Bush Will Go to Beijing Olympics; Obama Affirms Boycott
US Presidential Candidate Barack Obama made it clear again this week that he would not have attended the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing because of concern over China’s policies in Tibet and Sudan. His statements came in response to President Bush’s contrasting decision to attend the opening ceremonies.
However, in recent months, Senator Obama has also expressed some mixed feelings about boycotting the Olympics.
In early April, Obama said he was “of two minds” about the upcoming Beijing Olympics. “On the one hand, I think that what has happened in Tibet, China’s support for the Sudanese government in Darfur, is a real problem,” Obama told CBS’s The Early Show.
On the othe hand, he added, “I am hesitant to make the Olympics a site of political protest because I think it’s partly about bringing the world together.”
A week later, Obama joined Senator Clinton in asking the White House to consider a boycott of the 2008 games, saying “If the Chinese do not take steps to help stop the genocide in Darfur and to respect the digniy, security, and human rights of the Tibetan people, then the President should boycott the opening ceremonies.”
Now, Bush’s confirmation of his travel plans to Beijing have elicited a reaffirmation of Obama’s decision to boycott the games.
“In the absence of some sense of progress, in the absence of some sense from the Dalai Lama that there was progress, I would not have gone,” Senator Obama told a press conference Monday.
Related Posts About China and the Beijing Olympics
- Water Supplies for Beijing 2008 Olympics in State of Crisis
- Beijing’s Olympic Forest Goes For Gold With Sustainability
- China Wins the Gold Medal in Rain Control
- Obama says he wouldn’t attend the Olympics opening
Photo Credit: Jurvetson at Flickr under a Creative Commons license.
In view of all the difficulties that China under the current masters in Beijing continues to present to the world, we cannot put the focus solely on the sufferings of Tibet and the Tibetans, obviously. We are aware of Beijing’s support of Mugabe, the government in Sudan, the junta in Burma, recalcitrant North Korea…and in China itself, the frightening degradation of their environment, the relentless restriction and control of communication and information among their citizenry, the jailing of dissidents and Falun Gong practitioners (and the organ harvesting of the latter group)…and in the US, Beijing’s pervasive spy networks that recruit from all levels of their overseas workers, students, and even from among 2nd and 3rd generation Chinese Americans to ferret out industrial and security secrets or to monitor their own dissidents’ activities…the list of Beijing’s misdemeanours on a global scale is infamously extensive.
Yet the world leadership for the most part has managed thus far to let it slide. But because it has been of late the Tibetans who have gathered their courage and used the opportunity of the Olympics to raise their concerns before us that we can say the world-at-large knows more of the character of the regime the IOC awarded the Games. But if it really wants to know, this link will offer a more horrifying look at the details: <> . The report is well annotated with credible and creditable references.
At this late date, it would be absurd to say politicians are not aware of the truth of what has happened to Tibet and the Tibetans. The difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama understands the significance behind Beijing reneging on its promise to allow press freedom for the Olympics and not negotiating sincerely with the Tibetan envoys. If an opportunity such as the Olympics is not an incentive for Beijing to change but instead a license to further harden its traditional position of more of the same, then Obama is clear-headed enough to see that appeasement would be exceptionally counter-intuitive. If Bush at the end of the G8 summit could say, “Goodbye from the world’s biggest polluter,” as a parting joke to the other leaders, what could we say of his attendance at the opening ceremony. Maybe we could say, “So much for Bush ‘da decider.’” Obama’s affirmation to boycott it, on the other hand, is a plain affirmation of his own sanity — and a sign of hope for Americans (and the world) after November.
HusseinYoshinogawa, These are insightful views. Unfortunately, your link didn’t come through. Maybe you could post the link again?
China is not going to sever its relationship with Sudan (and Sudanese oil) overnight, but we can send a message to the corporate sponsors, who’s only goal is to get some attention associated with their brand. The sponsors are spending millions upon millions for their prized spots and we need to hold them and their brand accountable.
While there is no way to organize enough people in this last month before the Olympics (at the time of writing) to force the sponsors hand, we can at least hope to send a clear message. The sponsors of the games are not sponsors to support China or the Olympics as much as they are simply trying to get their name out. That is why I am part of a campaign to boycott watching the opening ceremonies, click here: https://www.thepoint.com/campaigns/olympic-sponsor-speak-out-on-darfur if you would like to join With 2008 people we can at least mar that image and send the message that blindly supporting a country that funds a genocidal regime is not okay, and is not good for your corporate image.
