As August approaches, there is no sign of a letup in pressure on China to honor the promises it made in return for the distinction of hosting this year’s Olympic Games. Those pledges, made with little sincerity, have since proven an invaluable foothold for Chinese activists and international organizations.
But one voice has been remarkably quiet on the guarantees it solemnly accepted seven years ago — the International Olympic Committee (IOC), which has deftly avoided pressing Beijing on its commitments in public view.
But this weekend, IOC president Jacques Rogge triumphantly broke his silence to praise improvements in China and crow over the Olympics’ “catalytic” role. His statement was complacent and disrespectful of the scores of Chinese activists who, unlike himself, have dared to push the envelope, refusing to let their government forget its promises.
And while the IOC would, in speaking out, risk only offending Beijing, the Chinese lawyers and nonprofit groups who publicly appeal for concrete change put no less than their careers, their freedoms and their family members’ freedoms on the line.
In Bucharest, Rogge said on national TV on Saturday that China’s openness over the devastating Sichuan earthquake last month showed evidence of the benefits of the upcoming Olympics.
Rogge has had nothing to say about the unyielding crackdown on Tibetans — a crackdown that has now turned into a witch hunt for troublemakers. He has likewise been reticent about restrictions on foreign media in China, which includes not only limitations in Tibet, but also unwavering barriers to meeting blacklisted environmental and social activists countrywide.
If Rogge feels that commenting on these events does not lie within the IOC’s role, neither should he step forward when the opportunity presents itself to offer a positive assessment of individual freedoms in China. This inconsistency, designed to be ingratiating to Beijing and the international community, represents a blatant rationalization of so-called Olympic principles.
In reality, the credit for keeping pressure high on Beijing goes to people like Yang Chunlin (楊春林), who was sentenced in March to five years in prison for collecting thousands of signatures from disgusted, displaced villagers accusing the authorities of caring more about Olympic glory than human rights. Such campaigners have made good use of the media ahead of the Games.
China’s response in the wake of the quake, which killed tens of thousands, has indeed displayed more openness than in past crises. With the world’s eyes bearing down as never before, China is not willing to risk being caught in a humiliating web of lies a la SARS.
And with tens of thousands of mourning friends and families — and a vast Internet-savvy population — claiming a trivial death toll this time around was not a viable option.
“You will see,” Rogge said on Saturday, “that the Olympic Games will change China.”
The Games have the potential to precipitate democratic reform, he said, adding that August will see “revolutionary” media freedoms.
The Olympics could have a lasting effect on Beijing’s administration of the country. But should this happen it will be in spite of, not because of, help from the IOC.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS