China’s Olympics Politics

By Bhaskar Roy

The boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympic games by the anti-Warsaw Pact block led by the United States represented a clear cold war divide. China, not a part of either of the two blocks, NATO and the Warsaw Pact, “fished in troubled waters” as usual. It sided with the US. Beijing had its own strategic reasons to do so, the Soviet threat. But that was a clean divide compared to the upcoming Beijing Olympics in August.

It is a matter of pride for any country to host the Olympic games. With the eyes of the world riveted on the sporting events and the colourful opening and closing ceremonies, it is supposed to be a show of sporting powers. China is not short in this area in any way. In fact, the Chinese athletes are poised to give the Americans, the Russians and some other leading sporting nations in the world a run for their money. They are heading for the second position after the powerful Americans.

The opening ceremony in the “bird-nest” stadium on August 8 is slated to dazzle the world. The logistics to accommodate and transport thousands of participants, journalists, foreign spectators and heads of states and governments is a mammoth task. The Chinese do not want a stitch out of place. They deserve a round of applause.

There is a much more murkier side to the Beijing Olympics, however. Unfortunate, but true to the tradition of the Chinese Communist Party leadership, the games have been termed into a major political event.

Propaganda is one of the most effective weapons of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). It is a relentless barrage of ideology, politics, outside threat to China and, more recently, China’s own growing economic and military power. It talks of enemies both outside the country and inside out to destroy or, at least, damage a peaceful and heavenly ordained nation, which wants to live in a “harmonious relationship” with the world. Such relationships, however, can exit only on China’s terms.

The propaganda for the specific purpose of the Olympic games started years ago. It appears to have been turned into a dangerous militant nationalism. Even a brief review of Chinese blogs over the internet would suggest that these are written by nationalists with official sponsorship and go beyond the games into security issues. Any critical or questioning views are blocked and the bloggers prosecuted.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy was brought to his knees to write a letter of apology to a Chinese athlete in a wheel chair who was roughed up in mele in Paris during the Olympic torch run. The incident happened in a clash between protestors and Chinese citizens over the politics of China, especially human rights and Tibet. Chinese officials and bloggers kept up a relentless propaganda against Sarkozy.

This is only one example how the Chinese officialdom and people’s ultra-nationalism worked in tandem in managing the Olympic politics. The official position also held out the threat of excluding France from China’s economic opportunities. France is not the only country presumed to fall in line to applaud Beijing Olympics through economic instruments. Even the US, UK and Germany have been, but the approach has been different in each case.

High on China’s Olympic politics was to showcase to the international community that the Tibetan and the Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang were happily assimilated with the dominating Han population and the Chinese government and the Communist Party. By taking the Olympic torch run openly through Tibet to Mount Everest, and through the main cities like capital Urumqi and Kashgar in Xinjiang, the objective was to prove that there was no ethnic dissension in the country and ethnic problems were a fictitious creation of western propaganda.

The plan went horribly wrong. The March 14, anti-China protests in Lhasa turned violent and spread to other parts of neighbouring provinces with Tibetan enclaves. The success of China’s minority policy claimed by Beijing proved to be a failure. The autonomy promised by Beijing under its autonomous region law was never executed by it either in letter or spirit.

Similarly, Xinjing demonstrated quiet and silent opposition. Both the Uighurs and Tibetans can be stubborn people who believe in their identity, ethnicity and their right to self-rule. Over the years, they have concluded they can live under Chinese sovereignty, but they must be allowed to keep their religion, culture, and ethnicity alive. But Beijing is determined to sincize them.

The Chinese Olympic torch run through Tibet and Xinjiang proved that the Central government remains defeated in winning over the hearts and minds of there ethnic people. The runs were severely curtailed and conducted in prison – like conditions only for controlled photo opportunities.

Tibetans are not known to have resorted to any kind of terrorist acts. In the past, protests in Lhasa have been held mainly by monks and nuns. These sere peaceful but were put down brutally by the authorities. But on March 14 this year, protests turned violent and the lay Tibetans also joined, in. A senior Tibetan official in Tibet government was also dismissed, suggesting that resistance is spreading against the Chinese.

Some Uighur Muslims have taken to militancy to demand independence. With Government organized Han settlement in Xinjiang, the Uighurs have become a minority in their own land. The divide between the Uirghurs and the Han Chinese have always been sharp, but following the recent crackdown on Uighurs by security personnel to counter terrorism, differences are bound to accentuate.

The Chinese authorities have legitimate concerns over possible attempts to disturb the games including through terrorist acts. But indiscriminate crack down including killings in so-called search operations, are not helpful. Using the Olympics to counter Uighur separatism appears a short sighted approach. Summary execution of suspected separatists hardly help.

These developments suggest that the Chinese efforts ahead of the Olympic games to demonstrate all was well here backfired and revealed the yawning gap between the two main minority races and the Hans.

Beijing has also extended its Olympic politics in its foreign relations. Apart from the French President episode, they have engaged large sections of Chinese living abroad, to counter protests by Tibetans and human rights activists. This happened in Japan, South Korea, the USA, UK and France. This is a new kind of aggressive Chinese external behaviour being noticed. China’s use of overseas Chinese for espionage in well known and documented.

That is one thing. But using Chinese students and workers abroad to take to the streets and indulge in pro-China hooliganism, is another. This time the hooliganism was associated with the Olympics. In the future, however, such street activities representing ultra-nationalism may be used to further other Chinese interests.

China’s Olympic politics is unlikely to fade away after the games. In fact, they are more likely to increase with the successful holding of the Olympic games.

(The author is an eminent China analyst with many years of experience of study on the developments in China. He can be reached at grouchohart@yahoo.com)