Thanks for visiting my blog, Serving Bread. Here you'll read stories, insights, reflections and ramblings from a campus minister, father, husband and Jesus-follower. If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to the RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
These particular Olympics have generated some controversy and dialogue on whether we should be boycotting these games due to China’s poor human rights record. I’m of the mindset that these Olympics allow the world community to better engage with China and it’s government on these issues. A boycott in this particular instance would do less than engagement to address the human rights conditions.
So I won’t be boycotting these games (and thanks to a month of free cable with gazillion channels, I’ll be enjoying many of the competitions). I am supportive that President Bush will be attending these games. I’m also glad that he has not shrunk back from his critiques of the Chinese regime and I’m curious to see what his worshiping experience will be like (and the implications of his visit) when he attends Church on Sunday. So on this note, I disagree with both major presidential candidates who said they would not attend the opening ceremonies if they were president.
What I’m looking forward to on Friday is watching Lopez Lomong carry the American flag in the opening ceremonies. It is unfortunate that the Chinese consulate revoked Joey Cheek’s visa (founder of Team Darfur, an organization of Athletes who are engaged in bringing an end to the crisis in Darfur, Sudan). The US Olympic Committee has distanced itself from Cheek and the controversy, but the captains of the American team decided that they would keep the Sudan crisis on the forefront through Lomong. Lomong is a Sudanese refugee who has an incredible and tragic story. Props to the captains for their bold move in spotlighting Lomong.
-----
If you enjoyed this post, be sure to grab the RSS feed. Also, please take a moment to submit this post through "Share This" above.
-----
|
Related Posts: |
I agree with your assessment. I’m impressed with the President’s handling of the matter. It seems to be a good mix of honor and shame. I think the athletes’ choice of Lopez Lomong to carry the flag is a great and inspiring move. I’m deeply excited to see him bring it in to the stadium and am nearly in tears thinking about it. Did I ever tell you that I met some of the Sudanese Lost Boys in Phoenix? Their national office shares space with the organization Rob consults there.
Haven’t checked out your stuff for awhile. Good to see you’re plugging away.
Glad you two are so impressed with Bush :^), but the folks that thought the Olympic Games would make a difference in China’s human rights approach have so far been proved wrong. On what basis do you two think the president attending the Olympic Games will make a difference in China’s egregious human rights violations and support of those kinds of violations abroad since the run up to the games produced none of that? Do you have any evidence, or is this just based on a general bias toward engaging those that are different? I too hold that bias, but sometimes the facts on the ground are important too. I’m glad the athletes showed something by electing Lomong, though can’t quite figure out why that would count as credit for one of the most tone deaf and ineffective (and destructive?) foreign policy administrations in our history.
Tom, glad to see you back. I don’t think I wrote that I’m impressed by Bush but that I am supportive of his decision to attend the games. I think engagement does work better than boycott. The Soviet Union eventually broke up not because we ignored them, but because we engaged them (or they engaged us). I don’t think that the president attending the games makes or will make any kind of difference in China’s human rights violations. However, I also disagree with your presumption that a boycott would make a difference. But it may seem that boycotting the games could do more harm if we are trying to influence China to change its policies. Perhaps the games were given to Beijing under false pretenses (under the guise that this would help their human rights records) and perhaps that was a poor decision on the part of the IOC. But what’s done is done, and it seems to me that engagement is the best way to address the context at hand.
Our policy (primarily as a boycott) in Cuba is a failure. Most political scientists will attest that boycotts rarely work. They probably did work in bringing an end to apartheid in South Africa, but you had a much more united and concerted effort toward that boycott from the global community (which you can never get toward China). China is much too big and important (economically, politically, strategically, militarily) to ignore.