With the Summer Olympics just a few months away, China is running into problems, already visible in the inaugural ceremony of the Olympic torch relay. The relay, dubbed the "The Journey of Harmony" by the Chinese government has been anything but harmonious. Several attempts have been made to extinguish the torch which is scheduled to pass through several different countries after its initial lighting in Athens, Greece and before it reaches the host nation. The first protest took place in Athens itself during the lighting ceremony when demonstrators loudly decried China’s crackdown in Tibet. Later on its way through London, the torch was accosted by human rights activists who attempted to douse its flame. The government of China denounced the act as "vile behavior." On Monday in Paris, the torch relay was disrupted several times when demonstrators managed to extinguish the flame on five different occasions despite heavy security, some of it provided by China. The Paris torch run was eventually cut short. So far the Olympic torch has met with protesters in three of the four cities it has passed through. More protests are expected when the torch reaches San Francisco on Wednesday where plans are under way to stage similar interruptions and road blocks. The International Olympics Committee is now rethinking its plan to continue with the scheduled torch relay.
About 3,000 French police officers, some of them spraying Mace, sought to guard the 17-mile parade route but were often unable to stop demonstrators, many of them waving Tibetan flags, from surging onto the streets as torch carriers passed. At least three times, the torch was extinguished and the athletes retreated for protection into buses.
Protesters often used the most picturesque landmarks in Paris — the Eiffel Tower, the Arc de Triomphe and Champs-Elysees, the Louvre Museum and Notre Dame Cathedral — as backdrops for screaming face-offs with police and large groups of flag-waving pro-China supporters.
The torch ceremony is a rich Olympic tradition, and the growing movement against it has left some Olympic officials considering whether to cut back the 58-day pageant, during which the Olympic flame is to travel 85,000 miles through 21 countries.
"The International Olympic Committee may have a bigger problem when the torch relay continues, if we get more of these demonstrations," Tove Paule, the head of Norway’s Olympic Committee, told public broadcaster NRK after a meeting with Olympic officials in Beijing. "One will have to look at whether the plans need to be changed."
In recent weeks, pressure has been mounting on the International Olympic Committee to respond to complaints from activists and politicians that China’s lack of political freedom is incompatible with the values enshrined in the Olympic Charter. Officials have said that they are concerned about Tibet but that the IOC is not a political organization and cannot strong-arm the host government.
While the protests have targeted China’s overall dismal record of human rights, most demonstrations have focused on Tibet whose plight touches a special sympathetic chord among peace activists worldwide. The truth however is that China is an equal opportunity oppressor. Chinese citizens – laborers, rural populations and even poorer residents of Beijing have faced brutal treatment at the hands of their government. Evictions, displacements and abuse of labor laws to facilitate shiny new developments for the Olympics have been commonplace in much of China for quite some time now.
A boycott of the athletic competition portion of the Olympics has garnered scant support. Organizers, athletes and the viewing public feel that the games should be above politics. Fair enough. But the Olympics as a public relations endeavor IS about politics especially for regimes like China, which wants to exploit the occasion to strut, primp and display its growing economic might. So world dignitaries for whom China is gussying up, should seriously consider giving the opening and closing ceremonies a miss. Let only athletes attend and compete. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (whom the Chinese government calls a "meddler") and Senator Hillary Clinton have called upon President Bush to stay away from the Olympic ceremonies. Barack Obama has condemned China’s actions in Tibet and human rights violations but he is equivocal about a boycott. (I am with Hillary on this one) The White House has indicated that George W. Bush will attend the opening ceremonies. What is Bush worried about? What does he think China might do if snubbed? Start bullying Taiwan or cozy up to Sudanese warlords? Add melamine to pet food or lead in children’s toys? Contaminate human food and adulterate pharmaceutical products? Come on now – surely, China will do no such thing!
(I had weighed in on the Chinese Olympics once before. I notice that Joe too has had his say.)

3 responses to “The Olympic Flameout”
At least we now know that the crushers of dissent in Tibet were responsible for the security in London.
I felt nauseated.
LikeLike
tell me. which country that has hosted olympics has a 100% clean record in human rights. so why target only china, as moscow was targetted once? besides, tibet had the same political status when the olympic committee decided on beijing for this olympics.
tibetans are trying to capitalise on the situation but the west is backing tibet for its own resons. this is more than a hangover of the ideological cold war. it is an effort to ebarass an asian tiger.
willing to bet the same thing will happen if new delhi is chosen for the next oympics?
LikeLike
Here is an interesting <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/opinion/10cohen.html?ref=opinion”>article in the New York Times describing why Asian Tigers like China, India and even Japan (for different reasons) may not want to see a progressive US administration in the White House. After all, unlike the Bush-Cheney regime, it might start paying attention to mere trifles like human rights, child labor and fair trade policies. Not that the US, even with Democrats in power, has been much concerned before about what happens elsewhere. But it will be nice if for a change, foreign policy decisions are based on conscience and not just the bottom line.
LikeLike