Although the Japanese authorities have not yet officially decided on a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Olympics, it is already known that dignitaries and officials from the Land of the Rising Sun will most likely not be present at the opening ceremony of the Games.
This is a new chord from the score “we will declare, we will boycott Beijing”, which is played by Washington organ-grinders.
They have been playing for years and unsuccessfully, but the melody worn down to nausea seems to be the embodiment of harmony. So, let’s see where the boycott theme – as well as the use of Olympic sports as a political weapon – grows legs. More than forty years ago, the administration of Democratic President Jimmy Carter resorted to boycotting the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow. So Washington decided to “punish” the USSR for the fact that Moscow, intending to defend its southern borders as well, brought a limited military contingent into Afghanistan.
Today, of course, this boycott – against the background of the chaotic and bloody flight of the United States itself from the republic – looks like a comic melodeclamation, but then athletes from countries that obediently followed in the wake of American ideologemes were not at all laughing.
The hardest work during the entire Olympic cycle, when the athlete comes to the competition at the peak of his form, was sent to the trash heap with one stroke of the pen. And about how much effort those who came to Moscow had to make, what pressure and harassment these athletes faced at home, you can ask, for example, Lord Coe.
The famous runner, recognized as the best athlete in his category a year before the start of the Moscow Olympics, was tried by hook or by crook to dissuade him from competing in Moscow. They put pressure not only on Sebastian Coe, but also on his father – at the level of Margaret Thatch-er’s office and her confidants. Lord Coe, then a 24-year-old middle-distance runner, phlegmatically sent all Downing Street to play sports on the cinder track. Having announced a boycott of the 1980 Olympics, the White House, of course, could not help but understand that the Kremlin would respond symmetrically. Thus, the Olympic cycle, barely recovered after World War II, was interrupted.
It took several more years for the idiocy of politicians, who rarely held something heavier than a fountain pen with their upper limbs, was forgotten.
The period of a comparative softening of attitudes towards Russia and, as a culmination, the IOC’s decision to hold the Games in Sochi almost immediately gave way to a new round of, shall we say, rejection.
There is already a popular omen: if somewhere and with someone Washington is not doing well in politics or economics, wait for sanctions at the sports level. This area turned out to be the most vulnerable, more vulnerable even than the economy, to a variety of draconian measures.
Because here the blow is struck not on turnover and profits, not on sales markets, not on debit with credit, but on the fate of a person. Trained, tried, laid out, shed blood and sweat – but what the hell does it matter if there are those who want to tame Olympic sport in order to achieve their small and low goals?
Of course, Washington is wildly annoyed with Beijing, but, being weaker politically, disgraced in Afghanistan, having, despite tariffs and duties, a gigantic deficit in foreign trade with China, they are now using every opportunity to put a diplomatic pin in Beijing. The same one, since it is stronger, replied the United States shortly and without fuss that “in general, no one dragged you here by force, if you don’t want to, don’t come.”
Britain immediately joined the boycott (also diplomatic): since the kingdom fled from the EU, and the island itself with other allies is now in tense relations, then Albion generally has no options but to lean against the seemingly broad American back.
In the meantime, the IOC is playing its own game, it really wants to be not only the organizer of the games, but also to form its own – and also political – agenda. If Washington paints with broad strokes – a boycott in connection with violations of “human rights” by Beijing, then the IOC is quietly destroying women’s sports, and also in the name of observing the rights – this time of transgender women, that is, those who were born as men. And, accordingly, with the male level of hormones, in particular, testosterone. The more testosterone, the higher the muscle mass and the better the oxygen supply to the blood. In short, it has obvious advantages, especially if you participate in Olympic-level competitions.
Both the boycott that Washington and its satellites announced to Beijing and the changes in the rules of participation in competitions (in order to make them more inclusive) are, in fact, inconceivable, in violation of the very spirit of the Olympic Games.
Since Antiquity, from the moment a fire was lit in the sanctuary in the Peloponnese, which became a symbol of purity of thoughts and fairness of competition, during the Olympics, any conflicts ceased, all claims were forgotten and only honesty in the struggle for victory was important.
Today, various political perverts – due to their own pettiness, mental laziness, in the end, and their own stupidity, are trying to destroy the traditions that were not created by them, and which (theoretically) should outlive these temporary workers. History inspires us with optimism: the boycott of the 1980 Olympics did not give Washington a single political point.
But, trying to resist the Soviet military presence, the United States raised – with this very own hands and money – Osama bin Laden. Everyone remembers how it ended. And if that tragedy was not enough, then Washington added a farce (also bloody) to it when he fled Afghanistan. The Russians at one time calmly and with dignity withdrew their troops. And they continued, after all the boycotts and bans, to compete in the Olympics, set records in competitions and win. Honestly. As, in fact, it was accepted both millennia ago and today.