I Don't Know...

Student: Jonathan M. Koch
19 November, 2009

“2008 Beijing Olympics: China’s Political Display of Power”

It was around the year 740 BC that a young aristocratic Athenian called Kimon won three consecutive chariot races with the same team of mares on each occasion. Kimon faced one problem upon his victorious return: He had been exiled by the tyrannical Athenian ruler Peisistratos. Kimon successfully negotiated that upon his return to Athens, he would hand over his second Olympic tethrippon to Peisistratos (Spivey, p. 178). This is just one example of how politics have taken place in Olympic history. In 2008, President George Walker Bush was urged to boycott the opening ceremonies of the Olympics in Beijing, China in effort to show the United States’ position regarding China’s neglect of issues concerning human rights (Stolberg, 2008). Bush responded to urges from members such as then Senator Hillary Clinton and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi by insisting the Olympics are not a political event and that his attendance would only show support for America’s athletes (Eggen, 2008).

In my essay, I will attempt to explain two points of view using realism and idealism: The first point being from a realist perspective how Bush’s view on political involvement with Olympic competition as an unacceptable means of pursuing advances of human rights within China’s government. I will attempt to show how Bush ignores realist factors such as human nature and national interest for survival. The second point I will attempt to make, being idealism, will focus on how China’s behavior toward the Olympics and unwillingness to cooperate with world leaders by taking stance against violations of human rights could jeopardize their pursuit of global recognition as a world power by threatening the peace and principles of democracy in the free world.

There was no doubt that the opening ceremonies for last summer’s 2008 Olympics were nothing short of amazing. A spectacular array of fireworks dazzled the city’s promising skies, cleared of industrial pollution that only years earlier had gloomed over the lands; talented musicians filled listener’s ears with brilliantly orchestrated music; dancers executed wonderfully choreographed routines – all as President Bush looked on from his secured place in the stands. In my opinion, this was one of the most awesome displays of both artistic and technical mastery I had ever witnessed. But then along came the photos of Chinese soldiers hailing the Chinese flag displayed above the Olympic rings. Bush urged political leaders in the US that the games were not to be viewed as a political proving ground yet the choreography of the ceremonies suggest that Chinese officials felt otherwise.

China had lost its bid for Olympic host in the year 2000 thought mostly because of their violent reaction to a student demonstration at Tiananmen Square in 1989 where it was estimated that thousands of Chinese civilian and soldiers were killed. China again placed bid in 2001 for the 2008 Olympics on grounds that it had been and would be continuing efforts to advance policy in human rights (China, p. 4). On March 31st, 2008, a mass protest arose in Tibet when protestors tried to stop the Olympic torch from being passed to Athens. In Hans J. Morgenthau’s book “Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace”, Morgenthau explains how it is necessary to identify and predict behaviors that exist in human nature and make it policy to create laws that take these natures into consideration (Morgenthau, p. 166) . Violence is one such behavior that must be taken into consideration. It has been determined that not all violence is political in nature. The less abrupt the violence, more likely the violence is to be politically charged (Kelly, p. 87) such as the student displays at Tiananmen Square and the protests in Tibet on March 14th, 2008 where an estimated 135 to 140 Tibetans were killed (AFP, 2008) Appeasing to China’s actions of violence as demonstrated on March 14th, 2008 showed weakness and tolerance of China’s status on human rights, giving Chinese officials the idea that the United States supports the actions taken by China.

The prior statement shows how, as a realist, Bush did not act accordingly based on his stance of the Olympic Games as a sporting event that carries no political quandary; however, realist would state that moralistic values must be taken in consideration when becoming involved in an international negotiation. It would not be realistic to expect that China’s communistic government can be radically changed in just a course of a decade. This can be seen historically in the late 1980’s through the 1990’s in the former Soviet Union after communism had failed.

The new freedom in Russia after having all sense of self-worth suppressed from individuals in the fate of communism had left citizens wanting their old ruler back. “Yes, they killed and imprisoned, but how great were our victories and parades!” says Nina L. Khrushcheva in a 2006 essay written for the Washington Post (Khrushcheva, 2006). Rulers such as Ivan the Terrible and Joseph Stalin had used fear to control its own government and to influence the governments of others. The respect of fear was all the citizens of the former Soviet Union had. When the west had won, Russia’s pride was taken along with any structure the people had ever known. If democracy is to take a larger place to aid in China’s struggle for human rights, the United States must learn moral standards that exist in China and make policy with those standards in mind. Even in a situation such as this, a realist still would not support the President’s decision to accept China’s invitation to attend the ceremonies on the grounds that a ruler must be able to accept their responsibility as a leader. The ruler must then make a decision whether to allow the people to realign their own government; to take position in the country and rule; or, to destroy all spirit and existing forms of government.

