Pre-flight checks
Pre-flight checks
Pre-flight Checks
August 1, 2008
I have written and rewritten this first instalment of pre-departure rambling about fifteen times now. Normally, I am concerned with whether I will come across as pithy, witty and wise, but with this blog - this whole enterprise of going to China - as a member of the BBC, as a conscientious supporter of universal human rights, I find myself thinking about what I am supposed to say, indeed, what I am allowed to say. It is a most uncomfortable of circumstances, a natural extension, and indeed outcome of the the policies of fear and yes, intimidation.
I find myself thinking about my responsibilities to the BBC, what I can say that won’t get me thrown out of the country or even worse, it may seem paranoid, but I have already had it made clear that the Chinese authorities are all too aware of me, even being called to a meeting with a representative from the Chinese embassy before I left the UK. I am sure I will have more on that later, probably when I land safely home.
I have been briefed and re-briefed by the BBC’s “risk assessment team” and Amnesty International’s staff and have made the decision that my role as a commentator for BBC sport can and should have a completely different tenor than my work, as Barack Obama would say, as a “citizen of the world.” Unless I see something on or off court, but within the arena, that should be reported on, I am more than happy to stick to talking about hoops during basketball games. If “Free Tibet” banners are unfurled within the arena, the “T sign” in support of Tibet start flying around or athletes and officials approach me as I report on game outcomes, then even the BBC would have a hard time suggesting that ignoring them is journalistic neutrality.
Outside of that work, I have always been my own man, and despite the new regulations for journalists and visitors that I have posted on this site for you already [link]. Restrictions, may I add, posted in direct contradiction to the Chinese authorities promise of full freedom of the press, I think it is important to say what I see and experience as objectively as I can. I can reliably inform you that it is more difficult to be totally objective when you feel like you are matched up against the school bully you can’t beat up.
The first thing I want to discuss is fear. I feel that the American and British governments both have been complicit in propagating an atmosphere of fear to get policies endorsed, passed and enforced, policies that in times past, would have been unceremoniously booted out of our collective houses of government. In America the Patriot act, the FISA bill and in Britain, the new 42 day detention period to name just a few.
I would like you to read the Chinese government’s rules for foreign visitors and journalists, before we cast a condescending gaze to China and the Beijing Olympics we should look to see if we recognise in our own country’s policy evolution, how these regulations - that may seem to range from laughable to draconian - might have taken root.
Throughout history, in times where fear has ruled the hearts, blunted the minds and obscured the vision of ordinary citizens we have allowed atrocities, sometimes by the rule of law, sometimes by the abject apathy and inability to empathise past one’s own picket fence that fear engenders.
In times where fear grips us, often quietly, innocuously, from beginnings not dissimilar to some of the policies we are all seeing suggested and in some places implemented in Britain and the United States, our legislation can devolve to the point where rules that were intended to protect us, simply confine us; laws conceived to alleviate our fears now only stifle our voices. This is the only type of evolution to which I object and the kind of which I am most afraid.
I admit, I am one of the foolish people, that has always taken my liberty and freedom of expression for granted - I have always felt free to fire off my mouth (in the most eloquent and clever way I could manage) so long as contemporary research and my own intuition were aligned, under the watchful eye of my superego to make me sure that my actions serve some purpose beyond my own aggrandisement or vain intellectual stimulation.
If you are wondering ‘why the Olympics?’ and ‘why Chinese human rights?’ as if there isn’t enough at home to worry about? Well, I have always been an outspoken advocate for one thing or another, to me there has always been an underlying consistent theme, a thread between issues of oppression, prejudice and the removal of opportunity for all people that binds us. Whether it be trying to increase access to education for all, encouraging opportunities in life-long exercise, societal respect for people regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, disability sexual orientation or gender expression or any other demographic. I believe the issues are connected, just as those who perpetrate are connected as are the victims.
What ever the perceived differences that tear at our social fabric, whatever burdens people so they do not enjoy an equality of opportunity, I feel that an individual’s and indeed a society’s opportunity for personal choice and holistic development is vital for our collective health. That chance to grow and develop, to fulfil innate potential as far as one’s own efforts and partnerships can take you should be considered a fundamental right. The right to dissent, to challenge the status quo, to creatively pursue another, ‘better’ way and even attack blind nationalism, without fear of reprisal or sanction is a principle mark of a developed civilisation.
