One especially cold week in early 2001, inspectors
for the International Olympic Committee were in Beijing poking
around in advance of making a recommendation as to whether the
Chinese deserved to host the 2008 Summer Games.
It was the dead of a particularly bitter winter, so the dead
grass outside the hotel of the IOC emissaries could be forgiven.
Still, cameras for CNN caught workers spraying some green substance
in the middle of the night to make it seem unseasonably lush.
The China Daily would later refute that charge, denying it was
paint, calling it, instead, a "color-enhancement substance."
Moral: Nobody should be surprised, as we peer ahead to this
week's opening ceremonies for the Olympics, that things are
not as the Chinese promised they would be. Painting the grass
was only the most ridiculous and unnecessary lie they told to
get this far, but it also symbolized just how absurdly far they'd
go to secure this honor.
There were more than enough reasons in 2001 to know that this
nation - operated by a brutal, greedy autocracy, more adept
at stirring up nationalistic fervor than any since the Nazis
- was faking its way to the altar with legacy-seeking IOC chief
Jacques Rogge and the rest of his gang.
In fact, I listed several of them in these very pages on July
23, 2001. "When the free champagne stops flowing," I wrote then,
". . . those who were swept up in rooting for this accomplishment
may wake to the reality that this could be a huge fiasco."
Honey, the alarm clock's ringing.
The Chinese promised that the foreign press would operate
unfettered. So consider dueling headlines from the Associated
Press and Xinhua, the Chinese government's mouthpiece news service.
AP: "Chinese blocking access to Internet; Media at Olympics
irked by censorship of unapproved sites."
Here's Xinhua's take: "Openness to media 'will stay' after
the Olympics."
AP described Olympic organizers "backtracking on another promise
about coverage of the Beijing Games." Xinhua quoted a government
official boasting that the country is "mapping out a new regulation
that we are confident will make China's media still more open
and transparent."
The Chinese promised a "green" Olympics, with a clean Beijing
hospitable to the world's greatest athletes. The New York Times
reported that the air is still full of smog, even though thousands
had been forced out of their cars, even though many had been
compelled to relocate, even though several factories had been
shut down. Several Olympians have said they plan to chill out
in Korea or Japan between events so as to not damage their lungs.
Typically, China pretends otherwise. A member of the Beijing
Olympic Committee was on NPR's Diane Rehm Show last month, claiming
he was looking outside at blue skies. Rehm's show began at 10
a.m. East Coast time. That's 10 p.m. in Beijing. Diane Rehm
didn't notice.
And, of course, contrary to so many government promises to
the world and the IOC, the Chinese themselves are hardly at
liberty, and certainly not at any greater liberty, to dissent
from their government or assemble in any sort of political or
ideological groups. The violent response to Tibetan protests
earlier this year put a fine point on that, but the same sort
of repression occurs in much quieter and equally insidious fashion
against Muslims in the northwest province of Xinjiang and against
Catholics across the nation, who reject the central government's
insistence on naming its own bishops.
The most frustrating part is that we knew this was how it
was going to be. Every step of the Chinese opening-up policy
since the days of Nixon have taken place carefully to ensure
the continued empowerment and enrichment of Communist Party
leaders. There has never been any reason to believe that they
had any interest in permitting any expansion of civil liberties
- despite the misguided belief by some in the West that economic
prosperity would automatically create personal freedom.
Why, then, did the IOC agree to this marriage? Because the
impossibly noble men and women of the IOC believed they could
change their bride after the wedding. They're still excessively
proud that South Korea became a democracy in 1987, the year
before the Seoul Olympics. They hog the credit for that transformation,
though it occurred largely because of international pressure
and massive internal protests after the torture and death of
a student dissident.
No, the IOC's new wife knew this marriage of convenience would
be too great an opportunity, and divorce far too costly, far
too humiliating. Even after China's duplicity led to the outbreak
of SARS and massive damage to the economies of Asia and Canada
in 2003, the IOC held firm. The IOC also shrugged when China's
lies led to the 2006 poisoning of a river shared with Russia.
And it was much too late for it to matter when illicit manufacturing
practices in China led to last year's massive product recalls
and the deaths of hundreds of pets worldwide.
The trouble is that the whole world will be watching this
month - and will know what it sees. That old trick China has
played all this decade - with the IOC's help - of simply saying
the opposite of the truth, and having the world believe it,
can't work with this sort of withering scrutiny.
That's oddly reassuring. China is not ready for her close-up.
This bride is about to be exposed for the lying, cheating gold
digger she was all along.
