Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Should the US boycott the 2022 Beijing Olympic Games?
Florida Congressman Mike Waltz has called for a US boycott of the 2022 Olympic Games in Beijing. Waltz, a conservative Republican and Trump supporter, makes his case not for military or economic reasons but for humanitarian grounds: "I don't see how, after unleashing Covid on the world, clearly covering it up, arresting journalists, arresting doctors, refusing to share data, and the ongoing genocide that two Secretaries of State from two different administrations have now agreed is happening, that we reward Beijing with this international platform to whitewash everything that they've done to the world."
In a conversation with Ian Bremmer, Waltz dismisses concerns that the US would be virtually alone in a boycott, citing China as an "insidious" threat because, "We're drunk on Chinese money and it's from sports, to Disney, to Wall Street, to our political class, to our universities, think tanks and political institutions." The interview on GZERO World airs on US public television starting Friday, April 23. Check local listings.
Watch the GZERO World with Ian Bremmer episode.
- So, are we in a new Cold War or not? - GZERO Media ›
- Will the US and other Western countries really boycott the Beijing ... ›
- What We're Watching: US Olympic boycott threat, Myanmar junta ... ›
- How political sports boycotts (really) work - GZERO Media ›
- Would athletes be exempt from a Beijing 2022 Olympics boycott? - GZERO Media ›
The logos of the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics are seen at the venue of an ice and snow festival almost a year before the start of the games.
Will the US and other Western countries really boycott the Beijing Olympics?
The Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics are nearly a year away, but discussion of a potential boycott is already stoking tensions on both sides of the US-China relationship. Officials in Washington and other Western capitals are coming under mounting pressure from activists to respond to human rights abuses in China. An increasingly assertive Beijing, meanwhile, vigorously rejects any foreign criticism of what it regards as internal issues.
The last time the US boycotted an Olympics was in 1980, when it withdrew from the Summer Olympics in Moscow to protest the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan. Four years later, the Soviet Union repaid in kind by skipping the Games in Los Angeles. Would the US and its allies do something like that again? And how might China respond? Eurasia Group analysts Neil Thomas and Allison Sherlock explain the drivers of the boycott movement and its possible fallout.
Why is momentum building for a boycott of the Beijing Olympics?
As Western countries' relations with Beijing grow more fraught, public opinion is increasingly focused on China's human rights abuses and authoritarian politics. Human rights and pro-democracy campaigners focus on the erosion of political freedoms in Hong Kong, threats to self-rule in Taiwan, and above all, Beijing's repression of the Uighurs in Xinjiang, which some Western governments have classified as genocide. Calls from activists to boycott what they label the "Genocide Games" will grow as the Opening Ceremony approaches next February, increasing the reputational risk for governments and companies that participate. This February, over 180 human rights groups published an open letter that urged all governments to refrain from sending political representatives to the Games — a so-called diplomatic boycott.
How has the situation changed since the last Chinese Olympics?
Back in 2008 there were calls to boycott the Beijing Summer Olympics because of religious persecution in Tibet and Beijing's support for a violent regime in Sudan. They mostly failed. A few politicians, notably German leader Angela Merkel, decided not to attend the Games, though more than 80 national leaders, including US president George W. Bush, still showed up.
But Western attitudes toward China have worsened considerably since 2008. Under Xi Jinping, who came to power in late 2012, China has become more authoritarian at home and more assertive abroad. Political crackdowns, human rights abuses, and aggressive "wolf warrior" diplomacy — with its politicized insults and economic threats directed at foreign countries and officials — are hardening attitudes toward China in Western governments, media, and publics.
What would a boycott look like, and how would China respond?
The experience of missing the 1980 Moscow Games — which hurt the careers of a generation of US athletes — soured the US National Olympic Committee on the idea of athletic boycotts. Most National Olympic Committees around the world agree. Given that these bodies must approve any athletic boycott, their stance makes a diplomatic response the more likely option. This path would see the US and other Western countries refuse to send high-level politicians or diplomats to the Opening Ceremony and other events. President Joe Biden, for one, will find it politically difficult to endorse the Games after supporting a genocide designation for Beijing's actions in Xinjiang.
Western activists and consumers are also pressuring corporations to withdraw from Olympic sponsorship deals. These firms are in a tough position. On the one hand, they risk reputational damage in the West by supporting a Games linked to Beijing's politics. On the other hand, any political statement against the Games by a corporation (or by a corporation's home country government) would trigger an even more vigorous (and likely state-approved) consumer backlash in China, jeopardizing commercial opportunities in the world's largest market.
What countries would be likely to participate in a boycott?
