Tim Dahlberg, the national sports columnist for The Associated Press, wrote a thought-provoking article [1] yesterday about the connection between the Olympic Games in China and China's human rights abuses:

The Beijing Olympics are still four months away, and already there are plenty of good stories to be told. One of the best can probably be found on some pig farm in rural China, where the Communist Party functionary who came up with the grandiose plans for the torch relay must surely by now be knee-deep in muck.

Totalitarian governments tend to have creative ways of dealing with people who make mistakes, and they don't come any bigger than the decision to take the Olympic torch on a month-long relay outside of China when all it's done is provide the perfect platform for protesters.

Coca-Cola is helping sponsor the relay, a decision that in retrospect looks about as smart as trying to sell New Coke. Ben & Jerry's ice cream isn't, but company co-founder Ben Cohen is urging everyone to come to San Francisco to protest China's role in Darfur when the torch arrives there next week.

...

Corporate sponsors are becoming uneasy, Steven Spielberg has resigned his role as an adviser, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Britain's Prince Charles won't be going. There are increasing calls for President Bush to reconsider his decision to attend the games, where the VIP section at the opening ceremonies could feature lots of empty seats.

This all must be a big embarrassment to Beijing, even though no one is talking about an athletic boycott. That didn't work in 1980 when President Carter made a stand against Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, and there's a general consensus that it would do little other than serve to embarrass the Chinese even more.

But while IOC president Jacques Rogge prefers to engage in what he calls "silent diplomacy" over issues like free speech, Darfur and Tibet, a few athletes have indicated they might not toe the line. India's soccer captain refused an offer to carry the torch in his country because of Tibet, and two-time French judo gold medalist David Douillet said his country's Olympic hopefuls plan to make a statement when the torch reaches Paris.

"We have things to say and we will say them," Douillet told a news conference Wednesday in Paris.

Luckily for the Chinese, the torch relay will disappear into that country early next month, and the protests likely will cease. If Tibet stays under control at the same time, there could even be a break in the outcry over human rights issues.

But China is opening itself up to the world for three weeks in August, and the government won't be able to control everything. There will almost certainly be protests of some sort in Beijing during the games, and if authorities are too heavy-handed in suppressing them there could be a backlash that defines these Olympics forever.

In the end, it may be the athletes themselves who decide how far this goes. If they begin speaking out in greater numbers, they might have a better chance of getting China to change some of its policies than the guy who invented Cherry Garcia ice cream.

So far, not many have had much to say. Most are far more interested in winning gold medals than what is happening in places they might be hard-pressed to find on a map and, besides, being a social activist isn't always good for the pocketbook.

Athletes and politics don't usually mix, even on the biggest stage in the world.

The Chinese can only hope it stays that way.

 

Image thanks to Selligpau [2] at fr.wikipedia [3]