Join our Mailing List

"As long as human rights are violated, there can be no foundation for peace. How can peace grow where speaking the truth is itself a crime?"

Olympic Games in crisis amid global protests

April 17, 2008

Hardening positions over Tibet and Western ’insults’ to China threaten
wider crisis

China Worker, China
Wed, 16 Apr 2008

The Beijing Olympic Games have been plunged into crisis. The protests
following the Olympic Torch on its global relay have revived
international criticism of the policies of the Chinese regime in Tibet
and on ’human rights abuses’ (a deliberately vague term that means state
repression). The reaction in China has been a wave of nationalism led by
the state-controlled media to ’defend China’s Olympics’, as if the Games
were not primarily a money-making opportunity for big corporate sponsors
like Adidas, Samsung, Coca Cola and McDonald’s, whose workers – in China
and worldwide – will see none of the benefits.

The blame game that erupted after street protests in London, Paris and
San Fransisco has led to sharpening national tensions that could spill
over into a wider economic and political conflict. In a disastrous
miscalculation for all the organisers the 2008 Games have become the
most politicised Games since Moscow in 1980. But whereas the boycott
that year was led by Western governments, spearheaded by Jimmy Carter,
Margaret Thatcher and eagerly supported by their ’friend’ Deng Xiaoping
(heralding the start of China’s long march to the market), today’s
protests have developed from below. They have been led by grassroots
organisations and have received very little support and encouragement
(rather the opposite is true) at state level. The fact that the protests
have been fairly small is proof that the organisers have largely
operated in a ’headwind’ with little media or establishment backing –
until now.

Western capitalist leaders have avoided criticism of China’s misnamed
’communist’ party (CCP) because their economies are so dependent on its
anti-worker and anti-democratic policies, but also because as the saying
goes: People who live in glasshouses shouldn’t throw stones! Given what
the world knows about the half a million people killed under the US
occupation of Iraq, the Bush Administration is hardly in a position to
pronounce judgement on the actions of other regimes. President Bush has
noticeably not criticised the Chinese regime for its repression in Tibet
(where reportedly 150 Tibetans and more than 20 Han Chinese have been
killed since 14 March), or in China as a whole, urging Beijing instead
to ’talk’ to the Dalai Lama and show ’restraint’. Referring to Tibet, a
top CCP leader was heard to say, ”We have Bush behind us, so there won’t
be any problems,” according to Xu Youyu of the Chinese Academy of Social
Sciences. [From Dagens Nyheter, Sweden, 25 March 2008] This replicates
the pattern from Taiwan in recent years, where Beijing and Washington
have cooperated closely to restrain the outgoing government of
pro-independence president Chen Shui-bian.

Protests from below

Governments internationally have been more muted over Tibet than over
the Chinese regime’s links with Sudan and Burma, where military
crackdowns have occurred, but where the real focus of concern for
overseas capitalism is China’s growing economic and diplomatic clout in
Africa and Southeast Asia. Even those concerns, however, have been
played down because of the West’s growing economic dependence on China.
This reality was spelt out bluntly by the French Foreign Minister,
Bernhard Kouchner, who was asked by Le Monde (29 March 2008) if his
government’s criticism over Tibet was ’limited’ by China’s economic
power. ”Indeed that makes things more difficult,” Kouchner replied. ”If
Tibet wanted and had the means to buy EPR [French made] nuclear
reactors, human rights would immediately be on a level footing with the
CAC 40,” he said referring to the Paris stock market’s main index.
French president Sarkozy is allegedly considering a ’boycott’ of the
Olympic opening ceremony, but this is an obvious ploy to rebuild his
sinking support in opinion polls. When the same Sarkozy visited Beijing
on a state visit last November, with a 30-strong delegation that
included half his cabinet, the Minister for Human Rights was left behind
in Paris! Sarkozy came away with €20 billion worth of Chinese government

Yet this smug and hugely profitable business arrangement among the
various capitalist governments could now be upset by an upsurge of
nationalist sentiment triggered by the Olympics. A recent opinion poll
in the Financial Times (UK, 15 April 2008) revealed a major shift in
attitudes in Europe, with people in Britain, France, Germany and Italy
now seeing China as a bigger threat to global stability than the US. In
the US, China was seen as a bigger threat than North Korea or Iran. This
is also reflected in the US presidential race, always an opportunity for
China-bashing, although this is usually toned down by the winner once
elected. Especially Hillary Clinton, who is struggling to stay in the
race, has rounded off on Bush’s plan to attend the opening Olympic
ceremony. A meeting between the White House envoy on Tibet, Paula
Dobrianksy, and the Dalai Lama, due to be held next week, could further
deepen the crisis. In India, the base of exile Tibetan leaders, Tibetan
protesters may have the dubious pleasure of being ’supported’ by the
Hindu fundamentalist BJP, which vehemently opposes self-determination
for the peoples of Kashmir, Assam and other parts of India, but
hypocritically accuses Manmohan Singh’s government of ”blatant
appeasement towards China”.

The images beamed all over the world of a massive security cordon to
shield the Olympic Torch (or ’sacred flame’ as the Chinese media call
it), are a propaganda disaster for the organisers. A Paris police
spokesman told The Guardian [UK, 8 April 2008] that the city’s security
operation, ”was a bit like that put in place for George Bush”. Such
media images, especially the high profile and at times aggressive role
of a squad from the elite ’Flying Dragons’ unit of China’s People’s
Armed Police (PAP) charged with guarding the torch, have done more to
connect the issue of repression and lack of democratic rights in China
and Tibet with the coming Olympics than any amount of lobbying and
publicity by Tibetan exiles or Chinese human rights groups. In a fresh
blow to the Chinese and IOC organisers, the footballer Diego Maradona
pulled out of the torch relay in Beunos Aires, an unexpected move given
Maradona’s close links to Castro’s Cuba and the government of Hugo
Chávez in Venezuela – two regimes that have publicly supported China’s
military crackdown in Tibet.

Hardening positions

At the time of writing positions are hardening. The Chinese dictatorship
refuses to cancel the longest ever torch-relay (130 days) covering six
continents, because this would be seen as a sign of weakness in the face
of international pressure, a retreat that could seriously undermine the
position of the one-party state. The various protest groups sense
growing public support internationally, but of course capitalist
politicians are now jumping on the bandwagon for electoral reasons,
using hypocritical and nationalist arguments. This shifting stance is
because the ruling class, particularly in the dominant imperialist
states, are alarmed by the Chinese regime’s intransigence over
Olympic-related issues and see this as a sign of a tougher stand in
future over other – more important – economic and geo-political disputes.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) suddenly finds itself in the
company of the G8, WTO and other symbols of corporate greed and power
politics that are the target of protests. With strong working class
parties in key countries it would be possible to issue an appeal for
workers’ unity against political and religious repression and capitalist
exploitation globally. Unfortunately, given that none of the main
groupings involved represent a working class or internationalist
position, the debate surrounding the protests has assumed a
nationalistic tone on all sides. The demonstrations are universally
described by the Western media as ”anti-China” or ”pro-China”, lumping
together the dictatorial regime and the masses it oppresses (often on
behalf of US and other foreign companies). To many Chinese this appears
to be a campaign against them as a people, traditionally looked down
upon by racist Western rulers, and for this reason many at this stage
are lining up on nationalist lines behind the CCP regime.

The fact that many spokesmen for the Free Tibet movement are Westerners,
not Tibetans, also helps feed the propaganda of the CCP that the
protests are organised by Western governments and the CIA, who exploit
the Tibetan issue to attack China. As we have seen, the opposite is
true. Not even the Dalai Lama and his bourgeois Tibetan exile government
– who are desperate for negotiations with the Chinese regime – support
the protests or the call for an Olympic boycott. The Dalai Lama
confirmed recently that envoys of his government have entered into
”private” talks with the Beijing regime even as the clampdown in Tibet
continues. President Hu Jintao demands that the Dalai Lama show
”concrete action” in order for serious talks to take place. Beijing
wants the Tibetan leader to distance himself even more categorically
from the protests, and to urge his followers to cooperate with the
authorities. This is not excluded in the coming period, but would
provoke deep schisms within the Tibetan exile movement and further
undermine a leadership that is heavily criticised for its conciliatory line.

Are the Olympics ’non-political’?

The claim by the capitalist establishment everywhere that politics
shouldn’t be brought into sport is pure hypocrisy! China’s opening to
the West under Mao Zedong in 1971 began with the decision to allow the
US national table tennis team to play in China. Today, backed into a
corner over Tibet in particular, the Chinese regime is using the issue
of the Olympics as part of a highly political gambit. It has given
massive publicity to the allegedly anti-Chinese slant of the Olympic
protests to create the idea that China is under attack and must defend
itself. Chinese nationalism has deep roots as a result of the crimes
committed by Western and Japanese imperialism in the past. But a closer
look at the regime’s policies exposes the hypocrisy of its current
position. The CCP has dismantled the country’s once extensive welfare
system (free health care, cheap public housing, free schooling) and the
bureaucratically planned economy that financed these reforms, in order
to embrace capitalist economics and massive amounts of foreign capital.
50,000 US companies operate from inside China and receive massive
handouts from the CCP regime in the form of tax breaks, subsidised land,
and cheap labour. Why on earth should workers and peasants in China
’defend’ this, or the other capitalist policies of the present regime?

The CCP regime’s strategic alliance with foreign capital is embodied in
the Beijing Olympics. The Olympics is a corporate sporting spectacle,
the main role of which is to make huge profits for its sponsors and the
media and construction industries. It offers little for working people
other than a temporary distraction from the hard grind of economic
survival. The torch relay which has been transformed by the Chinese
regime into a symbol of Chinese ’honour’ actually began life at the 1936
Berlin Olympics as a symbol of Nazi triumphalism. It has nothing
whatsoever to do with internationalism or harmonious relations. The
Chinese regime’s decision to route the march through Tibet (including a
plan to scale Mount Everest), Xinjiang and Taiwan cannot be described as
’non-political’. Such lavish publicity stunts are the hallmark of ruling
elites everywhere that want to show their strength and deflect popular
attention from the real issues: jobs, low wages, deadly pollution and
surging food prices.

Half the world’s population will ’boycott’ this year’s Olympics in the
sense that they are too poor to get to a television or to stop working.
The specially-built Beijing National Stadium – or ’Bird’s Nest’ – can
hold a maximum of 91,000 spectators, or 0.00007 percent of China’s
population. Despite the fact their city is one of the richest in China,
most citizens of Beijing cannot afford a ticket to the arena, where the
best seats will be occupied by wealthy foreigners and the Chinese elite.
The stadium has cost 3.5 billion yuan (350 million euros) to build.
Meanwhile 260 million people in China, including many Tibetans and other
minorities, have no access to safe drinking water. Beijing itself faces
a severe water shortage as a result of desertification in northern China
and depletion of the underground aquifer. To ’solve’ this problem for
the three weeks that foreign journalists, athletes and tourists are in
the city for the Games, the city of Beijing has been allowed to drain
the neighbouring province of Hebei of its water reserves, prompting
protests from industrialists and farmers there.

The 2008 Olympics is intended to celebrate this ’New China’, a key
player in the process of capitalist globalisation, but where the wealth
gap is now more extreme than in Russia or India. China has 106 dollar
billionaires, only the USA has more. Yet 300 million people still live
on less than one dollar (7 yuan) per day, the World Bank’s definition of
absolute poverty. For the vast majority of China’s still poor population
what’s needed is struggle and organisation – not extravagant nationalist
and corporate pageants!

Clash of nationalisms

By portraying all criticism of its policies as an ’attack on’ and
’attempt to split’ China, the CCP has succeeded temporarily in
mobilising public support, especially from the urban middle classes and
sections of the Chinese community living abroad. Not for thirty years
has such anti-Western rhetoric been used by the Chinese media, who for
decades have rather tried to emulate and covet all things Western. Even
regime critics and sections of the Chinese left have been swept along to
some extent by this nationalist wave. The CCP is copying the propaganda
of Bush and the US Republicans, who falsely portrayed all opposition to
the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as ’anti-American’ and ’pro-terror’. The
results – further down the line – can be similar in the sense of massive
disillusionment and anger against a government that lies to its people.
But this policy also entails huge risks for an escalation of Chinese
nationalism and a global backlash in the form of anti-China nationalism
opportunistically whipped up by politicians.

The bourgeois media internationally is once again trumpeting ”Western
values” as against Asia’s ”authoritarian capitalism”, as if the former
did not exploit and rest upon the latter. Police forces outside China
have arrested almost as many Tibetan protesters in recent weeks as
Chinese security forces (although of course their subsequent treatment
will not be the same). In London, it was reported that police even
arrested youth wearing ’Free Tibet’ tee-shirts – so much for freedom of

Right-wing commentators imply that democratic rights are intrinsic to
Judeo-Christian capitalist societies. This is nonsense! Historically,
the European capitalist states ruled much of Asia using similar methods
to those the Chinese regime uses today: There were no free elections in
Hong Kong under British rule, for example, or in Tibet which was invaded
and occupied by British troops from 1904 until the Second World War.
Most of Europe did not enjoy universal suffrage until after the
Bolshevik revolution in Russia in 1917, which forced the capitalists
elsewhere to institute far-reaching reforms for fear of revolt. History
has shown that the ultimate guarantor of basic democratic rights is a
strong organised workers’ movement. These rights are increasingly coming
under attack in Western countries especially since the start of the ’war
on terror’, and can only be maintained by sustained working class
struggle and ultimately by overthrowing capitalism and replacing it with
a democratic socialist society.

Unless steps are taken to diffuse the Olympic crisis, this could mark
the beginning of a new ’Cold War’ between rival capitalist camps. Within
the regime-sanctioned ’pro-China’ camp, as seen by their big
demonstration in San Fransisco on 9 April, an assortment of right-wing
nationalists, fascists, Kuomintang supporters and mafia – no friends of
the Chinese working class – are seizing this opportunity to extend their
influence. A veteran of the 1989 Beijing events was physically attacked
and called a ’traitor’ by pro-regime Chinese at the San Fransisco
demonstration for a tee-shirt saying ’Don’t forget Tienanmen’. In
Australia, Chinese organisations that are mobilising to ’defend’ the
Olympic Torch on 24 April have had to order extra stocks of Chinese
national flags as local supplies have been exhausted. The official 2008
Olympic slogan – ’One world, one dream’ – has become a joke! Meanwhile
within the Tibetan national movement advocates of independence as
opposed to the ’greater autonomy’ espoused by the Dalai Lama are gaining
ground as the repression intensifies.

Lessons from anti-Japan protests

As the anti-Japan street protests in 2005 showed, however, the Chinese
regime moved to diffuse the protests and lock down the nationalist
internet chorus when this began to pose a threat to its export markets
and foreign investments. In today’s precarious environment the threats
to China’s economy are even more serious. No large economy is more
dependent on global markets than China. Another – even greater – threat
to the Chinese regime is posed by the super-exploited working class,
which could seize the opportunity to go on strike for wage increases and
other improvements against the foreign capitalists who own a quarter of
China’s industry (although these companies are heavily enmeshed with
’national’ Chinese capital). In April-May 2005, 40,000 workers in Dalian
and 12,000 in Shenzhen, downed tools against their Japanese bosses.
Among their demands were free trade unions and while they did not win
this crucial demand, the strikes secured substantial economic concessions.

A campaign is now underway in China for a boycott of French goods
following the ’insult’ delivered by French politicians (ironically
including the Communist Party, which runs the city of Paris together
with the Socialist Party and Greens), and the perceived attack on
Chinese paralympic athlete, Jin Jing. She has been dubbed the ”angel in
a wheelchair” by Chinese media and given star status after she fought
off an attempt to seize the Olympic torch by a Paris protester. But this
boycott campaign is reactionary, and says a lot about which social
classes are most vocal in the current debate inside China. Nine-tenths
of Chinese people cannot afford to buy French wine or Louis Vuitton
handbags, so in that sense they are already ’boycotting’ these goods.
Internet activists are also calling for a nationwide boycott of
Carrefour, the biggest foreign retailer in China. But this campaign – if
successful – will mainly hurt the company’s 40,000 Chinese employees
rather than Carrefour’s French bosses.

Compare this stance to when 3,000 workers in Sichuan last July fought a
bitter struggle against the French cement multinational Lafarge, which
closed their factory near Jiangyou City. There were no calls from the
nationalists for a boycott of French goods at that time. Then, a
2,000-strong contingent of the same paramilitary police (PAP) that today
guards the Olympic flame and suppresses Tibetan demonstrators, was used
to crush the workers’ two-week strike. One 25-year old woman worker
committed suicide in protest against the French company and its Chinese
state heavies. Unlike today’s Olympic protests, or Tibet’s riots, the
protests in Sichuan were never reported in the state media.

Tibet – What’s the solution?

As socialists have warned the Chinese regime is using events in Tibet,
and now the Olympic protests, to garner public support for its much
greater use of repression and to silence all criticism of its anti-poor
policies. From a propaganda standpoint the regime was helped enormously
by the attacks on Han Chinese and Hui Muslim civilians during the 14
March riots. There is unfortunately a high risk for inter-ethnic
violence under a regime that outlaws self-organisation by the masses,
especially by the working class. There is a Chinese saying: ”Kill the
chicken to scare the monkey”! Today an example is being made of the
Tibetans, but the message – ”obey or be crushed!” – is aimed
particularly at the huge working class of China. It should be remembered
that in March 1989 Hu Jintao, then party boss in Tibet, organised a
military crackdown in Tibet with hundreds killed. Three months later the
same methods were used – with even greater bloodshed – against the
workers and youth of Beijing.

The repression in Tibet follows a pattern from other mass protests that
pose a challenge to the power and authority of the Chinese government.
The Shanwei massacre on 6 December 2005 in Guangdong province is a case
in point. Officially, three villagers were shot dead for protesting
against the construction of a high-polluting power plant. Local
residents say 13 were killed and accuse the authorities of hiding
corpses and terrorising villagers as part of a cover-up. All the victims
in Shanwei were Han Chinese. These images were never shown on state
television, unlike the footage of rioting Tibetans which has been shown
almost daily for several weeks. In fact, the Tibetan events are the only
case of political unrest to be shown on television, in a country where
according to official figures, riots, burning of police cars, and other
acts of violence, occur on an almost weekly basis. Seven protesters and
one policeman were reportedly killed in March in anti-pollution protests
in Fujian province, for example. News of these events – in which no
Tibetans took part – has of course been completely blacked out.

The protests demanding religious and political rights in Tibet, echoed
in recent weeks by protests in other Western regions and in the majority
Turkic-speaking province of Xinjiang, have met with great sympathy from
working people and youth internationally. This has nothing to do with
the stand of the capitalist classes in these countries who do not give a
damn for the plight of the Chinese or Tibetan peoples, providing their
own profits are safeguarded. The retort of the Chinese regime and other
nationalists that most people abroad have never been to Tibet and don’t
know the real situation there is largely irrelevant. Most of the 30
million people who demonstrated against the US war in Iraq in 2003 had
not been to Iraq or the US, but recognised military aggression when they
saw it.

The Tibetan conflict has been pushed to the fore of people’s
consciousness around the world, helped by a series of miscalculations on
the part the Chinese regime. But this conflict cannot be solved on a
capitalist basis. No amount of repression by the CCP regime will
reconcile the majority of Tibetans to the conditions they experience
today. But neither do the bourgeois leadership of the Tibetan struggle
in exile and the assortment of mostly religiously motivated ’friends of
Tibet’ offer any way forward. With increasingly heavy-handed measures
from Beijing’s side, there are now warning signs that a section of the
Tibetan youth especially could be driven in the direction of individual
terrorism. Socialists oppose this as a fundamentally flawed method of
struggle that will only give the Chinese state an excuse for greater
repression, while making a united struggle alongside the Han Chinese
workers and peasants more difficult. Liberation from dictatorship and
national oppression can only be achieved through democratically
controlled and organised mass struggle, based above all on the forces of
the working class.

’Capitalism is the enemy’

The Tibetan and Han Chinese communities have lived in close interaction
for centuries. Many Tibetan households revere Mao Zedong for his role in
ending feudalism and improving social conditions, although his
ham-fisted bureaucratic methods – the only methods available to a
Stalinist dictatorship – also alienated many. The current conflict
however is not just a re-run of the clashes in 1959 or 1989 (for more
background: see our article Tibet and the National Question). The
development of capitalism in Tibet has aggravated social tensions to the
extreme, as the majority of Tibetans (75% of whom live in rural areas)
have missed out from the last decade’s economic boom. Rather than
primarily an issue of religious, linguistic and national freedom,
although these are also important issues, the recent unrest was a
backlash against the growing domination of the Tibetan economy by
wealthier Han Chinese and even Hui, while Tibetans are economically
marginalised. ”Capitalism is identified as the enemy,” exclaimed Pankaj
Mishra in the Guardian Weekly (UK, 28 March 2008) in one of the few
Western reports to hit the mark.

Socialists defend the right of the Tibetan people to decide their own
future, up to and including the right to independence. But there is
great polarisation in Tibet, between ethnic communities and even among
the Tibetan people themselves. The Beijing regime has groomed a
substantial layer of Tibetan officials and academics who fear for their
privileges and positions if the Dalai Lama’s government is allowed to
return as part of a negotiated settlement, and fear the masses even
more. While for the exile government the ’middle way’ of greater
autonomy within China is no longer a ’tactic’, but expresses the desire
of these former feudal masters to become capitalist stakeholders in a
booming tourist ’Shangri La’ financed by big infusions of capital from
Beijing. Unbeknown to most outside capitalist commentators there are in
fact two rival Tibetan bourgeois elites, one internal and one external,
with the Lhasa-based elite even more hostile to a deal with the Dalai
Lama than the CCP tops in Beijing.

The working class in China, Tibet and internationally must take an
independent position from all the national bourgeois camps in this
dispute – clearly opposing racism and national chauvinism, and standing
for working class unity and internationalism. Concretely, the masses in
Tibet need to link their struggle for basic democratic rights, an end to
state repression, and democratic control over the economy, to the
unfolding struggle of the working class and peasantry throughout China.
This movement must fight for:

* An end to one-party rule and state repression
* For freedom of assembly, freedom of speech and religious worship
* For the right to organise, to build independent trade unions, peasant
associations and political parties, including the all-important need for
a fighting workers’ party
* An end to privatisations and neo-liberal attacks. Nationalise all
major companies – foreign and Chinese-owned – under democratic workers’
control and management. For a genuine socialist plan of production based
on elected factory committees, rural associations and other popular
organs. End the privileges of state officials.
* The right to self-determination for the Tibetan people and other
minorities, while recognising that capitalism and national oppression
(imperialism) can only be overcome through international socialist
struggle, with the aim of establishing a democratic and voluntary
socialist federation of China and other Asian states as part of a world
socialist federation

CTC National Office 1425 René-Lévesque Blvd West, 3rd Floor, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H3G 1T7
T: (514) 487-0665
Developed by plank