[+/-] : Homegrown threats top Olympics security worries-official

Homegrown threats top Olympics security worries-official

Reuters
Homegrown threats top China's security worries for the Beijing Olympic Games, an official overseeing security said, warning that airborne threats to Games venues will be shot down if they come too close.

Tian Yixiang, head of the Beijing Olympic Games Security Protection Coordinating Group, said the top "terror" threats to the August Games come from Uighur militants campaigning for independence for Xinjiang in China's far northwest, from Tibetan independence groups, and from followers of the banned Falun Gong sect.
"The security situation facing the Beijing Olympic Games is stable overall, but there remain threats in the traditional and non-traditional security spheres," Tian told the official magazine Outlook Weekly.

"Terror attacks are the principal threat to Olympic Games Security," he said, according to the report, which was circulated on the Xinhua news agency's website (www.xinhuanet.com).

Tian, who has rarely given public comments on preparations for the Games, said a failed bomb attack on a plane in Xinjiang in March and anti-Chinese unrest across Tibet that same month, "amply showed that they are scheming to sabotage the Beijing Olympic Games".

The official comments bluntly underscored how, just over a month before the Games open on Aug. 8, Beijing sees the main Games threat from long-term domestic worries, rather than international terrorist groups with no direct focus on Chinese policies.
Exiled Uighurs and groups campaigning for Tibetan self-determination have both repeatedly denounced as self-serving exaggeration China's claims that they form terrorist threats.

In talks last week with envoys of the Dalai Lama, Chinese officials said the exiled Tibetan Buddhist leader should denounce "violent terror" and named the exiled Tibetan Youth Congress as a particular threat.

The Dalai Lama's envoys said they "categorically rejected" the Chinese claims that the Congress engaged in "violent terror".

Tian said the airspace around Games venues would be closely controlled and security forces would seek to warn off, force down or shoot down airborne attacks as they approached.

Chinese military forces have been readying for the Games since early 2005, and were still rigorously training, Tian said.
(Reporting by Chris Buckley; Editing by Jeremy Laurence)
...
Read more

[+/-] : Smog in Beijing five times over safety limit as Olympics nears

Smog in Beijing five times over safety limit as Olympics nears

Flora Bagenal, Times on Line

Pollution around the Olympic stadium in Beijing could be five times worse than levels deemed safe by the World Health Organisation.

Chinese officials admit they can no longer guarantee that the air quality will match international standards as pollution tests by The Sunday Times revealed the full extent of the challenge facing British athletes.

With just five weeks to go before the start of the Beijing Games, tests conducted outside the national stadium — known as the Bird’s Nest — and at Tiananmen Square, the starting point of the marathon, showed the air is thick with particulate pollution.

Even the Chinese government’s official air pollution index — which monitors a range of pollutants, including carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide — is running at double the level recommended by the WHO.

Du Shaozhong, deputy director of Beijing’s Environmental Protection Bureau, said: “We made a commitment to ensure air quality for the Olympic Games . . . as for whether we have reached the goal, that will be examined after the event.”

The British team is taking no chances and will train in Macau on the southern coast until the last minute to minimise athletes’ exposure to Beijing’s smog.

Haile Gebrselassie, the world’s leading long-distance runner, who suffers from asthma, has already pulled out of the marathon.

Last week The Sunday Times used an industrial hand-held air monitor to measure the number of particles in the atmosphere, which include car emissions and coal dust from factories. The particles are considered the biggest polluting factor.

The average reading at the stadium was 780,000 particles per litre of air. Even factoring in a 25% margin of error for humidity levels exaggerating the readings, this is more than five times the amount deemed safe by the WHO. The organisation considers 105,000 particles per litre of air a health risk.

Average readings at Tiananmen Square were lower — but still four times worse than the WHO standards when factoring in the humidity.

“Anything over 300,000 would be very worrying if you were using the same equipment in London,” said Professor Frank Kelly, a pollution expert at Kings College London.
...
Read more

[+/-] : Beijing to limit vehicle use during Olympics

Beijing to limit vehicle use during Olympics
Beijing (dpa) - China on Friday said it would restrict usage of vehicles before and during the Beijing Olympics to improve air quality and allow better traffic flow for visitors.

All private vehicles will be limited to alternate-day usage from July 20 to September 20, based on licence plates ending in odd and even numbers, the government said.

Taxis, buses and emergency vehicles are exempt from the restrictions, while about 70 per cent of government vehicles are expected to be kept off Beijing's roads.

The restrictions are designed to improve traffic circulation and raise air quality for the Olympics in August and the Paralympics in September, the Beijing city government said in a statement.

The traffic control measures are expected to remove a daily average of about one-third of the city's 3.3 million vehicles.

The statement said many heavy trucks and all vehicles which do not meet the European number one emissions standard will be banned throughout the period.

The government will exempt all Beijing vehicle owners from road tax for the three months in compensation for the temporary restrictions, costing it 1.3 billion yuan (186 million dollars) in lost revenue.

China earlier said it planned controls on industrial pollution and suspended dust particles to improve Beijing's air quality during the Olympics.

The city will ban all excavations and concrete pouring at construction sites from July 20 until September 20, Du Shaozhong, deputy director of the Beijing Environmental Protection Bureau, told reporters recently.

It will shut down inefficient coal boilers, stop work at quarries, cement and concrete plants around Beijing, and has ordered 19 heavy-polluting firms in the city to cut emissions by an extra 30 per cent in the three-month period, Du said.

Contingency plans for the Olympic competition days in August include tougher "urgent control measures" to be used if Beijing experiences "extremely negative atmospheric conditions", he said.

The International Olympic Committee said it would also have contingency plans for the possible rescheduling of cycling, distance running and other events demanding high respiratory function for more than an hour, depending on pollution and other factors such as heat, humidity and wind.
...
Read more

[+/-] : China tightens screws against dissidents ahead of Olympics

China tightens screws against dissidents ahead of Olympics

GENEVA (AFP) — Chinese authorities have stepped up efforts to censor dissenting voices in the run-up to the Olympic Games, a report by two human rights groups charged Thursday.


"The context related to the run-up to the Olympic Games in August 2008 has continuously strengthened an environment already hostile to human rights and their defenders," said the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders in its annual report.

The observatory is a joint project by the Geneva-based World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) and the Paris-based International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH).

It cited four people who were arrested after making protests in relation to the Olympic Games.

Among them was Hu Jia, who was taken into custody last December 27 after publicly criticising the Chinese government's failure to keep its promise to promote and protect human rights, a promise that was make when it was awarded the Games.

Hu, 34, was found guilty at a Beijing court of "incitement to subvert state power" following a one-day trial in March, and sentenced to three-and-a-half years behind bars in early April.

