Olympics
from Beijing to London, and protests from Tibet to Iraq
by
Prof. Saroj Jayasinghe Faculty of Medicine University of Colombo
Courtesy The Island 21-04-2008
Those who are old enough to have closely followed the history of the
Olympics would appreciate the close parallels between the present politico-media
campaign in the West against the Beijing Olympics, and the US led boycott
of the Moscow Olympics in 1980. And for those who are bold enough to
imagine, I would argue that the Tibet issue maybe a bad omen for the
future of the Olympics, at least for London, in 2012.
As the Olympic torch wound its way towards Beijing came the protests
by several groups of Tibetan exiles, given prime-time airing by almost
all the large news channels. This was soon linked to the 'oppression'
of Tibet by China. Of course the media had a little help from the politicians
in the US. Nancy Pelosi of the US House of Representatives used photo
opportunities with the Dalai Lama to preach how concerned we all should
be about violations of human rights in Tibet. As the media whipped up
the frenzy with minute-by-minute newscasts, the protestors became increasingly
bold. Despite the gathering momentum of protests on the screen and the
importance of the event, the police in these great 'Western' democracies
became almost impotent. They were quite unable to control small numbers
of persons who would hurl themselves at the torch-bearers. One notable
feature is that the policing and planning were particularly poor in
the UK, France and US, though the BBC was more concerned about who the
'Chinese guys in blue were?'. Not a word about who the protesting people
were (for example, who were the pro-Tibetan Caucasians?) or why the
Police were so wretchedly incompetent particularly in these three countries.
Thankfully, the so-called less sophisticated (but perhaps more civilized)
countries managed to prevent such ugly incidents. If there was one country
that should have erupted in protests, it should have been India. The
country had repeatedly been at war with China, (the latest being 1962),
but did admirably well to allow the true spirit of Olympics to be celebrated
with dignity. This is also despite hosting thousands of Tibetan exiles
and the Dalai Lama himself. How is it that they could keep the event
peaceful, while the western countries with much fewer Tibetan exiles
failed so miserably? Luckily for humanity, His Holiness the Dalai Lama
himself thwarted any attempts at a boycott of the Olympics and hijacking
of the event by the 'West'.
So, what is the link between Beijing-London on the one hand and Tibet-Iraq
on the other? The link maybe tenuous, but I have attempted to fit the
jigsaw, piece by piece.
Tibet is supposed to have been invaded by China in 1950-1951. Therefore
for the 'self-appointed international' community and their media sycophants,
the current protests are 'justified' and reasonable. For a moment let
us accept this. If so, the underlying principle can be stated in this
manner: It is justifiable for people to protest against a country hosting
the Olympics, if this country has invaded another sovereign state.
Now apply this principle to the situation in Iraq, (and to the rest
of the globe). Iraq was invaded in 2004 by the 'coalition of the willing'
led by the US, the UK, and Australia. It was on the pretexts of searching
for weapons of mass destruction that are yet to be found. The oppression
is worse in Iraq than in Tibet. Unlike the police batons and water hoses
used by the Chinese in Tibet, Iraq is being decimated by the invading
forces using bombers, helicopter gun ships, tanks, infantry and artillery.
Though each and every human life is precious, the number killed in Iraq
exceeds any estimates of recent deaths in Tibet by thousand fold. According
to scientific researchers, the figure of civilian deaths in Iraq was
close to 100,000 by 2003 alone. (See the article, Mortality before and
after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey. The Lancet of
2004, Volume 364, Pages 1857 - 1864).
Therefore, if it is justifiable for Tibetan exiles and supporters to
protest about the Beijing Olympics, it is logically justifiable for
Iraqis to protest, during London Olympics in 2012. They could protest
about the invasion and killings perpetrated by the British in their
country. If the Arabs are to remember what the British did to Palestine,
they too could rally round with Iraqis to boycott the 2012 Olympics.
The torch probably may not be tolerated in any of the former colonial
countries where the British Empire plundered, just a few decades prior
to 'invasion' of Tibet by the Chinese. By extending this logic to history,
Malaysians, Africans (Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Egypt etc), Indians (who remember
the Amritsar Massacre of 13 April 1919, the horrific suppression of
the campaigns for freedom spear-headed by Mahatma Gandhi) and Sri Lankans
too could join in the protest against the London 2012 Olympics. It is
also ironic that the US led boycott of Moscow Olympics of 1980 was in
protest against the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. 28 years later
the clock has done a full circle and now there are several thousand
British (and American) soldiers in Afghanistan. As Tony Blair said in
November 2006, they will stay 'as long as it takes'. So perhaps the
Afghan exiles too could join in the 2012 London Olympic torch protest.
|
