The list of countries joining a diplomatic boycott of the upcoming Beijing Winter Olympics continues to grow as many take a stand over what they say are China's human rights abuses.
The United States was the first to announce its boycott on Monday, referring to China’s human rights “atrocities”, particularly against the minority Uyghur Muslim community in Xinjiang province.
Australia followed the US on Wednesday, with Prime Minister Scott Morrison saying that Australian athletes will compete at the Games, which begin in February next year, but officials and politicians will not attend.
The United Kingdom and Canada have also joined the growing list of nations refusing to send officials to the Games, with the European Union and Japan expected to do the same.
Human Rights Watch Australia's director Elaine Pearson welcomed the diplomatic boycott.
“Many countries commit human rights violations, but there is only one Olympic host that is committing crimes against humanity right now,” she told SBS News.
“I think governments should not reward that by turning up at the Olympic Games."
But why have governments chosen to go down this path, and how effective will it be?
What does a 'diplomatic boycott' mean?
The “boycotting” nations have made it clear that while their athletes will travel to China and compete at the Games from 4-20 February, no government officials will be part of the ceremonies in Beijing.
“The Biden administration will not send any diplomatic or official representation to the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics and Paralympic Games given the PRC’s ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang and other human rights abuses,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said on Monday.
The Australian Olympic Committee has confirmed it will attend the Games despite the diplomatic tensions.
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki announced the US's boycott of the Beijing Olympics earlier this week. Source: EPA
“Our athletes have been preparing for four years to compete at the Olympics. Diplomatic boycotts are a matter for governments and don’t impact on the team,” a spokesperson told SBS News.
What will the boycott achieve?
While the diplomatic boycott will place some pressure on the Chinese government, it won’t affect the human rights situation in China, according to Yun Jiang, managing editor of the China Story blog at the Australian National University (ANU).
“Boycotts and diplomatic boycotts such as this usually do not have much of an impact on [the] actual human rights situation in a country. We know that in all cases, to affect a human rights situation in another country is very, very difficult,” she said.
“However, this sends a strong diplomatic message to China that countries are concerned.
An absence of government officials from many Western countries at such a significant event will affect China’s reputation, according to Michael Shoebridge, Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s director of defence, strategy and national security.
“It is symbolic, but the symbolism really matters,” Mr Shoebridge told SBS News.
“Why does the Chinese government want to host the Winter Olympics? It’s not because they’re interested in increasing athletic excellence in winter sports globally.
“It’s because it’s a prestige event for them to host and a demonstration of their centrality to world events.
“That is why it’s important to Xi Jinping, the leader of the CCP [Chinese Communist Party], and the presence or lack of presence of government leaders or officials either embellishes that symbolism or damages it,” he said.
What else can be done?
In order to really address human rights abuses in China, Australia and other countries need to find pathways towards justice and accountability for the victims of these crimes, according to Ms Pearson.
“The UN [United Nations] has not even had access to Xinjiang. A starting point would be ensuring that there are independent international investigations into these abuses,” she said.
Western countries should also have the courage to be upfront about their concerns with China, said Mr Shoebridge.
“We’ve seen the New Zealand government saying they told the Chinese back in October they wouldn’t be sending ministerial representation.
“But when they were asked this week about the reasons for that decision, they didn’t want to say it was about human rights abuse or any matter of principle, it was just logistics and COVID.
“If you make a good decision but then you devalue it by completely undercutting the reason you made the decision, you may as well have not made the decision,” Mr Shoebridge said.
A message to the athletes
Mr Shoebridge had one final message for the athletes.
“Protests and acts of solidarity by athletes at and after the Winter Olympics are likely to be as or more powerful than any number of government diplomatic boycotts,” he said.
“The Olympic story is also a story of athletes expressing solidarity for victims of these kinds of abuses - racism or other ones.
“There are, even within the fairly tight rules that the International Olympic Committee has - you can’t protest during an event or medal ceremony, but you can express personal views at press conferences and on social media - real opportunities for various athletes participating in the Games to, by fairly low-key symbols and images, express solidarity.
“In the hyper-sensitive, over-censored world that Chinese citizens live in, these kinds of subtle images have enormous power,” Mr Shoebridge said.
How has China retaliated?
The Chinese officials have reacted aggressively to the diplomatic boycott, dismissing it as “political posturing and manipulation”.
Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian condemned the move as “grandstanding” at a news briefing in Beijing on Tuesday.
“I want to stress that the Winter Olympic Games is not a stage for political posturing and manipulation,” Mr Zhao said.
“It is a grave travesty of the spirit of the Olympic charter, a blatant political provocation and a serious affront to the 1.4 billion Chinese people. If the US insists in wilfully clinging to its course, China will take resolute countermeasures.”
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian has been scathing of the boycott. Source: Kydpl Kyodo
According to Ms Jiang, Australia should expect more retaliation.
“It’s quite possible that the Chinese government will have some kind of retaliation towards all countries who announce a boycott or diplomatic boycott of the Olympics … Trade will be difficult because it depends on the country … Not all countries have made the decision yet,” she said.
Uyghurs in China
It's estimated about one million Uyghurs are being held in more than 85 “re-education camps” run by the Chinese government in Xinjiang, where Chinese officials have been accused of carrying out atrocities including forced sterilisations on Uyghur women and separating children from their families.
Other allegations of torture, forced labour and sexual abuse have also been reported.
“I’m an Uyghur, living in the diaspora. And every Uyghur that lives in the diaspora, over a million of us, has close family members, relatives, friends that have been made to disappear in the forced labour camps, in the concentration camps or imprisoned arbitrarily for simply being an Uyghur,” Ramila Chanishef, the president of the Australian Uyghur Tangritagh Women’s Association, told SBS News.
Earlier this year, several Western entities, including the European Union, the UK, the US and Canada, imposed sanctions on officials in China over its treatment of the mostly Muslim Uyghur minority group.
China has vehemently denied the allegations of abuse, claiming the camps are “re-education” facilities used to combat terrorism.
“I think what [the boycott] really reflects is this frustration that the Chinese government has blocked all efforts at accountability for serious human rights abuses and the crimes against humanity that are taking place in Xinjiang right now,” Ms Pearson said.