Some people say I am a firebrand, others a loudmouth - there is a bit of truth in both to be fair. I have been told to shut up about the Olympic pledges and ongoing human rights issues in China, about the gap in achievement between black boys and white in education and employment in the US and UK, about the whole “gay issue,” the disparity in opportunity between rich and poor, and most other things I feel strongly about... but there is that thread again, I see them all as connected and far from being an altruist, I don’t believe in altruism, positive steps in any of these areas, where ever they occur is good for me, here and now. My mother instilled in me a well developed, but pragmatic, sense of personal responsibility and now is one of those times to employ it.
My experiences over the last few years at home in England, in America since 9/11 and in preparing for this trip to Beijing have really made me rethink what I have taken for granted, what human beings have a right to expect and what business I have - or don’t have - in dabbling in the affairs of others and fighting to keep fundamental tenets of human dignity universal...in terms of this Olympics, the rational for intervention is clear.
For those who are scanning through, simply waiting their opportunity to comment on the politicisation of the Olympics and indeed that sports is somehow “not political” can I just suggest you pay attention - your lesson begins now:
Sports have been political since the beginnings of time - certainly from the ancient Greek origins, from that moment in 490BC documented by Herodotus, where Pheidippides ran 150 miles from Athens to seek military support from the Spartans, politics was entwined with the outcome of a footrace.
As for the modern Olympics, I was involved in the successful London 2012 bid, doing everything from showing members of the IOC delegation around future Olympic venues in East London, to parading pretty brown children out to show our commitment to diversity and being briefed on the background of every delegate, I can assure you that the Olympics is VERY political. I can also assure you that I will be as ardent in holding the British government to account for it’s Olympic pledges for 2012 as I am the Chinese now.
In terms of the argument that Olympic athletes and the Olympics should be above political issues like human rights I have several observations:
1.I am not a politician and I have no aspirations to be a politician. None. I am as political as I must be in the US and Britain, to get things done. That’s where my political aspiration ends. This issue is not my “platform.”
2.It is absurd to suggest that anything we do on this planet is totally removed from politics. Regardless of the issue, the method by which change is engendered, and progress is made is invariably through negotiation, treaty, regulation, rules and law - these are clearly within the domain of politics. I advocate for issues - things like a fundamental equality of opportunity for all people - but the means to achieve this IS political action. That doesn’t make human rights themselves political - to me they will always be basic, human tenets. This isn’t semantics, it’s clarity.
3.It boggles my mind that athletes are always encouraged to be more than just glorified beasts of burden. They seem good enough to tell us what shoes to wear, what cereal to eat; to encourage our kids to read more, to eat more healthy foods, eat more fast food, to endorse anti-bullying, anti-poverty and anti-global warming messages. It seems that we encourage them to be holistic positive role-models and all around “good eggs” so why now, when discussing the most fundamental of rights, on or even near the biggest stage in the world, should we suggest they should “shut up and play?” I am in good company with Desmond Tutu, in suggesting that now is the time we should all stand up and be counted.
4.The Olympics are political, insidiously so at times - remember Salt Lake? However, the modern Olympic movement was not created just to glorify athletic achievement - read the Olympic Charter’s “Fundamental Principles of Olympism” (Page 8):
i.“...blending sport with culture and education, Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of a good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.”
ii.“The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of harmonious development of man, with a view to promoting peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.”
iii.[This third principle is about the authority of the IOC and the 5 ring symbol and for] “...all individuals and entities who are inspired by the values of Olympism…”
iv.“The practice of sport is a human right. Each individual must have the possibility of practising sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding and a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play…”
v.“Any form of discrimination with regard to country or a person on the grounds of race, religion, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement”
So tell me where in these tenets, people should not speak if their conscience moves them on their hopes, aspirations and even dreams and fears regarding their fellow man? What? Page 98!? Oh, you mean 51.3 - a more recently added cop-out to the charter:
51.3 “no kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.”
My response to this is that I am not advocating a demonstration, simply that the Universal charter on human rights - which includes free speech is upheld - and athletes are allowed to simply state their own personal position as advocates for free expression and the “preservation of human dignity.” as espoused in the fundamental principles of the charter.
I don’t want to embarrass the Chinese people, I don’t want to humiliate those average folks for whom this has been an opportunity to showcase their culture and show the world their wares, but things are happening in China, according to the majority of governments in Europe and the America’s, as well as numerous human rights organisations and from the mouths of Chinese citizens themselves and as we entertain ourselves with day long marathons of TV watching, it would and should not be untoward to cast our gaze a little wider….and reach out with our compassion to those Chinese citizens for whom the Olympics is neither entertainment nor a blessing.
Thank you and read on...in the my next blog, the departure...