Wednesday, April 9, 2008

200!

For the two-hundredth post, I've decided to talk about some political stuff. So if you don't care, you can deal with it, or you can not read. Your choice.

There are some things that can't go on being ignored. And there certainly are some attrocities for which people, or governments, should NEVER be rewarded.

In western Sudan, in a region known as Darfur, centuries-old ethnic and tribal divisions have bubbled to the surface with acts referred to by our own President of the United States as "the g-word": genocide. Do you know how hard-core it is to accuse someone of genocide? Imagine the implications! You don't say "the g-word" unless you've got evidence. Solid evidence. Such things deter most countries in our modern times to do things they ordinarily would not, such as refusing to do business regardless of the resource which it chooses to extract. However, China has chosen to ignore the atrocities of the Sudanese government and instead invested in the African nation, building things like roads and means to extract the oil with which Sudan was blessed in exchange for the oil China needs to fuel it's economy (it is shifting to oil from coal. Gas prices aren't goin' down, folks.) Action has been attempted at the international level in the United Nations Security Council. However, China holds veto power as a P5 member (I'll explain this to anyone who cares) and refuses to sanction Sudan or allow the UN peace keepers into the country without Sudanese consent.

The Three Gorges Dam is to be the largest hydroelectric power station in the world when it becomes fully operational in 2011. However, 1.5 million Chinese landowners and citizens have had to be relocated due to the subsequent flooding in the region. Oh. And arable land is PRIME real estate in China. It comprises 10-ish% of Chinas land, and the food produced is somehow enough to feed over 1 billion people. The land that has been flooded is a part of that arable land

An economy run largely run on coal has polluted the air.

Then there's the whole Tibet thing, which I don't fully understand, so I won't pretend to. WHat I do know is that Tibetans are a people who have been long oppressed by the Chinese government, who still refuse to grant the Tibetans autonomy.

Not to mention the persecuted church (on which I also have no statistics and don't really want to take the time to dig them up.)

So what does the U.S. as one of the most powerful countries in the world do? We'll be at the Olympics. No sweat. As long as China and the U.S. continue to do business, there's no debate.

I'm over-simplifying this, but there really does come a point when we have to do something. I don't have all the answers. But when the whole WORLD recognizes something is wrong, why are we legitimizing China's actions? Economic gain. What else is new.

People have always been trying to douse the Olympic torch, but it's never been publicized like this before. I won't watch the Olympics anyway. But for once, I hope they succeed in putting out the Olympic flame. I just wish G.W. had the guts to make some sort of stand against China in this situation. I think it would hurt economically, but it won't happen, right?

So I can ignore the reprocussions of that which won't take place.

2 comments:

Allen said...

China's jacked. So are we. I think we should reduce our trading with China. We're too far intertwined if you ask me. We gotta do something.

But here's my thing: why the Olympics? Why mess up a life long dream for these folks who are representing our country on THE biggest sports stage in the world? How is doing something there going to benefit the world? I would think economic implications would be far greater.

What say you? :-)

Brandon said...

I have thought of this exact question, whether to sacrifice individual achievement for the greater good.

I don't feel like it's necessary to boycott the entire Olympic games. I feel like if there were a boycott of the opening ceremony, this would basically show the world that not everyone approves of the Chinese violations of human rights. A lot of European Unions, and a two of the three political candidates for president have expressed this as a valid option, with the third keeping his options open.

Why the Olympics? They provide an opportunity for the world to show that it doesn't approve. The UN has no authority there, so China can't use their veto power to protect themselves.

However, the United States CANNOT make China angry and have it be solely our responsibility. This is where other nations being able to band together shows a united front against Chinese human rights violations.

That's all I've got now.

Thoughts?