The Turbulent Ride of the 2008 Olympics Torch
Aby April 13th, 2008
The charged political atmosphere in the torch relays of the Beijing Olympics of 2008 should cause the founder of modern international Olympics, the French nobleman Pierre Fredy roll in his grave. The sporting event revived with ideals of promoting peace, harmony and international cultural exchange has eventually grown to turn to to a background of violent political events. Over the last 70 years, there have been several instances where propaganda machinery tried to hijack the Olympics to their political games. However it is significant in the history of Olympics that a pre-sport event such as the Torch relay was mired in so much violent poltical protests, that the security for the torch is much as that a top foreign dignary from a hostile country would require.
Violent anti-China protests at London in April 6, 2008. Note the exaggeration of numbers by the protesters
The Beijing Olympics of 2008 has been turned into political theater for several reasons, right from a percieved threat of a rising China to the issue of Tibetan independance. The loudest protests in UK, US and France have been for the reason that one can be most self-righteous and moralistic about, the cause of Tibet’s freedom. One wonders, had London or San Francisco hosted the 2008 Olympics, would there have been as much widespread and violent protests? We are talking in context of the Anglo-US invasion of Iraq, of course. For those among us who are experienced in media bias and public attention trends in these countries, the answer is already obvious…
A violent anti-Iraq War protest in an Olympic event hosted by UK or US would most likely have been met with nationalistic outrage. The media and public would have had a field day with frenzied disgusts at the protesters with statements like, “How could they politicise an international sporting event like that?”. While the Chinese crackdown on Tibet killed a few hundreds of Tibetan protesters, the civilian death toll of the Iraq War (since 2003) is over 0.6 million and counting. In comparision to China’s crackdown on the Tibet revolution, the human rights abuses of Iraqis by US forces is much more perverted and brutal in nature. Yet the plight of the Iraqi people is far less likely to be a cause for concern, especially in an Olympic ‘run up’ event.
In contrast to the protests in London or San Francisco, the torch relay in the Tanzanian capital Dar Es Salaam met with a warm welcome and cheers from the local people. There were no ‘free Tibet’ protests or attempts to snatch the torch from the people as reported by BBC Afrique. BBC also reports that the torch passed a 20 km run through Muscat, Oman in the Persian Gulf without incident. It seems the violent protests against Beijing Olympics are limited only to a few countries, particularly the Anglo-US group of nations. This leaves us a question to ponder about, is the West European and American protests against Beijing Olympics a self-righteous expression of popular brewing anti-China sentiments? More on that in the coming articles….
No related posts.
- Ideology , World Politics
- Comments(31)
Loading ...
I love you Aby, you’re my hero
But it took you a month to update:(
I agree with you. It is all American conspiracy to destablise China.
And it is one of the reasons why the Chinese government has kept
a strict control over its media. Given that the majority of the Chinese
population are made up of uneducated farmers and under-educated
workers, who blindly believe the “objective and truthful” infromation
from the west.
China is slowly changing to a more deocratic society. The more educated,
and productive our population are the more democratic the government can
be.
too bad, my arguements alway get dismissed as “propaganda influenced”
and not worth noting.
Oh Aby, I’m thinking about writing an article for this website too. M writing
is not very good, but I have some profound thoughts. Maybe I’ll sent you
my crude copy and you improve upon that or just make some corrections?
Good work!
Reading Aby’s insight into the issue makes me understand why the Swiss are known for their diplomacy. The can relate to and understand the people of the world instantly like no other which makes diplomacy a part of their nature.
I am against the violence associated with the protest in the olympic torch relay. The pictures of the violent protests in London, Paris and San Fransisco were shown in Channel 4 of CCTV, a national TV network in China and are accessible in the web, and the Chinese people were disgusted with such violence. To a Chinese citizen, Tibet issue is not a simple human right issue. It involves justice to all sections of Tibetan people, conflict between the need for development and preservation of Tibetan culture, the unity of Dalai Lama’s Tibetan religion and government, and peaceful co-existance of all ethinic groups of Chinese people in and out of the Tibet area. So go to politicize the relay if peacefully.
