Olympic Boycott: Yes or No?

There is a lot of controversy in terms of this years location of the Olympics, that it is taking place in China. On the Olympics website there is a statement that says "The Games have always brought people together in peace to respect universal moral principles. The upcoming Games will feature athletes from all over the world and help promote the Olympic spirit." A very compelling statement.

Is this true, universal moral spirit? It's a very romantic view of the event. Besides the fact of authoritarian undemocratic regimes participating, the statement is plastered on the website. This year the event takes place in China, whose government might take the "universal moral spirit" statement in different light, maybe with a little touch of Mao.

The real question here is, should the world stand up and say no to the Olympics and begin a boycott? Some say yes, others say no. I'll give two articles on reasons why people should and why people should not.

The first article comes from Ethan Gutmann, author of Losing the New China. In the article he explains why a boycott should take place.

It was my four-year-old son's first demonstration. But he was getting cold, the police were manhandling the Tibetans to the point that there might be a stampede, and I wasn't sure if the bus that had just rushed by at such an unseemly speed actually carried the stupid torch, so we headed for the tube and home. My son wanted to know why people kept saying "China, stop the kitty."

"It's 'stop the killing,' " I corrected.

I tried to explain for the nth time: "Suppose you have a neighbor who has a dog. And he beats the dog. You can hear the dog crying all day. Then the neighbor comes by and invites you to bring your dog .  .  ."

"Daddy, we don't have a dog."

"I know. We will sometime soon. I promise. But pretend. The neighbor wants to invite your dog--and every other dog in the neighborhood--to a dog party. A big dog party. Black dogs, white dogs, yellow dogs, red dogs .  .  ."

"Or a mouse, it could be a mouse party, Daddy. Or a cat party .  .  ."

Okay, I thought, he gets it.

It wasn't until I got home and saw the paramilitary blue and white tracksuits flanking each torchbearer, and the wolfish Chinese army profiles so familiar to anyone who has lived in Beijing that I got it. I regretted not dropping off my son with some kindly Tibetan woman and trying to stand in front of the bus myself.

The second article is by Fareed Zakaria, who feels boycotting the Olympics is only going to bolster Chinese nationalism.

At first glance, China's recent crackdown in Tibet looks like a familiar storyline: a dictatorship represses its people. And of course that's part of the reality—as it often is in China. But on this issue, the communist regime is not in opposition to its people. The vast majority of Chinese have little sympathy for the Tibetan cause. To the extent that we can gauge public opinion in China and among its diaspora, ordinary Chinese are, if anything, critical of the Beijing government for being too easy on the Tibetans. The real struggle here is between a nationalist majority and an ethnic and religious minority looking to secure its rights.

In these circumstances, a boycott of the Olympics would have precisely the opposite effect that is intended. The regime in Beijing would become only more defensive and stubborn.

Obviously a different outlook for what we should do.

The problem for me in boycotting the Olympics is that I don't watch the Olympics. I can boycott in spirit, yet in reality it doesn't have the impact it should. If the boycott doesn't become realized and no one takes notice, will it be considered a failure? I say no.

It will possibly give a message to the organizers of the Olympics that never again will they place an event with lines such as "universal moral spirit" in a place of obvious oppression.

Boycott: Yes, No?