Oh shocker China opposes linking Games to Darfur issue.
UNITED NATIONS — China staunchly opposes the linkage between the Olympic Games and the Darfur issue, said Liu Guijin, the Chinese government’s special representative for Darfur, on Tuesday.
“The Olympic Games and (the issue of) Darfur are totally irrelevant,” Liu told reporters at the UN Headquarters.
Non-politicization is one of the fundamental principles of the Olympic Games, which is a great event to be hosted by China for the people around the world, he said.
China staunchly opposes the linkage between the Olympic Games and the Darfur issue, but at the same time “we are not afraid that some people might try to link these two events because they will never be able to achieve,” he said.
“We are very confident that we will be able to have a very good and very high-level Olympic Games,” the Chinese envoy added.
Yes, lets forget an ongoing travesty we are partially responsible for due to the money we pour into the tyrannical governement of Sudan, not to mention our own history of human rights violations, and lets just have some good old sporting fun.
This, while the Olympic Dream for Darfur team is encouraging China to engage Sudan in serious talks to end the madness in Darfur. Director Jill Savitt questions how China can uphold its international image as Olympics host while extending political cover and economic support to help Sudan finance militia attacks against thousands of its own citizens. She suggests not a full out boycott, but would like to see China exert some influence and pressure on the Sundanese government.
Olympic Dream for Darfur asks the question we should all be asking. How can China uphold its international image as Olympics host, while extending political cover and economic support to help Sudan finance militia attacks against thousands of its own citizens.
This campaign, although seemingly logical, is much the same as not believing in the war in Iraq but funding it fully. It is better than nothing, and may be the only way to exert any influence at all. My question is why would a country who has been supplying arms to and trading with Sudan, a country which stands to profit from years of fertilizing their holdings there, do anything but provide the world with a token effort in influence?
A total boycott would be the best shot at really making China do way more than they are ultimately going to do in this situation.
Again at this point in time we are grasping at straws, hoping that China exerts a measure of influence which will be temporary at best.