With regards to the Iraq situation, I remember a certain march I went to a few years ago in London that at the time was pretty famous and featured millions of people protesting against the war in Iraq. When people over here heard about Guantanamo bay, no one was happy and the same goes for any other human rights abuse that we’ve heard of that our governments are responsible of. Unfortunately given the governments we have, they didn’t listen to us and it seems that the power of protest has become rather insignificant, but don’t think for a moment we are happy with our governments doing this.
I just wonder how many western protestors really understand the history of Tibet and its problems and conflicts against the Chinese government.
I kept listening to various so-called civilised radicals. They have only one point to talk about - the Chinese government destroys the freedom and democracy of Tibet. “What do you mean? Could you tell me some examples, other than those you read from the paper ? ” asked I . They were all speechless.
Now, I understand democracy in some people eyes, in some people mouth, can be very superficial and contentless.
Democracy is all about responsible freedom, liberty, right to life and pursuit of happiness. In addition, it is about restraints on government, minority rights, among a much broader set of issues. It sickens me that Western governments apply double standards to democracy; while maintaining ties to aristocracies of this world, they lecture others (certainly including China) about democratic reforms. Certainly, in the past few years, it has become apparent that democracy isn’t even an issue at home in the U.S. even as this dumb shit of a president tries to impose democracy on the rest of the world.
Kinda ironic, don’t ya think?
The Chinese people have unfortunately become sheer materialists: driven by nationalist ideology what they stand for is nothing better than pushing their own pride onto the international arena, ironically using the Olympic Games which is about as far removed from Chinese totalitarian culture as you could want. It is not their fault, they have been brainwashed by the Communist Party - they know no better; Chinese people in Taiwan and overseas often do. The true roots of Chinese culture are not just Confucian but Buddhist which is why when they crush the living embodiment of true Mahayana Buddhism in Tibet they are destroying their own credibility on a far deeper level. After these “Olympics” (remember the East Germans?) most Westerners and freedom-loving people will respect Chinese power all right, but despise the political and moral values that have established it.
@John Fox
I to was at a protest about the wa in iraq perhaps not the one your’e thinking of but it ran through trafalgar and leicester squar, there thousands there to protest iin my pont of view it was meaningfull.
___________________________
These anti-China protests shouldent be addressing the Chinese olympic commity its just stupid;the chinese olympics aren’t involved with this Tibet issue.
Besides its nobodys buissness but China’s and The Chinese communist party.
@all
democracy doesn’t always work.
you have to listen to your countries people even though if it was completely wrong.
@ hbogyt
Thank you for your encouraging comment. Regarding the American stance towards China, it is more of a self-righteous attitude of Anglo-American people and media rather than any government conspiracy. Used to bullying weak third world nations, it is really difficult for the average American nationalist to come to terms that countries like China are too mighty to be bullied by UK or US. Hence, the violent protests against Beijing Olympics is an outlet of their nationalist frustrations in a self-righteous way.
If you want to write an article to be published in our site, you are welcome to do so. Just make sure the article contains authentic and original thoughts, verifiable facts and good presentation. Mail the articles to me using the contact information in “Contact” page of this site with your authorship details and I will do what is needed.
@ Bill Adams
Thank you very much. One isn’t born with diplomacy, they learn it after interacting with different kinds of people and understanding how humans share the same biology but different cultures and way of life.
@ John Fox
If your government doesn’t listen to the majority of people and if the public can’t do anything about it, how does it make your government any different from a communist government?
@ Bharat
I do agree that it is ironic, the most amusing irony being the American double standards in their world view. They express their self-righteous outrage at China’s issue with its Tibet region and the CPC government’s stance on press freedom. Yet they utterly ignore and disregard the US war crimes on Iraqis and the denial of media coverage on the Iraqi people’s plight. It is this “heads I win, tails you lose” attitude that creates much of the anti-American sentiments around the world.
@ Nofal
Democracy works if it is allowed to work. But that aside, there’s no puzzle created by the human mind that is unsolvable. Every now and then, some do fall through cracks.
For clarification, while I strongly defend democracy, I do not defend the U.S.-style democracy. For a long time, the democracy in the U.S. has been anything but. I think democracy is important because the people—wrong or right—have the right to have a say in issues that govern their lives.
Perhaps its noble, and not practical, given the state of media propaganda that we constantly see, but as a simple fact, democracy works—just like a dictatorship works—given the chance to make it work.
