The president of the European Parliament has said that European countries should consider a boycott of the Olympics in Beijing if the Chinese government continues to take a hardline attitude to unrest in Tibet.
Hans-Gert Poettering joined a growing list of western politicians calling on China to open talks with the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, whom Chinese officials blame for inciting a wave of protests and riots over the last two weeks. “If there continue to be no signals of compromise, I see boycott measures as justified,” Mr Poettering told Germany’s Bild am Sonntag newspaper ahead of a debate this week about Tibet at the European parliament. His comments follow strong criticism of the Chinese government by US House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi, who said on Friday during a meeting with the Dalai Lama that events in Tibet were “a challenge to the conscience of the world”. Taiwan’s President-elect Ma Ying-jeou said on Sunday after his landslide election victory that the Dalai Lama would be welcome to visit the island and repeated comments that Taiwanese athletes might not participate in the Olympics if the situation in Tibet worsens.
Attempts to link unrest in Tibet to the Olympics is likely to enrage the Chinese government, which had hoped the games would be a showcase for the country’s economic progress rather than a lightening rod for criticisms of its political system. An editorial in the People’s Daily, the mouthpiece of the Communist Party, said China would “resolutely crush” anti-Beijing forces in Tibet, while another official website accused the Tibetan cleric and his supporters of being “an outright terrorist organisation”. Over the weekend, state TV showed new graphic footage of violence against Han Chinese residents of Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, including reports that about five people were burnt to death.
There will be much whining about how many years and how hard the athletes train for this, but there is a larger idea here, and in the end, what is more important?
“and in the end, what is more important?”
Sleep with dogs and you get fleas…
The European Union is already infested with fleas from “being in bed with Saddam Hussein” through the 1990’s. I’m not sure why “Chinese fleas” would bother them.
“Attempts to link unrest in Tibet to the Olympics is likely to enrage the Chinese government, which had hoped the games would be a showcase for the country’s economic progress rather than a lightening rod for criticisms of its political system.”
Wow, are these guys really that stupid? Invite the whole world into your home and expect them not to notice (or care) about the prisoners chained up in your living room …
OTOH, what would an Olympics boycott actually accomplish? Boycotting the 1980 Moscow Olympics certainly did not oust Soviet troops from Afghanistan.
I agree completely with with #3. Don’t boycott. Here (again) is my much better solution.
Hand out bright orange saffron robes to each and every athlete (except Chinese) right before the opening ceremony.
Imagine the horrific embarrassment to the Chinese government! And funny as well!
I’m going with “Billions and billions of dollars.”
# 1 pat said, on March 24th, 2008 at 6:35 am
“and in the end, what is more important?”
Sleep with dogs and you get fleas…
How bout eating them?
Yes to boycott.
Yes, the athletes trained for four years, but Tibetans waited for 49 years.
Maybe some Parallel Olympics (Freelympics) could be organized with each sport in a different country of the free world…
Sure. Let’s mix politics with the only remaining thing that keeps nations together. Why not?
Weather they do or don’t boycott, there sure are a lot of people calling for it. At least it’s in the public view
I seem to remember that it was the US that led the boycott of the 1980 Olympics after the USSR invaded Afghanistan. Now I guess the US wouldn’t have the guts to join in let alone lead a boycott against China, given that so much of its consumables are made there.
Let’s also not forget the small issue of… Tiananmen Square? I’m a fan of the Olympics, but doing them in China is just plain disgusting. Worse than Deutschland, 1936, IMVHO.
Consider this possible sequence of events:
1. The U.S. announces it will boycott the Beijing Olympics.
2. China announces it won’t be buying any more U.S. treasury bonds, or sell any more cheap crap to Wal-mart.
3. The U.S. economy goes in the crapper (worse than now).
4. The Olympics become the least important story.
Nothing good will come from not boycotting the Olympics.
If we are going to boycott CHina then we should do the same for other criminal-countries: USA, Pakistan, Turkey, Sudan, etc…see? Not easy.
2008 World Olympics, where we can see Canada, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Norway, and Andora, compete…. how exciting!
#4. Only about a decade or so.
It would be truly galling to credit Jimmy Carter with the fall of the USSR. Did Reagan delay it by lifting the grain embargo?
#12. And in 1984, the USSR boycotted the LA Olympics. Back to back games wrecked by the absence of the major competitors. Is the world a better place for it?
#14. Problem is, the Chinese economy goes into the crapper also. On this scale, debtor nations have as much leverage as their creditors.
Oh, by the way, anyone know why China is in Tibet in the first place?
It’s not the scenery.
It’s not the high fashion (robes).
It’s not because they want friends.
It’s:
WATER
Tibet supplies the majority of southern China’s fresh water. So China (Mao) annexed the sovereign nation of Tibet to secure water.
And don’t think anything but all out war on a world scale is going to change anything.
No protest, no amount of talk, nothing.
Boycott = good.
#19, Ah yea,
I was unaware of that and a little checking verifies it. Just because nothing short of war will change the outcome does not mean we should ignore it though.