So here they go, the Winter Olympics in Beijing. But seldom was there less anticipation for the largest sports festival in the world than this year. And that is not only due to the corona pandemic, but also to an explosive political situation.
When the Winter Olympics (!) open in Beijing (!) this Friday, there may be good news for world politics in the short term – and bad news in the medium term. If Russian President Vladimir Putin follows his logic of aggression from past major sporting events, then he only launches military attacks in the near future of Olympic bliss.
It was like that in 2008, when he escalated the Caucasus war with Georgia at the start of the summer games in Beijing (then as a powerful prime minister), and it was like that in 2014, when after the home Olympics in Sochi he had Crimea annexed by his soldiers. Nobody knows what will happen in February 2022. One knows, however, that in the ongoing conflict with Ukraine, Putin has had a large number of the military moved to the state border and built up a powerful threat backdrop.
But she should be silent for now. Because Putin wants to hand over the world stage to his authoritarian friend Xi Jinping in the next two weeks. China, Beijing, can again present itself as the host of the largest sports festival on the planet. IOC President Thomas Bach and his followers decided that seven years ago. The German sports official also maintains a close relationship with Putin. And for good friends, even the Russian president might put off his plans a little. Officially, he doesn’t even want a military conflict with Ukraine.
The threat is already there
But that is only the global political shadow that weighs on these games. Many others are added. There is, of course, the corona pandemic and the country’s zero-Covid strategy, which has been heavily criticized internationally because it is tough and involves numerous cuts in people’s rights. There are massive violations of internationally applicable human rights.
There is once again Olympic gigantism and an astounding ignorance of sustainability. And then there are the athletes’ and coaches’ fears of espionage, sabotage, arbitrariness and the expression of a possibly inappropriate opinion. And what could be inappropriate in a country that equates freedom of expression only with party line, that’s what the party cadres evaluate.
Here, too, a corresponding threatening backdrop has already been set up. Penalties have already been announced by official bodies. Yang Shu, vice-director-general for international relations of the organizing committee, had said: “Any expression that conforms to the Olympic spirit will certainly be protected. Any behavior or expression that goes against it can be punished with a specific punishment, especially if they violate Chinese laws or rules.”
Horror scenarios everywhere
Whichever direction you turn in Beijing, horror scenarios lurk everywhere. From fake corona tests to exclude competitors or critical spirits from the competitions, to the total surveillance of the athletes via an app, to the possible spying out of highly sensitive team data. Anything or anything seems conceivable. The subject of doping is not even included. How can all this be reconciled with the spirit that Bach invokes for these games as well: a celebration of peace, solidarity and friendship?
The IOC boss parried critical tones as he once did as a fencer on the planche. In the 1970s, however, sovereign and successful (he was even an Olympic champion). Meanwhile ignorant and always leaning in the direction from which he can push away any responsibility from himself. The fact that the IOC, which is tough on commerce and the opening up of new markets, gives the governments legitimacy for their (aggressive) actions by awarding the games, the world association would never admit that.
The day before the opening, Bach emphasized once again that the IOC “does not comment on any political issues”, otherwise one would “get caught in the middle of tensions and political forces. Then we risk the existence of the Olympic Games.” These are ultimately linked to the Olympic Truce. For his IOC, “political neutrality” applies, everything else endangers “our mission to unite the world”. Again such a mess. Four years ago, at the South Korean Games, Bach ventured into political territory with his role as a kind of peacemaker between the North and the South, coming close to winning the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. Now the IOC is actually not known for political statements. But before the 2008 games, boss Jaques Rogge at least addressed the issue of human rights and respect for them. That the situation has deteriorated significantly since then? Apparently no argument for the IOC worth going into.
Well, how much of this peace will be felt on the Ukrainian border in the next few days? How much peace do Uyghurs and Tibetans held captive in Chinese detention and re-education camps find? How much peace do the representatives of the beaten down pro-democracy movement find in Hong Kong? This is probably not an issue at the IOC. One cannot “guarantee” that a United Nations resolution will be respected, Bach said. The IOC alone can “ask” to comply with the Olympic Truce. Period. May the games rather begin!
Uninhibited gigantism
And these games will again bring gigantic images to the world in the coming 16 days. About unexpected heroes that no one knew. About heroes thought to be invincible who suddenly (have to) cry bitter tears of defeat. By athletes just happy to be a part of Olympic history. Nobody likes to blame the athletes. The games are still the largest sports stage in the world, the title in most disciplines the most prestigious in the world. And probably also the most lucrative. Sport is also work that has to pay off.
The Chinese will also present fascinating images of their gigantic facilities, which no longer want to fit into the world view of humility and sustainability that sport often emphasizes. The ski jump facility built especially for the games is the longest in the world (possibly also the most expensive?), the new bobsleigh and toboggan run is the largest in the world. It is said to have cost 2.3 billion euros. This would largely use up the budget of 3.5 billion euros officially estimated by China. Are the games really planned as “simple” as promised? There are doubts about the figures. Especially since massive investments in infrastructure and the new ski area should not be included. The Yanqing area in the Beijing region will cost insane amounts of money to maintain.
Because it is located near the Gobi desert, it is a quite cold, but also very dry region. In winter, no more than five centimeters of snow fall here. The water for the artificial flakes is pumped over new pipelines from a distance of 60 kilometers. Everything about green electricity – at least that’s what the organizers assure. That parts of a nature reserve were sacrificed for the area? It’s better not to talk about it. And if so, then only irritated. Does that have to be all?
Tracking instead of transparency
The region suffers from acute water shortages. One speaks of this when a person only has around 300 cubic meters available per year, in Beijing it is only 170! However, this has not (yet) reached the highest level of the absurd. For the perfect staging, the surroundings should also be made artificially white, dust-dry slopes next to white ribbons destroy the impression of the perfect idyll.
After all (if you want a small restriction) the ski area will continue to be used for tourism after the Olympic and Paralympic Games. What does the future of the other mega systems look like? White elephants or constant use? When it comes to ski jumping, China is not even a developing country (soccer is supposed to be played in the outskirts of the ski jump facility in the summer), but in sledding there are at least a few athletes who are in the World Cup (far from the top). If the venues don’t just languish like in Athens, then a lot would have been achieved. You don’t need to waste any thought on the topic of “amortization” anyway.
What do the Chinese think of the games? Whether they feel proud or angry because of the upheavals and cuts? Hard to feel honestly. As the ARD documentary “Inside China” reveals, it is hardly possible for journalists to get opinions that are not in line with the Communist Party. The reporters are constantly being followed. If people threaten to speak openly, a KP cadre is always nearby. One can only imagine how much pressure is exerted. It takes a lot of courage to break out, to get honest insights. Just as the former doctor Xue Yinxian brought it up a few years ago and revealed to the ARD doping editorial team that Chinese athletes were doping across the board in the 80s and 90s.
The games will start this Friday at 1 p.m. German time. Sad because of Corona, sad because of the political situation. According to a current ARD survey, 66 percent of Germans feel that the award to China is wrong, and there is hardly any anticipation of the beginning among spectators and athletes. Many Western countries, including Germany, are boycotting diplomatic participation. But Xi Jinping will not be alone. Thomas Bach is of course there, as is Vladimir Putin. The powerful protagonists of world and sports politics are surrounded by a group that reads like the autocrats’ hit list, as the “Süddeutsche Zeitung” writes. Kassym-Jomart Tokayev is one of them. Just a few weeks ago, the President of Kazakhstan had an uprising in his own country shot down. Incidentally, Kazakhstan was the only applicant for the 2022 Winter Olympics, along with Beijing…