Enough, already

On 14 March 2008, in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa, ethnic-Chinese (Han) shopkeepers boarded-up their shops and ran, fleeing a fleeing a mob of angry Tibetans. The protests, the largest anti-Chinese demonstrations for many years, soon turned violent as Tibetans rampaged through the streets, smashing into non-Tibetan shops and lighting them on fire. 13 people are reported to have been killed, mostly in the fires, as many Hans live above their shops.

The Communist Government was slow to respond, perhaps cautious of the diplomatic implications of a violent suppression. But by the next day, tear gas was in use as the authorities moved to bring order to the town. Rumours spread of the shooting and beating of Tibetans by security forces. At least 105 rioters were arrested.

A month earlier, across the Indian Ocean in the quiet seaside town of Terrigal, Australia, on 13 February a young Dominican was praying that the racing on the last day of the Laser World Championships would be cancelled, so that the previous day's results would be final. By midday the final Olympic Qualification event for the Laser class had come to an end, and the Dominican realised his lifelong dream of qualifying for the Olympics, becoming the first person from his country to do so in the sport of sailing and the only sailor from the Caribbean this time around.

I do not wish to debate China's human rights record, as this is not the forum for such discussion. Neither do I want to talk about China's role in Sudan, Taiwan or North Korea. It is also too late to be questioning the merits of the decision to award the 2008 Olympics to Beijing: that ship has sailed. And although I dislike people using the Olympic forum to air their grievances, protest is an inalienable right of democracy, though I do condemn violence or any attempt to disrupt the journey of the Olympic Torch.

I am also saddened that accomplished sportsmen should be forced to reconsider their association with the Games. The Olympics are not about China, and any misgivings one has about China should not be transferred to the event it is hosting. The Games are about competing on the world stage, friendly combat between nations, realising dreams and pushing oneself to achieve the impossible. It is also sad that the companies which are supporting this amazing event, some of which have done so for decades, should now find themselves embarrassed, uncertain and under pressure to wade into political and other debates that they almost certainly wanted to stay out of. It is ridiculous that the CEO of Coca Cola, a company which has supported the Olympics for 80 years, should have to defend this support now.

Yet debate is good, although sensible debate is more productive that the rantings of hard liners, who have little interest in the middle ground. What is more worrying is calls for various levels of boycott of the Games. This type of action should be resisted - nay, struck down - and seen by the general public for the useless and selfish act that it is. A full boycott of the Olympic Games would benefit few, mainly politicians pandering to the populist vote, while at the same time inflict pain on many: the thousands of athletes who have dedicated years of their lives to their discipline; sports administrators who have toiled thanklessly to garner support for their athletes; the general public, who would be denied the "greatest show on earth". And it would not solve China's, Tibet's or Darfur's problems.

Politicians have a poor record when it comes to making hard decisions, preferring most often to take the politically expedient route, the one which wins the most votes, rather than encouraging any real change. So George W caves to the business lobby by rejecting Kyoto, or to the farming community by keeping trade distorting subsidies. Gordon Brown hikes up "Green Taxes" on air travel and petrol, rather than going after the real polluters. Around the world politicians and governments, with an eye on the next elections and maintaining public order, enforce price controls and export restrictions, which actually exacerbate the global food crises.

So it is easy for Nicholas Sarkozy to threaten to boycott the Opening Ceremony. That way he can say to the French people that he did something, took a stand, spoke out against China. Political posturing wins votes at home, but Sarkozy's proposed actions will have about as much effect on China as a candle in a hurricane. The same goes for any other world leaders. So, in 1980 when President Carter ordered US athletes to stay away from Moscow, the only thing he achieved was to destroy the hopes and dreams of hundreds of young men and women.

The only way to change attitudes is through open and direct dialogue, unity among persuaders, carrots and sticks, finding that middle ground. In the meantime, major sporting events allow cultures to mix, for Chinese to brush up against Americans, Israelis to discuss techniques with Arabs; for Jews and Christians, Hindus and Muslims to discover that they have a lot more in common than in difference.

And that must be a good thing.