Feed 
Have something to add? Join the discussion! Click here to leave a comment. No registration required!
You are Here: Home>> The Vance Report >>Why Bush Should Attend the 2008 Olympics in China
Click Here to Subsribe to the 'The Vance Report' Feed
Why Bush Should Attend the 2008 Olympics in China
Written by Robert Vance on July 7, 2008 – 8:56 pmIf human rights activists worldwide were not already angry at U.S. President George W. Bush, they are now. Last week the White House announced that Mr. Bush would be attending the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in Beijing in August. While the decision was not entirely a surprise to anyone, it is still likely to ignite a firestorm of condemnation from human rights organizations as well as politicians who have called on the President to follow in the footsteps of other world leaders and skip the opening ceremony. In this 2008 election year, the Democrat Party will be sure to try to gain some political mileage out of this decision; Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House of Representatives, met with the Dalai Lama earlier in the year and was joined by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in strongly urging Mr. Bush to consider staying home in August.
Unless China dropped a nuclear bomb on Tibet, there was never any doubt in my mind that Mr. Bush would attend the opening ceremony. When he was asked about his decision to attend at a press conference in Japan on Sunday, the President stated that “the Chinese people are watching very carefully about the decisions by world leaders and I happen to believe that not going to the opening ceremony for the games would be an affront to the Chinese people, which may make it more difficult to be able to speak frankly with the Chinese leadership.” He was almost right. Not attending the opening ceremony would be an affront to the Chinese people but only because their government would surely use his absence to tell Chinese people that Americans hated them and that their feelings should be hurt. It is doubtful if the Chinese people themselves would even care whether or not Mr. Bush made an appearance in Beijing; after all, there was never any doubt that the American athletes would be in attendance. However, Mr. Bush was right in that a decision not to go would “make it more difficult to be able to speakfrankly with the Chinese leadership.” In the end, Mr. Bush has recognized that China did not steal the Olympics; the 2008 Games were bestowed upon them by the IOC. The issue of whether or not the IOC should have given Beijing the Olympics may be up for debate but Mr. Bush sees the Olympics as an international event that showcases many different countries, not just China.
As I wrote about a few months ago in an article entitled Why Bush is Quiet on Tibet, Mr. Bush is simply adhering to a foreign policy towards China that was in place long before he was elected to office. Since 1979, when the United States officially switched diplomatic recognition of China from Taipei to Beijing, Washington has seemed to have had a special place in its heart for the Communist giant. The unique and yet often tumultuous relationship that the U.S. and China have shared over the past almost thirty years is not based soley on economic incentives as many would like to claim. Mr. Bush, like other presidents before him, has observed the incredible progress that has been achieved by the People’s Republic of China in the last thirty years. Unlike the countries of North Korea and Cuba, which are stagnant cesspools of totalitarianism and oppression, the political landscape in China has been greatly transformed as the Chinese government has gradually moved from a communist form of government to a socialist one. The market has been opened up in China, private ownership of property is now permitted, and the Chinese people are free to travel abroad. China’s ruling party is Communist in name only and this transformation can be at least partly attributed to US foreign policy. Despite the volatile nature of the relationship between China and the U.S., Washington has always managed to keep ‘one foot in the door.’ President Clinton’s 1997 renewal of China’s most favored nation status was the target of much criticism but his decision is hard to argue with now in light of the incredible changes that have taken place here over the last decade. Washington’s willingness to do business with China has resulted in the flow of Western goods and more importantly, Western ideas, into the country. These strong trade relations have had a very positive impact on Chinese society and politics.
While human rights in China have improved over the last thirty years, there is of course still much work to be done. Forced abortions, persecution against Christians, and the treatment of Tibetans are among the issues that are still of great concern to human rights advocates worldwide. But President Bush, as predecessors did, believes that the most effective way to influence the issue of human rights in China is to keep the lines of communication open with Beijing. The Olympics last for sixteen days; the next President of the United States will have China to deal with for at least four years. President Bush does not want an embittered Chinese government to be the first problem that confronts the new president when he takes office in early 2009.
The PRC may date back to 1949 but it has only been thirty years since Deng Xiaoping set China on a path of transformation and development with his ‘Open Door’ policy. People in the West are often very impatient when it comes to promoting change in a country especially when human rights violations are still obviously taking place. But with 1.3 billion people to govern, making big and lasting changes in China is like sitting in the captain’s chair of the world’s largest cruise liner; changes in direction take a long time. At least the anxious onlookers in the West can be comforted in knowing that the important changes which have been made so far in China are just the beginning. Washington needs to continue in its policy of applying pressure on Beijing while at the same time tactfully employing the use of diplomacy to encourage the world’s largest country to continue down its current path of development.
Other Recent Posts in The Vance Report
Don't miss...
- The American and Tibetan Terrorists in China
- Special Update on China Visas for ESL Teachers
- The 1-Child Policy Debacle in the China Earthquake Aftermath
- Why My Local Chinese Library is an Oasis in the Desert
- A Video on How to Make Chinese Dumplings
- China Helps North Korea Celebrate 60 Years of Oppression
- The Edison Sex Scandal Phenomenon
[...] week, I appeared on Wisconsin Public Radio to debate whether or not President Bush’s plan to attend the opening ceremony of the Olympics…is the right decision. You can find out what side I came down on by clicking here to read an article [...]
RV is quite right that most Chinese don’t really care who’s present or who’s absent from the Olympic opening ceremony, but most Chinese will be very angry if they claim that their absence is linked to Tibet.
Opinion polls conducted by sina.com in the internet showed that 88 percent of respondents said that they viewed Sarkozy as “extremely unfriendly”, while an equivalent proportion said they do not welcome his presence at the opening ceremony.
To most ordinary Chinese, the question is not who will attend, but we want to welcome.
Of course Bush knows first hand who’s behind the anti-China campaign.
The question he must be asking is whether the campaign has generated any interests outside CIA’s traditional allies. In pushing the confrontation too far, US risk revealing its own unpopularity at the world stage. Imagine Bush were to boycott the opening ceremony while everyone of his Asian ally including Japan, Australia and India attends. That will be really embarrassing.
CIA/Dalai’ s strength is in creating media sensation. There are rumors that they ve recruited individual athletes and spectators to carry separatist flags into the Olympic venue. This will trigger off commotion with the security. These individuals also risk being beaten up by ordinary Chinese. Western media will broadcast them live to the world claiming that plain cloth Chinese police beat up innocent athletes or spectators.
The other problem that I expect to see is that the French athletes may be subjected to some verbal abuse by Chinese spectators. If they perform badly they will put their blame on the Olympic host, triggering another round of China bashing or walkout.
[...] and more the true state of affairs in their developing country. As I wrote in an article entitled Why Bush Should Attend the 2008 Olympics in China, the change that has thus far occurred in China is remarkable. Hopefully, the international [...]