[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
//-->HUMANRIGHTS& HUMANWELFAREHuman Rights in China: 2008 Beijing Summer OlympicsBy Allison WelchChina’s human rights record has been the subject of intense scrutiny. Therefore, when Chinawas chosen to host the 2008 Summer Olympics, the decision was predictably controversial. Therewere calls for boycotts of the opening ceremony by many international actors, such as HumanRights Watch, Amnesty International, and an assortment of political figures. Institutions such as theUnited States Commission on International Religious Freedom argued that boycotting the gameswould bring critical attention to China’s troubled human rights record, which would ultimatelyprovoke Beijing to alter its controversial policies. Others argued that boycotting the games wouldonly serve to intensify China’s human rights abuses by unifying the Chinese government in the faceof international hostility. This paper examines the human rights climate leading up to the OlympicGames, the Chinese government’s reaction to protests and boycotts, and the outcome of thecontroversy.Pre-Games Human Rights ConcernsPerhaps the most common accusations against China regarding its human rights record concernits occupation of the Tibetan Autonomous Region. After decades of dismissing Tibetan declarationsof independence, Chinese troops invaded and seized control of the region in 1950. Although theChinese government asserts that the human rights situation in Tibet has greatly improved in recentyears, many Tibetan groups and non-governmental organizations insist that it remains intolerable,with blatant and persistent violations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR)continuing to occur. Without recourse, the Tibetans are denied the right to self-determination,freedom of speech, assembly, movement, and expression. Attempts at protest are quicklyextinguished by the Chinese police, typically with excessive force. Tibetans also have claimed thattheir heritage has been endangered by governmental incentives for settlers of Han Chinese origin torelocate to Tibet. All of these issues gave rise to pro-Tibet protests and demonstrations leading up tothe 2008 Olympics.Chinese control over the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region is the subject of similarcriticism. Although the territory is claimed and controlled by Chinese forces, the Uyghurs have beenasserting their independence for decades, and they have often been met with harsh punishmentfrom Beijing. Much of the aggression between Han Chinese forces and Uyghur nationalists is said tobe ethnically or religiously based, which compounds the self-determination issue. Uyghur separatistshave resorted to violence in the name of independence since the 1960s. In response, the UnitedNations and the United States have joined China in labeling the Uyghurs’ East Turkestan IslamicMovement a terrorist organization. As the 2008 Summer Olympics approached, separatist groupsseized upon the increased international attention, staging protests, riots, and demonstrations, bothinternationally and within China.In addition to China’s domestic policy, its foreign policy was also the subject of intense debate inthe years preceding the Olympics, particularly in relation to Sudanese Darfur. A United Nationsarms embargo prohibits foreign nations from militarily assisting either side of the conflict, butwidespread reports implicated China in providing small arms, armored trucks, fighter jets, and pilottraining to the Sudanese government. Critics believe this trade is linked to the strong economic ties211TOPICALRESEARCHDIGEST: HUMANRIGHTSINCHINAbetween China and Sudan. China buys most of Sudan’s oil exports. China also has supported otherauthoritarian regimes with poor human rights records, notably Myanmar. In defiance ofinternational calls for sanctions, China has provided approximately $1 billion in foreign investmentto Myanmar, supporting its highly repressive military junta. In the years leading up to the 2008Summer Olympics, such controversial foreign relations were criticized by human rightsorganizations.In its original bid to host the Olympic Games, Beijing promised to provide foreign journalistswith complete freedom to report from within China. However, as the Games approached,journalists attempting to cover anti-Olympics protests were detained and deported. Chinese humanrights activists residing in Beijing were arrested or removed from the capital for the duration of theGames, including internationally famous activists such as Hu Jia. Coverage of negative events takingplace in Tibet or Xinjiang was prohibited. Despite Chinese promises to allow free and unregulatedInternet access to foreign reporters, websites such as Amnesty International remained blocked.Although China agreed to issue protest permits and maintain designated protest zones throughoutthe capital, no protest applications were approved. Several applicants went missing or were detained.Other applications were withdrawn, rejected, suspended, or vetoed. When groups arrived at protestsites without permits, they were arrested.Soon after winning the bid to host the Olympic Games, Beijing began the process ofdemolishing and relocating homes to make room for the planned Olympic Village. By someestimates, over 300,000 people were forcibly relocated for the purposes of Olympic construction.Many of these residents applied for the aforementioned protest permits that were ultimately denied.Without any official recourse, one man named Baoguan Wang even burned himself to death whilebeing evicted