Simon Barnes
Win Sky+HD for a year and a trip to Barcelona
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -
for ever
— George Orwell, 1984
Is this the Genocide Olympics? There are already people claiming that this year’s Games, to be held in Beijing, are a rerun of the 1936 Olympics in Berlin – the Games that were a glorification of Hitler and Nazism; by extension a glorification of a genocidal regime.
Steven Spielberg and Richard Vaughan are an unlikely double act. Vaughan is Britain’s top badminton player. Spielberg has, I believe, made a few films. Spielberg resigned as artistic adviser to the opening and closing ceremonies in Beijing because of his reservations about China’s involvement in Darfur; Vaughan (“I think I can kiss my funding goodbye”) has signed up for Team Darfur, a group that aims to persuade China to end the crisis there. Suddenly we have heard of Darfur. Suddenly we are all experts. Already, this has been a bravura exposition of the power of sport, for this is not a conflict that makes daily headlines, just one of those endless, hideous, unrolling disasters that don’t affect our own lives.
Until something such as the Olympics changes that. So now we learn that Darfur is in Western Sudan and that in a conflict between government-backed militia and rebel groups more than 200,000 people have died, with many more maimed and sexually brutalised. Two million have had to leave their homes.
China has a warm relationship with Sudan, one based on oil. According to figures from Amnesty International, by 2005 Sudan had imported $24 million of arms and ammunition from China, along with tanks, helicopters and fighter planes.
It is impossible to assume anything else other than that these weapons are being used for this growing conflict. In other words, China is getting its oil by investing in death, misery and human rights violations – that is the burden of the message conveyed to us by Spielberg and Vaughan.
So what do we do about it? That is a big question. The British Olympic Association (BOA) characteristically decided that the smart move was to force athletes to sign a self-gagging contract. Ooher, we’re going to a repressive country. These people are frightfully sensitive about being repressive, so we’d better be repressive ourselves.
In the same way, the Football Association forced the England team to give Nazi salutes before a match against Germany at the Olympic Stadium in Berlin in 1938. It doesn’t look so good in retrospect, does it? The BOA was rightly shouted down; it is apparently “looking again at the wording” of the athletes’ contracts.
The Chinese are crying foul and saying that Sudan is nothing to do with them (and before you ask, nor is Tibet, not really) – and anyway, isn’t this all supposed to be about sport, pure and simple? But sport is never pure and rarely simple.
No more is fame. Beijing and China have just learnt a hard lesson, one that London and Britain will no doubt be learning as 2012, the year of the Games here, approaches. You don’t get the Olympic Games on your own terms. You don’t get any kind of sporting fame on your own terms.
Take the job of England football manager. When Sven-Göran Eriksson was merely a successful club manager, few of us had heard of him and those who had thought, well, jolly good manager, clever sort of a chap. Then he became England head coach and all at once the women he bedded and the company he kept became a national obsession. Fabio Capello, the new manager, is learning the same lesson: we already know more about his tax problems than is comfortable for him.
And when it comes to the larger issue of the nation of China, suddenly we find ourselves – entirely because of the Olympic Games – looking at other things than the nation’s ability to construct vast stadiums and finish them on time. People are asking about Darfur, about China’s internal affairs, wondering if the figure of 6,000 judicial executions a year is correct, about the numbers imprisoned without trial under this scheme called “reeducation through labour” and so on and so on. (Have these people not read Orwell, or do they think 1984 is an instruction manual?)
All at once, then, we are in a situation of moral chaos. Well, that is nothing new, not in a democracy.
Nothing is obvious, nothing is clear-cut. The ethics are as perplexing as the politics.
Does enjoying the Olympic Games mean that you are backing the slaughter in Darfur, or is sport nothing to do with anything except sport? Should Britain withdraw its athletes in protest? Does the question of Darfur affect the participation of an individual of conscience? If you take part, are you supporting genocide? Should you go and resolve to say your piece if anyone asks, or should you go and make some sort of a fuss, make yourself a martyr? If you do, will it do any good? Does it matter whether or not it does any good, as long as your conscience is square?
It’s not a simple issue. For the individual it is a matter of conscience and courage. But there is one thing that matters here: if the Olympic Games had not been awarded to China, these matters would not have come to widespread public attention.
China gave all sorts of guarantees about improving its record on human rights as part of its Olympic bid. Now it is learning a strange fact – that official organisations (such as national Olympic associations and governments) may make decisions, but individuals may not go along with them. Individuals can make their own minds up about China’s record on human rights.
Because in a democracy individuals can do a lot of things. We can disagree, dissent, refuse to conform, make our own decisions. And it is not only the specific areas of disagreement that matter, it is the entire fact of disagreement.
Disagreement is a vital aspect of our culture. It is the keystone of democracy. I can slag off Gordon Brown, the BOA and the Queen. I can even criticise Jonny Wilkinson. You may disapprove of what I say, but you will defend to the death my right so say it. In 1977, Jubilee Year, the Sex Pistols gave us the bitterly subversive, almost pedantically offensive God Save the Queen. They did so without being executed, imprisoned or requiring reeducation through labour.
By wishing the Olympic Games on itself, China has come into greater contact with the Culture of Disagreement than would otherwise have been possible. Beijing will be stuffed full of athletes and journalists who disagree with all kinds of things, a matter that will be plain from our very appearance. Some will make a fuss bout Darfur and executions and reeducation and so on, others will not. It’s an individual decision.
And it’s not the protests or the issues that matter so much as the fact that the Culture of Disagreement exists. Many, many Chinese individuals will see for the first time that this is the way we live in the nonrepressive world. If the 2008 Olympic Games have a political purpose, it will be in planting the seeds of Disagreement, the seeds of a real cultural revolution.

Simon Barnes is the multi-award-winning chief sportswriter at The Times. He also writes a Saturday column on wildlife. His 15 books include three novels and the best-selling How To Be A Bad Birdwatcher. His latest, The Meaning of Sport, was published last autumn. He lives in Suffolk with his family and five horses
Explore your passion for food with the delights of Thai, Indian & Chinese cooking
In our new series, Tony Hawks takes a dry, wry look at modern life - junk mail, interminable meetings and snooty sales assistants
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers

Find tickets for:
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
2007
£30,000
2006
£14,337
2008
£39,937
Great car insurance deals online
c.£75,000
GlosFirstmeansbusiness
Gloucestershire
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
£
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
Competitive Package
Npower
West Midlands
1 & 2 Bed apartments
From £249,995
Great Investment, River Views
Great Dubai Investment Opportunities
from £89,950
low-cost ownership homes in London
Las Vegas SALE!
£POA
With Ramblers Worldwide Holidays!
£POA
List your property with two leading travel websites
£POA
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - find property for sale and rent in the UK. Milkround Job Search - for graduate careers in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
About Dafur, the only reason China has such a large influence in Sudan is because the western countries has claimed moral high ground and refused deals with the impoverished country. At least with trade and economic involvement China has leverage to start a dialogue with Sudan (which it is now doing), but the west has achieved nothing but indulged in their own self righteousness.
To the question of âhave these people not read Orwellâ, no we have not, but weâve lived through the Cultural Revolution, which is far, far worse. If these article was better informed youâd know that we are still trying to pickup the pieces now.
Lillian, Cambridge, UK
it is so interesting that this time western media seems to stand at the opposite site of the majority population of china. There are over 1 billion is 'Han' ethnic, or in other word, 93% of whole population.
Allen, Minneapolis,
To see how injustice, non-objective, unfair the western media are! : http://anti-cnn.com/
uncovering their ugly and evil real faces!
Li, Xi'an, China
I think what the Chinese should do is say, "We're holding the Olympic Games, if you want to come, fine, and if you don't, that's fine too. We're not forcing you to come. If you're willing to overlook everything the West has done to the Third Word over the past 400 years, we can't help that".
China should not listen to anything the West says, since it was the same West that tried to carve up China in the latter part of the 19th Century and early 20th Century. If that had happened, China would be like India today, still 3rd world and illiterate. Nothing anyone in the West says will prevent China from becoming a Superpower in 20-30 years, despite communism. The West is racist against the "yellow" race, and nothing can change that. The only solution is to become a super power and dominate everything.
Phillip Wong, Ashburn, USA/VA
To Pfffill from Shanghai
Its a shame that you think so poorly of the Olympic Games. I have good friends who have dedicated their lives to making to an Olympic Games. Controlling every small element to maximise their potential and one day appear on the greatest sporting stage their is.
They made it and said it was even better than they could have imagined - in every way.
That must be the same for everybody who goes there, and that is not just the athletes - medical, support, coaches, family, organisers, local communities etc.
I think all the hassle and all the money, politic and everything else is worth it....the Olympic Games is worth it.
A T, Sydney, Australia
Simon Barnes is lucky to live in a "non repressive" world. Unfortunately for the Aborigines, they could not and cannot say the same. Nor could the Chinese when the British sailed all the across the world to sell them their precious opium. I shall spare you a list of the other peoples in the world.
Frank, Halifax, UK
Sport should not be political but by the same token China's human rights record cannot be ignored. It is my opinion that we should not take part in the Olympics in China. Chinese human rights violations deserve punishment from the international community not glorification.
A Seymour, Peterborough, UK
And what about Iraq? Shouldn't other teams boycott London 2012 because of Iraq war? Oh, those brits with their double standards... Go to your "democratic" heaven in Iraq if you don't like China!
Pc, Moscow,
I quite agree with what Stuart from singapore said, at least it's what i thought whenever i heard American or European talking about China's Human Right, after received all the benefits from all the exploitation they did to Asia and Africa, left all kinds of problmes here and there, now they start turning around to tell us "you can't do it, cuz it's just not right", my first reaction is "Pls shut up, look into the mirror and mind your own business, our Chinese we know what we really want"
Considering the democracy in Iraq, we feel lucky that we don't have it
Chi Zhang, Swindon, UK
i would rewind a bit at this juncture to remind everyone that china was awarded these games...with a closetful of skeletons : t square, tibet, odd missing political dissident, and darfur
it seems to me sport in general has painted itself into a proverbial corner, from all sides Whether it's cheating, doping, money, politics The olympic ideal is buried in the same pit as hippocratic oath, democracy, family values, marriage. Outdated perhaps?
andile, durban, south africa
Simon, you do alright.
Raymond Jurie, melbourne, australia
Stuart from Singapore makes a very pertinent point. Talk of human rights abuse on the part of China is immediately met with the response that the Western world is equally guilty. The PRC publishes a yearly report on human rights abuse in America (extraordinary rendition, guantanamo bay, executions and a foreign policy that results in the death of thousands as well as, at least previously, the tacit support of authoritarian regimes, pinochet etc, not to mention the genocide that Native Americans claim the US committed against its indigenous population - maybe Spielberg should concentrate on the US?).
Shaming China into action is unlikely to work as the CCP does not like kowtowing to international pressure since, to the general public, this would continue the century of humiliation that China suffered at the hands of imperial powers.
It is good to see people taking action over the issue of Darfur, but dont expect a great response from the CCP - economic growth is priority number
Peter, Manchester,
u haha ,oh my god.i spend one hour to read this article.
Mr.WangLiQun, soochow, China
Well, anyone who remembers the Los Angeles Olympics will remember that raising tricky political questions in the Olympics immediately preceding the one you're due to host is an excellent way of improving your medal tally. Look at how well the US did when the USSR stayed away....
"if the Olympic Games had not been awarded to China, these matters would not have come to widespread public attention." Indeed. But does this attest to the failure of journalists to spotlight the pressing issues until Spielberg discovers, conspicuously late in the day, that he has a conscience, or merely to the fickle and random nature of the spotlight, which points where it will?
Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK
Very well worded indeed. Here in Beijing it's not easy to find a local willing to analyse (let alone criticise) any aspect of the Chinese social and political life, least of all an event which is considered a milestone in their history and a chance to show the world their greatness. Anything said or done that would even remotely hamper this image, would have dire consequences for the offender, hence the ongoing clean-sweep of potentially critical voices and well known campaigners. In this case, of course, the Government is happy to mix sport and politics!!
What could slightly change, in case something occurred and was broadcasted live on television, is the perception that Chinese people, especially the younger generations, may have towards certain issues. Itâs realistic to say that changes in the common perception of human rights issues will probably take decades, but the Olympics may play somehow a role in this process. How big, that remains to be seen, time will tell.
Luca, Beijing, China
I think people in Europe fail to understand that China, and most other Asian countries, are intent on getting what they see as their fair share of Western culture's "pie" by any means. To do so they are adopting the amoral attitude that we British did at the height of colonial exploitation. Only human nature really!
As for sport, it is nice to see it put to some good use as a contrast to the tiresome financial machine it has become.
Stuart, Singapore,
If you believe that the Olympic games are representative of anything beyond corporate greed, government hubris and the massaging of over-inflated egos, then by all means buy your tickets and show interest.
Personally, I believe pigs can fly.
Pfffill, Shanghai, China
I must be in a minority, but I don't mind.
I had assumed that the modern Olympics were simply intended to bring together the best athletes from around the world to test themselves against each other - and maybe mix - at a venue selected by the IOC, every 4 years.
I have long puzzled how and why the Olympics Committee selected Beijing,with its known air pollution, but they did so choose it, and I had heard no major objections until now.
I presume that a new, posturing, event has been added.
MikeM, St. Albans, England