In a foreword to the report, writer Wei Jingsheng wrote: "In particular, last year the Chinese Government's repression has rapidly upgraded, in an effort to make sure there is no dissident voices from the people during the 2008 Olympics."

Outside China, charged Wei, some Western politicians have even tried to stop their sportsmen from expressing their political opinions on China during the Games.

In February, the London-based Mail on Sunday newspaper reported that the British Olympic Association had inserted clauses into its athletes' contracts forbidding them to comment on "politically sensitive issues."

Other human rights repression in China had included the forced evictions of citizens from their homes as well as censorship of the media and Internet, said the NGO.

Press freedom in China is now among the lowest in the world, and commentaries are tailored to meet "the propaganda standard(s) of the Chinese Communist Party," said the report.
...
Read more

[+/-] : Olympic visitors' data is at risk

Olympic visitors' data is at risk
Officials: China targets secrets in laptops, PDAs
By Peter Eisler, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — National security agencies are warning businesses and federal officials that laptops and e-mail devices taken to the Beijing Olympics are likely to be penetrated by Chinese agents aiming to steal secrets or plant bugs to infiltrate U.S. computer networks.


Chinese government and industry use electronic espionage to "easily access official and personal computers," says one recent report by the Overseas Security Advisory Council, a federally chartered panel comprising security experts from corporations and the State, Commerce and Treasury departments.

Equipment left unsupervised for just minutes in a hotel or even during a security screening can be hacked, mined and bugged, adds Larry Wortzel, who chairs the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a federal panel that monitors China-related security issues for Congress. China's government also controls Internet service providers and wireless networks, he says, so computers and PDAs can be monitored and planted with bugs remotely, too.

"There is a high likelihood — virtually 100% — that if an individual is of security, political or business interest to Chinese … security services or high technology industries, their electronics can and will be tampered with or penetrated," Wortzel says.

China's embassy did not respond to requests for comment but usually dismisses espionage charges.

"The so-called accusation of the Chinese military espionage against the U.S. is groundless and fabrication with ulterior motives," Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said at a news conference last month.

China's pursuit of American government and business secrets has been noted repeatedly in federal threat assessments.

Last year, the office of the Director of National Intelligence reported that China's espionage services are "among the most aggressive in collecting against sensitive and protected U.S. targets."

Thousands of Americans are expected to attend the Olympics, including President Bush and a large entourage of federal officials. The government isn't doing enough to publicize the potential espionage risks, says Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., a former FBI agent who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, which has been briefed on Chinese espionage threats.

The reticence stems partly from the administration's reluctance to anger China, a key U.S. trading partner, Rogers says. "I appreciate their position," he adds, but by "underreporting" the threat, national security officials let potential targets get "lulled into this notion that they don't have to worry about it."

The Chinese "will take full advantage of any opportunity to not only take a peek at what's on electronic devices but also to implant them" with bugs that could provide access to U.S. computer networks, Rogers says.

Rogers and others briefed on the threat suggest that Olympic visitors purge sensitive information on laptops and e-mail devices, or leave their regular equipment at home and carry "clean" surrogates.

Travelers returning from the Games also should have their equipment checked for bugs or viruses before reconnecting to U.S. computer networks, says Ray Mey, who ran Olympics security at the FBI before joining GardaWorld as a corporate security consultant.

FBI spokesman Richard Kolko declined to discuss briefings given to federal officials and businesses. Any time executives are in a country capable of "exploiting electronic media," he says, the FBI strives "to notify them of these risks and … appropriate precautions
...
Read more

[+/-] : Olympics: Foreigners told to behave at Beijing Olympics — or else

Olympics: Foreigners told to behave at Beijing Olympics — or else

By STEPHEN WADE, Associated Press

BEIJING — Foreigners attending the Beijing Olympics better behave — or else.

The Beijing Olympic organizing committee issued a stern, nine-page document — covering 57 topics — on Monday. Written only in Chinese and posted of the organizers' official Web site, the guide covers everything from a ban on sleeping outdoors to the need for government permission to stage a protest.
The document, not immediately available in English, also said having Olympic tickets is no guarantee of getting a visa to enter China.


"Those holding Olympic tickets are not guaranteed of being granted a visa," the guide said. "They still need to visit China embassies and consulates and apply for visas according to the related rules."

Fearing protests during the Aug. 8-24 Olympics, China's authoritarian government has tightened controls on visas and residence permits for foreigners. It has also promised a massive security presence at the games, which may include undercover agents dressed as volunteers.

The government is hoping to keep out activists and students who might stage pro-Tibet rallies that would be broadcast around the world. It also fears protests over China's oil and arms trade with Sudan, and any disquiet from predominantly Muslim regions in western China.

"In order to hold any public gathering, parade or protest the organizer must apply with the local police authorities. No such activity can be held unless a permit is given. ... Any illegal gatherings, parades and protests and refusal to comply are subject to administrative punishments or criminal prosecution."

The document also warns against the display of insulting slogans or banners at any sporting venue. It also forbids any religious or political banner in an Olympic venue "that disturbs the public order."

The guidelines seems to clash with a pledge made two month ago by International Olympic Committee president Jacques Rogge, who said athletes could exercise freedom of speech in China. He asked only that athletes refrain from making political statements at certain official Olympics venues.

"Freedom of expression is something that is absolute," Rogge said in Beijing in April. "It's a human right. Athletes have it."

The highly detailed document is entitled: "A guide to Chinese law for Foreigners coming to, leaving or staying in China during the Olympics." This appears under the slogan of the Beijing Olympics: "One World, One Dream."

For months Chinese authorities denied there had been any change to visa regulations, but recently acknowledged that rules had been amended. The changes may have little affect on some of the 500,000 foreigners expected to visit for the Olympics, many of whom will come on package tours with visas already arranged.

The rules published Monday say entry will be denied to those "who might conduct acts of terrorism, violence and government subversion ... and those who might engage in activities endangering China's national security and national interest."

The rules also bar entry to smugglers, drug traffickers, prostitutes and those with "mental diseases" or contagious conditions.

The document also warns foreigners that not all areas of the country are open to visitors. One such area is Tibet, which is also off limits to journalists.
"Not all of China is open to foreigners, and they shall not go to any venue not open to them," the statement said.

The guide also spells out a long list of items that cannot be brought into the country including weapons, imitation weapons, ammunition, explosives, counterfeit currency, drugs and poisons. It also prohibits the entry of materials "that are harmful to China's politics, economics, culture and morals".

Foreigners staying with Chinese residents in urban areas must register at a local police station within 24 hours of arriving. The limit in rural areas is 72 hours.
The guide also threatens criminal prosecution against anyone "who burns, defaces ... insults or tramps on the national flag or insignia."

