Press play to listen to this article
Critics of China’s human rights record have in mind a new sanction for Beijing: to deprive the city of the 2022 Winter Olympics.
Legislators in a number of major Olympic countries, including the Netherlands, Canada and the US, recently said the 2022 Games should be taken away from China due to the oppression of the Uighur Muslim minority in the northwestern region of Xinjiang. The Dutch and Canadian parliaments officially called the repression a “genocide,” as did the U.S. State Department.
In an interview, Sjoerd Sjoerdsma, a Dutch MP from the ruling coalition’s D66 party, pointed to ‘the largest detention of an ethnic minority since World War II’ and highlighted stories of forced sterilization and rape as proof that China had to be deprived of the Olympic Games. .
Sjoerdsma, whose social-liberal party introduced the Dutch motion to call the treatment of the Uighur minority a genocide, said athletes should decide for themselves whether to go to Beijing, but he preferred that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) , which arranges the games. , granted the opportunity to another country.
“The major sports organizations, whether it be the Olympics or football, need to consider the human rights situation in a possible host country much more carefully, and if it has already been awarded … see how the situation develops,” he said.
In early February, a group of seven Republican U.S. senators, including Rick Scott of Florida, all asked to move the Beijing Games. In mid-February, Canadian opposition leader Erin O’Toole made a similar demand.
This is not the first time that the location of a looming Olympic Games has led to debate. Before the 1936 Games in Nazi Germany, teams from a number of countries, including the USA, considered staying away. In 1980, the American team boycotted the Olympic Games in Moscow after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.
The impact that the bubbling resistance will host on Beijing in 2022 has yet to be seen. Protesters also erupted over China’s policy in Tibet ahead of the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, observers say, but the event went as planned.
Ties Dams, a China researcher at the Clingendael Institute, a Dutch think tank, said the idea of putting the Chinese government under pressure to change the treatment of the Uighur minority by threatening to host the Olympics boycott, is unlikely to be ‘naive’.
However he acknowledged that their numbers were not enough to defeat Uighur’s parliament. could at least force the new government, elected on March 17, to choose parties and either adopt the hawkish stance on China by US President Joe Biden’s government, or the more cooperative approach of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron.
Taking a European lead?
The Netherlands, a traditional greenhouse in the Winter Olympics thanks to its dominance in skating events, has recently emerged as a proponent of the use of sporting events to account for host countries for their human rights policies.
Dutch lawmakers passed a motion last month calling on the Dutch king and prime minister not to attend the Soccer World Cup in Qatar if the Netherlands qualify for next year’s tournament, citing “dire conditions” for migrant workers who build the stadiums.
A similar motion for the Olympics was rejected, but legislator Sjoerdsma said he was hopeful it would still succeed in the coming weeks, and some parties would probably change their position.
However, the Dutch Olympic Committee has issued a warning on how far the country may be ready to go. In response to questions about a possible Dutch boycott of the 2022 Winter Olympics, a spokesperson for the committee said: ‘In the Netherlands we have the policy that there is only talk of a sports boycott if the Netherlands participates as a country in a greater international boycott involving various sectors. This is not the case. ”
Canadian Olympic bosses also said before the national genocide declaration that they would not support a boycott.
In an opinion piece from early February – which remains their position – the heads of the Canadian Olympic and Paralympic committees write that sports boycotts ‘are little more than a convenient and politically inexpensive alternative to a real and meaningful diplomacy.’
Chinese setback
China, which was angry at the pro-Tibet protests before the 2008 Games, has made it clear that it takes any threats of a 2022 boycott very seriously.
‘It is very irresponsible for anyone to try to hinder, hinder or disrupt the organization and functioning of the organization [Winter] Olympics, for political reasons, “said Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin last month, responding to calls for an international boycott.
“We believe that such steps will not be supported by the international community, and that they are doomed to failure,” Wang added.
Shortly afterwards, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, the head of EU foreign policy, Josep Borrell, said the two parties “should use the opportunity of next year’s Winter Olympics in Beijing to discuss winter sports. promote “and” promote new highs “in bilateral cooperation.
In the same call, Wang also said China is “against fabricating and spreading lies and false news” about Xinjiang and Hong Kong.
The IOC, in turn, tried to stay on the political sidelines and told POLITICO that it remained “neutral” on all global political issues.
“The awarding of the Olympic Games to a National Olympic Committee (NOC) does not mean that the IOC agrees with the political structure, social conditions or human rights standards in its country,” he said.
This is a position that has attracted its own criticism. Jules Boykoff, a professor at the University of the Pacific who has written extensively on the Olympics, accuses the IOC of ‘hypocrisy’.
“The IOC has shown an unfortunate tendency to turn away from human rights atrocities to make sure the games continue,” Boykoff said.
“The Olympic Charter is full of powerful ideas on equality and anti-discrimination, but the IOC ignores its own Charter if it is convenient for them to do so,” he said.
But what effect does the geopolitical maneuver have on the real stars of any Olympics?
The Olympic participants have been put in a difficult position, said Rob Koehler of Global Athlete, a sports movement led by athletes.
“As governments demand a boycott of the 2022 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Beijing, athletes are again used as pawns,” Koehler said. “The IOC and IPC are for the first time to blame for putting athletes in this position.”
“It is the IOC and IPC that have decided to award the games to a country with an abysmal human rights record,” he said.
POLITICO is China Direct will examine Europe’s diplomatic and commercial relations with China, and provide expert reporting and analysis in your inbox each week. Join today.**