Leading Articles

null -1° London Hi 5°C / Lo 2°C

Leading article: Enjoy the Olympics, and hope

Sunday, 3 August 2008

The world's biggest festival of sport, the Olympic Games, begins next Friday in Beijing. We shall, at least, have no trouble remembering when it starts – at 8.08pm on 08/08/08. As our report today points out, the sheer scale of the Games has never been greater. The Olympic statistics baffle the imagination – 10,708 athletes from 205 countries will participate in 28 sports and 302 events. There are 24 new venues for the Games – some of them remarkable pieces of modernist architecture – which involved more than a million workers. The cost came to £19.7bn, plus security – not a precedent that London should wish to follow for the Games in 2012.

It will, of course, be a wonderful spectacle which will unite a global audience of hundreds of millions of people in a way nothing else can. People in every nation on Earth will be spectators – certainly tens of millions of Britons will be watching and cheering on our athletes, such as Tom Daley and our equestrian and yachting teams.

This is China's moment, and, tellingly, China seems likely to underpin its status as the major economic power of the 21st century by winning more medals at these Games than anyone else – including the US. China is, overwhelmingly, proud of the Beijing Olympics, which confirm its new standing in the world.

But the point of the Olympics is not simply to be bigger, grander, more expensive than the ones before. The Olympic ideals are lofty – they mark the moral aspirations as well as the sporting ambitions of the international community. The Games are meant to be a force for good – and they can be. In contemporary terms, they are a means to foster international good will, to be an agent for environmental progress, for encouraging human rights. It would be to ignore reality – as we point out below – to suggest that this has been the outcome to date. But it is still important that the Olympics have, at least, raised awareness of China's failings. And if athletes mount the victors' podium with T-shirts drawing attention to the problems, we should cheer them on.

Indeed, while many people in China were indignant that the journey of the Olympic flame around the world was used by Western activists to demonstrate against the Chinese record in Tibet, the demonstrations did raise global consciousness of the plight of the Tibetans. Undoubtedly, the actions of individuals such as Steven Spielberg in refusing to participate in the Games prompted China to justify its policy on Darfur.

When the Games get under way, there will be countless opportunities for the global leaders present to make courteously clear to their hosts their disquiet about China's foreign-policy failures concerning Sudan and Burma, about the repression in Tibet, about the plight of Chinese Christians and other minorities, and the treatment of human-rights activists. They need look no further than the Amnesty International report last week on China's record. Every European head of government present should express concern about the conviction last year for "inciting subversion" of a human-rights activist, Hu Jia, after he had told a European Union parliamentary hearing that China had not lived up to the promises it had made to the Olympic authorities on human rights.

There were real hopes that these would be the first "green" Games – and those hopes have not been realised. The pollution in Beijing not only raises concerns for the athletes breathing this particulate-heavy atmosphere; it ought to make us concerned for the unfortunate citizens who breathe it every day. It may be that the authorities can, by banning even greater numbers of vehicles from Beijing during the Games, and closing more smog-producing factories, clean the air – if they do not, the outcome of the Games will be seen to be compromised. And, remember, hundreds of thousands of peoples' homes were arbitrarily destroyed to make way for the Olympic site.

Journalists have also complained about restrictions on foreign press seeking access to various internet sites – a small instance of more general government interference in web access. For all that, the liberties of citizens in China are unimaginably better than they once were. Nonetheless, the Tiananmen Square massacre, 19 years ago, casts a long shadow.

As for the Games, it is important that individual achievements are not compromised by drug taking – already the American relay team has been disqualified. The Olympics is not a contest between rival pharmaceutical companies: the draconian action taken, for instance, against Dwain Chambers will be justified if it means other athletes stay clean.

But for all the problems and the disappointments about unrealised aspirations, the Beijing Games will still be the greatest show on Earth, 17 days of bliss for sports lovers and a compelling spectacle for everyone else. We wish it well.

Interesting? Click here to explore further

"a compelling spectacle for everyone else"

Not me. Thank god it only takes place every four years.