We just agree with some methods over others.
@ bharat
nicely put
@bharat
The west don’t give the chance to make it work in China. The winner has kicked down the ladder.
@ hboGYT
I said, and I quote, “Democracy works if it is allowed to work.” Try as you may, you cannot suggest that democracy is a living entity. It is merely a practice in governance. I agree—to an extent, Western countries are to blame, but China isn’t a role model, either. One of the reasons the West has issues with China is because China is communist; it is also a large, strong country, both in terms of economy and military strength; it also has a comparatively intelligence capacity. Besides, who said the West HAD to GIVE China the chance to make democracy work? China could, if it desired to, work around Western attempts to destabilize China; perhaps it doesn’t want to?
I meant “comparatively decent”
@Bharat
Why would not China want to work around, if it really brings benefits to its people?
Yes, we desire to, but the circumstances do not warrant such an action.
The inescapable fact is that 60% of the Chinese population are from rural areas. They are less educated and relatively poorer.(I’ll explain this in detail in my upcoming article). This would inevitably impede any successful change of government. But without them, our economy cannot grow as fast. So status quo will do for the time being.
In addition, the west plays a part in impeding our democracy.
The riot in tibet and tibetan indepence movement was clearly foreign-incited and -funded. Luckily we still had the option of a crackdown. Imagine what would happen had China been a democracy.
I will further elaborate in my upcoming article.
A few things to note, first: My point clearly was to point out that China was not blameless. The West is a traditional enemy of communism, and China is communist. The fact that it is also militarily strong is no consolation. The question posed at the end of my post had to do with options, and the willingness to exercise it. You ask the question, and you answer it. You should perhaps refer to your own post for the answer to your question, or clarify, and I’d be happy to respond. I look forward to reading your article if it is published. As mentioned before, the West plays no greater a role in destabilizing China as China herself does against the West. This would be equivalent to the saying, “the pot is calling the kettle black.” While I’ll grant that West is clearly not the lesser of the two evils, Chinese covert intelligence activities pose a big threat to the U.S., notwithstanding the huge budget of the CIA. Then, again, during the Cold War, the CIA’s budget was approximately a hundred times greater than that of the KGB, yet the KGB outflanked the CIA in virtually everything. The point? Chinese efforts are limited to acquiring the technical know-how—in some instances, even the actual technology—to advance China as a nation, but the fact is, even they try to destabilize the U.S. (and other Western nations, but primarily, the U.S.). The U.S., as a war economy, relies on funding militias to do its dirty work. Crackdown? I doubt that China didn’t have more options at its disposal, but I agree that the Western media has blown the incident well out of proportion. Even Democracy leaves room open to deal with these issues. They just vary in how they are implemented. I look forward to reading your article, as mentioned before, particularly the evidence you cite in order to justify your claims.
Simply put, the existence of western influence has made a political transformation unapealling to the Chinese leaders.
The Chinese tries as hard as the west in destabilising each other, but with less success, as westerner are brainwashed to a greater extent.
It wants to, but reality will not allow it.
I’m afraid my article will not answer all your questions. If you are interested, you can study some “institutional economics”, or some other branches of social science that builds upon solid philosophical foundations. The article will be more easily understood if you do read a little about them.
Unviable options are not options. I spend $100 daily, I can either finance it by working in the supermarket or the mechanics, now does robbing a bank count as a third option.
I will definitely cite some convincing evidence.
Perhaps you should write an article too and see whose is more convincing.
China has simply many reasons which forces it not to leave Tibet.
some of them bieng:
1.Tibet’s trillion dollar oil reserves
Tibetan plateau holds an estimated 4 trillion dollar oil reserves ,which well can be backbone for China.The latest China land resources survey gives out a preliminary conclusion that the Qiangtang basin on the Tibet Plateau is of rich oil and gas reserves. As a possible area promising for rich oil reserves on the plateau, the Qiangtang basin may become a new base in China’s oil and gas industry.
The investigation results show that Tibet has well developed hydrocarbon rocks, with thick and fine oil producing layers. The hydrocarbon rocks in the middle of the basin are found with mature structures, favorable for light oil formation. Meanwhile, an ancient oil belt running 100 km long has been discovered in the southern section of the basin. All these findings confirm the solid material basis for forming a large oil field, indicating marine oil and gas formation and conglomeration processes in the basin.
