Free Thoughts

In response to the article “Why an Olympia boycott is bad for human rights in China“, which argued that an international boycott of the Games in 2008 would play into the hands of the Chinese governments, ArekExcelsior wrote in his comment that no one should be stopped to use their right to protest against injustice. That is absolutely right!

In fact the Olympia article was not suggesting to ban protests, nor was it trying to convince people to stop their protests. It was merely pointing out that an Olympia boycott might bring the human rights movement in China rather backwards than forward if applied wrong.

This however should stop no person in China or outside China to protest if they wish to do so. Their right to protest and publicly point out injustices is a fundamental right that no state nor any other groups shall ever even compromise it. No athlete can be forced to participate in the Games, and if they personally decide not to participate - it has to be respected.

The argument is rather that such a boycott is not very effective in terms of winning the trust of the majority of the Chinese public against the propaganda they face from the state. Having a wide public support for human rights among the mainland people - in particular the Han Chinese - is more important than external forces, as the Beijing government is more likely to react to internal demands then external ones. Why would that be? Policy interest number one is maintaining the position of the party. In order to do that the public needs to be satisfied with their policy to a sufficient extent. To do so economic growth and a very slight increase of rights is currently seen by the government as satisfying.

To my knowledge, whose sources I do not wish to further qualify, even reformers in the mainland and even very progressive rights activists see the boycott attempt and in particular what from it is presented to them through their means of information as unfair and sided . I suggest everyone to talk to any few mainland Chinese and to get their own impressions, including overseas chinese who do have a different access to media. I am not able to present reliable statistics on public opinion and you may dismiss the point on that basis.

The suffering of Tibetans need our support and our outspoken support of their rights. What they need is support from Beijing. Beijing has the ability to ensure their rights if it whishes to do so. How can they be made wishing that? Force is not always the best way, but often necessary. The way Beijing and China reacts to international pressure is different from they way other countries do. We have no time to loose when improving the rights of Tibetans, Han Chinese or any other groups. Me and many other are not convinced whether a boycott does not rather hamper the opening up process.

For the last few months and in particular since the uprising in Tibet in March 2008, voices calling for a boycott of the Olympic Games in China are becoming louder. Many claim that the Peoples Republic of China should not be supported in hosting the Games in August 2008 because of the countries human rights record. But is this actually conducive for the human rights situation in the country? There are good reasons to doubt that.

The Beijing government points out the spirit of the Olympic Games, when trying to prove its right to host the Games. Others see the Games as one of the very few occasions to exert pressure on the one party regime. Both views are right. However, China is very self-reliant and even economic and other sanctions would have little effect on a possible change of the governments position towards freedom of the press, freedom of religion, the death penalty and the right to unrestricted access to the Internet and hence the thoughts of others.

But in fact, China will not compromise its policies for the sake of the Games. On the contrary, the Games are actually an event that can bring China closer into the world and keep it in a position of international engagement and dialogue. By boycotting the Games or its opening ceremony, the only thing achieved is to play public sentiment in China into the hands of the governing party. The mainland Chinese public is proud to host the Games and sees it as a step-stone in joining a global family and the league of “world nations”. Any attempt to boycott the Games will be seen as an attempt by the West not to let China come into that position and not to let its people gain the pride they have been working for so hard in the past years. China was closed for decades and this leaves scares into self-understanding and the view towards the outside world. This deep rooted specialty of the people in the PRC needs time to be reflected upon and to be overcome. A boycott is hence the last thing needed under these circumstances.

As a result, the intercultural dialogue among the public societies will suffer. Dialogue will be further poisoned with distrust and the identity development of the Chinese Nation will experience a drift away from joining international norms and a drift towards looking for a distinction and superiority in certain cultural values.

Of course, not all people in China would share this feeling and there are many in the PRC who support change and support a boycott of the Games. Real change - and this means sustainable change - however will not come about through external pressure and blaming and shaming, but it will come through an opening of the public debate from within the country. Reforms in China need to come from within and need to have its most support from within if they are to have any chance of impact and momentum.

Therefore let us apply caution when shouting at a country that is orienting itself in the world and whose citizens are subject to media control and nationalistic propaganda. Who needs to be engaged is the society in China, not just the government. The Chinese government is much more sensitive to internal public demand then to any pressures from outside. Pressure from outside will mostly result in an increase in the restriction of the media, restriction of Internet access in China, increased propaganda, and hurt public sentiments which plays into the wrong hands.