Posted by Gavin | 04.08.08, 00:03 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

I will be watching the Olympic games and supporting it 100%!! Why does everyone think that supporting the Olympic Games = supporting "everything about the demonic Chinese regime?" Foregin policies are based on self-interest, so they are going to be "selfish".

Posted by Cass | 03.08.08, 13:30 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

John McGowan's comment: "I love the olympic games but shall not be watching them on tv as my personal protest against the repression of the Tibetan people and China's human rights record and some of their selfish foreign policies."

I totally agree with this sentiment and will be doing the same.

Posted by Tristen O'Driscoll | 03.08.08, 12:31 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Chinese people, not just in China, but all over the world, find these lectures from Western people extremely patronising.

The West cannot speak in a condescending manner to the Chinese when their historical and colonial records in China leave much to be desired, not to mention the treatment Chinese people who settled in the West received in terms of discrimination, physical and verbal abuse.

Posted by DK | 03.08.08, 11:57 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

I love the olympic games but shall not be watching them on tv as my personal protest against the repression of the Tibetan people and China's human rights record and some of their selfish foreign policies.

Posted by John McGowan | 03.08.08, 10:42 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

When will the West start to learn the civilised manner of not to have twisted entitlement to splash coffee at tea table and talk dirty to the friendly host in front of all other guests, when being kindly invited over for an elegant reunion party, particularly after enjoying a £19.7bn-worth expansive dinner???

Posted by Hu | 03.08.08, 09:57 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

A compelling spectacle for everyone else ?

I don't think so. Here is one who is not compelled.

17 unbroken days of continuous sport is still BORING... no matter how you dress it up !

And I am sure there are millions / billions out there who feel the same.

There IS life beyond the Olympics !

Posted by James Norton | 03.08.08, 09:06 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

"The cost came to £19.7bn" - oh, it will do in our case, never fear. The 2012 Olympics will cost much more than that as historians will eventually be allowed to point out. The benefits to the peoples of Britain - zippo. Whereas the Chinese can spend £20bn in promoting their country, knowing that the return on investment will be much higher, our little expedition into the world arena is for the self-aggrandisement of our politicians and hangers-on. A few OBEs and what-not handed out for services rendered - but b*gger all use for the rest of us. It's a pity that the French didn't win the 2012 - at least they can afford it since they are set to own most of our electricity generation.

Posted by Dwight Vandryver | 03.08.08, 03:46 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

"And if athletes mount the victors' podium with T-shirts drawing attention to the problems, we should cheer them on. "

No surprise that you & the West who hates China will cheer them on. The real surprise is unlike 1989 Tianmen Square, Chinese people, nomal Beijing citizens will not join you this time. Thus numbers are not on your side.

How do you know? It's because you'll hear a loud lasting woos coming from the crowds who athletes "supposed" to protest for. How ironic will that be? Since it will be anonymous, you can't say that they dare not join you coz they're afraid of being watched. Since BBC is obliged to broadcast live, you & I, and all the ppl around the world, can count with our watches to see how long the woos will last. Isn't that just fun?

Despite Chinese govt failings, Chinese know that in general it's still the best govt at this time. China has always been the center of East civilization & has her own pace of development. The West: pay due respect to the host !

Posted by Wang | 03.08.08, 03:06 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Not true : 100s of 1000s of people moved for Olympic sites; it was only 1000s so about 100x less than you state.

Posted by Steve | 03.08.08, 00:12 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Columnist Comments

deborah_orr

Deborah Orr: One more inquiry isn't going to help

I don't believe a public inquiry into the Baby P case is necessary

hamish_mcrae

Hamish McRae: It will take time, but we'll recover

If officialdom seems over-optimistic in its forecasts, the markets seem too pessimistic

janet_street_porter

Janet Street-Porter: Mother does not always know best

One of the most sensitive subjects for writers is the mother-daughter relationship

mark_steel

Mark Steel: Never mind the baby, just get back to work

The next thing will be an exciting new scheme known as the 'workhouse'