For those planning on sleeping outdoors to save a little money — forget it. This is banned in order to "maintain public hygiene and the cultured image of the cities."
...
Read more

[+/-] : China needs to stop playing games

China needs to stop playing games

As 20,000 journalists get ready for the Beijing Olympics, just how much freedom will they have to report what is happening on and off the track?
by Phil Harding , The Guardian, Monday May 26 2008

In Beijing's bid for the 2008 Olympics, the guarantee was clear and unmistakable: "there will be no restrictions on media reporting and movement of journalists up to and including the Olympic games".


In a country that keeps such a tight grip on its own media and which severely restricts access to its markets by foreign media companies - resisting even the persistent blandishments of Rupert Murdoch - it is a guarantee that has been hotly disputed ever since. In just under three months' time, amid some very mixed signals from the authorities, just over 20,000 journalists and broadcasters will descend on the Chinese capital to put it to the test.

Ever since the International Olympic Committee (IOC) announced in 2001 that this year's games had been awarded to Beijing, it has been clear that they were going to be the most politically sensitive since the boycotted Moscow Olympics of 1980, possibly even since the 1936 Berlin Olympics. Ashling O'Connor, Olympics correspondent for the Times, believes that is bound to shape the reporting: "Normally once the games actually begin, the coverage is pretty much confined to the sports pages. This time because the Chinese authorities have left so many questions unanswered these games are going to be on the news and foreign pages too."

Free to travel

The journalist advocacy group, Reporters Without Borders, has singled out China as the world's leading jailer of journalists, with at least 33 imprisoned at the start of this year. Sports and news editors' in-boxes have been flooded with emails from human rights groups. Given the highly controversial nature of these games and given China's record on media freedom is it going to be possible to report freely?

Lindsey Hilsum, Beijing correspondent for Channel 4 News, says the big tests will come when the games start: "Will the internet really be uncensored? Will journalists be free to travel? Will CNN and BBC World not be blacked out any more?"

In January 2007 the Chinese Foreign Ministry announced that accredited foreign journalists would be free to travel in China, outside Tibet and the Muslim western region of Xinjiang, without official permission. In practice, this has only partly happened. In the last fortnight access for the foreign media to the disaster areas of the Sichuan earthquake has been relatively unrestricted. But during the Tibet disturbances in March more than 40 journalists were turned away from covering protests in neighbouring regions, and some were detained. The Guardian's Jonathan Watts made a video of his frustrating trip calling it "7 Days not in Tibet".

The important difference is that the Tibet protests were political, the earthquake emergency is not. Jon Williams, the BBC's world news editor, says of the government's attitude overall: "When they've been good, they've been very good, when they've been bad they've been horrid."

Free access to the internet in China - another promise for the Olympics - has always been problematic. Via the "Great FireWall of China", there is strict control on what can be seen and what can't. When challenged over access to the BBC news site, the Chinese government always denied blocking and cited "technical problems". This year in March during the Tibet demonstrations, the Guardian site was briefly blocked in China for the first time.

Then at the end of March - and just before an inspection visit by the IOC - the BBC News site in English suddenly and without explanation was unblocked for the first time in 10 years. But the BBC's Chinese-language site has stayed off limits. The internet now mirrors what happens with the World Service's radio broadcasts where the Chinese broadcasts are jammed while the English programmes are not.

After their most recent visit, the IOC said they "were satisfied by the assurances we received across a number of areas including internet access". But a month later, China's technology minister, Wan Gang, was less clear: "I've not got any clear information about which sites will be screened or shut ... Every country limits access to some websites". According to Hilsum, internet access still "comes and goes", Wikipedia sometimes disappears, sites such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are still blocked: "I would not be surprised if all the English sites are unblocked for the three weeks of the Olympics. The big issue will be what happens after that."

The most important window on this summer's games will be television. It is the television images that will set the tone for the games. The worldwide audience is expected to top 4 billion viewers. Dave Gordon, who as BBC Sport's head of major events is in overall charge of the BBC's Olympic coverage, says: "This to me is a huge challenge of a story. My first Olympics was Moscow. This is even more of a challenge." It is significant that for these games the BBC has decided not to treat the opening ceremony as just another sporting event. Its coverage will be fronted by Huw Edwards from News alongside Hazel Irvine from Sport with expert analysis from Carrie Gracie, the former Beijing correspondent.

Pictures of the ceremony and sporting events will come almost exclusively from a pool feed provided by the Olympic host broadcaster, Beijing Olympic Broadcasting, a joint Chinese-foreign company set up specifically for these games. For each event there will be one set of identical pictures from each venue available to each broadcast rights holder. In all there will be some 3,800 hours of live feeds. At any one time broadcasters will have up to 20 feeds coming in. As the Chinese have a track record of censoring television coverage they don't like, possible censorship of the Olympics has become a real issue.

At one time it was reported that the Chinese authorities had asked for a delay on the live feeds. But Gordon says: "We have been given absolute assurances that the feeds will be live." But what is not yet clear is what the policy of the host broadcaster will be on coverage of any demonstrations. For Gordon this is fundamental: "We will expect all events to be fully covered in the stadium whether it's on the field or off the field action. We don't want any editorial decisions made for us." But, just in case, the BBC will have its own unilateral cameras at some events "able to capture what we need if we need to".

French television has said if there is any censorship of the pictures, they will boycott coverage. What can domestic Chinese audiences expect to see during the Olympics? Until the non-stop coverage of the earthquake eclipsed all other news, the tone of much of the Olympic coverage on CCTV had been remorselessly upbeat and euphoric. Step-by-step reports on the progress of the torch relay through China were regularly the lead item on the news. On one day just the dress rehearsal for the relay in Macao made the second lead. Coverage of the earlier protests in the west was much more circumspect. What has also come across strongly from Chinese media coverage is the real sense of hurt and anger at the way the western media have concentrated so much on protests and abuses of human rights. Both the BBC and CNN have encountered fierce protests about their coverage (there is now a Chinese website called anti-cnn.com). Many of the comments also seem to express genuine puzzlement at what they see as the dismissal of China's best efforts to offer the world a peaceful torch rally, coupled with a spectacular Olympics. Some bloggers see a western-led conspiracy between Washington and Paris.

In the next few weeks the media spotlight will inevitably switch away from the earthquake and back to the Olympics. For those covering the games, it will be a tricky and pressurised time. If the Olympics are portrayed as a well-organised success, the media will be accused of falling for a Chinese propaganda exercise. On the other hand, if there are protests and they are properly covered, there will be accusations from the Chinese that the actions of an unrepresentative minority have been magnified out of proportion. Jon Williams warns against journalists going to China with too many preconceptions: "It would be wrong for us to start with a fixed mind to cover the games through the prism of Tibet and protest. But on the other hand we have to be prepared for any events if they do happen."
...
Read more

[+/-] : Will the Beijing Olympics ultimately help or hurt the cause of freedom in China?

