The 2008 Beijing Olympics represents a golden opportunity for the brand-conscious sportswear industry to associate its products with the cherished Olympic brand. For a costly, but manageable sponsorship or licensing fee, a sportswear company can infuse its athletic shoes and clothes with the lofty Olympic ideals of fair play, perseverance and, most importantly, winning.
Nicknamed the “Bird’s Nest,” the iconic Beijing National Stadium for track and field events is constructed of over 42,000 tons of steel. As the largest stadium ever built for the Olympic Games, it includes a gourmet restaurant, a four-star hotel, and an underground shopping center. It seats 91,000 spectators.
The surprising survival and endurance of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) since the pro-democracy 1989 Movement has led most scholars to be skeptical about the prospects of democratization in China. No prediction seems safer than that the CCP will continue to control China for years, if not decades. No prediction invites more ridicule than to argue that the CCP’s days in power are numbered.
China’s growing economic presence in sub-Saharan Africa is normally portrayed in one of two ways. Either it’s cast as engaging in rapacious resource extraction without local employment and financial gain, or it’s portrayed as a source of beneficent foreign investment, bringing much-needed capital and building infrastructure in the world’s poorest region. The resistance to Chinese timber exploitation in the West African republic of Mali provides a more nuanced look at the Sino-African relationship, which, under certain circumstances, could act as a catalyst for positive political change in Africa.
While most of the recent attention that has been focused on the Beijing Olympic Games has been concerned with civil rights and environmental issues, virtually no comment has been made on the fact that by hosting the games, China becomes yet one more country to enter into what is essentially a pact with the devil with capital on the one hand and western sporting “ideals” on the other.
As the principal negotiator for the landmark market access agreement that led to China’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO), I have reflected on whether the agreements we negotiated really lived up to our expectations. A sober reflection has led me to conclude that those trade agreements did not.
In their contributions to the Foreign Policy In Focus strategic dialogue on the Beijing Olympics, James Nolt argues in Counterproductive Olympic Protests that protesters are not spurring change in China only an upsurge in patriotism. Eric Reeves, in On Boycotting the Beijing Olympics, makes a case for the international community to send a signal to China over its Sudan policy by boycotting the opening ceremonies. Here they respond to each other by focusing on the question of Darfur.
Recent events — in Darfur, in Tibet, in Burma, and within China — force an inevitable debate about the appropriate political and moral response to China’s hosting of the Summer 2008 Games, and in particular whether some form of boycott is warranted. Unfortunately, if predictably, there has been a good deal more heat than light generated by this debate, which too often reflects clashing axioms rather than informed argument. Since my own expertise lies in understanding Sudan, and in particular the ongoing genocide in Darfur, I’ll necessarily focus on this part of the debate. But few working on Sudan are unaware of the controversies associated with Chinese economic policy and human rights standards elsewhere in Africa.
Whatever the intent of those organizing protests around the Chinese-hosted Olympics, the effect is largely counterproductive. Protesting a peaceful symbol of national pride merely insults all Chinese people rather than targeting action against the specific and unrelated actions of the Chinese government that protesters oppose. There is no doubt whatsoever that the Olympic Games are themselves a peaceful activity, offensive to nobody. Those wishing to protest specific Chinese government actions focus their protest on the Olympics only to opportunistically exploit the media attention on China during this popular event. This is an understandable tactic in this world of media-driven politics. However, many of the organizers of these protests have no idea of the real affect they have within China.
China as an “emerging superpower” makes for a compelling story line in the media. It is reinforced by the propaganda image that the current Chinese leadership would like us to accept. But the reality is quite different. Although recent events in Tibet and western China – and the central government’s response – appear to be generating pro-government patriotic feelings, they dramatically display the practical limits of the government’s power. Other sources of unhappiness with the regime, including income disparities and the inevitable collapse of unsustainable price controls on fuel and food, could breed both urban and rural discontent that has no ready outlet besides unlawful opposition to the government.