"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does not want the U.S. to boycott the Beijing Olympics, but she says that President George W. Bush should consider skipping the opening ceremony,"
ABC News reports:
"I think boycotting the opening ceremony, which really gives respect to the Chinese government, is something that should be kept on the table," Pelosi, D-Calif., told "Good Morning America" co-anchor Robin Roberts in an interview airing Tuesday. "I think the president might want to rethink this later, depending on what other heads of state do." . . .
"I don't think China should have gotten the Olympic Games to begin with," Pelosi told GMA. "I had a resolution in the Congress which was very popular, and bipartisan support on it. But they did get them with the promise that they would open up more and have better respect for human rights and freedom of expression. They have not honored that."
There's certainly a case to be made that the Olympics shouldn't be held in a country ruled by a repressive regime, although supporters of Red China have the 1936 and 1980 precedents on their side.
But does Pelosi's call for the president to boycott the opening ceremony make sense?
On a Beijing street a few weeks ago, a man began to beat his wife. A small crowd gathered, but nobody intervened until an American leaned from his apartment window overlooking the scene and began to shoot photos.
Noticing him, a spectator stepped up to the assailant and told him to stop. "There's a foreigner taking pictures," he pointed out.
As the Olympic torch gets under way this week in the run-up to the 2008 Olympic Games--the proudest moment in modern Chinese history and a symbol of the country's return as a major player to the international stage--incident sheds light on one of the Beijing authorities' key concerns as they prepare to welcome the world.
Outsiders must not be allowed to see anything that reflects badly on the government or the country--such as dissidents' complaints or the unrest in Tibet--which would lose both of them face.
Wouldn't a presidential boycott serve the communists' interest in reducing press coverage?