from his home. Although the Chinese government provided relocation assistance to itsdisplaced citizens, most experienced a decline in their living conditions.Protests and BoycottsAs the 2008 Summer Olympics approached, it became evident that Beijing would not fulfill allthe promises of reform it had made to the International Olympic Committee. In response, manyprominent figures called for a boycott of the opening ceremony—or, in some extreme cases, of theentire Olympic Games. French President Nicolas Sarkozy joined several other officials from theEuropean Union in exploring the possibility of not attending the opening ceremony unless there wasan end to violence in Tibet, an openness to dialogue between the Chinese government and the DalaiLama, and the release of political prisoners. Steven Spielberg, who was initially hired as an artisticadviser to the Olympics, stepped down from his position in February 2008. His resignationstatement specifically condemned China’s indirect military presence in Sudanese Darfur and theirrefusal to pressure Khartoum to end the conflict. Calls for boycotts were echoed by organizationssuch as the International Campaign for Tibet, Reporters Without Borders, and Students for a FreeTibet.Despite its status as a symbol of international unity, the Olympic torch encountered anti-Chinese protests as it traversed the world on its way to Beijing. During the initial torch lightingceremony in Athens, two members of Reporters Without Borders rushed the stadium field, wavingblack flags. For the torch, this marked the beginning of a tumultuous journey. In San Francisco,London, and Paris, police officers created a “human shield” around the torch to protect it fromthousands of protesters. Despite this, the torch was momentarily extinguished by protesters in both212HUMANRIGHTS& HUMANWELFARELondon and Paris. The planned route through Pakistan was altered due to fear of militantinterference. Protests surrounding the torch’s journey were also reported in Kazakhstan, Turkey,Argentina, India, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam.AftermathUltimately, the call for boycotts went largely unanswered. Despite persistent criticism, influentialpoliticians (including the United States President George W. Bush) decided to attend the Games.Many politicians who had planned to boycott the Games did not. Nine of twenty-seven EuropeanUnion leaders attended the opening ceremonies, including the heads of Slovakia, Cyprus, and theNetherlands. Others adhered to the boycott for the duration of the opening ceremonies, butattended other celebrations and sporting events throughout the duration of the Olympics. Humanrights activists who had hoped for a politically effective boycott were, for the most part,disappointed.Some scholars have argued that the controversy and calls for boycotts served to unite theChinese people. According to several studies, most Chinese citizens believe that the internationalmedia is biased in favor of the Tibetan cause. Furthermore, the Chinese government’s indignationover the international dispute may have helped to unite the people of China and justify acontinuation of Chinese policy. Long before Beijing’s selection for the 2008 Olympic Games,human rights groups, national governments, and other foreign critics had voiced their disapproval ofhuman rights violations taking place in China. Despite constant calls for China to comply withhuman rights legislation, Beijing has not issued a significant response. Although calls for boycottsand protests might have resonated with an already sympathetic population, their potential for lastingchange in China has proven to be very limited.Annotated BibliographyAaronson, Susan Ariel. 2007. “On Righting Trade: Human Rights, Trade, and the 2008 Elections.”World Policy Journal24 (4): 19-28.Annotation: The article analyzes the implications surrounding United States PresidentGeorge W. Bush’s decision to attend the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing. According to theauthor, Bush’s attendance raises questions about when and how the United Statesgovernment should link its trade policies and human rights objectives to China. The authordetails how the Chinese government has implemented repressive measures, such as jailinghuman rights activists, denying religious freedom, and undermining the labor rights of itscitizens. The author appears to believe that President Bush’s acceptance of the Chineseinvitation was highly inappropriate under the political circumstances.Alter, Jonathan. 2008. “Boycott Opening Ceremonies.”Newsweek,April 21Annotation: In this article, the author provides his opinion on calls to boycott the 2008 OlympicGames in Beijing. The article includes a brief reflection on China’s human rights record,213TOPICALRESEARCHDIGEST: HUMANRIGHTSINCHINAparticularly its controversial relationship with Sudan. The author argues that, as a risinginternational power, China should have a moral obligation to humanitarian leadership. Hefeels that China’s relationship with Sudan in light of the Darfur conflict demonstratesirresponsible global leadership. Furthermore, he believes this issue can and should beaddressed by boycotting the Olympic Games. The author also discusses how a boycottmight affect Chinese nationalism, potentially causing Chinese citizens to question theirgovernment’s human rights policies.Black, David R. and Shona Bezanson. 