China, Bush, Olympics
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
Bush: 'I don't need the Olympics to express my position to the Chinese leadership on freedom'
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW

Going to the Games?

What Bush plans to do about calls to boycott the opening ceremonies.

 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

Is George W. Bush still planning to attend the opening ceremonies of the Olympics? When reporters asked White Housespokesman Dana Perino Wednesday about the president's intentions, Perino responded that it was "way too far in advance for us to announce the president's schedule." Perino's answer came as the controversy over which world leaders would be in Beijing continued to mount. France's Nicolas Sarkozy and Germany's Angela Merkel have threatened to snub the performance in protest over China's human-rights record and the crackdown in Tibet. In Britain, initial reports that Prime Minister Gordon Brown would join the boycott were overtaken by announcements that Brown had only planned to be there at the end rather than the start anyway. Meanwhile, in a rare political rebuke, International Olympic Committee president Jacques Rogge called on the Chinese government to respect its "moral engagement" to improve human rights and to provide the media with greater access to the country ahead of the Beijing games.

In Washington, Perino said that she could not yet say what the U.S. president would do about attending the opening ceremonies. However, in an exclusive interview with Raymond Arroyo that airs April 11 on the Roman Catholic cable-television network EWTN, Bush said that he indeed still intended to go. Excerpts:

RAYMOND ARROYO: You are now planning on going to the Olympics …
GEORGE W. BUSH:
Yes.

... to be at the opening ceremonies of the Olympics. You just said earlier, freedom is a gift from the Almighty. Considering the human-rights record …
Yes.

… of that [Chinese] regime, how can you in good conscience go to that ceremony, Mr. President?
Because I—you know, I'm going to the Olympics, for starters. My plans haven't changed ... I don't need the Olympics to express my position to the Chinese leadership on freedom. I just don't need them—because that's all I have been doing as your president. In other words—if people say, well, you need to express yourself clearly about freedom of religion, my answer is, what do you think I've been doing?

Angela Merkel boycotted it
I don't think she boycotted it, necessarily.

She's not attending the opening ceremonies, it appears.
She's not attending the Games, period. I don't think she's going to Beijing at all, at least that's what she told me. But look, I hear all this rhetoric. I want to be an effective president. And I don't think it—as I say, I'm going to Beijing.

We're talking about the Chinese people, as well. And the question is, does the American president take decisions that will enable the next president to be effective or not. I've made my case. These Chinese leaders know exactly my position. I've talked about freedom of religion every time I visited with them. I've talked about Darfur. I've talked about Burma. I've talked about the Dalai Lama. As a matter of fact, I'm the only president to ever stand up in public with the Dalai Lama here in the United States. So they know my position.

And my question that I think about is, if I politicize the Olympic Games, will that make it less effective for me to deal with them, or more effective? But nobody needs to tell old George Bush what to—that he needs to bring religious freedom to the doorstep of the Chinese, because I've done that now for—I'm on my eighth year doing it.

© 2008

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Al Gore's Climate-Change Evolution
Al Gore's Climate-Change Evolution

Using emotion to convince people to change.

Heaven Can Wait
Heaven Can Wait

A new book promises proof of eternal life.

The World's Biggest Foods
The World's Biggest Foods

Monster edibles from around America.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: ipfreak @ 04/16/2008 10:52:34 PM

    you be the judge:

    http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html#notes

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xsoc4-QnplY&feature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdMvBXYRzAw
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTTpewnUGlo&feature=related
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVTiAO2nLg&feature=related
    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/ful ... 3A05757C0A96E958260
    http://www.cesnur.org/press/Newsweek.htm
    http://www.tibet.com/dholgyal/CTA-book/chapter-5-1.html
    http://www.dalailama.com/page.136.htm
    http://www.amazon.com/review/pro ... mp;showViewpoints=1
    http://www.iivs.de/~iivs01311/SDLE/Part-2-07.htm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorje_Shugden

  • Posted By: Tenzin Gyatso @ 04/16/2008 2:32:13 AM

    Western world's sense of moral superority
    I am a Chinese and spent three years in US studying law and working as a lawyer. I consider myself as a Chinese deeply influenced by Western culture for which I have a lot of respect. And yet this time I am so totally outraged by what the western world have done to China and Chinese. I see an arrogant, biased and hypocritical western world with no sense of proportion and perspective. Looking back to the path of western world's modernisation, I see blood, death, war, killing, looting and pursecution. What have you done to Africans, Asians and native Indians? The whole bloody history of aggression and exploitation of other countries and civilizations is so conveniently forgotten by the western world. Granted they have built up modern democratic judicial and political systems - but don't forget that is only after they had pretty much concurred the rest of the world. "Well fed and then comes the sense of decency". In short, I fail to see which part of Western world's history of modernisation can be used to justify their sense of moral superority.
    All these once again tell us Chinese only one thing, and one thing only, and that is: It's all about power. We as a people must be working even harder to build a more powerful country.
    We also need to make genuine efforts to reform our systems, in a gradual but efficient way, to get rid of things that have hindered progression of our society. With improvement in education and living standards, our government should not concern too much about social and even political liberalization (but that absolutely must be done in a gradual and orderly fashion).
    Tibet was, has been, is and will always be part of China!

    Andrew Z
    Beijing
    visit www.anti-cnn.com

  • Posted By: twentyvision @ 04/14/2008 4:26:28 PM

    I AM SO GLAD THERE IS STILL MEDIA LIKE NEWSWEEK. DOES ANYONE KNOW WHO ARE THE FINANCIAL BACKERS OF JOHN ACHERLY, THE CHIEF OF "SAVETIBET.ORG. HE LIED SO BOLDFACEDLY ON C-SPAN THAT CHINESE MAPS HAVE NEVER INCLUDED TIBET TO BE PART OF CHINA. HE IS BETTING ON AMERICAN IGNORANCE TO BLUFF THROUGH THE FACTS. CHINA SHOULD LOOK INTO THIE LIAR'S FINANCE. THANKS AGAIN.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now