This is Aaron Hui (H Block) I decided to post a youtube video (previous post) that focuses a little more on one of the places that our guest speaker stated was an obstacle in the fight against Genocide: China. The video talks about how the 2008 Olympic Games are related to China and the Darfur/Sudan Genocide. After watching the clip (which is about 2.30 minutes), do you agree with those such as Frank Wolf and Mia Farrow that by supporting the Olympics, one is supporting the Genocide in Darfur? Or should the Olympic games be unrelated to the Genocide? Here's an article from the SF Chronicle, which gives another side of the China/Darfur relationship, and how China has in fact tried to stop the Genocide: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/09/11/international/i161342D50.DTL&hw=darfur+sudan+china+olympics&sn=002&sc=864.
Another link from the WashingtonPost that talks about China's possible consequences with its relationship with Sudan: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/13/AR2006121302008.html.
What do you think about the relationship? Would you agree or disagree that China and the Olympics are or are not helping with the Genocide?
13 comments:
Thanks Aaron, I just watched the video and I found it really relevant and interesting in relation to this course and more specifically, to the speaker last Friday.
I found it a bit suprising and fascinating that China decided to name the 2008 Olympics "The Genocide Olympics" in honor of bringing attention to the Darfur Genocide, especially since there is sufficient evidence showing that the Chinese government has been in fact assisting the Sudanese government in their goals by investing in their large oil companines as well as supplying them with arms and weapons, which in turn are being used to kill and harm civilians. It is almost as if China is showing two different sides of the argument, and in some ways, trying to "cover up" or mislead the rest of the world into thinking that they are not part of the problem, and that really, they are trying to fight against what the Sudanese government is doing.
I sense that as the rest of the world is anticipating the Olympics and athletes are continuning the train and prepare, that people will start to think about, become curious and also question the things that are going on in Sudan. I think in the long run, it is a good thing, in that since the Olympics is an international event, by including the word "Genocide" in its title, it is bond to shed some attention onto the reality, and spread some awareness. However, as one of the speakers pointed out, it is also going to create some tension and disagreements as to whether the games should be at all connected with the intricate dealings of controversial politics. Should such a heavy and weighted topic be the "overarching theme" of a sporting event? What sort of boundaries or expectations are present between politics and the public forms of "entertainment"?
Is China just complicating itself and the rest of the world by putting these two words in one phrase, "Genocide" and "Olympics"??
Hey guys this is Casey (I haven't figured out how to make is say my name instead of Ms. Finn)
Thanks Aaron for the video. Hearing about the role that China is playing in the genocide in Darfur from our guest speaker last Friday was particularly interesting to me and especially pertinent given the upcoming Olympics in China in 2008.
My immediate reaction to watching the video and finding out that China has dubbed the upcoming Olympics "The Genocide Olympics" was that it was a hypocritical statement on the part of China. As Ting mentioned above, there is sufficient evidence that China has and is continuing to play a major role in supplying Sudan with the necessary weapons and money that further contributes to the continuation of the genocide in Darfur. Given this evidence, it seems hypocritical of China to call the Olympics "The Genocide Olympics" as a way of conveying the message that they are not involved in the genocide and in fact are opposed to what the Sudanese government is doing to its civilians in the region of Darfur. Knowing that they are in the public spotlight as a result of the upcoming Olympics, it is as if China is hoping that by naming the Olympics "The Genocide Olympics" they can in some way counteract the evidence of their involvement in the genocide. I got the impression that this was a last minute effort on the part of China to "clean-up" their image in the public eye.
After watching the video a second time I was also saddened and a bit angered by the fact that so much controversy is surrounding the Olympics and that there is talk of U.S. athletes boycotting them. It has been said many times that the Olympics is the one time when countries can forget their differences and/or conflicts to come together and support one another for the love of sports. I think that it isn't fair that athletes from around the world who have been working hard in pursuit of their personal goals of success have been put into the role of "political pawns in the fight between nations" because they really don't have anything to do with it. While many individuals may choose to ignore the tension surrounding the upcoming event, I think that to some degree the attention of the games will be shifted from the games themselves to the conflict and the genocide in Darfur. This makes me wonder: is the attention that is being shed on Darfur positive or negative? Will this attention lead to action/change in Darfur? Has China created a positive or negative image for itself by bringing the genocide into the Olympics?
Hey guys, this is aaron. i agree with both Ting and Casey that the Olympics should be a place for different nations and countries to unite. At the same time, i remember from the speaker that the Genocide in Darfur is really underreported, so i feel that the Olympics would have positive attention in terms of giving a lot more people more awareness on the Darfur Genocide. However, i also think that the Olympics will have a negative influence on China, if in fact the Olympics can bring more people to the attention of the Darfur Genocide and especially China's role in the situation.
Just to clarify, it is not China that is dubbing the olympics the "genocide olympics" but rather critics of China and its involvement in the Darfurian genocide. I'm pretty sure that the Chinese government does not want anyone to draw any connections between the olympic games and China's connections with Sudan.
I think there are other ways of showing disaproval of China's involvement in Sudan than by boycotting the Olympics. As the woman on CNN said, the athletes should not have to give up their lifetime's work because of politics. Boycotting the olympics would make a statement to China, but not nearly a strong enough one. If the US was serious about pressuring China, it would put major economic pressure on Chinese industries. Think about how many products come from China. The US is a huge importer from China, so if the US wanted to send China a message, it would not be by destroying some atheletes' dreams, but rather by importing products from other countries.
I totally agree with Jordan. (At first I was confused because I doubted that China would call the olympics the genocide olympics---rather it's the critics saying this)
I think that it is an unfortunate time for China to be hosting the world event becuase every other country is mad at them for their continued involvement in Darfur's genocide. I think that we should be able to separate these two events because they are unrelated. The athletes should not be punished for all their hard work. Instead of boycotting the 2008 olympic games, I think our athletes should go out and represent America and what we stand for to the best of their abilities.
I agree with Jordan in that the U.S. should be boycotting the Olympics through trade sanctions as opposed to having athletes boycott the games, which will have virtually no effect on China's actions in Sudan. But, I disagree with Aileen in that the games and China's actions are unrelated; it is important to remember that the world has become so globalized and interconnected that its extremely difficult to say that any two things involving separate countries are unrelated. We always have to be conscious of the fact that our actions have repercussions, and the U.S. needs to make sure that it acts in a way that will have the right repercussions. As Jordan said, economic sanctions will affect China's relationship with Sudan, whereas athletes boycotting the Olympics probably won't.
I think a boycott would only work if every athlete did it, and so I think it is up to the Olympics committees to decide if they want China to host the games in 2008 and therefore support China's economy and indirectly support/accept it's role in the genocide in Darfur. I don't think the international community should support China at all, but it is probably too late to change the location of the Olympics. Maybe instead genocide cessation organizations can use the tourists and media attention generated by the Olympics in China to help bring more attention and help to Sudan in general.
I definitely think that the olympic games should be completely separate from all political happenings. The olympics have always been a good way for the entire world to get together in a safe competition without weapons and warfare. Introducing politics into the picture would be unnecessarily controvercial. I do, however, think that the genocide in Darfur needs far more publicity than it currently receives, but the publicity needs to come from a source other than the olympics. It is interesting to think that, by having this news clip about a possible boycott (which hopefully will not happen), is, in itself, publicizing the genocide, and possibly making more people in the u.s. and in china aware of what is going on in sudan.
I definitely think that the olympic games should be completely separate from all political happenings. The olympics have always been a good way for the entire world to get together in a safe competition without weapons and warfare. Introducing politics into the picture would be unnecessarily controvercial. I do, however, think that the genocide in Darfur needs far more publicity than it currently receives, but the publicity needs to come from a source other than the olympics. It is interesting to think that, by having this news clip about a possible boycott (which hopefully will not happen), is, in itself, publicizing the genocide, and possibly making more people in the u.s. and in china aware of what is going on in sudan.
I disagree with Michael that the Olympics should be completely separate from politics. Some powerful political statements have been made at the Olympics, the most prominent being Tommie Smith and John Carlos's black power salute during the national anthem to protest racial discrimination in the United States at the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City. Any event as big as the Olympics can be a powerful political stage also. I don't think any of us would know about China's involvement in Darfur if it weren't for activists pointing out the relation during the media coverage for the Olympics.
Here's a link if you're unfamiliar with the story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/17/newsid_3535000/3535348.stm
Hey this is Aaron Hui again. I agree with both micheal b. and diego in different parts. I definitely think that the Genocide in Sudan has to have a lot more attention and awareness. However, especially in our nation, the media has such a crazy high influence on what we see, what we value, and it permeates almost everything we do. What is saddening is that if in fact the media has probably the highest influence over what most of the society knows, and that the media from our class discussions have in fact been underreporting the Genocide in Sudan, then the Olympics could be the next best thing in terms of bringing the world to a higher awareness of the Genocide in Sudan. Most of the world I presume would watch the Olympics, and i think it is one of the few events that incorporate every person from every society. I really believe that the Olympics can have a positive affect on the Sudan/Darfur situation. Sure, I think China will have a lot of people condemning its actions, but i feel that there are ways to work around improving or helping China to find alternative sources of oil and at the same time stopping the Darfur Genocide.
With the perception that it's supporting the Darfur conflict and with the Olympic Games coming up, China's international reputation does hang in the balance. However, for this particular reason, and other points of leverage, China has begun to act.
They've appointed a special representative to African Affairs, Liu Guijin, who's stated that Darfur is his top priority. Also, China, after consistently refusing to support any UN resolution that endangered its economic interest in Sudan, on August 31, 2007, did not use its veto right for Resolution 1706, which would create a UN peacekeeping force for Darfur.
However, as China is Darfur's largest economic and political ally, I believe that it's not doing enough. They currently support the Sudanese government tremendously by purchasing their oil (CNPC, a state-owned Chinese company, controls 60 to 70 percent of the total oil production in Sudan) and they have, along with Russia, actually supplied Sudan with arms.
Congress unanimously passed a bill earlier this year, Resolution 422, which urges China to end the Darfur genocide. House Resolution 628 expresses the House's sentiment that the President should boycott the 2008 Olympics (it hasn't passed).
Senate Bill 831, also known as the Sudan Divestment Authorization Act, was introduced on March 8 and encourages states to divest in firms that do business in Sudan. This particular bill would have the biggest effect on China's relations with Darfur as it could potentially put significant economic pressure on China. China has stated that the Olympic Games will be a demonstration of China's economic success entering the new millennium. If you're interested in this bill, and would like to contact our Senators about passing this bill, you can visit http://www.darfurscores.org/blog/2007/03/22/697.
I think that it's good that some pressure was put on China, even if only through the threat of maybe boycotting the olympics rather than actually doing that. If that pressured China enough to act upon the statements that were being made I believe that that is a good enough reason for the threat to be made.
If it reduced China's role in the genocide or aiding it in any way, or promoted china's urge to help stop it i feel that such pressures were positive.
Post a Comment