Shanghaiist: 2008 Olympic Games: French athletes won't be allowed to wear their “For a better world” badge

John Ian Wing

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:32:49 +0800

The first Olympic boycott was at the 1956 Melbourne Games. Because of the Suez Crisis and Russia invading Hungary, a number of countries stayed away whilst others refused to attend the opening ceremony. Even some governments had ordered their athletes not to mix with other athletes in the Olympic Village. Then there was a near riot during the Water Polo match between Russian and Hungarian players. As a young school boy at the time, I was very concerned that the Olympic Movement was being torn apart and that the athletes were being used as a pawn in a political game. The athletes had come to the Melbourne Games under the umbrella of the Olympic Movement and did not want to be part of the political game. I remember an old saying, “The pen is mightier than the sword”. I wrote a letter to the organizing committee with an Idea, which was to get all the athletes together for the closing ceremony and to ask them to intermingle, regardless of race, colour or religion, and walk freely around the Stadium as One Nation. And so it was done and I was awarded an Olympic medal for my idea. Will all these calls for boycotts and disruptions hurt the Chinese government and the Chinese people? You bet it will. Will the Chinese government change its policies at this late stage? No! The Chinese people are a very stubborn, but a proud nation. They have achieved so much in such a short time, much more than any country in the last 100 years. If they get hurt, they will simply close its border to the rest of the world, and so what have we achieved. It will be the athletes, although not all, who will feel that the spirit of the Olympic Movement has been torn apart. At the Melbourne closing ceremony, some athletes walked arm in arm whilst others were waving and laughing to the crowd in the stand, conveying a message of goodwill, peace and harmony to the world. During that brief moment for them, war, nationality and politics were forgotten for they had formed the first Olympic Nation. The IOC must share most of the blame for what is happening. In the last two decades, it has been getting itself involved with world politics and with the United Nations. Recently, the president of the IOC Mr Jacques Rogge said,” the Olympic Games were about sports and not politics, and the two do not go together.” Yet the IOC is putting pressure on the Human Rights and Civil Liberties groups, to force the Chinese government to amend its human rights policies, and to intervene in other countries policies. In October 1999, an IOC panel were discussing reforms to the Olympic movement, “In areas of conflict during the Olympic Games, the IOC should implement the proper measures in order to symbolize or enforce the Olympic Truce,” read a proposal put before the 80-member reform panel. The word “enforce” met immediate objections from former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, a member of the panel. “Many conservatives in America will go crazy when they see this,” said Kissinger. For the IOC to interfere with world politics can be very dangerous for the whole of the Olympic Movement. It may in the future, find itself in a political crisis which it cannot handle. What happens if a country decides to retaliate with violence against the host country during an Olympic Games. Has the IOC thought about the safety of the athletes? Is the IOC still after the Nobel Prize? Isn’t there another young person out there in this world who can sort out this Olympic mess? If you care to read my story, you can go to my website: www.johnwing.co.uk John Ian Wing

Alcoac

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:18:18 +0800

(L) CCP (L)中共 (F**K）Tibet 入境随俗！没有共产党就没有新中国做一个毛主席的好学生！ Honestly, the sheer willingness of so many Chinese to blindly support their unelected, unaccountable, unsupervised, and by the words of China's Constitution "DICTATORSHIP 独裁" is really beyond me. Before I came to China, I had a lot more faith in the power of free will in the face of overwhelming ideological indoctrination of utter lies. Then again, we are talking about an organization that made 70 million Chinese people willing to starve themselves to death, and have lots of babies at the same time.

Les Izmore

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:18:16 +0800

My money is on Croatia...

nanheyangrouchuan

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:07:52 +0800

Just goes to show that the Olympics are not about human rights, it is about political favoritism, bribes and corporate profits.

T

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:06:33 +0800

So who do you have winning the basketball gold this year, Les? Can the US regain the gold, or will it be Argentina, Spain or even Russia?

Les Izmore

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:52:48 +0800

Peijin- as usual you are a voice of reason and comity. My post is only about the online 'battles' not any real life crushing. I doubt I will ever have enough knowledge of the particulars of this case for me to make fully informed choices so I will leave the politics to the politicians in this matter. There are very real debates that can be held on human rights worldwide, but this subject always seems to bring out the rhetorical long knives. I think the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution should be universally accepted. People have a right to express their ideas any time and I have a right to say they are crazy, angry, bitter, etc. I have absolutely no problem with discussion, even heated discussion, but useless name calling is really depressing and boring to me. That being said, fool that I am, I think these kinds of events do rise above the political. I think they can show how we are tied together rather than forced apart. I'm bemoaning the fact that for me in this poisoned atmosphere I see little chance of that transcendence happening.

vladivostok

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:31:35 +0800

Excellent point Peijin.

