- Wednesday, February 16, 2022

There has been no shortage of outrage surrounding the Beijing Olympics: over the decision by the International Olympic Committee to award the Games to China in the first place, over China whitewashing its abuses by selecting an Uyghur torchbearer and so much more.

Amid all this well-deserved outrage, however, I can’t help but wonder why so few have spoken out to decry what may be the most outrageous thing of all — the fact that athletes at these Olympics literally fear for their freedom and safety if they speak out against the human rights abuses of the host country.

Since the modern Olympics began in 1896, I can find no evidence of a Summer or Winter Games where the visiting athletes — writ large — received warnings from elected officials and briefings from law enforcement about the need to stay silent. Yet, this is precisely what happened in the lead-up to the Beijing Olympics, with the FBI briefing the U.S. Olympic team on the risks of surveillance at the Games and urging them to take great caution to avoid such surveillance. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went so far as to tell American athletes, “You’re there to compete. Do not risk incurring the anger of the Chinese government because they are ruthless.”

When the IOC awarded Beijing the Olympics for the second time, anyone who follows human rights in China knew immediately that these Games would be deeply problematic and controversial. China’s authoritarian regime flies in the face of precisely what the Olympics stand for — placing “sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity,” as laid out in the Olympic Charter. But perhaps participating countries, and the IOC, underestimated the degree to which awarding Beijing the Olympics would actually place the athletes themselves in danger.

Rule 50 of that same Charter states that “no kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.” For decades, this rule has been the basis for discouraging, prohibiting and censuring any form of protest at the Games. However, it hasn’t completely stifled political protest — indeed, there is a rich history of political protest at the Olympics. But in the past, political protest by athletes has generally ended in censure by their own national Olympic committees or dismissal from the Games. What differentiates Beijing 2022 from the past, in a terrifying way, is the clear threat to athletes from the host nation.

As Mrs. Pelosi implied, the safety and security of American athletes should and must take priority over the desire or even urgent need to speak out against China’s totalitarian regime and on behalf of those people who suffer most under its rule. There is ample reason to fear that China would make good on its threats to punish athletes who speak out. But prioritizing athlete safety does not preclude democratic leaders from boldly expressing their outrage that the athletes should have to compete under a specter and with fear for their personal safety eclipsing freedom of expression. This reality is as far from the Olympic spirit as one can imagine, and it will leave a stain on the Olympic Games for years to come.

I, and many others, will surely breathe a sigh of relief when the Games end and our athletes, along with those from other democratic nations, return home safely. Perhaps some will then choose to raise their voices in protest from the security of their home countries. And perhaps they will have hard questions for their own Olympic committees and for their leaders: Where was your outrage over the impossible and terrifying position we were put in? Why did you not have the courage to call out the IOC for enabling this environment of fear and censorship? Would you have even stood with us, had we felt compelled to speak out? Or would we have been left to face the wrath of the Chinese authorities alone?

If the Olympics have any hope of continuing the proud legacy of bringing the world together through sport, then the U.S. and like-minded countries must demand the IOC that we never again put Olympians in a position where exercising their fundamental right to free speech could endanger their freedom and safety. If they choose to do nothing, we might as well bid farewell to the very notion of Olympic ideals.

• Katrina Lantos Swett is president of the Lantos Foundation for Human Rights & Justice and an adjunct professor at Tufts University, where she teaches about human rights and foreign policy.

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.