Journalistic fog and the politics of Olympic sport

Every once and a while, the fog rolls in on Albertan ex-patriots who have chosen to live in Nova Scotia. Just such a fog seems to have plagued my column last week. I gave Gerald Keddy credit for the work done by Bill Casey

on the Crown’s share, money from the offshore that the feds have agreed to transfer to provincial coffers. Thankfully, the humidity has passed and the fog has lifted. Not to say that Mr. Keddy isn’t deserving of praise, but

apologies to Mr. Casey just the same, to the guy who remains the 2008 political champion of Nova Scotians.

I sure hope my praise for Mr. Keddy hasn’t put him in an awkward position amongst his Tory buddies!

Speaking of champions, it’s hard to avoid watching the Olympic coverage, isn’t it, even if one is trying to discipline one’s television consumption? And it’s particularly difficult this time, given the negative,

pack journalism that has previewed the event. American and Canadian journalists decided that the way to prove that they still have un-corrupted souls, was to line up to criticize China.

I’d be happier if we could hold an Olympics free of jingoistic nationalism, international symbolic competition, and simple political grandstanding, but believing this possible would require the sort of naivety that is drummed

out of those who study politics.

This year’s event is unusually vulnerable to this sort of politicization, partly because it overlays some very

difficult questions about how we should relate to China, an emergent political and economic force governed by a tightly strung state-capitalist regime.

As usual, George W. Bush doesn’t seem to be able to do much more than the obvious and facile, criticizing the Chinese administration harshly before enjoying the opening ceremonies, smiling as if he doesn't quite get the full picture, cozying up to beach volley-ball, basketball, and swimming Americans as he did to soldiers in Iraq. About those human rights you are so concerned about Dubya, how is your record? Water boarding isn’t an Olympic

sport, you know.



Where’s the carrot?

Our prime minister thought it best just not to go, even to the opening ceremonies. If not having your presence is the stick, Steve, what exactly is the carrot? Under pressure to defend his leader’s non-attendance, a clear slight to the Chinese, Secretary of State Jason Kenney, apparently said on CTV's Question Period, “why would a political leader go to a non-political event?” Sure Jason, we get it, but these Olympics were an easily predictable political event and Steve’s absence is much more political than his appearance would have been.

With both leaders, it is likely that the suppression of religious freedom in China makes it difficult to exercise the sort of finesse that our relationship with China demands. Not that religious freedom is un-important, but that the intensity of religious conviction of both leaders make it difficult for them to take a more nuanced perspective. To his credit, Foreign Affairs Minister David Emerson, ex-Liberal that he is, has a defter capacity to manage this file, which is perhaps why room is apparently being made for him to run a safer seat for him in Vancouver.

Political repression exists in China, though China has come some way along this road in the past 30 years. Moreover, China’s role in Africa, and elsewhere in the world, where they appear to be emulating the worst of the American traditions of manifest, is a sorry turn. But the China portfolio is one that requires sophisticated leadership. Perhaps Barak Obama will set out a new, more sophisticated strategy, just as his foreign policy generally

will be more nuanced and multi-faceted.

It would be great to have set politics aside for the remarkable achievement of the Opening Ceremony. If this is what the Chinese can do technologically, symbolically, and in terms of human co-operation, we do indeed need to pay them a lot more attention. But making cheap points by

publicly trying to embarrass them seems to be well short of an adequate policy. There is much to like and admire in China, and in the Chinese, and perhaps we should begin again there.