A controversial suggestion

But hear me out. Britain can’t afford it, doesn’t have the resources, manpower, or infrastructure. She also harbours dozens of terrorists rubbing their hands with glee at the opportunity to make a bang in the spotlight. Old Blighty badly needs an exit strategy, and this is it: send the Games back to where they came from.

Setting aside the pettiness of China’s hollow promises with regard to press freedom, the shabby treatment of many of its own citizens for extra presentation points, and some questionable practices in the name of gold, Beijing’s organisation of the Games themselves was outstanding. Plus, and here’s the real clincher, they’ve got a birdsnest lying around with nothing better to do other than accommodate the occasional interest of structural engineers looking for cracks in the architecture. Well, make ready with the Polyfilla boys, because you might be needing the nest for one more gathering of hatchlings.

The ultimate joint venture

Britain can spin it as the spirit of cooperation in a globally interdependent age and Beijing can propagandise the whole thing as ‘the west needs our help; benevolent, peace-loving China heeds the call’. Just imagine; both flags flying side by side. Hu and Brown (assuming he’s still inside No. 10) singing the Internationale at the opening ceremony, which would naturally include re-enactments of the Boxer Rebellion, the Opium Wars, and the handing over of Hong Kong. Personally, I would prefer a contemporary re-working of 6/4 with London buses replacing tanks. Probably a non-starter.

The possibilities are endless. Sino-UK relations can be cemented with the ceremonial return of a relic or two – a couple of opium pipes perhaps. On the athletic front, Liu Xiang would have a second chance on home soil, and He Kexin would get an opportunity to compete as a legally-aged gymnast. Further, Beijing taxi drivers can look forward to a gathering of easy victims the like of which they thought they’d never see again in their lifetimes.

And Beijing needn’t trouble itself over the cost of a fireworks display, they can just run the same footage as last year and call it ’environmental pyrotechnics.’ Residents of the capital will be delighted because the sky will turn blue again and they’ll be able to see their neighbours’ houses when they open the curtains in the morning.

Sure, there will be a few issues to smooth over - at which point the opium pipes might come in handy - but it’s a marriage made in heaven, I tell you. Somebody please forward this proposal to Boris, Seb, and Gordon right now. Seriously, can anyone see a downside here?

Last night a typically glum looking Jacque Rogge, with one foot already out the stadium door, gave Beijing a subtle reminder that there’s more to the Olympics than great stadiums and gold medals. It was quite a moment: the IOC president discovering that he does, after all, have the testicular fortitude to be something other than a complete Beijing sycophant.

For the last eight years China’s obsession with superlatives has been building momentum and influence towards gaining the coveted accolade of “the best Games ever”. I’m on record in my earlier Olympic predictions post as saying that I felt sure the IOC – and Rogge in particular – would cave in on this point. Ultimately his conscience wouldn’t allow it following too many broken promises and controversies before and during the big show. Good for him. I feel he could have gone further, though…

“These were truly exceptional Games (this is actually where Rogge choked, so I’ll finish) … exceptional hype and propaganda; exceptionally ill-conceived global torch relay; exceptionally nationalistic; exceptional media restrictions; exceptionally limited access to journalists; exceptionally high numbers of people dispossessed of their homes; exceptional harrassment and incarceration levels for anyone with a dissenting voice; exceptionally blatant circumventing of the rules in order to field underage gymnasts; exceptional levels of lies and disregard for joe public in the distribution of Olympic tickets; and exceptional levels of bureaucracy that kept the number of foreign visitors well below expectations and seats empty in the stadia.”  – JR in a more honest life.

Beijing did, on a positive note, produce exceptional venues for the Games and significant improvements to the city’s infrastructure. These things came at an exceptionally high cost, in both human and financial terms, neither of which cause leaders obsessed with appearances any lost sleep. 

London will be exceptionally different. It would be folly to try and match the cosmetic grandeur born of Beijing’s desire to be taken seriously, not to mention their very deep pockets. 2012 needs to address the more humanistic areas where Beijing fell short. Notably; human rights, journalistic freedom, internet access, freedom to travel within the host country, freedom of expression, fair play, and sportsmanship. In short, London must attempt to bring the reality of one world; one dream to sports’ greatest stage, and not use an empty slogan that serves only as reminder of what the Games should have been all about.

Based on Sunday night’s handover, the early signs for London are a bit worrying… 

                            …God help us!

Updated to bring you another BJ moment:

“Ping-pong was invented on the dining tables of England in the 19th century and it was called whiff-whaff.

“The French might look at a dining table and see an opportunity to eat. We looked at it and saw the opportunity to play whiff-whaff. And I say to the Chinese, and I say to the world, ping-pong is coming home.”

The man’s a star. You tell ‘em, Boris.