Playing for Keeps: A Symposium
By THE AMERICAN
From the May/June 2008 Issue
Filed under: World Watch

Will the Beijing Olympics ultimately help or hurt the cause of freedom in China? THE AMERICAN asked eight experts.
From August 8 to August 24, China’s capital city will host the 29th Summer Olympics. It promises to be as much a political event as an athletic spectacle. With that in mind, THE AMERICAN asked eight China experts to answer this question: Will the Beijing Olympics ultimately help or hurt the cause of freedom in China? Here are their responses.

DAN BLUMENTHAL

During the 2008 Summer Olympics, 600,000 armband-wearing citizen volunteers will join 90,000 police, military, and paramilitary forces in Beijing, flush with hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on security technology to help enforce the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) writ. No one should be under any illusion that the Olympics will pry China open. On the contrary, the party’s repressive techniques will grow stronger thanks to Western technology and training. The requirements for security technology in Beijing are large, and Western companies are rushing in to meet them. Some American companies are installing surveillance systems, while others are providing networks of security cameras.

As the former head of criminal intelligence for Hong Kong puts it, “They are certainly getting the best stuff.” The “best stuff” is similar to the technology that was supposed to liberalize China throughout the 1990s. It didn’t. Instead, Internet and telecommunications technology was put to work by the Communist regime against its citizens. The news that grabs headlines—for example, when Western companies provide Chinese authorities with the IP addresses of known dissidents—tells just part of the story of a Chinese security apparatus that has grown stronger through international commerce. Even before the Olympics, tens of thousands of Internet police monitored antiparty activities each day. During and after the Olympics, this number will certainly grow.

The Olympics will not pry China open. The Communist Party’s repressive techniques will grow stronger thanks to Western technology and training.After the 1989 Tiananmen massacre, many foreign experts predicted that the days of one-party rule were numbered. But that was 20 years ago, and the CCP is still very much in power. True, it survives thanks to impressive economic growth. But no less important is the CCP’s acquisition of sophisticated and modern technology to squelch dissent. The party simply has more resources to employ against those trying to use new technologies to push for a more open China.

In other words, by deepening trade with China, in particular technology trade, the West threw the CCP a lifeline. Although the “Tiananmen Sanctions” were meant to prohibit the sale of goods and services that would improve the repressive means of the state, there is simply no way for companies to ensure that technologies sold for commercial purposes are not diverted to police or security use. The Olympics have further opened the spigots.

All countries, including China, have legitimate concerns about terrorist threats during the Olympics. The problem is that the CCP’s definition of “terrorist” includes Tibetans and Uighurs agitating for greater religious and cultural freedom. Indeed, as Liu Shaowu, a senior Chinese official in charge of Olympic security, has stated, the CCP has set its sights on anyone taking part in any protest. Even democratic countries err on the side of more centralized power when faced with potential threats. But China is not a democratic country: there are no checks on power, and there is no recourse for a citizen whose rights are abused. The ruling elite uses legitimate security concerns as excuses to become even more dictatorial.

With foreign journalists pouring into China during the Olympics, there will surely be protests against the CCP. But if the 1990s are any lesson, the Chinese Communists will emerge stronger, prouder, and more sophisticated in their repressive techniques, and they will be armed with the finest Western technologies to crush dissent well past the Olympics.

Dan Blumenthal is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

JACQUES DELISLE

The Olympics are likely to have a modestly positive impact on freedom, civil and political rights, and kindred values in China. This unexciting prospect is more plausible than predictions that Beijing 2008 will bring a reprise of the 1988 Seoul Games (sometimes credited with expediting South Korea’s democratization) or the 1980 Moscow Games (sometimes interpreted as hastening Gorbachev’s reforms, and thus the demise of Soviet Communism). Marginal change is also more likely than the bleak vision of a Beijing Olympiad reminiscent of the 1936 Berlin Games, which handed an odious host regime a propaganda coup.

Having led China through meteoric economic growth and rapid ascension as a regional and aspiring great power, the reform-era Chinese regime is far more resilient than its counterparts in South Korea and the Soviet Union were during the 1980s. Also, China remains below the level of affluence and related social changes that presaged democratization in South Korea and other East Asian countries. On the other hand, and despite heavy investment in Games-related security and the suppression of Games-linked dissent, China has come a long way from its Maoist past. It has engaged the outside world’s norms and institutions, introducing freedoms and openness that would have been unimaginable under Mao.

To be sure, the run-up to the Olympics has included much that is bad for freedom and human rights. The regime has used poorly paid and mistreated migrant workers to build Olympics-related projects; it has ousted urban residents to make room for that construction; it has quashed many protesters (including those calling for Tibetan autonomy, religious freedom, freedom of the press, property rights, and labor rights); and it has scolded, without apparent irony, its critics for “politicizing” the Games.

If the Games present China as a powerful and capable state, this will increase expectations that China live up to international human rights standards.Still, the net effect of the Olympics is likely to be favorable. If the Games go smoothly, this should boost Chinese rulers’ confidence that the liberalizing influences the Olympics foster do not threaten their political order. If the Games present China as a powerful and capable state, this also will increase expectations that China live up to international human rights standards. If the regime does not respond, Beijing will find it harder to persuade the world that China’s rise will be “peaceful” and “harmonious.”

If the Games show the regime’s repressive face—especially if there are telegenic moments akin to the lone man standing before the tanks in Tiananmen Square or a military vehicle toppling the “Goddess of Democracy”—then post-Olympics China will have a more difficult time achieving the international recognition and rehabilitation the Games were supposed to provide, as they variously did for South Korea in 1988, Germany in 1972, and Japan in 1964. More broadly, the Olympics likely will increase China’s openness to international ideas and foreigners’ monitoring of its human rights record. While global attention to China will wane, it is unlikely to recede to pre-Olympics levels. At least in the long run the Beijing Games promise to be another small step in China’s long march toward greater global engagement and political transparency.

Jacques deLisle is the Stephen A. Cozen Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania and director of the Asia Program at the Foreign Policy Research Institute.

JAMES A. DORN

Will the Beijing Olympics ultimately help or hurt the cause of freedom in China? Once one realizes that any expansion of trade—in goods, sports, ideas, or capital—widens the range of individual choice, the answer to this question is obvious. The Olympic Games will link China more closely to the free world, and the millions of people who view the Games will see firsthand the progress China has made since it opened to the outside world 30 years ago.

But the world will also hear the cries of demonstrators who rightly recognize the repression of human rights in China. Those protests, however, should not shut down the Games and deny Chinese and other athletes the opportunity to pursue their dreams of winning Olympic gold.

China has come a long way since Mao Zedong made capitalism a crime and abolished private property, but the CCP has yet to accept the basic principle of freedom. Today, Chinese people are allowed to own their own homes and are free to start their own businesses, to work in the nonstate sector, and to travel and trade.

The Olympics will allow the Chinese to take pride in their progress and to show the rest of the world that China is a peaceful rising power, not an inevitable enemy of the West.But the state continues to deny people freedom of expression and to maintain its monopoly on political power. Nonetheless, one should not lose sight of the positive impact of economic liberalization. As Jianying Zha, author of China Pop, has noted, “The economic reforms have created new opportunities, new dreams, and to some extent, a new atmosphere and new mindsets…. There is a growing sense of increased space for personal freedom.”

In March 2004, the National People’s Congress (NPC) amended the official Chinese constitution, which now proclaims, “The lawful private property of citizens is inviolable.” And in 2007, the NPC passed a landmark property law to better protect ownership rights. Such legal changes would have been unthinkable during Mao’s reign.

In 1978, China’s foreign trade sector barely existed and was dominated by a handful of state trading companies. Today, the foreign trade sector is open to virtually anyone, and China is the world’s third-largest trading nation. The transition from central planning to a “socialist market economy” has allowed millions of people to escape from poverty and has increased the demand for safeguarding newly acquired property.

The Beijing Olympics will allow the Chinese people to take pride in the progress they have made and to show the rest of the world that China is a peaceful rising power, not an inevitable enemy of the West. “Peaceful development” has been the mantra of China’s leaders since 1978. Their primary goal has been economic development. Treating China like Cuba or North Korea would be counterproductive.

We should recognize the progress China has made and hope for a peaceful and prosperous China. However, we should not confuse market socialism with market liberalism. More importantly, we should remind the Chinese leadership that official proclamations of human rights must be backed up with institutions that limit the power of government and allow people freedom under a just rule of law.

Brave protesters are reminding the world of what still needs to be done in the cause of Chinese freedom. Their voices should not be shut out in the quest for Olympic gold.

James A. Dorn is a China specialist at the Cato Institute and editor of The Cato Journal.

DAVID S. G. GOODMAN

There is considerably more freedom in China today than there was at the height of the Mao era in the early 1970s. Economically, politically, and socially, the degree of personal freedom has continued to increase since the early 1980s, even though change has sometimes been fitful. It is hard to see how the 2008 Olympics can have anything other than a slight impact on the pattern of developing freedom.

The increase in economic freedom has been the most dramatic change in China during the last three decades: for entrepreneurs, managers, and peasants. We have seen the emergence of an entrepreneurial class that has sped up the pace of growth and change. In a very real sense, economic freedom has made it possible for Beijing to host the Olympics, both by integrating China into the world economy and by providing the party-state with the resources to finance the event. If the unveiling of the new buildings and infrastructure associated with the Olympics is a reliable guide, the Games will showcase the achievements of economic liberalization.

It is unlikely that the Games will expedite China’s social liberalization. In fact, the continued evolution of domestic freedoms may be temporarily halted.Many foreign observers have expected China’s integration into the world economy and its economic development to lead almost automatically to increased political freedom. There have indeed been some gains. Independent political space has expanded, albeit slowly, which has made room for a range of new institutions, including chambers of commerce, nongovernmental organizations, and even loosely defined “activist” groups. All the same, more dramatic political change is unlikely absent a major reform movement within the CCP, a state crisis, and widespread unrest. And in any case, the Olympic Games are not likely to affect this trajectory.

Socially, Chinese people have won many new freedoms. For example, it has become much easier to move around China in search of work or leisure. Employment opportunities are more market-driven than ever before. The standard of living has improved dramatically for most people, providing them with greater opportunities for personal expression. Cultural activities and artistic expression have started to flourish, with the aid of greater private funding.

At the same time, there is little doubt that social customs and China’s entrenched inequalities of class, sex, and region have been slower to change. For that matter, it is unlikely that the Summer Games will expedite China’s social liberalization. On the contrary, there is the strong possibility that, due to the increased public expression of Chinese nationalism associated with the Olympics, the continued evolution of domestic freedoms may be temporarily halted.

David S. G. Goodman is a professor of contemporary China studies at the University of Technology, Sydney.

DAVID C. KANG

Will the Beijing Olympics ultimately help the cause of freedom in China?

The short answer is no.

The longer answer is still no, but somewhat more encouraging. China is in the midst of a long-term economic, social, and political transformation. At the start of China’s opening 30 years ago, few could have foreseen its rapid economic growth, its increasingly globalized citizenry, its membership in international and regional institutions, and its often responsible behavior as a great power. Yet as far as China has come, there remain many areas in which Chinese rights do not meet international standards.

However, nobody has any idea whether or when China will become democratic, whether or when China’s economic and intellectual rights will match its GDP growth, or whether the CCP can “muddle through” for the next generation. The Chinese people themselves will decide this over time, and the choices made today will affect how and when the process unfolds.

Hosting such a global event throws a spotlight on China and makes it clear that China’s own interests are furthered by continuing domestic reforms.So what is the role of external influence on that process? The two main approaches to swaying another country’s internal affairs can be characterized as “cursing the darkness” and “lighting a candle.” Neither is likely to work by itself, but a combination of approaches to China is the strategy most likely to succeed.

To be sure, those hoping for a dramatic change in China will be disappointed, and it is hard to imagine external pressure (“cursing the darkness”) having an immediate effect. Realistically, barring fundamental change in the ruling Communist Party, political rights in China will be the slowest to improve. If America pressures China to reform, it is likely to sour relations between our two governments at a time when Sino-American cooperation is crucial to solving many environmental and strategic problems. It may also provoke a nationalist, anti-American backlash among the Chinese people.

“Lighting a candle”—that is, engaging China and making it clear that responsible behavior is in Beijing’s interests—may bring some benefits, but progress will be slow. The Beijing Olympics are one example of this approach: hosting such a global event throws a spotlight on China and makes it clear that China’s own interests are furthered by continuing domestic reforms. Yet the Olympics will merely be one more step in China’s long transformation, and the process will be gradual at best.

Ultimately, Chinese freedoms will arise when Chinese themselves, both inside and outside of the government, decide that the best way to govern themselves, their economy, and their society is through a model in which basic freedoms are expressly present. China is well along that path, and the role of the Olympics will be one small factor in its transformation.

David C. Kang is a professor of government and an adjunct professor at the Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College. His latest book is “China Rising: Peace, Power, and Order in East Asia” (Columbia University Press).

TARUN KHANNA

On a recent flight from Beijing to Los Angeles, I read the eloquent writings of Mandarin Yung Wing, a senior bureaucrat during the time of the Manchu regime in China and the first Chinese national to graduate from Yale University (class of 1854). His story is instructive in understanding how the Olympics might advance freedom in China, if at all.

