Save the Olympics, Save the World
by Jeremy Weltmer
Senior Staff Writer
Several weeks ago, the Olympic torch began its iconic and symbolic journey around the world with the ostensible purpose of engendering a worldwide spirit of togetherness, fairness, and a willingness to share the ever-shrinking world. It does so in preparation for the upcoming Beijing Summer Olympic Games, and at each step of its journey, it has met with hordes of pacifist protestors. And while each demonstration from Canberra to Paris has been nonviolent, the density and zeal of the protestors has resulted in ever-increasing security for the torch, the runners, and the flame itself. When the flame traversed the Champs-Elysees near the beginning of its circumnavigation, the French Olympic authorities transferred it to a van in order to protect it from the crowd for the remainder of its journey. And now, near the end of its travels, it arrived in Canberra on an official Chinese Olympic jet with the level of security usually accompanying the arrival of a foreign head of state. In every milieu, the protestors speak out against the same issue: the Chinese subjugation and brutalization of Tibet.
In 1950, the Chinese army swept through Tibet, and from then onwards, the Tibetan people have suffered. Before the Chinese occupation began, Tibet was a peaceful nation, existing in its own right with its own particular form of Buddhism forbidding its members to bear arms or even eat meat. But from 1950 onwards, the secular and officially atheist People's Republic of China has tried to suppress completely the area's traditional Buddhism and culture. While this religious persecution may seem unfortunate, it pales in comparison to the human tragedy deliberately engineered by Hu Jintao, the President and Chairman of the Communist Party of China. Over the past four decades, hundreds of Tibetan women have been subjected to forced abortions and sterilizations to advance the Chinese plan for racial transformation of Tibet in which they prevent the conception or birth of ethnic Tibetans and repopulate Tibet with loyally communist ethnic Chinese.
Thus, the tragedy taking place in Tibet clearly deserves recognition and merits protest, but the issue that has emerged over the past several weeks concerns the appropriateness of demonstrations and rallies that threaten the Olympic flame and torch. Many argue that while the Chinese government deserves reprehension for its actions, by protesting around the Olympic torch, one attacks the Olympic institution as opposed to the Chinese occupation of Tibet. But however logical this argument may seem, it does not account for a variety of factors. Firstly, the traditional running of the torch presents an ideal stage: the entire world is watching. And as many know little or nothing about the situation in Tibet, the protests stand to reach millions presently ignorant.
Furthermore, China has attempted to use the games to bolster its prestige and to establish it as a bona fide Westernized nation. However, its record and present actions belie this notion; China falls far short of the lofty Olympic credos. China must, as the host, at least pretend to act in a manner concordant with the values that it is trusted and charged with protecting come summer. Thus, the protestors have every right, and indeed an obligation, to protest around the torch, for all of those who will follow the games this summer must recognize the disparity between China's desired image and effected actions. But these protests should remain respectful. While the movement of the torch presents a viable forum, the protests must be against the actions of Beijing, not the Olympics in Beijing. Carrying the demonstrations too far, for instance by extinguishing the Olympic flame, would present an affront to the Olympic games themselves. Thus, if the demonstrations remain nonviolent and respectful, they can educate millions; if they spiral out of control, they could demean the Olympics themselves.
Along these lines and as a manner of protest, many US and European politicians have suggested a boycott of the opening ceremonies, which would be a colossal mistake. The opening ceremonies exist to celebrate the confluence of the most talented athletes in the world and a worldwide spirit of fair and level competition. To choose to boycott the opening ceremony is to choose to boycott the athletes and the Olympic goals, not the host or its actions. If one disregards the athletes and the Olympic objective, the games stand for nothing other than a media bonanza. Therefore, it is the obligation of humanitarians to abhor the egregious atrocities in Tibet, to protest them before and after the games, but to uphold the high standards and goals of the Olympic tradition during the Games themselves.