This is not breaking news. In fact, it’s a story that’s been doing the rounds for some time, with the exception of the Chinese media, whose silence is often a good barometer for ‘we’ve got something to hide’. We can safely dismiss the ‘sour grapes’ theories of apologists in this case as doubts were first voiced well before the Games began. I think it deserves to stay in the spotlight a while longer.

The apparent deception in this case concerns the age of two (or more) of China’s female gymnasts in Beijing. Chinese authorities have decided to censor online discussion of the matter, omit the issue from media coverage altogether, delete or revise incriminating evidence, and rage with defensive indignation if the issue is raised at press conferences. Sound familiar? It also sounds like they’ve been rumbled and have reverted to type by wrapping themselves up in denial. The story has been gaining traction for several months now, ever since online records and reports relating to pre-Olympic domestic competitions clearly indicated that both He Kexin and Yang Yilin were barely old enough to be out of diapers. 

Initial queries about the online records were labeled as western meddling and rebuffed by waving shiny new passports that ‘proved’ the darling cherubs really were 16. Unfortunately, and exasperatingly, for Chinese authorities (and their IOC buddies), western media – not to mention athletes cheated out of medals - are not so easily put off. Nor should they be.

At this stage, the gymnasts and their guardians knew what the questions were going to be at the post-gold press conference. And they were ready with perfectly choreographed answers that actually answered nothing at all. What the responses did reveal was that the girls had been turned into liars on behalf of their masters. Needless to say, western journalists didn’t take this lying down and have kept the story simmering nicely on the back burner waiting for the next opening. They didn’t have to wait long. Hat tip to Imagethief for that link to some pretty compelling evidence.

He and Yang are, of course, blameless in this episode. They are merely doing what they are told - tools of the State whose tiny lives have been micro-managed within a punishing training regimen since the day their gymnastic potential was first identified. The culprits are the adults masquerading as their caregivers and the authorities to whom they must answer. 

Years of unquestioning obedience and acceptance of whatever the government does and says have made for complacency. Thus, China’s crude answer to the age problem seems to have been to deduct a couple of years from the gymnast’s birth dates, issue new passports, and re-educate the girls about the year they arrived on the planet. The really stupid part of this strategy is that they expected to sweep gold, accept the plaudits, and have any suggestion of wrongdoing eliminated at the stroke of a pen. Then again, this strategy has been perfected on a domestic testing ground, and it seems increasingly that the Games have been orchestrated with the primary goal of satisfying the home audience. Therefore, offending western moral sensibilities doesn’t come close to bothering team China, and whose IOC lapdogs are too weak to act on a clear breach of Olympic rules.

A more recent defence of the flexible fledglings’ ages has been to state that it’s common practice in China to falsify records to show that an individual is younger than they truly are, and, so some would have us believe, that this is clearly what happened when the girls were registered for previous competitions (the evidence found online). Well, that’s alright then. To be fair, I’ve encountered this phenomenon in China several times; they really do falsify documents to show themselves to be younger – when it’s to their social, educational, professional, or financial advantage. A recent sporting example of how falsifying documents to appear younger can be advantageous comes in the form of NBA star Yi Jianlian. In the case of our diminutive darlings there was no conceivable gain to registering as two years younger for the domestic competitions that preceded the Games. If you read the linked-to articles you’ll be aware that He Kexin was registered for those competitions with a birthdate of 1 January 1994.

If anyone needs a guide as to the chances that these gymnasts were competing within IOC age regulations, let me offer a helpful comparison: it’s about the same chance that I would have of beating Usain Bolt in a sprint. Hope that makes things clear.

There are a couple of points that warrant closer attention here. First, the falsification of passports and revision (or removal) of online documents and media content can only have been achieved with the full assistance of the State and high-level authorisation. No wonder BOCOG and Chinese officials want this one to go away. Second, the pathetically toothless IOC‘s reluctance to get involved in this issue (and many others) reinforces my belief that Beijing have got Jacques Rogge well and truly in their pocket. The CCP certainly knows a thing or two about corrupting coercing those that it needs in order to get its own way. In Rogge they found their man. Under his presidency, and in particular with his kowtowing to Beijing, the integrity of both the IOC and the Games has been further undermined.

China isn’t the first nation to engage in state-sponsored cheating, and they won’t be the last. But when not one domestic voice is prepared to call them on the matter (whether through fear or nationalistic fervour), it’s a red flag to foreign journalists and bloggers to set the record straight. I can’t tell you that the age rules for Olympic gymnasts are sensible, but I can tell you that those rules were breached by the Chinese female team and that it was done with the full knowledge of their relevant governing body.

I originally missed this in The Sydney Morning Herald a few days ago:

ZIMBABWE’S President, Robert Mugabe, has been forced to return home following intense political pressure from the Chinese Communist Party not to attend Friday night’s opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympic Games.