On the other side of theory, the idealist side, the violence and rebellion that exist in China would suggest a problem within the government. Chinese political officials look at the rebelling public as a threat to the nation’s status, and attempt to control public violence by placing strict censorship on press and crackdowns on assembly. Political idealist would not see the public as the threat to government, but as a means of control over governmental policy. As mentioned earlier, when politically charged, violence is not abrupt. In idealism theory, violent demonstrations would suggest a problem with structure.

The display of Chinese soldiers in a ceremonial world gathering would suggest to be seen as a display of power. The Olympic Games were an opportunity for China to reach the world and gain the recognition as a world power. As stated in Yong Deng’s book “China’s Struggle for Status”, in order to gain recognition, you must have power (Deng, p. 21). As displayed in part by the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games, realist China is focused on power, and by bidding on the hosting nation in the first place, is very concerned with recognition. Idealist would see China’s display of power and lack of systematic cooperation as a threat that could lead to catastrophe. Idealists theorize democracies will not fight other democracies, but if China is to remain incompliant with idealistic goals, then action must be taken. Idealist could see China’s actions and lack of compassion for human life as just cause for war.

If war is to be the case, certain criteria must be met before most idealists would accept war as a feasible option for controlling further threats to democracy. 1) The declaration of war would carry moral weight. The war would be declared to defend human rights of citizens and the rights of others that are directly affected by China’s communistic government. Violations of human rights do not only affect the people of the governments which impose them. Violations set moral standards that bring fear, hatred, and resentment of envied nations. This fear, hatred, and resentment is the same that has fueled the spread trans-national terrorist organizations that pose threats to the security of nation states globally. 2) The declaration of war would not be made in sole interest for power of a single person as many nations and individual lives have been affected by China’s complete disregard for human rights. For a leader not to act on these disregards would be immoral. If China continues to behave in such an oppressive manner with no intent on following through on negotiated terms, intervention of war must be considered by nation leaders. 3) The intent must be to right wrongdoing by China. China having to result to violence in order to protect its government may not be considered by some just war theorists as cause for declaration of war, but the genocidal treatment of its own people that cause the uprising of the people can and should be. Sudan has been suffering what the United States has recognized as genocide at the of Chinese oil purchasers. International institutes would see China’s stance on human rights as a blight attempt to stop any further war. States should then reform policy and make a firm stance against China’s ill treatment of humanity. 4) Attempts to advance human rights have been made numerously by the United States, that of which China’s government officials have continually ignored. Ignoring diplomacy in favor of selfish gains will disturb peace that must be restored. 5) If faced with war, the waging sides must possess the ability to win. Without the ability to win, the cause is lost. The United States possesses the technology and military force to match China’s own forces. 6) The proportion is that the rights of Chinese citizens and citizens of states affected by China’s stance on human rights would be equal to the proportionality of rights sought by western nations. The United States and allies would refrain from using any unconventional tactics that would cause indiscriminate harm to non-combatants when fighting for human rights as this would contradict the declaration of the war.

War would not be the preferred method by idealist, but it would have served its purpose if it were the means of advancing democracy by “planting seeds of democracy” as an effective foreign policy tool (Meernik, p. 123). These seeds would then grow to a greater involvement of the United States and other democratic nation states within the borders of China. The presence of other governments would intervene with any recognition of a self-standing world power that China seeks much like the United States did with Japan and Italy after World War II. If China is to stand on its own and compete globally, they must accept democracy in all cause. If China simply chooses to ignore policy on human rights, the free world will have to align for the good of democracy in order for theory of idealism to work.

