International criticism of the genocide in Xinjiang, China, has been followed by a boycott of the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics. The parliaments of Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom have all addressed the Beijing Winter Olympics this week when discussing the issue of Xinjiang. This is a case of pulling the carrot of “Xinjiang genocide” and bringing out the mud of the Beijing Winter Olympics. But the three countries discussed the issue from different angles.
In early February, more than 180 human rights groups called on governments to boycott the Beijing 2022 Olympics in protest of China’s ongoing crackdown on ethnic minorities. So far, however, no government has announced that it will boycott the Beijing Olympics.
The Canadian Parliament on Tuesday passed a motion by Conservative MP Michael Chong to “declare that China has committed genocide against the Uighur people in Xinjiang. The motion also asked the Canadian federal government to call on the international community to “change the host city for the 2022 Winter Olympics from Beijing to another city. Of Canada’s 338 members of Parliament, 266 voted in favor of the motion and 0 voted against it, while more than 70 members of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ruling Liberal Party abstained from voting. Since the Liberals are a minority government, the motion passed by a large margin with the combined support of the three opposition parties and Liberal backbenchers. Although it was a non-binding motion that could not influence the specific policies of the ruling Liberal government, the motion itself sparked strong opposition from China.
On the same day, Republican Ranking Member Michael McCaul (R-Texas) introduced the American values and Security in International Athletics Act to prevent human rights abuses by countries like China from improving their image. The bill was introduced shortly after it was introduced on the 23rd.
The bill was placed on the agenda of the House Foreign Affairs Committee shortly after it was introduced on the 23rd, and was considered by the committee on the 25th, along with a number of democracy and human rights-related bills. McCaul told the committee that now that it is hosting the 2022 Winter Olympics, China will use the Olympics to clean up its image. The bill focuses on U.S. athletes participating in the Olympics, ensuring that U.S. team members are properly informed about human rights issues and invasive surveillance practices in China, helping to protect them from being used, and preventing the Chinese Communist Party from using the Olympics as a “big outreach campaign. The bill was passed by the House Foreign Affairs Committee without objection and will be sent to the full House for consideration and, if passed by the House and Senate, will be sent to the President for signature.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee bill itself does not call for the 2022 Winter Olympics not to be held in Beijing, which is similar to the situation in the United Kingdom.
British Prime Minister Johnathan said in Parliament on Thursday that the persecution of the Uighur minority in Xinjiang by the Chinese Communist Party was genocide and that Britain would launch an international campaign at the United Nations to hold China to account. But Johansen also said, “In our country we do not normally endorse sporting boycotts, and that has always been the position of the British government.” Johnson made the remarks in response to a question from Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey during a debate in the British House of Commons.
The British Olympic Association expressed support for Johnson’s decision saying, “We do not believe that boycotting the Winter Olympics is the right choice. We believe that the athletes who have been putting their best efforts into training for this event should go to the competition and should represent this country.” The spokesman added, “We saw in Moscow in 1980 that sports boycotts don’t work. They punished the athletes, and those larger political issues were not addressed or focused on as a result.”
In response to calls seeking a boycott of the Beijing Olympics, the IOC quoted an anonymous spokesman as saying that the body “does not have the power or the ability to change the legal or political system of a sovereign country.” The official position of the International Olympic Committee is that the body is an international sporting body and is not involved in politics.
According to the Voice of America, Annamie Paul, the leader of Canada’s federal Green Party, publicly stated last week that she supports sanctions against Beijing for the Winter Olympics because of China’s genocide in Xinjiang and called for a change of venue for the Games. She argued that the Winter Olympics could be held in Vancouver, a Canadian city that has hosted the Games, and that many of the competition venues are readily available. However, the president of the Canadian Olympic Committee said in an interview, “Boycotting the Olympics is not the answer to China’s problems. Instead, attendance at the Olympics allows for better communication, exchange and bridge building.” Representatives of Canadian athletes also expressed their support for the Canadian Olympic Committee’s decision.
Canadian experts calling for a boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics are concerned that if the international community does not listen, the world may repeat the mistakes of 1936. That year’s Berlin Olympics were called the “shame of the Olympics. Will they go on to Beijing this Time, knowing that a humanitarian crisis may be taking place in China’s Xinjiang region, as a symbol of “world peace, friendship, and solidarity”?
It has also been suggested that the international community should urge the Olympic Committee to postpone next year’s Winter Olympics in Beijing, based on what is happening in China and the Epidemic. This would serve as a warning to China that we need to change the venue of the Olympics if the genocide continues; and, at the same time, give China a chance. And China has already warned against attempts to boycott the Beijing Winter Olympics, saying those countries could be subject to “economic sanctions.
Recent Comments