The Herald understands high-powered lobbying from political leaders who will be attending the ceremony prompted the highest levels of the Chinese Government to convince him not to attend. It is understood he had arrived in Hong Kong on Sunday but could get no further.

After coming under considerable pressure from world leaders China had little choice but to send their good buddy packing, lest Hu Jintao found himself looking at a lot of empty seats in the emperor’s box tonight. Instead he gets to chat with Dubya, whose been saying nice things about China on his tour of Thailand.

While I applaud the act of refusing to allow Mugabe to get further than the men’s room at Hong Kong airport, I have to question why he was extended an invitation in the first place. That was not very savvy of face-conscious Beijing when their big show requires world leaders to show up by the dozen.

I wonder how many guns China promised the despot in return for not causing them embarrassment.

Five things I see ...

1. China comfortably wins most gold medals. This is the easy one. No stone has been left unturned to ensure this eventuality, despite the rather disingenuous downplaying of expectations by the Chinese. If anyone is contemplating a speculative investment on the stock market, my advice would be to visit your local bookmaker instead and bet on China to win most gold (as opposed to most medals). Odds may appear prohibitive, but you will collect. The bonus with this strategy is that if the hosts find a way to bend the rules in their athletes’ favour, their ‘gold by any means’ mentality will be working for you. Besides, it’s the only way you’ll get a buzz out of CCTV’s coverage of pistol shooting.

2. Beijing 2008 is declared ‘the best Olympiad ever.’ Whatever the excellence of facilities and stewardship, this accolade will not be deserved due to all the broken promises, forced evictions, media restrictions, and petty micro-managing. Such a declaration will have nothing to do with objective measurement and everything to do with the extent to which the Chinese have got IOC president Jacques Rogge by the goolies. I’m not sure what they’ve got on him, but it’s enough to keep him in line for a closing speech that will produce a billion orgasmic cries of delight. My guess is BOCOG have compromising pictures of Rogge receiving a complimentary full-body massage.

3. Security scuffles over flags and t-shirts. Beijing’s finest (and military personnel) have been placed on high alert to look for flags that are not red with five stars, and for clothing slogans that deviate in any way from “Zhongguo jia you”. Such items will be measured (flags) or removed (clothing) if they are found to contravene BOCOG’s paranoid guidelines. Thus, when a surly uniform tells a baffled visitor that the banner is a centimeter too big or that ”Go USA” is not an authorised slogan, expect a tug of war to ensue that will result in torn fabric and fisticuffs. American, British, French, or Japanese flags may even be incinerated for you. There will be no charge for this service.

Wearing slogan-less apparel is no guarantee, either. Stadium pleasure seekers should be aware that they will be denied entry to events if wearing similarly coloured/styled clothing. Such fashion coordination has been identified by Beijing as an indicator of foreign troublemaking. I would feel proud if that was a joke. I’m not and it isn’t. 

4. Beijing taxi drivers will be sending their kids overseas next year. This confident prediction is based on both personal experience and the anecdotes of a thousand others that have tangled with the capital’s fleet of cabbies. They’re going to make a mint. With so much tender and non-savvy foreign meat to feed on, these boys are going to make a tank full of piranha seem like a litter of newborn kittens. No manner of written or spoken warning will be sufficient to save the unwary. It won’t be pretty, although Beijing will insist that it is.

To avoid being ripped off by one of these jackals you will need: at least three years residence in the capital behind you; a map of the city implanted in the frontal lobe; minimum upper-intermediate Mandarin; the ability to watch the meter and the road (to circumvent the mystery detour) at the same time; the capacity to shout aggressively when they pretend not to hear your instructions to stop.  If you can do all this and more; then you will be a man, my son. You will also be on every Beijing cabby’s blacklist.

(Update: here’s another reason to be mindful of Beijing’s taxis. Unbelievable! Or is it?)

5. A moment of cheating sporting controversy. I’ll be happy to get this one wrong, but I believe we’ll see a moment where fair competition is compromised by the desire for gold. When expectations are so high, when pressure is so great, and when gold medals are given meaning beyond athletic excellence, human nature has a tendency to step outside the boundaries of Olympic sportsmanship and ideals. And I’m not just referring to competitors, but also to officials and spectators.

Liu Xiang has already been told (quite disgracefully, but in keeping with Beijing’s motivational style) that if he doesn’t successfully defend his 110m hurdles title at the Birds Nest, his past accomplishments “will be meaningless”.  Now, if China’s authorities are putting this kind of pressure on an athlete, what sort of influence (subtle or otherwise) might they bring to bear on, say, the false-start officials during the 110m hurdles final? I’ll be watching very closely.

China’s national anthem calls for its people to ‘stand up’. What it fails to say, and what too few people in China care about, is that it’s the manner in which one stands up that counts. I hope that even if Liu Xiang fails in his bid for back-to-back Olympic gold, the 90 000 in the stadium will rise to both the winner and a man who did his best under intolerable pressure.