THE RECENT Tibetan protests in China have darkened the mood for the upcoming Olympics, by all standards regarded as a grand Chinese celebration of their achievements in recent decades. As the violence escalated over the past few weeks, several nations began contemplating boycotts of the 2008 games. While the Chinese government has mishandled the situation, the complex factors driving the violence and animosity do not warrant a full-fledged boycott of the Olympic games.
Popular notions in the Western world traditionally conceptualize China-Tibet relations as a valiant David struggling for independence against a heinous Goliath. But the relationship between China and Tibet is far more nuanced. In fact, Tibet is not even seeking full independence from China. The Dalai Lama has merely requested autonomy while acknowledging that Tibet should remain within the Chinese realm.
The conflagrations this month in several regions throughout Western China were a mix of resentment over Chinese rule and vexation with increasing numbers of Han Chinese immigrants becoming more visible and powerful in Tibetan public life. A reporter for the Economist explained the actions of the protesters as follows: "The approach of Beijing's Olympic games in August is seen by many of Lhasa's residents as an opportunity to put their contempt for Chinese rule on display to the outside world."
The violence also had a distinctly ethnic flair. "The rioting seemed primarily an eruption of ethnic hatred. Immigrants have been flocking to Lhasa in recent years from the rest of China and now run many of its shops, small businesses and tourist facilities," according to the Economist. Poor economic conditions played a part as well: "There is big resentment too over sharp increases in the prices of food and consumer goods from the rest of China," says the Economist article. The violence appears to be a manifestation of a confluence of factors, none decisive by themselves in explaining the clashes.
Chinese actions have not helped to provide stability either. The harsh repressive measures of the Chinese government have only encouraged further violence. Various sources cite different casualty figures, with as few as 12 to as many as 100 dead. Those represent both Tibetan and Han Chinese deaths. Clearly, the violence is a two-way affair.
As a response to the violence, some nations -- most prominently France -- have threatened a boycott. According to a Reuters article last Thursday, "French President Nicolas Sarkozy ... left open the possibility that he might not attend the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics because of the way China has handled unrest in Tibet." The international community certainly must take a firm stand on China and pressure it to resolve the matter as peacefully as possible, but to boycott the games entirely implies that this whole situation -- that is, the situation in 2008 only -- is somehow China's fault entirely.
The international community can reign in China through other methods. Instead of boycotting the Olympics, which would simply be a symbolic move, nations that have the necessary gravitas could threaten to sabotage or cancel economic deals that they've made with China. France, for example, has nuclear deals and other financial plans with China; why doesn't Sarkozy target those instead of making insignificant gestures about the Olympics? Ruining those economic arrangements would hurt the Chinese where it matters: their pockets, not their pride.
It should be enough to say, without assigning any blame, that this is a complex situation. And even if we were to assign blame, we'd have to blame both sides about equally. Plunging into the weary depths of history is important in understanding the context behind the conflict, but we must also realize that the current problems arose from more modern circumstances. In these recent struggles, the Tibetans were driven by justified modern and historical grievances and the Chinese responded to a situation verging on total chaos. The nations considering a boycott of the Olympics must keep these complicated dynamics in mind. The 2008 Olympics should be a momentous period in Chinese history -- it would be a tragedy if these incidents were to ruin it all.
Erald Kolasi's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at ekolasi@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Donald Trump will be a threat to student loan forgiveness
By Ryan Williams | YesterdayTo be sure, this is not a problem of the University’s making. Nevertheless, understanding the uncertainty of financial accessibility in education, the University must step up to the plate.
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 6 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
