed to prevent news of human rights from getting abroad. The
Chinese authorities are pulling out every stop to prevent what they
consider embarrassing news from reaching an international audience.”
The latest victim of the Chinese campaign to silence activists is Hu
Jia. The 34-year-old former AIDS activist was a one-man human-rights
band, keeping in close contact with dissidents, farmers and
human-rights defenders and their families, collecting information and
putting it out on the web for the world to see.
His work ended the afternoon of December 27 when some 20 plainclothes
police charged into Hu’s apartment and dragged him away. He was later
formally charged with subverting state security. "The action taken
against Hu Jia cannot escape being connected to the Olympics," the San
Francisco–based Duihua Foundation announced in a statement.
Countless others have also been punished in connection with the
Olympics. Ye Guozhu was sentenced to four years in prison for
protesting forced evictions related to the Olympics; Yang Chunlin, a
former factory worker, has been charged with subverting state security
for launching an online petition called "We Want Human Rights, Not the
Olympics"; and Liu Jie was sentenced to re-education through labor for
protesting land issues. The list goes on.
Li Xiaorong, professor of political philosophy at the University of
Maryland, says there’s been a systematic rounding up of undesirables –
the homeless, vagabonds or petitioners – from the streets of the
capital, adding that people were being forcibly sent back home,
sentenced to re-education camps and detention centers, even confined to
mental hospitals. "The government doesn't want these poor and
downtrodden coming onto the streets of Beijing in the run-up to the
Olympics," says Li. "It wouldn't look good for the image of China as a
powerful and wealthy country."
So far, the government is impervious to criticisms.
“Generally speaking, they don’t worry too much about international
pressure,” says Teng Biao, professor of law at the China University of
Political Science and Law. “The Chinese government feels it’s very
powerful and its position on the world stage is very strong.”
That was until February 12, when Oscar-winning director Steven
Spielberg rocked Beijing with his public resignation as an artistic
adviser to the Olympics. Spielberg expressed disappointment that China
had not done more to halt the violence in the western Sudanese region
of Darfur. China provides weapons to Sudan and accounts for two-thirds
of its oil exports, and critics expect it to exert influence over the
Khartoum government. Spielberg may have hoped to change policy on
Darfur by working within the system, but progress did not materialize.
When asked to comment on Spielberg’s announcement, US President George
Bush told the BBC that he intended to attend the Olympics. “I have a
little different platform than Steven Spielberg, so I get to talk to
President Hu Jintao,” Bush boasted. “I do remind him that he can do
more to relieve the suffering in Darfur."
Many human-rights activists argue, however, that quiet diplomacy has no
impact on China.
Human Rights Watch’s Bequelin says that beginning in 2006, the
government went after every major human-rights activist, ticking off a
half dozen names. He blames the international community for remaining
“passive, silent and complicit” in the face of this campaign.
“All they do is raise these issues privately,” he says. “But this is
nonsense. At such a low level there is no impact. The only thing that
has a strong impact is when you speak out.”
Human-rights workers say that attendance of world leaders at the
Olympics undermines the possibility of effecting change in China. “The
Games are going ahead, and these leaders have accepted invitations to
come without making any conditions for improving human rights,” says Li.
Public world pressure is spiraling, however, and Communist Party
leadership is no doubt beginning to worry.
In January, Prince Charles, an ardent supporter of the Dalai Lama,
announced that he would not attend the Olympics.
Also on February 12, nine Nobel Peace laureates, including South
Africa’s Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Elie Wiesel, joined other
celebrities in sending a joint letter to Hu, urging him to do something
to halt the bloodshed in Darfur.
Spielberg’s resignation sent a flurry of news reports focused on
China’s role in Darfur and the human-rights situation at home.
Dream for Darfur, backed by actress Mia Farrow, announced on February
14 that it would pressure 19 companies associated with the games,
including Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Visa, Panasonic and Adidas, to
highlight their “moral obligation” regarding China’s role in Sudan.
There’s also talk of a call for turning off TV sets while advertisers
sell their products during the games. Billions of dollars of business
ride on the global broadcast of the Olympics.
There’s speculation that music producer Quincy Jones, who is writing
the theme song for the Olympics, could be the next high-profile figure
to abandon the games. A spokesman told a British newspaper that the
reports were “speculation,” but conceded that Jones was “keeping an eye
on the situation.”
Celebrity pressures aside, the Communist Party can expect a wide range
of interest groups to launch actions over the next few months:
supporters of a free Tibet, house Christians, Falun Gong adherents,
political dissidents, death-penalty opponents, anti-abortionists and
environmentalists – just to name a few.
Teng says he doesn’t favor a boycott of the Olympics, arguing it might
result in a severe government backlash against opponents. “But if
foreign countries don’t give China pressure on human rights,” he says,
“the Olympics will bring no good to China at all.”
The year 2008 promises to be the most politicized Olympics in recent
memory and it’s taking place in the internet age where information zips
around the globe with a push of a send button. The party machine will
find itself hard-pressed to deal with the deluge of criticism that it
can’t manipulate.
By seeking global acceptance of the wealth and power of the one-party
state through the glitzy Olympics, China may be discovering the cost.
Policy changes and liberalization required to win the world’s approval
could weaken its iron grip on power. And that’s something China is not
willing to negotiate.