The Washington Post reports that protests over Tibet may lead the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to cancel the worldwide torch relay ahead of the Games. As torchbearers jogged through streets in London and Paris, they were met with everything from boos and jeers to pro-Tibet activists who chose a more direct approach, managing to grab the torch and nearly snuff its flame.
The People’s Daily, China’s state-run newspaper, blames “a handful of Tibetan separatists” for trying to “sabotage the Olympic torch relay,” and argues that “the public will not look favourably at a few people who are trying to challenge the Olympic spirit. These acts will surely arouse the resentment of the peace-loving people, and are bound to fail.”
For the record, the Dalai Lama and the government he leads have never called for separation from China, nor have they even demanded restitution for the Tibetans killed during and since the 1949 Chinese invasion — 800,000 to 1,000,000 according to Time Magazine and 1.2 million by Tibetan government-in-exile estimates. Nor have they requested compensation for the more than 6,000 monasteries that the BBC says were destroyed. All they want is cultural autonomy and the right to preserve their identities — a “distinct society” of sorts that would ensure the survival of Tibetan culture, spirituality and language, and that scares the bejeezus out of China.
Says the Guardian:
San Francisco is the only North American city taking part in the relay. Already, three protesters wearing harnesses and helmets have climbed the Golden Gate bridge and tied to its cables the Tibetan flag and two banners saying “One World One Dream” and “Free Tibet”.
From the CBC:
The torch arrived in San Francisco on Tuesday, a day ahead of the full relay along the city’s waterfront.
The same day it arrived, thousands of people are expected to attend a rival torch relay supporting Tibetan independence.:
I’ve been following all this pretty closely, and as many of you know, for various reasons this is a bit of a soft spot for me. There have been calls for the world to boycott the Games, boycott the Opening Ceremonies, and refuse the torch passage, and now there are calls from within the IOC itself to halt the international parade of shame. Though perhaps motivated by the best intentions, this is a terrible idea.
As I argued here a little while ago — in what I think was one of the more read-worthy posts on this little site if I do say so myself — it would be a bloody shame if the torch, that symbol of the peace and understanding that the Games are supposed to be about, were zipped off on a non-stop flight to Beijing. That torch, and the Games that come with it, are the only reason Tibet is even in the news, and they represent Tibet’s single greatest hope in creating the international uproar needed to get China to ease their plight. From CNN and the BBC to Al-Jazeera and the Times of India, the world is watching Tibet by torchlight, and if that light is snuffed out — even by the most well-meaning protestor — Tibetans are the only ones who stand to suffer.
6 responses so far ↓
1 B // Apr 10, 2008 at 1:12 pm
What do you make of this?
http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/behind-dalai-lamas-holy-cloak/2007/05/22/1179601410290.html
2 mark // Apr 10, 2008 at 6:39 pm
I don’t know how the Dalai Lama’s critics get away with pointing to the primitive state of Tibet in 1959 as justification for the Chinese invasion — nearly all of China was every bit as poor, and a whole heck of a lot more violent.
As for the accusations in that article, I’ve never seen them anywhere else, and I’ve never heard of theage.com.au, as a reputable news source or anything else. I’m not saying it’s impossible that they’re true, but I’d be pretty shocked, and I’d wonder too why CNN, BBC, NPR, CBC, the NYT, and all the rest of the reputable outlets aren’t trumpeting these things from the rooftops.
Another giveaway: the article doesn’t source anything — it just makes allegations without any real authority behind them, much like the Chinese government’s unsubstantiated insistence that the Dalai Lama is behind the riots in Lhasa. Unsourced allegations are a big no-no for any responsible journalist.
On the surface at least, that site seems to lack credibility by every standard I know. Does that mean it’s wrong? Not necessarily. But it doesn’t bode well for the accuracy of its reports.
3 B // Apr 11, 2008 at 12:29 am
I agree. I just found it interesting because it seems to be so off the wall.
On a side note, I’d disagree with your categorization of CNN, BBC, NPR, CBC and the NYT as reputable. I wonder if there are any reputable news organizations left. I am increasingly becoming convinced that journalism, in practice, is dead.
4 Rawda // Apr 11, 2008 at 1:06 pm
B, the link you posted is quite interesting. It’s very “aggressive” and lacks sources, but I don’t really find it hard to believe that the Dalai Lama is or was secretly receiving help from the States, after all, he peacfully opposes one of their enemies. Frankly though, I sometimes want him to be more of a political figure than a religious one, simply because I think we’re free-ier without religious boundaries. Not that I expect him to revolt, just that I think it’s healthy to be emotional sometimes -forget it, maybe it’s because I’m a woman- :p
And you’re right, unfortunately. Jounalism is dead. CBC and BBC are still somewhat better than others I find..
5 mark // Apr 11, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Journalism is not dead! I sometimes feel like the craft’s lone defender, but while it’s definitely a little sick, this is probably (sadly) the healthiest it’s ever been.
Never have we had so much access to information as we do today, and nobody can seriously argue that all our news 10, 20, 50 or 100 years ago was any freer of bias, filters or prejudice than it is today. We have different biases today, different filters, but we’re not any worse.
If anything, more than ever there’s truth to be found in the multitude of sources, newspapers, blogs, eyewitness accounts, press agencies and other news outlets online. You may have to wade through a lot of lies, junk and nonsense to find it, but it’s almost always there, shining in some otherwise dark corner of the Web.
If you read a dozen outlets, including the most radical ones you can find on all sides of an issue, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle of them all. And the more reading you do, the better you get at finding that magic neutral point for a given issue.
6 B // Apr 11, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Nope. Journalism is dead.
Editorializing, however, is alive and thriving.
Leave a Comment