The US is cranking up the political pressure on China, with a lengthy bill now under consideration in the Senate – and an amendment contained within it could enforce a diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Beijing Olympics. If that were to happen, pressure would then fall on other countries to do the same, though it doesn’t look – at the moment – as if any athletic delegations plan to skip the Games next February.
Elsewhere, the Chinese leadership will be greatly hearted by the revised IOC rules on athlete protests, which essentially continue to outlaw all Olympic protests of any kind. That doesn’t mean athletes can’t or won’t take matters into their own hands, of course, but it definitely makes it harder for them to do so. There’s a full discussion of all this and more below.
Weekly Roundup
- US Senate to vote on diplomatic boycott of Beijing 2022
- Olympic protests outlawed for athletes
- Japan backs away from promise to cooperate on Olympics with China
- Digital yuan set to roll out at the Beijing Games
- More boycott news from around the world
- Other features and stories in the build-up to Beijing 2022
US Senate to Vote on Diplomatic Boycott
In the US, a last-minute amendment to the bipartisan Strategic Competition Act of 2021 bill mandates a diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Beijing Olympics. The amendment, which was co-sponsored by Senators Mitt Romney, Tim Kaine and Ed Markey, was part of the wider 300-page bill laying out a strategic approach towards China, which the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved by a voice vote of 21 to 1. The bill now heads to the Senate for a full vote.
If approved and signed into law, the diplomatic boycott part of the bill would prevent any American diplomats attending the Games, but does not prevent the athletes from participating. It’s along the lines of what Romney proposed in his New York Times op-ed, as I discussed a few weeks ago. In that piece, he also mentioned an “economic” boycott, but that is more problematic in that it is far, far harder to define and enforce, hence the reason why a straight forward diplomatic boycott made the cut.
Given the current US-China relationship, a diplomatic boycott doesn’t seem like such a big deal. Of course, China won’t like it, and the Foreign Ministry has already been speaking out against it, but there’s 300 pages of substantive material to go through in the bill, so not having Biden and co at the Opening Ceremony on February 4 next year will hardly be top of mind for long.
Olympic Protests Still Outlawed
One of the things Romney also mentioned in that op-ed was the symbolism of having American athletes standing on top of the podiums in Beijing. Some will surely do that, but what they won’t be able to do is make any kind of protest once there.
That’s because the Athletes’ Commission of the IOC has put forward a set of recommendations in regard to Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter, which is designed “to protect the neutrality of sport and the Olympic Games” – a laughable phrase given the recent history of the IOC.
There’s a lot of waffle in there about non-discrimination and inclusion – although all of that should have been brought on board years ago – but what Rule 50 typically refers to its an athlete’s right of expression, something that has become increasingly prominent around the world through actions and protests in support of the Black Lives Matter campaign and other similar causes.
However, in reading the recommendations – which will come into effect for Tokyo 2020 and last at least through Beijing 2022 – it’s clear that absolutely nothing has changed. Here’s a summary of what Rule 50 meant prior to the refresh:
- No protests at any Olympic venues, including on the field of play, in the Olympic Village, during medal ceremonies or during the Opening and Closing Ceremonies.
- Any protest or demonstration outside Olympic venues must comply with local legislation wherever local law forbids such actions (particularly relevant for China).
- Athletes can “express their opinions” during press conferences and interviews at the venues or on social media, but this must not constitute a protest – defined as displaying any political messaging (including signs or armbands) or making gestures of a political nature (eg hand gestures or kneeling).
The recommendations double down on all of the above, protecting the field of play, the Olympic village and podiums. However, the press release notes that:
The majority of participating athletes did not think it is appropriate for athletes to express individual views during the Opening Ceremony, on the podium nor on the field of play. The respondents were most likely to believe it appropriate for athletes to demonstrate or express their individual views in the media, in press conferences and in the mixed zones.
It is entirely understandable why the IOC would want to keep protests off the field of play and away from the podiums – although don’t be at all surprised if a handful of athletes purposely break this rule – but nowhere in the recommendations does it suggest that athletes can in fact demonstrate their views in press conferences, as the press release concedes a majority of them want to do.
The sole place that has been suggested as a platform to allow athletes to discuss and highlight topics that are important to them is Athlete365 – a part of the official IOC website that almost no one has ever heard of. Call me cynical – and you’d be right – but the IOC has taken one of the most controversial rules in its Charter, completely ignored calls for a fundamental review and turned it into a marketing play to drive traffic to its website. Talk about tone deaf.
A final note: the release says that the recommendations “are also based on feedback from human rights and sports law experts”. I would love to know exactly what feedback those pesky human rights lawyers provided – or who they were – but I don’t suppose we’ll ever know.
We’ll see whether any Olympic protests materialize in Tokyo, with plenty of social causes close to the hearts of athletes. There is sure to be particular interest on what punishments are handed out to violators of the rules. But the given the global sentiment on China at the moment, the pressure to stage Olympic protests will ratchet up when outspoken athletes arrive for the Beijing Olympics – as will the pressure to keep them from public view.
Japan Cools Olympic Cooperation with China
Japan has walked back on a previous mutual promise with China to support each other’s Olympic Games, after growing international criticism of China’s alleged human rights abuses in Xinjiang.
Last November, Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga and Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi met with Chinese Foreign Ministry Wang Yi in Japan, with the Japanese government stating that the countries had agreed to cooperate to make both the upcoming Summer and Winter Games a success. But it appears Motegi has since backed off from this agreement.
In news reported this week, Wang Yi requested that China and Japan “mutually support” each other for their respective Olympics during an April 5 phone call. However, in comments not officially released by Tokyo – no doubt due to the sensitivity of the situation – Motegi reportedly responded that he hopes the Beijing Winter Games “would be a festival of peace in accordance with the Olympic and Paralympic principles“. According to Japanese newspaper The Mainichi, the reference to the Olympic Charter implies that there should be no discrimination based on religion, national origin, or of any kind, with Japan’s revised stance “aimed at preparing for how the international community will respond to the human rights issue and the possibility of a boycott”.
COVID-19 reports coming out of Japan this week don’t sound good at all. However, as of now, the Tokyo Games will proceed as planned. But Japanese residents with tickets to the Tokyo Olympics may not know until weeks before the Games open if they can even attend. A decision is expected some time in June, with the Opening Ceremony to follow in July 23.
Digital Yuan Set to Roll out at the Beijing Games
Li Bo, deputy governor of the People’s Bank of China, said this week that China is trying to make it possible for foreign athletes and visitors to use its digital currency during the Beijing Winter Olympics in 2022. He was speaking at this year’s Boao Forum, an almost entirely domestic affair given China’s current travel restrictions.
Li added that China’s digital currency pilot was going well following last year’s launch in four cities, plus the Winter Olympic venues. The experiment has since expanded to include 10 cities and provinces, covering 100 million people.
He also said the aim of the digital yuan or e-CNY (electronic Chinese yuan) is not to replace the USD’s dominance on the international stage, but that’s essentially the analysis of most foreign observers. Electronic payments are incredibly widespread in China. Almost everyone already uses either WeChat Pay or Alipay rather than cash in day-to-day transactions. But the main focus of the digital yuan is on international transfers, and could be leveraged as a way to establish the RMB globally, if not actually challenge the USD for dominance.
Boycott Watch
The message to put the focus back on the athletes and not on the politics is getting out there. Anita DeFrantz, a member of the International Olympic Committee and rowing bronze medalist at the 1976 Olympics with the US women’s eight, writes in the FT: “A boycott hurt my Olympic dreams. Don’t do it again.” Meanwhile, Canadian Olympic Committee president and Olympic medalist Tricia Smith tells Maclean’s about “the folly” of boycotting the Beijing Olympics, saying “only athletes pay the price”. And it’s not just athletes – Bloomberg columnist Adam Minter got the memo, too, writing “An Olympics Boycott Isn’t the Best Way to Advance Human Rights“, arguing that athletes should attend and make their voices heard, although he will no doubt be disappointed by the IOC’s Rule 50 refresh as it concerns Olympic protests.
Elsewhere, well-known American economist Jeffrey Sachs has become a darling of Chinese state media in recent weeks, writing that “The Xinjiang Genocide Allegations Are Unjustified” in Project Syndicate, saying that the US State Department should withdraw the charge and support a UN-based investigation of the situation in Xinjiang. The Columbia University Professor isn’t known for his views on human rights, but it’s not the first time he has divided opinion on the issue this year. In January, he responded to questions about Xinjiang with a tirade about US human rights abuses, displaying the classic “whataboutism” tactic perfected by the Chinese Foreign Ministry. Another MOFA tactic is attacking the BBC, which he also did live on the BBC this week. Suffice to say, one sides loves him, the other does not.
See also: UK parliament declares genocide in China’s Xinjiang; Beijing condemns move [Reuters], Winning the Olympics in Beijing would send a stronger message than a boycott [Washington Examiner], Why countries should boycott 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics [India’s Sunday Guardian]
Other Stories and Links
See also:
- 300 Days To Go: BioNTech Vaccine in China & Boycott Threats Ease
- 43 Weeks To Go: Ping Pong Diplomacy & Canadian’s Chinese Dream
- 44 Weeks To Go: Test Events, Nike Reprieve & Chengdu Postponement
- 45 Weeks To Go: To Watch or Not To Watch?
- 46 Weeks To Go: Romney Speaks Out & Vaccine Spin
To keep up-to-date with all the latest news from China Sports Insider, please click on the “SUBSCRIBE” button in the top right corner of this page (or see below on mobile version or click here from email version). Also follow along on Twitter for regular updates.
