Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Munich, Moscow, now Beijing - to boycott or not

By Chris Lewis - posted Tuesday, 27 April 2021


Should Western societies respond to the Communist Party of China (CCP) through sporting boycotts?

At a time when democratic societies face substantial challenges from the growing might of the CCP which seeks to promote its interests on behalf of China almost everywhere, I argue that sport too should also reflect this serious political issue.

I argue this despite strong sympathy for the plight of athletes whose sporting ambition rests largely on Olympic Games participation, and my own recognition that all nations have made significant policy mistakes (including the US and Australia).

Advertisement

In this article, I reflect my perspective that sport, rather than being used as a tool for totalitarian governments to supposedly express its prowess by winning lots of shiny medals, reflects an important part of the Western tradition and influence.

Representing the relative beauty of our pluralist political system, where power is dispersed and backed by the rule of law, Western societies have developed sport over many decades aided by public funding to build sporting fields and promote activities, even creating professional opportunities in time for national and overseas athletes.

Social interaction through sport, as much as government legislation, has been a catalyst for breaking down barriers between different ethnic groups in many Western societies, including Australia, despite those still arguing that systemic racism persists.

Hence, China under the CCP, with its nationalist agenda and bias towards the Han majority, mistakenly thinks it can deflect criticism of its human rights record through its longstanding approach that forces all minorities into the centre within a view that only the CCP knows best how to ensure China's progress.

Heaven help humanity (and the planet) should the CCP ever dominate international relations with its total disregard for pluralism and checks and balances.

Hence, in line with a recent call for Australia to reconsider its participation at the 2022 Winter Olympic Games in Beijing, I also argue that there comes a time when decent nations (including Australia) should take a stand against CCP influence through sport, and not repeat the same mistakes when the Nazis used the Olympic Games to create a false impression it was a supporter of a better world.

Advertisement

In line with my past concerns about the rise of China under the CCP since 2009, the CCP's increasingly fascist behaviour is clearly evident.

We see this through the mass arbitrary detention, torture, separation of families, forced labour and violations of reproductive rights of the Uighur and other Muslim minorities in Xinjiang,

the sending of Han Chinese into Tibet to take over Tibetan lands and property while persecuting and jailing Tibetans;

trade sanctions on any country that opposes the CCP's actions (including Australia),

the destruction of Hong Kong democracy through the repression of any opposition to the CCP;

the CCP's constant threat to take over democratic Taiwan, having never accepted the nationalists moving there after their defeat in the Chinese civil war in 1949;

and the CCP's claim on nearby territory in violation of international agreements and borders, including the disputed reefs and islands in the South China Sea where the CCP takes fishing and economic rights from other nations while building military bases, and has endeavoured to take territory from India on that border.

I agree that Western democracies (led by the US) should draft a plan for massive sanctions, including action against companies who trade with China, albeit this would be the last cog in Western retaliation against the CCP given the serious impact it will have for the global economy.

While many Western national governments may not force their national sporting bodies to boycott international competitions, they can encourage opposition.

It is worth noting that a potential boycott by 22 national signatories expressing concern about China's Xinjiang abuses during 2019 alone would have a major impact if they refused to attend the Winter Olympics.

Including eight of the ten nations that have won 75% of all Winter Olympic Games medals ever awarded, the 22 countries were Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom (UK).

Boycotts can have an effect.

For example, under the leadership of Nelson Mandela, the African National Congress's long struggle against racial discrimination in South Africa understood the power of sport to help isolate a racist government from the rest of the world.

From the 1950s to the 1970s, pressure on the international community led to South Africa being banned from FIFA, the Olympics, international cricket and later rugby union, a reality that annoyed the many sports loving white fans perhaps more than economic sanctions.

While sanctions were lifted from the time Mandela's release from prison in 1990 to his election as president more than four years later, it was made clear to the reformist government of FW De Klerk that a No vote for the democracy referendum would mean that South Africans would not be watching their athletes at cricket or football World Cups or the Olympic Games.