2004. “The Olympic Games, Human Rights, andDemocratisation: Lessons from Seoul and Implications for Beijing.”Third World Quarterly25(7): 1245-1261.Annotation: In this article, the authors speculate on potential political messages for theimpending 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing. They discuss how the Seoul Olympic Games in1988 ushered in a new era of political strategy, bringing new attention to South Korea’sdemocratization and “western-style liberalization.” In comparing the two Olympic Games,the authors discuss the potential for addressing China’s contemporary human rightssituation. The tone of the article is optimistic, implying that the Olympics can serve as ahelpful catalyst for illuminating international differences.Black, David R. and Janis Van Der Westhuizen. 2004. “The Allure of Global Games for ‘Semi-Peripheral’ Polities and Spaces: A Research Agenda.”Third World Quarterly25 (7): 1195-1214.Annotation: This article provides a general overview of what it means to host global games.At first, the authors examine the various implications of hosting events such as theOlympics. On one hand, events like the Olympics provide hosting nations with a uniqueopportunity to showcase their culture, history, and national pride. They can be ideal for thepurpose of increasing national unity. On the other hand, events like the Olympics are alsophenomenal “marketing opportunities” in a more economic sense. The authors question thesystem by which host cities are chosen, raising questions about inherent inequality,development, and political liberalization. Essentially, they argue that the countries that couldmost benefit from the economic and social perks of the Olympics are the ones least likely tohave a chance to host.Chepesiuk, Ron. 2002. “Built Environment: Beijing Goes for the Olympic Green.”EnvironmentalHealth Perspectives110 (9): A512.Annotation: In contrast to Beijing’s critics, the author of this article praises the Chinesegovernment for its progress on environmental issues prior to the 2008 Olympic Games. Theauthor cites several reliable sources addressing the environmental conditions in China,illustrating how Chinese population growth has contributed to severe environmentalproblems. He goes on to argue that China has made exemplary progress in addressing thoseissues prior to the 2008 Olympic Games. He implies that the Olympics served as a catalystto accelerate Beijing’s environmental consciousness. Although it is short, this article providesa refreshing contrast to more critical accounts of China’s preparation for the Olympics.214HUMANRIGHTS& HUMANWELFAREDittmer, Lowell. 2001. “Chinese Human Rights and American Foreign Policy: A Realist Approach.”The Review of Politics63 (3): 421-459.Annotation: The author of this article provides valuable background information concerningthe United States’ position on Chinese human rights. Particularly after the TiananmenSquare incident in 1989, the United States has had some difficulty addressing China’s humanrights record. The author argues that the United States has been trying to approach anidealist issue through realist means, which has ultimately been detrimental. For example, theClinton Administration’s attempts to use trade policy to rebuke China’s human rightspolicies were not successful. However, the author notes that idealist measures have beensimilarly ineffective. For example, sanctions by international organizations have not had asignificant effect. This has interesting implications when it comes to various political leaders’boycott of the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing.Economy, Elizabeth C. and Adam Segal. 2008. “China’s Olympic Nightmare: What the GamesMean for Beijing’s Future.”Foreign AffairsJuly/August.Annotation: In this article, Elizabeth Economy and Adam Segal address some of Beijing’sinconsistencies when planning for the 2008 Olympic Games. They discuss how China waseager to use the Games to illustrate its political and cultural strengths, and how this wasevident in the spectacular displays it produced. However, they focus upon China’s failure toaddress some critical shortcomings. The Olympic torch relay was used as an example.Intended to put a spotlight on the Games, the 2008 relay generated mass protests inresponse to Chinese policies on Tibet, Xinjiang and the Uighurs, Sudan, the environment,trade, journalistic freedom, and a host of other issues. The authors note that Chinaattempted to quell the protests within their own borders, but it was difficult to quiet thedissatisfied international community. They argue that by neglecting to respond to theiradversaries, China acted irresponsibly as an Olympic host. The article is a good generaloverview of the criticism surrounding the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games.Gallagher, Mary. 2005. “China in 2004: Stability above All.”Asian Survey45 (1): 21-32.Annotation: In this article, several of the challenges facing China in 2004 are discussed. Theauthor illuminates numerous struggles that China faced throughout the year, particularly asthese issues relate to its social stability. Economic and political challenges seem to havereplaced the SARS fears of the previous year, but the author argues that they are no lesssignificant. The Chinese government has instituted stricter policies surrounding both itseconomy and its political hold on its constituents, but its restrictions on free dissent havecaused feelings of social unease throughout the country and the rest of the internationalcommunity. Highly critical in tone, this article condemns the Chinese government for itsrestrictive policies and argues that the government must adopt a more compassionatedevelopment model.215 [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]