By Mark C. Partridge, Contributing Editor
Do not politicize the Olympics: It has become the favored refrain for groups around the world as the Olympics have neared. A chorus of press releases and official statements has not only used this theme, but these very words.
Tibet has been of particular focus as protestors and human-rights organizations have tried to link the Olympics with what they see as deplorable policies concerning Lhasa. China’s policies towards Darfur led to similar efforts. As a result, the torch relay in the run up to the Games was marred by protests in Paris and London.
Chinese officials say they are “resolutely against” any attempts to politicize the Games, and President Hu Jintao added that “politicizing the Olympics does not favor resolving these issues, and also violates the Olympic spirit.”
However, Communist party officials have themselves linked their Games’ with their political machinations. It has become cliche to say that these are Beijing’s “coming out party.” That China will use this as a foundation for its own future interests is beyond doubt. To this end, the country must be presented as a united whole, which has lead to statements that China will “totally smash” Tibetan efforts for sovereignty and independence.
The International Olympic Committee has retorted that it “regrets that political statements were made during the closing ceremony of the torch relay in Tibet.” Trying to find neutral ground, the IOC has ruled that “no kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues, or other areas”–leading some to say that the body is siding with Beijing.
The U.S. has taken this opportunity to speak more openly about its own difficulties with China. The Bush Administration has been careful to keep their dialogue private for the past seven years, with few public statements overtly critical of the Middle Kingdom. President George W. Bush was quick to eschew talk of boycotting the opening ceremonies as other leaders did, noting that negotiations over trade, Darfur, Iranian sanctions, et al would be far more fruitful without the Chinese being publicly wounded in this manner. Still, the president has taken a stronger line of late, urging Communist leaders to allow greater freedom of speech and religion. The Chinese response was curt: “We resolutely oppose any words or actions which interfere in the internal affairs.”
There is another element: With all eyes focused on Beijing, politicians, diplomats, and certainly journalists have less time for other goings-on. Is it coincidence that John Edwards gave a most solemn confessional to ABC News on the very day the drummers and athletes were assembled in the Bird’s Nest stadium for the Beijing’s opening ceremonies? It seems unlikely.
And, what about the outbreak of violence in Georgia’s breakaway province of South Ossetia? The proxy dispute between Moscow and Tbilisi over these lands has been rumbling for years, and though it has escalated in recent months—particularly with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili’s push for NATO membership—there was no major catalyst. As Anne Applebaum writes in Slate, “Previous tensions—both in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the other piece of Georgia that has declared sovereignty—had somehow been resolved without an actual war. Someone, clearly, wanted this one to go further.” The what and the who are still unclear; yet the timing is suspiciously close to the Olympics.
In this atmosphere of politicizing the Games, with recriminations trading back and forth, it is important to remember that the Olympics have long been an event steeped in politics. The process of winning a bid; the business of sponsorships; the media coverage; the dignitaries; the bureaucratic management: the sheer size and breadth of the undertaking necessitates and imbues politics. And least it be forgotten that governments have used the Olympics for overt politics statements in the past—most notably with the U.S.’s and USSR’s sister boycotts in 1980 and 1984, respectively.
But do not let all this talk of politics and sports mislead you. All the duplicitous statements about separating these two institutions of the human psyche are futile. In fact, it is the very fact that sports and politics are so entwined that elevates these types of events beyond pedestrian entertainment. The Miracle on Ice; an Iraqi soccer team bringing together a divided nation in 2007; an aboriginal runner lighting the flame at the Sydney Olympics in 2004: sports have often served to bridge the divide that politicians cannot for years. Sports have even brought wars to standstill.
So politicizing of the Olympics is happening on all sides; yet it is inevitable and understandable. And, it is something to be embraced, rather than avoided, for the very reason that these Games are being staged in the first place: to act as a catalyst for collaboration and understanding.