Yung Wing was responsible for creating a pathway for Chinese students to study in the United States, for transferring U.S. machine-technology to China, and for promoting the rights of Chinese workers in the Western world. He was a successful human bridge between the West and China at a time of turbulence, including the U.S. Civil War and China’s Taiping Revolution.

His bridging was based on a deep understanding of both societies, and on finding helpful change agents in both China and the West. This meant “working within” both systems. That may sound like a euphemism for acquiescing to unsavory acts, but it is not, as Yung Wing amply demonstrated through his disavowal of corruption in graft-ridden Manchu China.

Of course, many bridges—both personal and institutional—have been constructed since then, most recently following the modern phase of Chinese reforms initiated around 1978, a process interrupted by the Tiananmen Square incident of 1989 but renewed by Deng Xiaoping’s 1992 “southern tour” (in Chinese, nanxun). Seen in this light, the 2008 Olympics offer another opportunity to continue China’s bridging to the world.

The Olympics offer another opportunity to continue China’s bridging to the world.With this progressive bridging have come freedoms of many sorts. Primary among these are freedoms from basic economic deprivation and hunger for hundreds of millions of Chinese. It is hard to overemphasize the importance of these freedoms. There is also much more information available than before, particularly regarding economic activity. For example, magazines such as Caijing, a leading business publication, would not have been feasible even a few years ago.

Of course, there are many freedoms that remain unrealized in China. There is little freedom to express religious beliefs—witness the tension between the party-approved Catholic Church and the underground one—and to debate politics.

During the Beijing Olympics, the government has promised limited press freedoms in return for restraint exercised by foreign journalists. But it is hard to let this press freedom genie out of the bottle only partially. The party must contend with a host of entities pursuing goals that are sometimes at odds with its own.

What do Yung Wing’s efforts tell us about outside attempts to promote freedom in China? Simple: outsiders desirous of spurring change are more likely to make progress if they figure out a way to leverage the system within China. As Yung Wing demonstrated, outside catalysts need to work with China’s domestic reformers. There is no compelling evidence that force majeure will produce the desired results—something we should keep in mind before, during, and after the Beijing Olympics.

Tarun Khanna is the Jorge Paulo Lemann professor at Harvard Business School and author of “Billions of Entrepreneurs: How China and India are Reshaping Their Futures and Yours” (Harvard Business School Press).

MINXIN PEI

The organizers of the 29th Summer Olympic Games in Beijing picked an auspicious date, 08/08/08, for the opening ceremony. In Cantonese, the number eight has the same sound as “making a fortune.” But it remains unclear whether the Beijing Olympics will be auspicious for the future of freedom in China. If history provides any guidance, it offers little encouragement.

Since the first modern Olympic Summer Games were held in Athens in 1896, the only authoritarian state that became democratic directly as a result of the Olympics was South Korea, which played host in 1988. Recent political developments within China do not augur well for an immediate expansion of political freedom. Although the average Chinese citizen enjoys more personal freedom today than he has during any period since the founding of the People’s Republic in 1949, essential political rights (such as dissent) and civil liberties (such as freedom of speech, association, and assembly) remain severely restricted.

With the Olympics approaching, the instinct of the Chinese government is not to relax political control but to strengthen its “stability-enhancing” capabilities and ensure that the Beijing Olympics will not be tarnished by unwelcome incidents of political protest or social unrest. As a result, urban slums, where thousands of petitioners from the rural provinces have temporary shelters, are being cleared. The Chinese media and the Internet are subject to more intense scrutiny. A leading AIDS activist, Hu Jia, has been sentenced to three years in prison.

It is understandable that the government would seek to provide security for the athletes and foreign visitors. But the unfortunate short-term effect of the Beijing Olympics has been to curtail Chinese freedoms, not to expand them.

The unfortunate short-term effect of the Olympics has been to curtail Chinese freedoms, not to expand them.This puts the West in a quandary. Since the Chinese people genuinely want to see Beijing stage the most successful Olympics in recent memory, it is unrealistic to expect them to respond positively to international criticisms of China’s poor human rights performance. In all likelihood, such criticisms will backfire, convincing the average Chinese that the West is unwilling to give China the international respect it deserves. Indeed, there is a real risk that the cause of freedom in China might suffer a further setback due to such a nationalist-populist backlash.

However, the long-term effects of the Beijing Olympics on freedom are likely to be more positive, although very limited. Massive investments in Beijing’s infrastructure will speed up its urbanization. The millions of peasants who subsequently migrate to Beijing will not only have access to a higher standard of living, they will also have greater opportunities to agitate for political rights. But it would be too generous to credit the Beijing Olympics even with this possible upside. Modernization, not the staging of international sports competitions, has long proven to be a far more potent force for expanding freedom around the world.

Minxin Pei is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and author of “China’s Trapped Transition” (Harvard University Press).

ROSS TERRILL

The Beijing Games will display China, not change it. The world will see a booming urban China that has temporarily separated economic freedom (which is permitted) and political freedom (which is denied), thus creating a hybrid system of liberalized commercial life coexisting with authoritarian politics. During the Games, the Chinese regime will do what it takes to put on a good show.

In the short term, freedom will shrink for those Chinese who are always on the threshold of repression. These include handicapped people, migrants from the countryside, AIDS activists, pro-democracy figures, bloggers who show a tendency to make “anti-China” statements, and others who mar China’s “harmonious society.” Over the long term, however, there may be a slight gain in freedom’s prospects, as sometimes occurs when the Chinese party-state has to rub shoulders with non-authoritarians.

Today, Chinese nationalism is burnished by economic progress, the space program, archaeological research to demonstrate how old and clever Chinese civilization is, and Japan bashing. The Olympic Games will add a little to this mix, if everything goes smoothly.

To be sure, hosting the Games is politically risky, as it means bringing international elements into China. Something could happen. But then, something could happen to China’s brittle political system at any time: for example, if disgruntled farmers mobilized; if Tibet or the Muslim area of Xinjiang grew restive (witness the recent protests by Tibetans in Lhasa and elsewhere); if Hong Kong tangled with Beijing; or if a regime collapse in North Korea brought millions of refugees flocking into northeast China.

Freedom can’t advance far under the present party-state. Beijing has learned how to turn the screws on and off according to circumstance. But a secular movement away from communism is gaining strength in China, and the Olympic Games may mildly help it.

The party-state will win some rounds with its organizational and theatrical skills. Beijing will look clean, bright, and exciting. If the Asian Games of two decades ago are any indication, the opening and closing ceremonies mounted by Beijing will be of the highest standard.

