By LISA CHIU
Observer staff
April 23, 2008

The current fallout over the run-up to the Beijing Olympic Games is testament to just how little the international sporting event actually has to do with sports.

For China, Aug. 8, 2008, will mark both its role as host to a global event, and its debut as a major world power. And part of that role, it would seem, means being able to handle international criticism.

Photo by REUTERS
Pro-Tibet activists attend a candlelight protest in front of China’s Embassy on the eve of the Olympic torch relay in Camberra, Australia.

Human rights groups have protested China’s hosting of the Olympics ever since the People’s Republic first made a bid for the 2000 Games, but it was Tibetan protests in western China last month and the Chinese response, that set off this latest row that has become a tangled ball of nationalism and sovereignty.

Some Chinese have argued that coverage of the unrest by Western media was biased. Many also view the Tibetan protest, where a reportedly 19 mostly Han Chinese were killed, as domestic terrorism. But Tibetan exile groups are quick to point to the subsequent Chinese crackdown where a reportedly 140 were killed.

As a result of the unrest, protests have followed the Olympic torch since it was lit in Greece in late March. But when images from Paris of wheelchair-bound fencer Jing Jing fighting off anti-Chinese protestors on April 7 appeared on Chinese Web Sites, many began to organize their own counter protest.

Thousands demonstrated in front of six stores across the country owned by French supermarket chain Carrefour last weekend. Some demonstrators also held a rally at the French Embassy in Beijing. Millions more have signed online petitions vowing not to shop at French stores or purchase French items.

The fact that French President Nicholas Sarkozy has been noncommittal about whether he will attend the opening ceremony of the Games has also angered many Chinese.

The frustration has not been limited to the French. There has been widespread criticism by Chinese bloggers against CNN for commentator Jack Cafferty’s April 9 comment on “The Situation Room” where Cafferty said: “I think our relationship with China has certainly changed… I think they’re basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they’ve been for the last 50 years.”

Cafferty has said that his comments were aimed at the Chinese government and not its people. Meanwhile CNN has said that the comments were Cafferty’s own opinion.

But many in China are unconvinced. One blogger has even created an anti-CNN Web site that aims to expose the lies and distortions of coverage of China by the Western Press.

The site reads: “We are not against the Western people, but against the prejudice from the Western society.”

It was also reported today that 14 lawyers have even filed a lawsuit in a local Beijing city court against CNN and Cafferty, saying they harmed the reputation of the Chinese, according to China Daily, the national English language newspaper.

Plaintiffs Beijing Huanzhong & Partners, demanded that CNN and Cafferty cease harmful acts, issue a public apology and pay each of them 100 yuan or about $14.30 in compensation for mental distress. It’s not clear if the court will accept the case.

While some of these attempts at preserving national pride seem unlikely to come to fruition, the Chinese are the only people pushing less-than-fruitful missions.

Last year, members of the U.S. Congress introduced bills calling for a boycott of the Games based on Chinese human rights abuses. At the time, the push was due to China’s failure help end the killing by militias in the Darfur of Sudan. China is the largest investor in the Sudan.

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., introduced a bill calling for a boycott for China’s support of the Sudan and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., introduced a bill calling for a boycott for China’s support of human rights abuses in the Sudan, Burma and North Korea.

While boycotts have certainly taken place – former president Jimmy Carter boycotted the 1980 Moscow Olympics in protest of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan for example – they hardly seem plausible given the increasingly diverse global opinions of China. China, by the way, also boycotted the 1980 games.

Even Amnesty International, which has protested Chinese policies, has made it clear that they are not calling for an Olympic boycott. Spokesman T. Kumar said it’s just not their policy.

“Even when the U.S. held the Olympics in Atlanta, we had a major campaign on the death penalty,” Kumar said. “But we did not ask countries to boycott the U.S.” He said his group hopes to encourage China to improve its human rights record before the Games. Their main concerns are China’s death penalty, the lack of media freedoms, punishment of human rights defenders and the policy of re-education through labor.

Photo by REUTERS
Joggers run past the newly built “bird’s nest” stadium in Beijing.

One reason why those pushing for a boycott or massive protest of the Games are getting prominent media attention may be due to China’s vast economic growth.

Prior to receiving Permanent Normal Trade Relations Status with the United States in 1999, China needed an annual waiver to maintain free trade status. So from 1989 to 1999, there was a regular annual debate in Congress about human rights and trade issues before the renewal of China’s free trade status.

Once China earned most-favored nation status, which allowed it to join the World Trade Organization in 2000, that annual debate effectively ended.

“When (permanent normal trade relations) was passed, it took away the regular need for those in favor of China trade to have to go to the Hill to get votes,” said Jim Loi, a visiting fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a foreign policy think tank in Washington D.C.

“In the last five years, there’s not been a balanced message going to the Hill. There’s no reason for those that support China trade to be up there and they no longer balance out that discussion.”

But that’s not to say that there aren’t legitimate concerns about the development of civil society in China. China’s sudden restriction on foreign travel into has been a concern among many journalists, said Freda Wan, a resident of Hong Kong. This concern is shared by others who fear they may not be able to travel because of the Games, reports Jaya Conser Lapham, an English teacher in the Western Chinese region of Xinjiang.

“Originally there was talk that the torch would stop here, but with all the controversy and road construction it seems we’ve been crossed off the list,” Conser Lapham said.

For Virginia resident Kenneth Liang, those protesting the games don’t understand the different pace with which China implements reforms. Liang said that hosting the Games will allow China to share its culture with the world and improve its international image.

“I think it’s a big honor for all the Chinese across the world,” said Liang, 35, who emigrated from China 15 years ago.

Other Chinese living in the United States have a different view of the Olympics. Bing Wu, of Seattle, said he doesn’t view the Games with cultural pride, but has found the coverage frustrating.

“The news stories about Olympics have been torturous. I didn’t care for China hosting the Olympics, but I certainly don’t like to see China being mocked at, which is what is happening now,” said Wu, who is now a U.S. citizen.

“Personally, I think many critics are racists: they don’t believe China deserves the world power status and they don’t believe the Chinese can govern other people who don’t share an East Asian heritage.”