He wrote that he would run with the torch "not in support of China" but "with a prayer in my heart for the people of Tibet". The rulers of China will doubtless be moved by his prayer. The people of Tibet will be touched. But the actor added a comment that sounded implicitly like a defence of China. He wrote: "In fact, if we were to find on this planet a place to hold the Olympic Games where the government of that place had not been responsible for human rights violations (in one way or the other), then I suspect that we would be left with very few options, if any at all."
The actor is correct. Almost all nations have smudged human rights records. However, he seems to have missed the point. The protest is not against a nation, but against a particular action taken by its government. And this is by no means the first time that an Olympic boycott is being suggested.
In 1980, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan led the US to call for a boycott of the Moscow Olympics. Among many other nations, China joined that boycott. Beijing must have deplored the Soviet "error" of not claiming Afghanistan to be part of Soviet Union! In 1984, the Soviet Union called for a boycott of the Los Angeles Olympics due to "chauvinistic sentiments and an anti-Soviet hysteria being whipped up in the United States". Thirteen Soviet allies joined that boycott. Iran was the only country to boycott both Moscow and Los Angeles.
There are two issues involved today. Does China’s action in Tibet merit censure? Apparently, Aamir Khan thinks so. Otherwise, he would not pray for the people of Tibet. The second issue is whether politics should affect sporting events. Would Aamir Khan have supported Test cricket with the South African team during apartheid? If not, it would appear he’s hunting with the Chinese and running with the Tibetans.
(Puri can be reached at rajinderpuri2000@yahoo.com)
