EDITORIAL

Unity has always served as a foundation for The Olympics. The Games originated about 3000 years ago in Ancient Greece, not just as a platform for athletic men to showcase their strength but also as a way to promote unity among the Greek cities. Every four years, citizens would gather in Olympia for one to three days, until Emperor Theodosius I outlawed it for its inclusion of pagan celebration. However, in 1896, the modern Olympics began, paying tribute to the ancient Olympics in some respects, but adopting new practices in others.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) hopes to preserve the ancient Greeks’ emphasis on community. On their website, the IOC states the purpose of the Olympics as, “to contribute to building a peaceful and better world.” While efforts such as promoting gender equality and supporting those who have been displaced from their home have helped to improve world peace, the IOC has not fully upheld their sentiment. 

This year’s Olympics in Beijing were overshadowed by human rights violations occurring in Xinjiang, an autonomous region in northwestern China. China acquired this region in 1884 under the Manchu Qing; the Uyghurs, who would become an ethnic minority in a majority Han-populated China, already inhabited this region. In 1966, Mao Zedong wished to bring China into a new age, ordering the destruction of mosques, burning of Uyghur books, and “re-education” of the youth in areas in Xinjiang. While the Uyghurs briefly experienced a reclamation of their culture after the death of Mao, the rise in political activism in the 1990s alarmed the Chinese government, leading to stricter surveillance of the Uyghur people. This region contains large economic potential for China, making it an area that the government fears losing to a separationist movement. This fear has resulted in violent acts and blatant discrimination; eventually, in 2017, China reintroduced re-education camps.

When the UN began to call attention to these camps, China responded by saying that they were “vocational training centers” to “re-educate the Uyghurs.” However, a combination of leaked aerial pictures and accounts written by those who experienced the camps reveals a larger goal. Gulbahar Haitiwaji, a former captive of a camp, described that after being sterilized, she realized that the camp’s strategy was, “not to kill us in cold blood, but to make us slowly disappear. So slowly that no one would notice.” 

China claims to have released the majority of people from these camps, but the UN estimates around 1.5 million people to still be captive. There has also been evidence showing that inhabitants of the camp have been forced to work under poor conditions in Nike and Apple factories. 

The International Olympic Committee, aware of these state-sponsored atrocities, allowed Beijing to host the Olympics. At worst, this can be considered an endorsement of human rights violation, and at best, apathy towards the situation. It brings to question the true purpose of the Olympics: to promote a “peaceful world,” as the website states, or simply to advance as another business entity focused on profits? One could imagine the financial losses that the IOC would endure if they changed the location of the games last minute, in addition to the ire and scrutiny of the involved parties.

Despite IOC’s lack of action, some countries, including the US, Canada, UK, and Netherlands, declared the situation a genocide.  Additionally, the US, Australia, UK, and Canada exercised a “diplomatic boycott” of the Olympics, meaning they did not send any government officials to watch the games. Though these gestures were noted, they did not seem to bring awareness to these acts. China even attempted to downplay them in a politically charged spectacle with the lighting of the Olympic cauldron by Uyghur Dinigeer Yilamujiang.

In order to truly uphold the values that originate in Ancient Greece, the Olympic Committee must acknowledge and promote what it stands for: a peaceful world. This may be as simple as bringing awareness to human rights issues or even considering relocating the games in protest. Actions to show that the IOC believes in its mission have the potential to fuel change. This would be welcomed in a world of many continued injustices, but instead, we see the IOC retreat into the comfort of maintaining a financial profit.