T******** Two
April 21st, 2008
[Prof Carr note: David and Richard submitted related posts, so I loaded them both at the same time. Be sure to see and catch Richard's related post below. Other posts remain in the cue. If yours has not yet appeared, it will in time as I space these out, be patient.]
Submitted By: David Dougherty
When Beijing was chosen as host city for the 2008 Olympic Games, many human rights campaigners around the world expressed their discontent since China is often credited with having the worst human rights violations, most notably the 1989 massacre of T******** Sqr. This was justified by the committee as being a “force for good” and China has seemingly committed to using this event to boost their international image.
Ironically, with only a few months before the opening ceremony, yet another humanitarian catastrophe could be brewing.
Many of you may be familiar with the events currently taking place in T****, as they currently dominate international news. They stem from decades of forceful Chinese sovereignty over the region clashing with a T****** desire for independence. A summary of the history behind this rise can be read here.
The recent anniversary of the failed 1959 uprising against Beijing rule has sparked new demands for more autonomy.
Recently, China President Hu Jintao told a T****** delegation that Chinese leadership must “ensure the well-being of T******* improve the work related to religions and ethnic groups, and maintain social harmony and stability.” On March 10 in an annual address, the T****** leader said “he looked forward to the implementation (of Hu’s words).” He continued to state “For the realization of these concepts, economic progress alone will not suffice. There must be improvements in observance of the rule of law, transparency, and right to information, as well as freedom of speech. Since China is a country of many nationalities, they must all be given equality and freedom to protect their respective unique identities if the country is to remain stable.” Beijing did not react well to these words. They conclude that it is evidence to prove that sabotage in Lhasa was organized, premeditated and masterminded by the D***-led government in exile.
In this context, riots erupted in Lhasa. One day later, Chinese forces are said to have been “forced to use a limited amount of tear gas and fire warning shots to disperse the desperate crowds” to control hundreds of Buddhist monks who gathered near the Central Cathedral. There have been claims that more than 2,000 armed police and security personnel surrounded an estimated 500 to 600 monks from the Sera monastery as they marched near a police station, where some of them had been detained.
The “limited” force however caused the death of 10 people, according to Chinese sources. Eye-witnesses speak of at least 100 dead, and it could be hundreds more when all is said and done. Despite China’s restriction of foreign journalists in T**** to gain control over spread of the protests, the uprising continues to escalate all over T****.
We can all surely recognize that Beijing’s handling of this fragile situation is extremely critical in protecting years of human rights progress. With China already being forced to answer criticism of its ethical right to host the games, does this event have the potential to unite the world in an international boycott of the Beijing Olympics? Should it?
[See also Richard's related post below.]
Entry Filed under: Pre-Departure, Beijing, China
2 Comments Add your own
1. steve feng | April 21st, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Interesting posts. This will not create an international boycott of the Beijing Olympics. You will have the opportunity to seethe mount of capital this country invested to build the infrastructure. They are very serious about having the best Olympics ever. Also, if you could remember the sanctions and boycotts on China after the tragic event of Tiananmen Square, then we could predict this outcome. There may be an initial shun, but China’s power will inevitably stop political powers from getting involved. It is difficult to say whether the atheletes will boycott. They have been training for many years to compete in this event, and they will be in an ethical dilemna. Just my thoughts.
2. Simone Michel | April 22nd, 2008 at 10:12 pm
I have to agree with Steve’s point, but it’s not only the many years of training that would “go down the drain” by a boycott. The main intention of Olympic Games is people coming together from different cultures and countries to communicate, respect and getting to know each other, as well as having a good time together – having a maybe once in a lifetime experience. On the other hand famous athletes should seize a chance in making a stand against China’s issues since they reach a large and diversified community all over the world.
The point is not to demand something from sports that politics were not able to achieve. But the Olympic movement would lose its credibility if it would keep silent regarding the events in Tibet. The IOC has to remind China of the expectations it has and also that the world of sports trusts in the resolution of the domestic problems in accordance with the Olympic spirit: in dialog and not violence. The Chinese should be aware that many other problems lie ahead. Together with the Tibet question, issues such as human rights, freedom of press, doping and environmentalism will be broached. It is very important how China responds to these questions.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed