Qualifying for the Olympics

When China was awarded the 2008 Olympics, I wondered why the International Olympic Committee did that, in the face of all the human rights abuses there (like this story points out, for one). A lot of people wondered aloud why such persecutors were being rewarded. Some observers speculated that with the whole world watching them now, China would clean up its act, treat its people better, and bring their countrymen into the 21st Century.

But who’s been holding them accountable for that, especially once the Olympics were awarded? Looks like no one, or no one with clout.

Five years after Beijing was chosen to host the 2008 Olympic Games, “the improvements in human rights promised by the government are not yet in evidence”. If anything, the Communist regime “has launched a campaign of repression that aims to choke any dissenting voice”. So the International Olympic Committee (IOC) should press the Chinese government, in full Olympic spirit, to fulfill its promises.”

This was the request made in an open letter written to the IOC chairman, Jacques Rogge, by a group of Chinese lawyers and human rights activists.

They wrote: “At this year’s April meeting of the International Olympic Committee in Seoul, you drew attention to the human rights situation in China. However, since that meeting, respect for human rights has worsened. Today, in China, not only are all Chinese denied their constitutional rights, legal professionals and lawyers who work as rights defenders are denied their human rights.”

In particular, the letter points out three civil and human rights activists who have been persecuted in the past six months alone.

“There are less than two years to go before the 2008 Beijing Olympics,” continued the letter. “The Chinese government is already preparing an illusion of peace and prosperity to mislead visitors. In doing so, they feel that voices critical of the government need to be crushed. That is exactly why they are engaging in large scale suppression of the human rights movement in China. They are anxious to crush Chen Guangcheng, Gao Zhisheng, and Guo Feixiong in an effort to intimidate others.”

“In this new round of suppression, the media has not escaped: this is evident from extensive protests last month against the announcement of “Management Measures” targeting news. The suppression of China’s rights defenders is only part of a larger plan. We could call the plan the “Pre-2008 Beijing Olympics Cleansing.”

The campaigners continued: “We welcome social harmony in China, and we are not unconditionally opposed to Beijiing hosting the Olympics. But we do want the 2008 Beijing Olympics to abide by the Olympic spirit. The Olympic Constitution is clear: internationally recognized human rights are not to be violated because of differing political or religious views. Thus, China’s harmony must not come at the cost of depriving the Chinese people of their human rights, or at the cost of cowing their defenders into silence.”

China’s leaders must be counting on nobody paying attention to this crackdown. But it’s not like nobody is watching. Pope Benedict has spoken out about the religious persecution in China and the government illicitly naming their own bishops. He has signaled on several occasions that he is watching.

The letter writers here made the issue of world attention a point of their letter, which

also recalled that “when Beijing was chosen by the IOC to host the Games, the whole world had doubts. But Beijing vowed to improve its record. Five years have passed. How much has the human rights situation actually improved? Aren’t the recent arrests of our friends a clear indicator of what is happening?

The campaigners ended their letter by noting that “the Seoul Games and those held in South Africa were turning points for the countries hosting them and this is why we are writing to you: we know the IOC is not a humanitarian or a political organization but according to its expressed goals, we believe the committee is obligated to press the Chinese government to improve human and civil rights in China.”

Sounds like that puts the ball in the IOC’s court.