Both the oil and gas indicators and the discovery of the ancient oil belt have confirmed the formation, migration and conglomeration of oil and gas in the Qiangtang basin. Scientists have so far discovered 1,189 potential sites that may contain oil or gas. Mostly made of limestone, the oil storing layers are concentrated over slopes, rupture belts, and relatively higher tectonics in adjacent areas..
2.Tourism in Tibet
With more than 100,000 foreign tourists having visited Tibet over the last seven years, bringing in foreign exchange earnings over US$48 million, and an annual growth rate of 97%, tourism in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) is becoming one of the pillar industries to support the local economy, reported the official Chinese news agency Xinhua. It cited unspecified sources as saying that more than 100 companies and agencies in Tibet deal with tourism-related businesses, with a total of more than 580 million yuan (US$72.5 million) of fixed assets. The news report also stated that more tourist routes connecting Lhasa, the capital city, with sightseeing spots scattered on the Tibetan Plateau had been developed, while new tourism programmes were being added, including mountaineering, field exploration, cycle racing and scientific research. With the rather disconcerting news recently emerging from Tibet stating that Tibetan tour operators educated in exile, numbering over 60, having had their licences cancelled by the Chinese authorities, and the influx of Chinese immigrants continuing unabated, the question remains whether it is not the Chinese who gain more from it.
3.Tibet’s forest resources
Tibet is China’s largest source of timber with 7.6 million hectares of forests. Forest production accounts for 14 percent of the region’s gross domestic product. Tsawa Pashoe, Zogon, Markham, Chamdo, Kongpo, Dromo, Nangchen and Bathang are only some of the mentioned areas in Tibet where major deforestation takes place.
So,after all of this do you expect China to just leave Tibet so easily.
I dont think they are going to do this,until ALL THESE RESOURCES ARE FULLY EXPLOITED.
Just an observation: inviable options ARE options. The fact that the likelihood is high or low has no bearing on its being an option. Its determined by factors just as consequences, resources—availability, optimal allocations—among other things. My point simply is this: options are not entirely inviable on the basis on the external factors—previously mentioned—but also on the willingness to exercise options. Would you suggest a lack of willingness to rat on a friend as an inviable option? I’d argue that the option is valid, but it’s the willingness not to exercise it that makes it appear as though it was inviable. So, really, you can’t apply it in the general sense. Notwithstanding that, I certainly agree that people in the West are brainwashed and seem to have an usual liking for themselves, and often even indulge in acts of self-importance whether or not it is appropriate to do so. But there are other ways to destabilize a nation; currency is a rather good example. In fact, would you not agree that the undervalued Chinese yuan is economically destabilizing. The fact that it’s not very effective has little to do with the act itself and more to do with the fact that the dollar remains the world’s reserve currency. Lose that, and the U.S. loses its ability sustain its status. Will it remain a formidable force? Yes. Will it sustain it? Probably not, unless an anomaly arose.
I must say that I am not communist.I visit China almost every month for last 8 years for business.I have been to most parts of China on eastern coast and met people from all walks of Life. having said this much I must say i have to find a place where AS AN INDIAN , I would be treated as First class citizen, EXCEPT IN CHINA.Go to any western country , including US OF A. we are always looked down upon , as browns. shops, hotels, airports,trains , buses .one can feel the under current of distrust. but NOT IN CHINA.They may have their own political systems , but that does bother their own citizens, I have yet to find a Chinese who complained to me about the life in China. talking about dissidents , which country does not have?
I’ve been to China, from Beijing through most of the Yunnan Province, three times the past two years and consistantly found the people friendly and delightful. I had the same experience recently while touring Turkey. The Chinese are far more friendly and positive about the world than your average Uncle Sam.
aby the only question that i would like to ask you is how do you view the tibetan protests in India which is home to second largest population of tibetans in the world after tibet itself and a country where dalailama lives and runs his government in exile. I don’t know if you saw the protests when bush came to India but that was more wide spread than this tibetan protest which was highly concentrated in New delhi.
