Enough with the protesting of the Olympics and the torch. Yes, China is horrendous on human rights issues. Yes, they have trouble making toys without lead-based paint. Yes, they are a communist dictatorship.
The International Olympic Committee, which the U.S. is a part of, voted to give China the 2008 Summer Olympics knowing full well the bed they were making.
It does not make any sense, however, for American politicians to call for any boycott whatsoever.
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton recently called out President George W. Bush, urging him to skip the opening ceremonies.
"The violent clashes in Tibet and the failure of the Chinese government to use its full leverage with Sudan to stop the genocide in Darfur are opportunities for presidential leadership," she said on April 7, saying the Bush administration has been wrong to downplay human rights in its policy towards China.
Clinton said Bush should not plan on attending the opening ceremonies unless there are major changes by the Chinese government.
Funny, how in September of 1995, as First Lady, Clinton ignored requests calling for her to cancel a trip to China to attend an international women's conference because of China's human rights record and oppression of Tibet.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain urged Bush to reconsider attending as well.
"If Chinese policies and practices do not change, I would not attend the opening ceremonies," he said.
Barack Obama, the other Democratic candidate, has also recommended a boycott by Bush, but stated the actual decision should be made closer to the games.
It's easy to throw grenades from the cheap seats, but everyone knew the Chinese government wasn't going to change when it was awarded the Olympics. Why make a sporting event a political spectacle?
While it may not be the responsibility of the U.S to tackle human rights issues in China, it also is not something that the world should ignore. However, like Bush has said, the Olympics should be looked at as a sporting event - and should be left unmolested by political fracas.
Thank goodness someone has the right perspective. This is a sporting event - one of the greatest in the world. What good does protesting an Olympic torch accomplish? How does our president skipping the Olympic opening ceremonies do anything for the people of Darfur or Tibet? It doesn't.
In London, Paris and San Francisco, the torchbearers, all innocent locals, were subjected to harassment and potential harm from protesters, even while surrounded by enough security for a presidential visit. What did they do to deserve treatment like that? The answer: nothing.
While we understand China's government is not the greatest in the world, this should be about the athletes. Boycotting the 1980 Olympics was one of the worst decisions the U.S. could have made. What did it accomplish? Nothing, except the ruining of hundreds, if not thousands, of athletic careers - lives dedicated to two specific weeks.
The Olympics should be a sacred event - they should be a worldwide event that focuses on the athletes. Every country that has hosted, or will host in the future, has a side they don't want glorified, or brought attention to. When the World Cup comes every four years, civil wars are halted (Nigeria in 1967 was for two days; Ivory Coast's exploits at the 2006 World Cup and African Cup of Nations have helped promote the peace process that has brought that country's civil war to a close). If soccer can get it right, why can't the rest of the world?
|
