11 responses so far ↓

• 1    Jim // May 31, 2008 at 1:43 pm

  Also, China has used all of this oil and such to create an environment which isn’t conducive to Olympiads. The air there is very polluted, and some athletes are even going so far as to skip the opening day and appear only for their day of competition, in an effort to keep their bodies in top physical condition.

• 2    brendangreenley // May 31, 2008 at 1:59 pm

  Well yes, I guess one could imagine that the first place winner is trying to stop himself from breathing in smog with his hands, but I feel that the pollution issue is wholly separate from the Darfur Issue. With or without Sudanese oil, China is a country with a rapid growth of industry, unchecked by enforced pollution regulations. The Darfur issue definitely deserves greater scrutiny than any city specific pollution problem, although global warming and environmental issues as a whole are also need to be addressed, but alas, that is a topic we will not be covering here.

  Thanks for the comment, Jim

• 3    DavidWu // May 31, 2008 at 3:13 pm

  I wouldn’t say that the pollution issue is wholly separate from the Darfur issue, Brendan, but I do see your point. We have to realize that China’s recent economic boom will only create greater and greater demand for energy resources. The Chinese government doesn’t share many Western values and asking them to prioritize humanitarian concerns over its own growth may appear to them as the West trying to curb China’s rising power rather than preventing war crimes. Part of it is simply that China, having been one of the greatest empires of its time, wishes to return to its former position in the world and believes the West feels threatened. Indeed, some of us do. In any case, international action and diplomacy must be taken to convince the Chinese that continued endorsement of the genocidal Sudanese government is NOT in their best interest.

• 4    Eric // May 31, 2008 at 3:31 pm

  Brendan, I could not agree more with your position. It is in all nation’s best interest to persuade through example that stability and peace in Darfur can be as productive and economically viable to developing nations as warfare. Certainly, China could have much to offer to Darfur in terms of physical economic incentives such as their expertise in petroleum drilling. One always wonders how to convince such diametrically (and all too often, reacially) opposed groups to lay down their arms and set about building a safer, more profitable future for themselves and their country.

• 5    formless // May 31, 2008 at 10:53 pm

  This is a question of conflicting interests within Sudan as well. Remember, many in Darfur wish to secede, as the government does not represent them well in their opinion. As long as the main Sudanese government supports China, China will support the government, unless people in Darfur assert more authority. This is only possible through governmental empowerment and fair treatment.

• 6    Justin // May 31, 2008 at 10:58 pm

  The thing is, with the current situation in Sudan, granted the solution as stated above is through empowerment of the citizens. Considering it is the government of Sudan that is being entirely too oppressive, what would possibly bring about a change in governmental policy of such degree aside from immense diplomatic (and possibly military, but lets hope that it isn’t necessary) pressure?

• 7    Bob // May 31, 2008 at 11:25 pm

  I never knew that China sold military weapons to the middle east like that. I just learned a lot about the Save Darfur program and joined the club at school.

• 8    brendangreenley // May 31, 2008 at 11:28 pm

  Hey “Bob”,

  Sudan is in Africa, not the Middle East, and I’m interested in what school has a “Save Darfur” program, as that’s definitely a school with the right frame of mind for how to shape a student’s character.

• 9    Deeeeanna // Jun 1, 2008 at 11:19 am

  Hrmph well I think… if we could find an alternative energy source faster that doesn’t cause those food problems and is affordable, then countries wouldn’t need oil as much and China probably would also stop investing in Sudan’s oil. But if there’s no more money for Sudan’s government, then what happens?
  And boycotting the Olympics just to pressure China into doing something completely unrelated to the Olympics is stupid and… idk but if it were just for health issues like the athletes are doing, then that’d make sense.

• 10    brendangreenley // Jun 1, 2008 at 11:45 am

  I disagree, as I believe the Olympics represent more than sports. It is the stage of the international community. Jesse Owens’ victory in front of Nazi Germany and their claims of a “master race”, and the Miracle on Ice in 1980 where the US beat the USSR were more than just athletic feats. These victories were treated as victories on a political and social scale. Boycotting the Olmypics likewise would be a powerful gesture.

• 11    Shayan // Jun 1, 2008 at 9:35 pm

  Boycotting the Olympics would send a message, but if something is to be done about the situation in Darfur, greater action must be taken.

Leave a Comment