The most likely participants are the US, Canada, Australia, the UK, and several other western European countries, all of which say the protection of human rights is a key foreign policy objective and whose relations with China have deteriorated in recent years. Consequently, their governments face political pressure to punish Beijing for its conduct in Xinjiang and elsewhere. If a boycott goes ahead, these countries will seek to move as a group to raise the costs of retaliation for Beijing. US partners in the Indo-Pacific — such as Japan, South Korea, and India — are less likely to participate in a boycott because of their deeper economic ties with China and trickier security dynamics as close neighbors of China. Tokyo and New Delhi both contest territory with Beijing, while Seoul wants Chinese cooperation in dealing with North Korea.
What are individual athletes likely to do?
Athletes will be a wildcard in boycott dynamics. Human rights advocates are urging them to protest through social media, t-shirt slogans, or media interviews. Canadian athletes are the most likely to rally behind these calls, so long as two of their countrymen — Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor — languish in Chinese prisons for what are widely viewed as political reasons.
Doesn't the Olympic Charter forbid political protests?
Yes, but governments or sponsors that penalize athletes for speaking out would face a severe consumer and political backlash in the West. The US National Olympic Committee, for its part, says it won't punish athletes who "advocate for racial and social justice." Beijing will likely go to great lengths to control public events to avoid any potential embarrassment but will struggle to stamp out activism, particularly on social media, which it can control only within its own borders.
Neil Thomas is Adviser, China and Allison Sherlock is Associate, China at Eurasia Group.
- What We're Watching: US Olympic boycott threat, Myanmar junta ... ›
- How political sports boycotts (really) work - GZERO Media ›
- Podcast: The IOC's Dick Pound on how sports and politics should mix - GZERO Media ›
- Peng Shuai, China's tennis star, appears safe but questions remain - GZERO Media ›
- Biden and Putin hold virtual meeting as US-Russia tensions increase - GZERO Media ›
- The Winter Olympics in a divided world - GZERO Media ›
- Paris 2024 Olympics chief: “We are ready” - GZERO Media ›
- Would athletes be exempt from a Beijing 2022 Olympics boycott? - GZERO Media ›
- Could the Olympics ever be free of politics? - GZERO Media ›
- Ian Explains: Why authoritarian rulers love the Olympics - GZERO Media ›
Man walks past a board with logos of 2022 Winter Olympic Games in Beijing.
What We’re Watching: US Olympic boycott threat, Myanmar junta delays vote, US resumes aid to Palestinians
Will the US skip the 2022 Olympics? The Biden administration and its allies are reportedly discussing the possibility of a coordinated boycott of the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing. Although the State Department almost immediately tried to walk back its own previous statement, the move would be an act of protest over allegations of China's vast human rights abuses in Xinjiang province. Skipping the games is a big deal, symbolically at least. The last time the US did so was in 1980, when America boycotted the Summer Olympics in Moscow in response to the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan a year before. But practically speaking, do boycotts have a real effect on anyone besides the athletes who miss a shot at gold? That's a thornier question. Regardless, there are many ways to define "boycott" — the US could — and likely would — do as little as simply keeping its top diplomats from attending. China, for its part, has threatened a "robust response" to any efforts to snub the Beijing games.
Myanmar junta digs in its heels: As widely feared by pro-democracy activists, Myanmar's ruling generals on Wednesday announced they may delay new elections until at least 2023. The extension of the post-coup state of emergency confirms that the regime is indeed content with killing protesters and stifling the opposition until it deems citizens are scared enough that a military-backed party will "win" when eventually it's time to go to the polls. So, what's the way forward for Myanmar? The generals have so far held steady in the face of mounting street protests, international sanctions, and even a potential rift with China over attacks on Chinese-owned businesses. Rumblings of an impending civil war are getting louder, but it's hard to imagine a ragtag army of dissidents and ethnic minority groups posing a serious threat to the well-armed and battle-hardened military. As long as the junta is willing to watch the country burn if necessary to stay in power, the generals are likely to keep — literally — calling the shots for a long time.
US resumes aid to Palestinians: In the latest reversal of the Trump administration's Middle East policy, President Biden is restarting US funding to the Palestinians. The Biden administration will dole out $235 million, the lion's share of which will go to UNRWA, which provides financial and humanitarian aid to Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. Biden has also signaled his intention to give even more money to Palestinian leadership, and possibly reopen the Palestinian diplomatic mission shuttered during the Trump presidency. The current US administration aims to foster goodwill amongst the Palestinians, who felt shunned by President Trump's Mideast peace proposal, broadly seen as dismissing their interests and favoring Israel. Washington also hopes to restart peace negotiations between the two sides in the medium term, yet any engagement will need to wait until the dust settles on Israel's political stalemate and the Palestinians vote in their own polls in May and July. The situation is very much in flux.