Running of the Torch
Austin Vowels
3/19/2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/world/asia/20china.html
China won’t alter Olympic Torch Path
This is an article on the Olympics being held in Beijing, and how violent protests in Tibet could potentially hard the Olympic torch barer. This brings up a good question for American Foreign Policy: what stance should we take?
On the one hand, it seems like it is everyone who participates in the Olympics duty to protect the honored tradition of the opening ceremony, but on the other, should the US and everyone else really be a co-participant in China’s immature decision to hold the Olympics in their current social and political state?
The Olympics is noted world round as an event that bring countries together in good spirit despite whatever else is going on in the world. The Chinese are especially playing off of this with their decision to host the games, by calling the torch running a “Journey of Harmony”. Are they trying to be a peaceful nation?
China can barely afford to take care of its own people. Less than 50% of the people in China have health insurance, and there is no social security for the elderly. The welfare state in China is very poor, with the government contributing very little. Now, they are holding the games, and spending much of their budget to do it. This seems irresponsible and frivolous. There is every right to protest by the people. It is very unlikely this decision would have been made had the majority of people been asked what they would rather spend their government funding on. Are the Chinese sacrificing their people’s well-being to try and make better foreign relations? If they are, should the US foreign policy allow/promote or forbid/demote this?
The Olympics are a double edged sword for China.
3/19/2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/world/asia/20china.html
China won’t alter Olympic Torch Path
This is an article on the Olympics being held in Beijing, and how violent protests in Tibet could potentially hard the Olympic torch barer. This brings up a good question for American Foreign Policy: what stance should we take?
On the one hand, it seems like it is everyone who participates in the Olympics duty to protect the honored tradition of the opening ceremony, but on the other, should the US and everyone else really be a co-participant in China’s immature decision to hold the Olympics in their current social and political state?
The Olympics is noted world round as an event that bring countries together in good spirit despite whatever else is going on in the world. The Chinese are especially playing off of this with their decision to host the games, by calling the torch running a “Journey of Harmony”. Are they trying to be a peaceful nation?
China can barely afford to take care of its own people. Less than 50% of the people in China have health insurance, and there is no social security for the elderly. The welfare state in China is very poor, with the government contributing very little. Now, they are holding the games, and spending much of their budget to do it. This seems irresponsible and frivolous. There is every right to protest by the people. It is very unlikely this decision would have been made had the majority of people been asked what they would rather spend their government funding on. Are the Chinese sacrificing their people’s well-being to try and make better foreign relations? If they are, should the US foreign policy allow/promote or forbid/demote this?
The Olympics are a double edged sword for China.
posted by Austin P. Vowels at 10:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home