LOGIN
Click here to receive automatic email updates on the most recent developments of your favorite GGW topic.
One World, One Dream? Olympics Raise Doubts about Global Governance
Category: Human Security, National Security
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
The Olympic Games have provided spectacular moments of athletic achievement. However, the games have transpired against the backdrop of world events that bring into question the movement toward global governance. As the world’s athletes promenaded around the track at the opening ceremony, concerns about human rights in China, genocide in Darfur, and a full scale war in the Caucuses trailed close behind. The Olympic opening ceremony had the dual effect of uniting the international community and prompting it to face the reality of a struggling global system.
The most blatant disregard of Olympic fraternity came by way of Russia’s violation of the Olympic Truce . Created by the International Olympic Committee in 1992 and adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1993, the truce seeks to promote “a peaceful and better world through sport and the Olympic ideal.” Ironically, Russia supported the Beijing Olympic truce in a resolution approved by the UN General Assembly in October of last year. Russia's UN ambassador Igor Rogachev stated to the General Assembly that “the absence of war is a precondition for sporting competition.” This rhetoric has since been overshadowed by Russia’s military occupation of sovereign territory in neighboring Georgia.
The UN Security Council has proved powerless in dealing with the conflict unfolding in Georgia. As a permanent council member, Russia’s veto power allows the Federation to block any resolution that would ostensibly condemn its incursion into Georgia or require it to withdraw troops from Georgian territory. Russia’s ambassador to the Security Council, Vitaly Churckin, said resolutions requiring the withdrawal of troops are “a waste of time,” because the withdrawal process has already begun. However, Russian artillery positions and checkpoints remain in the Georgian city of Gori, with no guarantee that troops intend to leave.
Western nations have long been frustrated by Russia and China’s veto power at the Security Council. In the run up to the Beijing Olympics, the conflict in Darfur became a rallying point around which international human rights activists agitated for Security Council action. China’s warm relations with Sudan were a source of consternation as Western Security Council members argued for the creation of UNAMID , the African Union-UN peacekeeping force in Darfur. Nonetheless, China’s relations with Sudan continue to trouble activists such as Mia Farrow, who hosted the Darfur Olympics in Sudan, in protest of the games in Beijing.
Deep political currents have always underpinned the Olympic Games. The presence of heads of state and world leaders makes the games a convenient forum for political dialogue on some level. This year marks a striking absence of political discourse within the host country. Although the Beijing Olympic organizers had originally planned to grant permits for protesters to demonstrate in three special zones, applications were ultimately denied . Issues such as pollution, human rights, Darfur, Georgia, and others were not given an international platform as result.
The Beijing Olympics places the movement for global governance at a difficult crossroads. Since the opening ceremony, the Olympic Truce has failed and the Security Council has demonstrated its impotence. The international issues that might have been addressed by public demonstrators were silenced by Olympic organizers in China. As a result, the oft repeated mantra, “One World, One Dream,” risks becoming an empty catch phrase for what is turning out to be an uneasy international gathering.
A JOINT PROGRAM OF