Now, regarding this article, I have to agree with it, but only partially. A lot of the protests, for us geo-strategic analysts, is instigated by the CIA. If you want to understand China, you have to remember its history. China got raped by the western powers a hundred years ago, torn apart, colonized, and partitioned. Then they faught a massive war to get back together again. To this day, they are absolutely PARANOID of anything that even hints at an attempt to Balkanize the mother land. And Tibet, with 700 years of history, and further back during the chinese dynasties, is seen as a part of China, and is considered part of the Motherland. It also doesn’t help when the CIA historical records show the CIA helping, aiding, and abetting the free tibet activists. So, naturally, when the Olympic torch was on it’s way, and suddenly all this hoopla gets ridiculous in the West against China, of course the chinese got freaked out. They see it on a whole other level. They see an active force out to partition them again, which reminds them of the past humiliations. If you can take yourself out of your mindset, and just for a moment put yourself into China’s shoes and remember their history, then you get a much better idea why they’re so paranoid about it. They see the protests as a threat against their Sovereingty. And let’s not forget, they saw what happened to Korea, which got divided and partitioned, and Vietnam, which also got divided and partitioned, but faught a bloody war to get back together again. Obviously, the chinese don’t want to get screwed again.
The fact is that most of the people who vehemently protest against China’s “brutal” human rights record are those who have never been to China. For those who have been to China, it is, more often than not, a different story.
One of my friends studying in France told me, she has seen people being paid up for joining in the torch-relay protest. But when asked “where is Tibet?”, some of those guys had completely no clue, let along know something about its history.
A term often talked about in China is SEEK TRUTH FROM FACT. I really hope those who are either born hating China, or taught to hate China, or paid up to hate China, or hate China due to its aloofness, whatsoever, pay a visit to China to verify themselves how “brutal” today’s Chinese government is towards its people, and how intensely today’s Chinese people have been “suffering” under the “ruthless” Communist rule.
To those who hate China merely because of its status as a communist, I have to say, you are not correct yet I may help to correct you.
Today’s China is on the road of pursuing, what we term it, Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.
“Chinese Characteristics” means we are working on a unique way of administering, which to my understanding, means we are combining the best of the proven good experiences from other countries, including that of the Western countries, with the cream of the time-honored socialism. Today’s China is a great departure from what it was 20 years ago. I do not think it’s wise to always associate what has happened 20 years ago with today’s China or Chinese government. Actually, it seems to me that the mentioning of “Tiananmen Student Movement”, or some of you may call it “massacre”, has become a good fashion among a significant number of people to hide their outdated knowledge about today’s world, and boast of their being democratic. If so, why not talk about the bloody history of American Indians several hundred years ago whenever the topic concerns the United States? Time is progressing, so does China.
To those who hate Chinese people merely because of our status as Chinese, I have to say, you are beyond correction. Your hatred will always be our source of power driving us to excel.
Fault or even deficiencies can always be found as to the Chinese government or the Chinese system of governing, which is a fact nobody could deny. However, more encouraging is that the Chinese leadership has been constantly aware of this and always takes immediate actions to correct itself into the right path, which are always proven effective, which can be broadly reflected by Chinese government’s response to the recent earthquake relief, China’s gradual loosing control of media freedom, and more important, Chinese government’s persistent efforts in lifting millions of people out of poverty.
Well, I welcome criticism of all kind to China or its people so long as it is intended to help, but not virulent abuses or senseless pretest as mentioned above.
Foresttrans and Sea Wang YOU ROCK the lama is just a vioent slave owner. The westerners are not bad people they just don’t understand what is really happening. +I am a Chinese American
Tallen Lu，你会说中文吗？我好久没连系了。如果我可能实践我的与您的汉语我会是非常愉快的。加油！
Did anyone saw the picture of the lama on a tank seeing his evil slave owning troops. The PLA saved the tibetian people1
Sorry I messed up what I mean is- Did anyone saw the picture of the lama on a tank seeing his evil slave owning troops. The PLA saved the tibetian people!
I also want to point out that the European colonists in America forcefully took control the land which had previously belonged to the Indians, then massacred them when they did the only thing any sensible man would have done, attack back and defend his land. My point is, Americans shouldn’t judge others, especially if their actions are justified, and yours’ is not.