Peijin Chen

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:06:51 +0800

@les I have to totally disagree with that. There is out right demonization by some people on some sides, but not all. I would prefer to think of my own position (not that I matter, but argument's sake) as being critical of China. I don't make her out to be the devil. That said, also disagree with the "crushing opponents by any means necessary bit". There are great inequalities of power here. French Free Tibet radicals and the Chinese government are fairly unequal in both the hard and soft power that they command. Bloggers and readers of blogs are another category; probably the most transparent (we are all on the internet), but yet not too visible (we don't make the evening news). So I don't know if there is any point bringing richardlee or nanheyangrouchuan bless their souls, into this. You can just watch the sports. Turn off the internet and turn on the tv!

Les Izmore

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:54:12 +0800

This gonna be long summer. We've got two sides who both think the other side is the devil and will use any opportunity to push their point. Since both sides believe they have the moral high ground they will never give in and they're completely justified in crushing their opponents by any means necessary. Its going to be a wonderful world of nanheygrouchuans vs. richardlees when all I want to do is watch some silly sports events...

Peijin Chen

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:23:37 +0800

To want everything to be apolitical seems to border on some kind of mental illness. I won't go as far as to say that the Olympics are "inherently political", but I think what is key is that we are allowed to debate our opinions about this very issue. In Chinese officialese, however, such opinions are "irresponsible"--so they are not allowed in the realm of public discussion. These voices are shunted, in effect killing dialogue in favor of the monologue of power. Those that have some cause they want to bring attention to are always going to use the Olympics somehow, which means that this debate is ongoing and affects the entire world. China would do better to show itself as a country that wants to be part of the debate. Next Olympics they won't give as much of a shit though, since it won't be on their turf anymore. They might still officially protest against the "politicization" of the Olympics, but if they don't protest as vehemently and you ask them why, they are likely to say "the UK is the UK, they are democratic, its different."

T

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:04:40 +0800

Since the french is so concern about China's Human rights situation, they can simply chose to not come to Beijing for the game... Ah yes, why doesn't everybody just not show up for the Olympic Games? Well written, WatchBagDVD, but unfortunately as winterfalling has just proven, the attitude is going to be more of "another victory over conniving Westerners trying to ruin OUR Olympic Games" instead of "what are we doing that is getting so much negative publicity and what is it that we should be doing to change it?" One last thing - the Olympic Games are not China's. They are the world's - China just happens to be hosting it this year. If China doesn't want all the criticism, then they really should have thought twice about actually asking for the most visible event in the world to be hosted here.

T

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:59:56 +0800

Well said WBD, but unfortunately this is just going to be viewed as another "victory" by the Chinese over the bad bad Westerners who are trying to usurp "their Olympics." Which leads me to another point - if you want to invite everyone over to your house, don't complain about how they're going to behave when they get there - YOU KNEW THAT WHEN YOU INVITED THEM THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE. And if you didn't you're extremely short sighted. If you don't want all the scrutiny don't ask for the Olympics.

winterfalling

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:57:13 +0800

Well, Since the french is so concern about China's Human rights situation, they can simply chose to not come to Beijing for the game... why do they come while put that little bag into their pockets? it is very funny. Anyway, French win few medals every year, it is better for them to fuckup something than do something real. Losers.

WatchBagDVD

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:54:46 +0800

um, that's "stubborn policy emphasis," just for da record.

WatchBagDVD

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:49:07 +0800

We're in a crazy place--all of us collectively, Westerners, Chinese, whoever--when a general statement in favor of a universal moral principal becomes a political impossibility at an event that's ostensibly about bringing the diverse peoples of the world together and, yes, "making the world a better place." I'm fascinated by the general argument that somehow the Olympics should not be "political." It's really an amazing feat of rhetoric to even get to the point where that argument makes the slightest bit of sense, but here we are: A broad statement that can be interpreted, among other things, to mean that human beings everywhere should be treated with dignity and justice is censored because it's too "political." The Olympics are inherently political, starting with the basic premise of national teams. If it were just about sports, athletes would not be parading around in flag-festooned uniforms for the duration of the games. If it were just sports, big countries wouldn't pour millions and millions of dollars into training athletes for the "glory of the nation." China, like any other host nation, sees the Olympics as a way to make a broad political statement, something like: We are a major nation capable of organizing a major world event and we deserve worldwide respect and admiration. It's a message that ripples across all areas of national interest, whether subtly or blatantly. So what's the political message of pretending "it's just about sports"? It's a tacit endorsement of host nation political policy, as well as of a global order that values economic growth and stability over issues like human rights and environmental protection. In fact, those issues have to be actively suppressed for the official narrative to flow. But, of course, those issues aren't easy to suppress, as we're seeing. And it's a tacit endorsement of China's policy stubborn emphasis on national sovereignty to the near exclusion of considerations of human rights and environmental issues. If you're cool with that, then go ahead and be a hypocrite and pretend "it's just about sports." But like Clausewitz said about war, Olympic sports are really just politics by other means.