Beijing Olympics: What can a diplomatic boycott achieve?

The
United
States
said
it
would
not
be
sending
high-level
government
officials
to
the
Games
in
protest
against
ongoing
human
rights
abuses
in
China,
while
the
UK
had
earlier
said
it
was
considering
such
a
move.
Calls
for
other
countries
to
do
the
same
are
growing
louder.

“We
will
see
non-governmental
organizations
speaking
out
more
intensively
in
the
coming
months,
increasing
the
pressure
on
national
governments,”
Jürgen
Mittag,
a
sports
policy
expert
at
the
German
Sports
University
in
Cologne,
tells
DW.

Mittag
expects
the
boycott
discussion
to
peak
in
mid-January.
Then,
he
says,
“we
will
be
able
to
see
whether
there
really
is
concerted
action,
that
is,
whether
a
larger
number
of
heads
of
state
and
government
will
not
be
there.

“In
that
case,
the
Olympics
would
certainly
be
damaged,”
he
continues,
“and
the
Chinese
government
would
not
achieve
what
it
actually
hoped
to
gain
from
these
Games:
a
positive
presentation
and
thus,
above
all,
stronger
support
of
the
country.”

Previous
boycotts
of
sporting
events

There
is
a
long
tradition
of
boycotts
and
threats
of
boycotts
at
Olympic
Games
for
political
reasons.
Spain,
the
Netherlands
and
Switzerland,
for
example,
did
not
participate
in
the
1956
Summer
Games
in
Melbourne
in
protest
against
the
invasion
of
Hungary
by
Warsaw
Pact
troops.

In
the
1960s
and
70s,
sub-Saharan
African
countries
repeatedly
prevented
the
then-apartheid
states
of
South
Africa
and
Rhodesia
from
competing
with
threats
of
boycotts.

Following
Russia’s
occupation
of
Afghanistan
at
the
end
of
1979,
42
countries
boycotted
the
1980
Games
in
Moscow.
Russia
and
19
other
countries
returned
the
favor
four
years
later
by
staying
away
from
the
Los
Angeles
Games.

In
1988,
North
Korea
sent
no
athletes
to
the
Games
in
the
South
Korean
capital
of
Seoul,
with
five
other
countries
joining
in.
There
were
also
calls
to
boycott
the
2008
Summer
Games
in
Beijing
because
of
human
rights
violations
in
Tibet,
but
little
actual
action
came
from
those
appeals.

How
effective
is
a
diplomatic
boycott?

By
comparison,
a
diplomatic
boycott,
sometimes
called
the
politician
boycott,
seems
like
a
“light”
version
of
not
sending
participants
to
the
Olympics,
but
only
at
first
glance.

“In
the
end,
depending
on
the
intensity
of
this
boycott,
the
major
event
may
well
be
damaged
to
a
certain
degree,”
sports
policy
expert
Mittag
tells
DW.

At
the
2012
European
Football
Championship
in
Poland
and
Ukraine,
the
members
of
the
European
Commission,
the
EU’s
executive
branch,
and
many
European
heads
of
government
turned
down
all
invitations
to
matches
in
Ukraine
to
protest
the
imprisonment
of
the
then
opposition
politician,
Yulia
Tymoshenko.

In
contrast,
the
absence
of
former
German
President
Joachim
Gauck
from
the
2014
Winter
Games
in
Sochi
made
headlines
in
Germany
but
hardly
made
a
dent
internationally.
Gauck
justified
his
refusal
by
citing
human
rights
violations
in
Russia.

A
diplomatic
boycott
becomes
more
effective
the
more
governments
take
part,
says
Mittag,
especially
when
dealing
with
countries
like
Russia
or
China.

“China
is
a
world
political
heavyweight,
a
global
power,”
he
tells
DW.
“In
this
case,
one
will
think
relatively
carefully
about
the
extent
to
which
one
initiates
a
diplomatic
boycott
because
it
is
to
be
feared
that
China
will
retaliate
with
counter-reactions
elsewhere.
That
can
lead
to
inconveniences
that
you
don’t
necessarily
want
to
incur.”

Putting
pressure
on
China

According
to
Amnesty
International,
the
human
rights
situation
in
China
has
not
improved
since
the
2008
Summer
Games.
The
recent
case
of
tennis
player
Peng
Shuai
appears
to
back
up
that
assertion.

The
human
rights
organization
calls
on
“foreign
governments
to
use
the
2022
Winter
Olympics
to
highlight
the
dramatic
human
rights
situation
and
demand
the
sustained
improvement
to
which
the
Chinese
authorities
have
committed,”
says
Dirk
Pleiter,
China
expert
at
Amnesty
Germany,
adding
that
such
measures
did
not
necessarily
need
to
include
boycotts.

The
European
Parliament
already
called
on
EU
governments
in
early
July
to
“decline
invitations
for
government
representatives
and
diplomats
to
attend
the
Beijing
2022
Winter
Olympics
unless
the
Chinese
government
demonstrates
a
verifiable
improvement
in
the
human
rights
situation
in
Hong
Kong,
the
Xinjiang
Uyghur
Region,
Tibet,
Inner
Mongolia
and
elsewhere
in
China.”

Mittag
sees
the
Winter
Games
in
Beijing
and
the
subsequent
World
Cup
in
Qatar
as
a
“litmus
test”
for
the
EU.

“The
EU
has
made
sports
diplomacy
a
priority
and
has
developed
it
into
a
targeted
instrument,
but
has
not
yet
really
worked
with
it
or
only
to
a
very
limited
extent,”
he
says.

The
discussion
about
rainbow
lighting
during
football’s
European
Championships
earlier
this
year
showed
how
intensively
human
rights
are
now
on
the
sports
agenda,
he
said.

“The
relationship
between
sport
and
politics
is
currently
being
reset,
renegotiated,”
says
Mittag.
“What
direction
this
path
will
take
and
where
it
will
end
is
not
yet
clear.”

A
diplomatic
boycott
of
the
Beijing
Winter
Games
could
provide
the
first
clues.

Source:

DW