China had spent billions of dollars over the course of seven years since it was awarded the responsibility as hosting nation for the 2008 Summer Olympic Games. The position of host had been awarded to china with the consideration that China would be given a chance to change. China responded by attempting to distance itself from the war in Darfur, Sudan which the United States has referred to as genocide. China then, instead of implementing controls on trade with Sudan, had only attempted to cover up any involvement they had ever taken in the mass demonstrations of violence and murder (Reeves, 2008). China had also promised a greener environment by replacing coal-powered plants in Beijing with clean energy. Instead of replacing the means of energy, China had only relocated the plant facilities far outside the city limits where toxin levels would not be measured. China also did not want to be viewed as a heinous transgressor of human rights. Instead of probing the problems existing and seeking solutions, China only quieted the problem by imprisoning anyone who spoke out against the Olympic planning committee and the Chinese government (China, 2008).

The cover-ups China had attempted should have made it very clear to the United States that China did not view the Olympics as sport. China had viewed their Position as the hosting nation as a means to gain political and economical status with western nation states. If President Bush wishes to view himself as a realist, he would have seen that China is acting in a very selfish manner by lying to the United States and by suppressing its own people. By attending the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games, President Bush was allowing China to assume that the United States, the leader of the free world, would be accepting of lying, murdering, oppressing as long as you can cover your tracks. Even if President Bush had identified himself as an idealist, he would have not attended the opening ceremonies on the grounds China was imposing threats on democracy.

China has a long way to go if they would like to be accepted into trade by the free world. Hosting the Olympic Games should have been seen as a test to see the commitment China will be willing to assert to the free trade market. In the idealist sense, China failed miserably. In order to gain respect and compete globally, China must be accepting of equal gender rights. China must implement regulations on forced labor. Since 1999, there have been over 180 forced labor camps that have operated illegally in China in 2005. Laborers in these camps consist of elderly, children, and women. The prisoners of these labor camps are subjected to torture and brainwashing techniques that routinely result in the death of the tortured (Xu, 2005). There should be no forced abortion, no unequal gender rights. Any woman forced to abort pregnancy has been raped of her rights as a human and as a woman.

From these arguments we can conclude that, from a realist perspective, President Bush should have not been so passive in his stance against China. While events within Olympic competition may be competed as sport, hosting a global event should never been seen as anything but political when the only entity controlling sovereign nations is anarchy. If Bush wanted to assert the power he holds to let China know he was not impressed with the lack of advancement achieved by China, not attending the opening ceremonies would have been the best way to deliver. We may also conclude that China has much to overcome if they would like to receive the recognition as a world power that they intended to seek while hosting the 2008 Summer Olympic Games. The free world is a liberal one with roots in idealism. Idealist should never taking liking to any nation that poses threat to the peace and democracy that is sought in a free world. The fact that China lied and tried to cover violations of human rights that were promised to be addressed and fixed was a slap in the face to western nation states that ultimately only hurt the integrity of China’s leaders.


Works Cited

AFP. (2008, April 4). China urged to drop Tibet from Olympic torch route. Retrieved November 14, 2009, from AFP: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jt-Bnn9Znx27RmyvpYHjCuHNK8Yg

China, C.-E. C. (2008). The Impact of the 2008 Olympic Games on Human Rights and the Rule of Law In
China. 110th Congress (p. 4). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Deng, Y. (2008). China's Struggle for Status: The Realignment of International Relations. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Eggen, D. (2008, April 2008). Bush Holds Firm on Plan to Attend Olympic Opening. Retrieved November 12, 2009, from The Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/11/AR2008041102484.html

Kelly, G. A. (1977). Human Nature in Politics: Politics, Violence, and Human Nature. (R. Pennock, & J. W. Chapman, Eds.) New York, New York: New York University.

Khrushcheva, N. L. (2006, February 12). Why Russia Still Loves Stalin. Retrieved November 15, 2009, from Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/11/AR2006021100845.html

Meernik, J. D. (2004). The Political Use of Military Force in US Foreign Policy. Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate Publishing Company.

Morgenthau, H. J. (1985). politics among nations: The Struggle for power and Peace. New York, New York: McGraw Hill.

Reeves, E. (2008, March 22). China's genocide Games. Retrieved November 16, 2009, from The Boston Globe: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/03/22/chinas_genocide_games/

Spivey, N. (2004). The Ancient Olympics. New York: Oxford University Press Inc., New York.
Stolberg, S. G. (2008, July 4). Bush to attend opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics. Retrieved November 10, 2009, from New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/04/world/americas/04iht-prexy.1.14235707.html

Xu, G. (2005, June 27). Forced Labor in China. Retrieved November 17, 2005, from Congressional-Executive Commission on China: http://www.cecc.gov/pages/roundtables/062305/Xu.php