Hosting an Olympic Games in the middle of a pandemic is like the ending of Game of Thrones.
There is something that doesn't quite fit. It is supposed to be a great celebration
of sport and then you find the stands empty. It happened last summer in Tokyo
and it has happened again with the Winter Olympics being held in China.
Winter sports, of course, do not arouse great passions unless, of course, you are from Norway,
Canada or one of those few places more suitable for polar bears than for humans.
The point is that, if Beijing 2022 has made the news, it has been for anything but medal
contention. Xi Jinping's regime has tried to repeat the success of the 2008 Games.
In fact, Chinese propaganda has not stopped highlighting the fact that
Beijing is the first city to host both the Summer and Winter Olympic Games.
And it is true: we all remember Beijing 2008 as the moment when the Asian giant
woke up and presented itself to the world as a great economic superpower.
The Bird's Nest Stadium became an icon of the new, modern China.
A success in terms of image that was also accompanied by sporting
success for the host nation. China won more gold medals than ever before and
led the medal table for the first time in history.
But, VisualPolitik fans, things have changed a lot since 2008.
The boycott announced by the US government was supported by Australia, Canada, the United
Kingdom and New Zealand. Japan, Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands also joined the boycott.
It should be clarified that this boycott is only diplomatic and that in no case has it led to the
withdrawal of their athletes. But the most important thing is that, in the last year,
many countries have raised their voices. They denounce the human rights abuses China is
committing on the Uyghurs, the repression in Hong Kong and the pressure it is exerting on Taiwan.
So the question is, how has China taken this diplomatic
boycott of Beijing 2022? What can we expect from these Olympic Games?
And more importantly, how does Xi Jinping's communist regime plan to
take advantage of the Games? Today we are going to answer these questions,
but first let's look at a bit of history.
(A SYMBOLIC MEASURE)
Boycotts at major sporting events are like cheap sexual references in a reggaeton song.
You just gotta have some. The aim is usually to pressure the boycotted country to introduce some
changes. As you can imagine, they serve little purpose. But the headlines remain. Of course,
if they were made by Orban, Bolsonaro or Maduro we would say that they were a populist gesture.
Now, there is nothing more populist than threatening a boycott and then
not carrying it out without anything having changed in
the meantime. That's what happened with the Berlin Olympics in 1936.
Many countries threatened not to participate as a protest against the Nazi regime. As it
turned out, 49 countries took part, more than ever before. Fortunately,
Jesse Owens later gave us a lot of satisfaction.
Then came the Cold War and the father of all boycotts: in 1980, the United States and 60
other countries opted out of the Moscow Olympics. This was a protest against the Soviet invasion
of Afghanistan. Four years later it was the turn of the Soviet Union,
which together with other Eastern Bloc countries, boycotted the 1984 Los Angeles
games. Obviously not. But wait a minute, because there was one boycott that did have an effect!
South Africa was banned from participating in major sporting events between 1964 and 1992 as
a protest against apartheid. This was arguably the most successful boycott. Perhaps the only
one that actually had a real political effect. The problem is that this kind of boycott is not
something that will be repeated against a giant like China. We are talking about the most populous
country in the world and that translates into it being one of the most important markets for
the International Olympic Committee. There are too many interests at stake. American ones included.
Because apart from the athletes who were left unable to compete in Moscow 1980,
the biggest loser of that boycott was NBC. The television station that had acquired
the rights to broadcast the Games in the United States lost $22 million dollars.
It is therefore unthinkable that this boycott against the Beijing Games goes
beyond diplomacy. Xi Jinping's government has tried to play it down by assuring that
US representatives cannot decline to go to a party to which they have not been invited.
This has been the most polite response. Then there is Zhao Lijian,
one of the spokesmen for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who believes that the best thing
China can do to justify what is happening in Xinjiang is to go on the offensive.
(The US was built on plunder of Native Indians' homeland and crimes against humanity. What
authority does it have to smear other countries' ethnic policies based on lies and disinformation?
What's the hidden agenda behind all its rumor-mongering and defamation? - Zhao Lijian)
As you can see, this does not go beyond the typical exchange of statements between the
governments of two rival countries. In the end, the diplomatic boycott will remain a more or less
symbolic measure. As other countries join in, the negative effect on China's image will be greater.
But we shouldn’t fool ourselves or have any illusions either. First of all,
nothing will change within the Asian giant because of such a boycott. And
then there’s the fact that we are once again facing an Olympic Games
in full pandemic. Media attention will soon be diverted to other matters.
And you may ask: why are we dedicating a video to this topic on VisualPolitik? Well,
we are going to look at that right now. (A LOT OF YUAN AND LITTLE SNOW)
Beijing was selected to host these Games in July 2015. At that time,
Donald Trump had only been President of the United States on the Simpsons and the West was
not yet showing so much distrust towards China. However, the situation has changed a lot today.
China is becoming increasingly distrusted around the world. And so are the Olympic Games.
To give you an idea, Oslo withdrew its bid for these games after seeing all the cost
overruns of the Sochi 2014 Olympics. In fact, the other bid competing with
Beijing for these games was Nur-Sultan For those who don’t know, Nur-Sultan
is the capital of Kazakhstan. And what are the requirements
set by the International Olympic Committee for a city to host the Winter Olympic Games?
Some of you will think... that the one fundamental thing is that the host city has
snow, right? Well... not at all. (Almost all of the snow at the
Beijing Winter Olympics will be fake. NY Post) Yes indeed, the Winter Olympics were held in a
place where it snows less often than in London. The weather in Beijing is dry: almost desert-like.
So they had to build a water transfer system that requires more than 59 million gallons,
that’s 223 million liters of water. That's what it takes to feed all the hundreds of snow machines.
So what is the reason for this unsustainable nonsense? Well,
it is basically due to two key factors. The first is PROPAGANDA.
The main virtue of the Zhangjiakou and Yangqing Olympic venues is that they are 62 and 125 miles
away from Beijing. In addition, some of the venues used for the 2008 Games have been refurbished.
The Water Cube that hosted swimming events is now the Ice Cube for curling matches.
The handball and gymnastics stadium is now the home of ice hockey. And
the Bird's Nest Stadium will host the opening and closing ceremonies.
All this to boast that Beijing was the first city to host both the Summer and
Winter Olympic Games. This connects us directly to the second key factor.
With the venues being so spread out, China has spent more than $9 billion to
build a high-speed train linking Beijing to the nearby ski resorts of Zhangjiakou and Yangqing.
It certainly seems like a huge waste of yuan as skiing is not a popular sport in China. But
the regime wants to boost ski development near Beijing to service its affluent middle class.
In China, skiing is synonymous with a good social position. Such a socially classist goal is bound
to make you think that I'm talking about the last century. But that's how things work in China.
And, as you can imagine, Beijing's whole concern is that these games are a masterpiece
of propaganda. That's why they took care of everything down to the last detail.
(China warns foreign Olympic athletes against speaking out
on politics at Winter Games. Washington Post) The fact that there was no public made it much
easier for the communist regime to control any kind of protest. In fact, it is very
striking that while in the West spectators have already returned to sporting events, in China the
government has remained firm in prohibiting the attendance of spectators at the Games.
Nor should we be surprised because it is quite consistent with the strict closure
of borders that has been applied throughout the pandemic. Be that as it may, I assure you that
Xi Jinping's main concern at the moment is something else. What exactly? Check it out.
(XI JINPING'S LATEST FAILURE)
2022 is an important year for Xi Jinping. In theory, it should be the year of his farewell.
That’s what happened with Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao, who left office after 10 years in power.
However, VisualPolitik fans, this time it will be different. Everything indicates that next fall,
the Communist Party Congress will declare Xi Jinping as president of China until...
well, until this gentleman gets tired of ruling. In the purest Mao style.
For this reason, Xi Jinping wanted the organization of these Games to reach perfection.
He wanted the country to once again receive the same accolades it reaped with Beijing 2008.
Of course, just like when it organized those Olympic Games, China has spared no expense.
At that time, 14 years ago, they surprised the world and presented a huge market for
anyone willing to take advantage of it. But the global landscape has changed a lot since then.
At the beginning of the century, it was believed in the West that dialogue with China would favor
a greater liberalization and opening up of the communist regime. This is no longer the case.
Since Xi Jinping came to power in 2012, China has become an increasingly authoritarian state.
As opposed to Hu Jintao's discreet profile, Xi Jinping has deployed
an aggressive foreign policy. And of course, the clash with the West has been inevitable,
especially since Trump set foot in the White House.
So Xi Jinping's main problem is not that Beijing 2022 is an economic ruin, because a few yuan up
or down is clearly the least of his worries. His main problem is that the Games were also
a failure at the propaganda level. Because most of the world already views China with different eyes.
First there was Donald Trump's trade war. Then the takeover of Hong Kong, tensions
with Taiwan, and finally the coronavirus. China not only obstructed investigations into
the origin of Covid-19 but has also lashed out at Australia for calling for greater transparency.
If you recall, throughout 2020 China wanted to seduce the world with what we called
mask diplomacy... with dubious results. In 2021, China wanted to repeat the operation,
this time with vaccine diplomacy. And in this case, the failure was resounding. Check it out.
(The increase in Covid-19 infections in some countries that used Chinese vaccines raises
doubts about their effectiveness - Archyde) Chinese vaccines were among the first to
be released. But now they have proven to have rather low efficacy compared to other options.
This has considerably damaged China's image in many countries. Its companies have lost
credibility abroad. But wait a minute, because inside China they are not much better off either.
Evergrande, one of the country's leading companies, is in receivership and on the
verge of bankruptcy. Its liquidity problems have shaken the foundations of the Chinese economy.
As if these problems were not enough, Xi Jinping has also seen the formalization in September of
AUKUS, a strategic military alliance between the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia
aimed at confronting Chinese interests in the Indo-Pacific region. For all these reasons,
these Olympic Games come at a very delicate moment for Xi Jinping. The 2008 Beijing Games
were China's gala presentation. These 2022 Games may become the symbol of China's fall from grace.
So the question is, do you think that international pressure on China could
bring about any change in the Asian giant’s behavior,
or do you think that a total boycott of the Games would have been better in order not to
be complicit with the communist regime? You can leave me your answer in the comments.
And, of course, don't forget that we release new videos every week. So subscribe to the channel so
you don't miss any of our updates. If you liked this video, LIKE it and see you in the next one.