For us, the poor people of the third world, these remarks of Obama has once again proved that it makes no difference whether it is a democrat or a republican that is going to take up the reins of power soon in the USA as the butchers of democracy at the global level will never give up their nefarious attempts at engineering coups and organizing mafia bands against those regimes and the governments which do not fall in line with their corporate interests. Bush’s plan to visit China during the Olympics games is just another gimmick for domestic consumption at the time of elections.
The only consistant thing about Obama is his consistant flip flop on every issue. What possible good would boycotting the opening ceremonies be? Would China change thier policies, would they start taking orders from Washington? This country has a very big ego and is under the ridiculous notion that we run the world. We seem to want to dictate to every nation how things should be. Just look at the mess here at home these morons created we have not had a true President or Congress worth anything since that knuckle head Reagan came into office and sold his bill of goods about speculative capitalism being a good thing to the gulible American people. Instead of dictating to China and everyone else we better fix things here first. Neither McCain or Obama represent the kind of change we need to save the republic. America has a terminal case of Capitalism (going from one economic crisis to another each worse than the last) and will surely die from it as other capitalist imperialist states have.
I, Prophet-Historian Segbene received revelation from the Holy Angels from Heaven today, 8-08-08, that three powers of three nations has conspired to assasinate the current President of the United States.
I am posting this article here as a warning to him so that he will be very careful from today onwards…
Thank you… Hope this piece of information wil reach President George W. Bush Jr.
AS A NATIVE of China with great affection for the Tibetan culture, I have felt saddened by the violence that erupted in Tibet in mid-March and has left a number of civilians and a police officer killed.
I learned Tibetan folk dancing during dance training in Beijing years ago. I understood from the passion of my teacher and fellow classmates that Tibetan culture (is well respected among China’s majority Han population. As a journalist intern, I interviewed the Tibetan singer Caidan Drolma (in the Tibetan language her names mean “longevity” and “fairies” respectively). Her smile and golden voice in the song “Emancipated Serfs to Sing the Song,” which reflected her own experience, remain fond in my memories.
Here in the United States, I always detect a whiff of politics when Tibet is mentioned. Media coverage on the violence has been critical of the Chinese government. One scene that rekindled my feelings for Tibet was an interview on the privately owned television service for overseas Chinese, Sinovision, which featured an ordinary Tibetan woman on the street who emotionally pointed out that the good life of the Tibetan people had been disrupted by violence committed by a few Tibetan mobs.
Interest groups want to utilize the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games to advance their causes. But as a Wall Street Journal reader from Hong Kong responded to a Journal op-ed article calling for a “Genocide Olympics” campaign, some people “forget that the whole point of the Olympics is its explicitly nonpolitical nature.”
Some people believe it is fair to vent their grievances with China, but don’t see any unfairness in depriving China and its people of the dream to host the Games. In both 1936 and 1948, Chinese Olympian athletes had to detour through Asia to raise fund for their trips by performing in competitions. They ended up exhausted and defeated in the Olympics. It would be equally unfair to deprive the world’s athletes of their dreams and the chance to compete in the most important global athletic competition.
Using the Tibetan issue as a cunning game of political machinations is unfair both to China and to the Tibetan people. In order not to alienate certain voters, a politician might say before an election that countries should consider boycotting the Olympic Games. But, after winning the election, he might just as easily switch positions in order not to upset domestic athletes and infuriate China. He would be a victor, but China and the world’s athletes would be the victims.
Foreign reporters highlighted a few weeping monks decrying Tibet’s lack of freedom in the Jokhang Temple after China organized the media trip to Tibet. Didn’t the young Han Chinese man shown separately on Sinovision, whose teenage sister died in the fire set by the mobs, deserve equal coverage by western media?
It would be wrong to assume that the Chinese do not have free minds and that the government orchestrates everything. It’s not surprising that blogs in China have exploded in the anti-splittist and anti-West comments of the “Fen Qing” (furious young surfers), expressing anger over the violence and the western media’s one-sided, twisted reports.
Overseas Chinese have also been energized. A video on YouTube, “Tibet was, is, and always will be a part of China,” produced by a Canadian Chinese student, was clicked 1.2 million times and received 72,000 comments in three days. Patriotism and nationalism are strong among the Chinese. The power of the people’s voice should not be underestimated.
Historical burdens at times prevent people from moving forward. Buddhism’s art of meditation offers wisdom: Let go, develop a refined awareness of the present moment, and reach a clarity of mind. This may be useful for all who genuinely care about the fate of Tibet and desire a constructive solution. As Gandhi said, God ultimately saves him whose motive is pure. Violence and political maneuvering may not necessarily help shorten exiled Tibetans’ journey back home.
-Anne Wu, associate at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.