If there are massive international protests against the Games, most Chinese will rally behind their government.Other elements of the show will strike informed observers as bittersweet. Few Americans will guess that the tap water in their five-star hotels is unavailable to the vast majority of Beijing residents. Most of the city’s tap water is not safe to drink. Only in the area housing athletes and some foreign visitors—and only during the Games—will drinkable water flow from faucets. Providing safe water for an Olympic elite and dirty water for the Chinese masses does not exactly boost the credentials of socialism.

Politicizing the Games would not have a good outcome. It would not free any Chinese political prisoners, nor would it make China’s foreign policy in the Third World more pro-democracy.

If there are massive international protests against the Beijing Games, most Chinese will rally behind their government.

Yes, the Olympics are a tool in the authoritarian state’s box of tricks. But a successful Olympics will be China’s glory more than the government’s. The government will sweat, repress, and spend billions. But the Chinese people will feel proud, and why shouldn’t they?

The Olympic Games are ultimately a sporting event. Unfortunately, they can’t be a 100 percent sporting event because authoritarian governments use the occasion for boasting. We may grimace at this, but we must stick by our principles. The United States did not need to trumpet the 1984 Los Angeles Games to fortify its political legitimacy. If other countries use the Olympic Games as a crutch, so be it. I think the world will get the message: free governments are relaxed, but repressive regimes are always fearful.

Ross Terrill’s books include “Mao” (Stanford University Press) and “The New Chinese Empire” (Basic Books). He was recently a scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
...
Read more

[+/-] : 2008 turns out to be a year of trouble for China

2008 turns out to be a year of trouble for China
By TINI TRAN, Google News

BEIJING (AP) — China hoped 2008 would be a yearlong celebration, a time to bask in the spotlight of the upcoming Beijing Olympics. Instead, the Year of the Rat has also brought a wave of troubles — both natural and man-made — that are putting a heavy strain on the communist leadership.

The 7.9 magnitude earthquake that struck Sichuan province Monday, killing thousands, is only the latest.

China has long experience with large-scale disasters — from coal mine explosions to chemical spills to floods that displace tens of thousands.

The central government prides itself on its ability to quickly react, usually with deployments from China's huge military corps. The ruling party's mandate in part rests on being able to deliver aid in emergencies.

But China's capacity to control disasters and how they play out in the media is being stretched this year. Its leaders are grappling with the fallout from multiple problems in the information-hungry Internet age when they had expected to focus only on the Olympics.

"The Olympics are an important symbol of China's effort to ... get on the same gauge with the rest of the world. So they have attached a lot of importance to them," said Roger Des Forges, a China historian at University at Buffalo, State University of New York.

"But for most Chinese people, they are secondary to the quality of life that they are trying to achieve. So these questions of disasters are uppermost in people's minds, watching how the government is going to deal with them," he said.

China was quick to show its public response to Monday's quake. Just hours after it struck, Premier Wen Jiabao flew into Sichuan Province to oversee the emergency relief effort. Speaking from Dujiangyan City, where a high school collapsed, burying some 900 students, Wen acknowledged on national TV the task will be "especially challenging."

This year, China's problems began just before February's Lunar New Year, when the worst snowstorms in five decades hit the densely populated southern and central region. They left scores dead, knocked out power across cities, and stranded hundreds of thousands during the country's single busiest travel period.

Meanwhile, its leaders also battled decade-high levels of inflation and struggled to improve the nation's image as a global manufacturer following last year's tainted drugs and food scandal and defective toy exports.

In March, huge anti-government riots erupted in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa, sparking sympathy protests in Tibetan areas across western China. The violent protests were the biggest challenge to Chinese rule in the Himalayan region in nearly two decades.

The subsequent government crackdown brought sharp international criticism of Beijing's human rights record and its rule over Tibet. China has said that 22 people were killed, while Tibetan groups have said that many times that number died in the violence.

Thousands of troops were deployed across a wide swath of the country to tamp down unrest and restore order. But their massive presence continued to draw an unwelcome spotlight on China's harsh rule in Tibet.

The negative attention spilled over to the Olympic flame's around-the-world tour. Meant to be a feel-good kickoff event to the Beijing Games, the relay turned into chaos as pro-Tibet protesters mounted demonstrations from the very start of the ceremonial lighting in Greece, and at stops including London, Paris, and San Francisco.

The bad news kept coming. In May was China's worst train accident in a decade, leaving 72 dead and more than 400 injured when a high-speed passenger train jumped its tracks and slammed into another in rural Shandong province. Excessive speed was determined to be the cause, and five railway officials were promptly fired.

This month also brought a sharp rise in the number of reported cases of hand, foot, and mouth disease, a normally non-deadly viral infection that has killed 39 children this year and infected nearly 30,000 others.

Only last week's feat by a team of Tibetan and Han Chinese mountaineers in bringing the Olympic flame up Mount Everest gave China the positive publicity it craved, three months to the day before the start of the games.

Beijing's leaders had carefully chosen Aug. 8 as the opening day for the 2008 games (8-8-08), believing that it was an especially auspicious day. Many Chinese people in this officially atheist nation remain highly superstitious. The number eight, "ba" in Chinese, is closely associated with prosperity and good luck because it sounds similar to the word "fa," which means rich.

China spared no expense on its Olympic debut, spending an estimated $40 billion on improving infrastructure and building sports venues. Its money was apparently well-spent. None of the venues, 31 of them in Beijing alone, was reportedly damaged.

Li Jiulin, a top engineer on the 91,000-seat National Stadium known as the Bird's Nest — the jewel of the Olympics — was conducting an inspection at the venue when the quake occurred. He said the building was designed to withstand up to an 8.0-magnitude quake.

"The Olympic venues were not affected by the earthquake," said Sun Weide, a spokesman for the Beijing Olympic Organizing Committee. "We considered earthquakes when building those venues."

Ultimately, the series of crises could prompt China to reassess its true priorities, said Des Forges.

"I think there may be some way in which these crises are reminding the government that, as important as the games are, there are perhaps more important issues that need to be addressed," he said.
Associated Press writer Stephen Wade contributed to this report.
...
Read more

[+/-] : The Twin Betrayals of the Olympics in 1936 and 2008

The Twin Betrayals of the Olympics in 1936 and 2008
By Thomas Kleiber Special to The Epoch Times May 12, 2008

The Olympic Games were first held in Greece, the birthplace of democracy, and from the beginning have carried the message that nations should gather in peace and compete in sports. There is an inherent kinship between the peaceful Olympic Games and the peaceful ways of democratic and free nations, and the Olympics have had their finest moments when hosted by democratic countries.

The years 1936 and 2008 have in common the hosting of the Olympic Games by totalitarian regimes: Nazi Germany and Communist China.