Of course, given that the CCP is so much more powerful than South Africa ever was, extracting whatever resources it wants from China's gigantic economy in a way that many Western governments rarely do outside war situations, there is a possibility that the West may not been able to influence many of the poorer countries who are currently benefitting from greater economic interaction with China.

Hence, a sporting boycott may be limited to Western societies.

Western Corporations too, if they put ethics before profits, can also take a stand by not sponsoring the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics.

It is noted that companies participating in the elite Olympic Partner Programme, including Airbnb, Coca-Cola, General Electric, and Visa, collectively fork over at least $1 billion for exclusive marketing rights allowing them to include those five coloured rings in commercials.

At the sporting federation level, while the International Olympic Committee is a power of its own which is eager to hold on to its influence within global sport, they have the capacity to take the lead against rogue players.

At present, the Australian Olympic Committee rejects the possibility of a boycott, predictably saying that "neutrality on global political issues" was a critical feature of the Olympic movement..

This is in line with the US Olympic and Paralympic Committee whose chair Susanne Lyons also stated "We at the USOPC oppose athlete boycotts because they've been shown to negatively impact athletes while not effectively addressing global issues in the past", and that such matters should be left to diplomats and other government officials who are better equipped to address such concerns rather than using young athletes "as political pawns in these issues".

However, one can note how the IOC and other sporting federations banned Russia from the Olympic Games and major sporting competitions because of its blatant systematic use of banned performance enhancing drugs.

Finally, individual sports people can take the lead, as they have with their various individual stances over the years in societies where the power of individuals can have a major effect, albeit not without personal risk.

One can note the 2016 example of Colin Kaepernick, then quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers in the National Football League, when he knelt during the national anthem at the start of NFL games in protest of police brutality and racial inequality in the US.

While Kaepernick reached a confidential settlement with the NFL in 2019 after filing a grievance in 2017 against the NFL and its owners alleging that they were keeping him out of the league, albeit he has never played since, his previous protests received renewed attention in 2020 during the George Floyd protests against police brutality and racism.

Of course, not all athletes may be willing to consider sacrificing their careers.

While many Olympic Games sports also have a regular world championship and annual circuits with significant prizemoney, they often still depend on public funding that is inspired by global medals, particularly Olympic Games which drives funding models in Australia and the United Kingdom.

Even in the US, where the government plays a much lesser role, the chair of the US Olympic and Paralympic Committee rightfully points out that pressure on corporate sponsors can affect athletes and related programs given companies provide the bulk of financial support in the longer term, not just for specific events.

In the end, however, all Western actors, whether they be governments, corporations, federations, participants and spectators, do have the option of recognising that sport and politics can mix when the issues warrant such action.

Of course, some decisions may require political leadership. With a recent US poll finding that 49% supported a potential boycott of the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics because of China's human rights abuses, with 46% opposing it, it could be that the US President leads a boycott as it did in 1980 when 61 other countries supported President Carter's decision, said to be one of the least popular decisions he ever made.

With the Biden administration during April 2021 talking with allies about a joint approach to address complaints of China's human rights abuses, with the US State Department not ruling out an Olympic boycott, a CCP Foreign Ministry spokesperson warned of an unspecified "robust Chinese response" to a potential Olympics boycott.

Given the seriousness of the CCP question, however, I argue that Western societies have to decide one way or another whether they want to participate in sporting events run by the CCP which is only too happy to repeat the age-old argument that sport and politics should not mix.

My personal position is that the separation of democracies from authoritarian regimes should include sport, along with economics, despite the short-term pain.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

9 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Chris Lewis, who completed a First Class Honours degree and PhD (Commonwealth scholarship) at Monash University, has an interest in all economic, social and environmental issues, but believes that the struggle for the ‘right’ policy mix remains an elusive goal in such a complex and competitive world.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Chris Lewis

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 9 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy