The three T's - Tibet, Taiwan, and Tiananmen Square

The decision to award China the Olympics has been placed under an even closer microscope this week as events develop in Tibet. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, while not calling for a boycott, called for a symbolic absence from the opening ceremony. The response of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao? That the principles of the Olympics and the Olympic Charter should be respected. The Games, he said, should not be politicised.

It is not unknown for sport and politics to collide – in recent times the England and Wales Cricket Board’s tour of Zimbabwe springs to mind – but it is the status of the Olympics in the world’s consciousness that makes these developments unique in recent times. Prior to the awarding of the Games to Beijing, they had been hosted by Greece, Australia, and the U.S.

Going further back, it is interesting to note that China itself has boycotted two Olympic Games – the 1976 Montreal Olympics, following a row over the recognition of Taiwan, and the 1980 Moscow Games, where China was among a number of countries who did not attend following the USSR’s invasion of Afghanistan.

There are plenty of reasons that these games should be the subject of similar boycotts - Darfur, or one of the three T’s (Tibet, Taiwan, and Tiananmen Square) would serve as sufficient justification. Similarly, arguments exist that engagement, and not isolation are key. However, I would argue that sporting events are an opportunity to make a statement, and such a statement needs to be made given the suppression of human rights that is currently occurring.