Nazi Germany was a one-party regime, as is China today. Both the Nazi and Chinese Communist parties struggled to gain power and the Nazis endeavored, just as the Chinese regime is endeavoring today, to establish a good reputation by hosting the Olympic Games.

Nazi Germany invented the tradition of having a torch relay, which served to connect and bind as many countries as possible to the event in Berlin. It was a propaganda campaign, one that continues to have an impact.

China has taken the torch relay to the extreme by planning the longest torch relay ever in history, including going high up atop Mount Everest. At every step the Beijing torch is protected by "torch guards," whose presence is already a break with the Olympic spirit.

These totalitarian Olympics may put a parenthesis around the torch relay: After the protest-plagued 2008 Olympic torch relay, the IOC is considering ending the tradition that started in Berlin.

Before holding the Olympic Games Nazi Germany had started to persecute the Jewish community, although it did not begin the "final solution" until several years later. The Nazis didn't even dare to officially exclude Jews from participating in the Games (although Jews were prohibited from representing Germany in the Games).

The Chinese regime has not only started to persecute a group of people for their religious beliefs, but is even very frank about its policy of persecution. At the end of 2007 a spokesperson for the Beijing Olympic Committee stated that practitioners of the Falun Gong are excluded from all Olympic activities.

All human rights organizations and governments know that Falun Gong is one of the main victims of state-sanctioned persecution in China. Several thousand adherents have been tortured to death because of their beliefs.

In Nazi Germany, Dr. Josef Mengele started human experiments on Jews after the Berlin Olympics, during the Holocaust.

In today's Communist China medical doctors have for several years been extracting organs from living Falun Gong practitioners for profit. The live organ harvesting is believed to have started in 2001, the same year that China won the bid for the 2008 Olympic Games.

Nazi Germany needed all countries to come to the Olympic Games in Berlin as a sign of the legitimacy of the Nazi regime. Nothing less is the case in China: The attendance of government officials from around the world at the opening ceremony is considered a measure of approval for the Chinese regime.

The fascist German regime and the communist Chinese regime would appear to be opposites, although similar in betraying the Olympic spirit. However, the communist regime in China has adopted so many capitalistic measures that it cannot be considered communist anymore. Since 1989 it has transformed itself into a fascist regime that uses the Communist Party to dominate society and ruthless capitalistic measures to provide sustaining fuel for the Party's rule.

Of course, the Chinese regime doesn't have a Führer like Adolf Hitler, who was the leader of a movement that sought to vindicate Germany's greatness. However, in China, the Communist Party plays a role similar to that of the Führer, demanding all serve it as the embodiment of China's national destiny.

In the debate about whether the Berlin Olympics should have been boycotted, some claim that Jesse Owens competing in the Olympics refuted Adolf Hitler's racist theories. However, Owens' four gold medals were not able to stop the Holocaust in which an estimated 8 million were killed. In looking back, we might ask if a boycott of the 1936 Berlin Games would not have been more successful in helping avoid World War II and the Holocaust.

In 1936, there were no precedents for how to deal with an Olympic Games held in a totalitarian country. In 2008, we once again face the question how to deal with a totalitarian host of the Olympic Games.

The Chinese regime argues that sports and politics should be separated.

The Olympic Charter speaks of placing "sport at the service of the harmonious development of man, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity."

The Charter also speaks of "respect for universal fundamental ethical principles."

By describing as "politics" any objections to systematic violations of human rights that retard the harmonious development of man, deprive society of peace, destroy human dignity, and violate "universal fundamental ethical principles," the Chinese regime is not separating "politics" from sports. It is separating the Olympic Games from their hallowed purpose. And it is doing so even while increasing the persecution against groups like the Tibetans and the Falun Gong.

It is fitting that the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who grew up under communism in East Germany, should be one of the first national leaders in her actions to show an understanding of the significance of the Beijing Olympics. She knows that basic human rights cannot be considered independent from other issues, much less the Olympics, and she has lead the way for other European leaders by announcing she will not attend the Opening Ceremony in Beijing.

In 1936 the world, when confronted with a betrayal of the Olympics by a totalitarian regime, failed to uphold the fundamental principles central to the Olympic movement. This year the world gets a second chance. The nations of the world may choose to participate in the self-promotion of a brutal regime and in doing so to betray the Olympic spirit or they may insist that the Olympics must be kept true to itself.
...
Read more

[+/-] : China's Olympic Lie

...
Read more

[+/-] : China's latest virus: Better safe than sorry

China's latest virus: Better safe than sorry
from The Economist May 8th 2008

Once bitten, twice shy: China's past transgressions in reporting viruses come back to haunt it in the run-up to the Olympics

IT IS all too reminiscent of an epidemic that paralysed Beijing and other parts of China in 2003. This month state-run television has been showing pictures of conscientious health officials and mask-wearing schoolteachers fighting an outbreak of disease by spraying disinfectant on every accessible surface. And, as they did in 2003, Chinese authorities are insisting that things are under control.

In 2003 the disease in question was the mysterious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). As it turned out, the Chinese authorities were lying outright about where things stood. Their obfuscation made things much worse. In the end, SARS spread far beyond China, killing 774 people worldwide. This time the problem is a less exotic and better understood bug, called enterovirus 71 (EV71), which can cause a dangerous form of hand, foot and mouth disease. This is a common childhood illness that sometimes kills but often is cured with no lasting harm.

China has reported 30 deaths in the current outbreak, centred in the town of Fuyang in the central province of Anhui. By May 7th China had reported a total of 15,799 cases. This was a sharp increase from the previous day's tally of 12,000. But officials said this was because surveillance was improving, not because the spread of the virus was accelerating.

There is no evidence of any systematic cover-up by the central government. But local officials took too long to sound the alarm. In Anhui ten doctors handling the outbreak were disciplined for misconduct and—fairly or not—China's poor track record on such matters leads to obvious questions about its openness and trustworthiness. But the World Health Organisation (WHO), which in 2003 struggled mightily with Chinese footdragging on SARS, now sees no indication of a cover-up. The WHO's China representative, Hans Troedsson, expressed concern about the unusual concentration of cases in Anhui, and about the occurrence of pulmonary and neurological symptoms not typically seen with hand, foot and mouth disease. But he also called for “the right perspective” in viewing the situation, pointing out that such outbreaks happen regularly in countries in the region.

Indeed, China last year saw a total of 80,000 cases and 17 deaths. But this year's outbreak has caused unusual nervousness because it comes just three months before the start of the Beijing Olympics in August. As the disease tends to peak in the heat of June and July, health authorities say that more cases are likely. Despite signs of new cases in two Beijing kindergartens, Mao Qun'an of China's health ministry insists the outbreak will have no impact on the games. An anxious nation and its visitors want very much to believe him.
...
Read more