Politics, protests aren't categories of Olympic sport
Yakima Herald-Republic
More 'Opinion'
- It's time to act on gang violence in Yakima Valley
- Bail out the states? Just say no
- Guest worker program raises more red flags than solutions
- Big Three need to retool to get bailout money
- Guest commentary: Postscript on a fallen friend
- Revered freedoms of speech, religion at cross purposes
- Proposed new appellations show wine industry growth
Most Read
- This feature is under development and will be available soon.
There's no question China has a lot to answer for in terms of environmental degradation and human rights abuses, but that does not change the fact that some of the world's greatest athletes should be allowed to compete there this summer without disruption by politics and protests.
The games will be held Aug. 8-24 in Beijing, and already the route for carrying the Olympic torch around the word to the games has been disrupted by those protesting China's policies in Tibet.
Another development would have world leaders boycott the opening ceremonies, which might be long on symbolism but is short on effectiveness.
President Bush most likely will attend the ceremonies. He feels -- and we agree -- that the Olympics are for athletes and sports, not politicians and politics. He told ABC News on Friday that his decision to attend the games is not affected by pleas from activists who want world leaders to skip the opening ceremony to protest violence in Tibet.
Bush maintains his presence at the games will allow him to raise human rights problems directly with Chinese President Hu Jintao while watching the best athletes in the world compete.
That's a defensible position. On the other hand, it's disturbing that front-running candidates seeking to replace Bush have engaged in political opportunism on the campaign trail.
John McCain, the Republican senator Bush has endorsed as his successor, says he would go only if China improved its rights record. And the two Democratic presidential candidates, Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, are urging Bush to skip the ceremonies.
So does McCain think the rights record will suddenly "improve" in just a few months? And Obama and Clinton, also both U.S. senators, have had plenty of opportunity in that chamber to protest China policies in a forum other than the Olympics.
Even the exiled Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of Tibet, avoided direct discussion of the situation there during much of a weekend visit to Seattle. He did say Sunday that Tibet cannot make any more concessions to China and renewed his calls for the government to cease suppression in his former homeland and withdraw troops.
China is attempting to contain violence in Tibet ahead of the games. It has sent thousands of police and army troops to the region to maintain peace, hunt down protest leaders and cordon off Buddhist monasteries whose monks had led protests.
Of course, China's record of rights abuses is much more visible these days. That country has taken on a new role as a world economic power and appears to be having trouble adjusting to the notoriety and attention that goes with it.
On the other hand, some leaders in the United States tend to view the new power as "more like us," in terms of economic development and trading, and don't seem to be uncomfortable, as are we, by the alarming trade imbalance in China's favor, between the U.S. and China. That kind of thinking needs to be re-evaluated, too.
The protests are a good attention-grabbers and China's leaders need to realize that being a global superpower, particularly in the economic sense, means it now shares the kind of world pressure the U.S. has long experienced. No longer can leaders there adopt a government policy of "what we do is none of your business," because policies there do indeed have worldwide ramifications.
Several recalls of toys made in China, for example, don't just highlight a safety threat, but working and quality control issues that must be addressed if it is to continue as a major world trading partner.
But let's separate all that from the Olympics. A valuable lesson should have been learned in 1980 when the U.S. and other countries boycotted the games in protest of the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
The impact was not on the Soviets or Afghanistan, however. It was on the athletes who were not able to compete in the 1980 Olympics.
And ironically, in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C., the U.S. also invaded Afghanistan to topple the terrorist-supporting Taliban regime.
China must clean up its act in terms of pollution and human rights to assume a more responsible position on the world stage, and the protests of Tibet policies have focused new attention on that issue.
In the meantime, world leaders should attend the opening ceremonies as a show of support for hard-working world-class athletes and not let politics cloud the issue.
The athletes who have trained years for these events deserve that backing.
* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Sarah Jenkins and Bill Lee.

RSS
E-mail
Print