Americans back total boycott of Beijing Olympics under certain conditions

This week, the White House announced that it would not send President Biden nor any U.S. government official to the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing next February. Heavy pressure to boycott on human rights grounds was growing from lawmakers in both parties, primarily citing the curtailment of individual rights and political liberties in Hong Kong and the brutal repression of minority Uyghur Muslims in the Xinjiang region, which both the Trump and Biden administrations have declared a “genocide.” Anglosphere allies Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom followed suit with their own diplomatic boycotts.

A CSP/TIPP poll of 1,301 Americans, conducted just before the diplomatic boycott was announced, asked respondents whether they believed “the United States should boycott and not send athletes to the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing.” While the announced diplomatic boycott has symbolic and strategic significance, it is a relatively toothless declaration in that it does not interfere with the participation of American athletes at the Games. The last time the United States staged a total athletic boycott was the 1980 summer Olympics in Moscow, in a move meant to punish the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan the year before. In 1980, 65 countries (mostly Western allies and Islamic nations) boycotted while 80 countries participated. It is ominous that we potentially face this reality again, as last time, the context was a serious geopolitical crisis between rival superpowers.

Respondents were able to choose from three options, one with five distinct scenarios/circumstances:

One that the U.S. should “not under any foreseeable circumstances” withdraw their athletes from the games (25%),  or

that an athlete boycott was justified in one of five circumstances:

1. Even if China simply maintains the status quo (19%)
2. If China continues to “disappear” prominent citizens like tennis star Peng Shuai (9%)
3. If China continues to oppress the Uighur minority in Xinjiang, including mass deportation to reeducation camps (6%)
4. If China initiates military action against Taiwan and/or other neighbors (6%)
5. If China attacks U.S. military assets in the region (10%)

Finally, they could indicate that they were “not sure.” (24%)

Overall, 50% of those polled said that “Yes” an athletic boycott was justified for at least one of the abovementioned reasons. A quarter of those surveyed, 25%, were not in favor of athletes boycotting the Beijing Olympics.   A considerable number, 24%, were disengaged and answered “Not sure.”

It is striking that nearly 1 in 5 adults feel that we should withdraw our athletes if China simply continues its current policies. It is unsurprising that many Americans (10%) would also support this measure if China attacks U.S. military assets in the region. A further 9% would be upset by continued “disappearances” of China’s sports and entertainment stars, as such pop-culture figures are more relatable for the public. Issues more remote to Americans’ daily lives like the anti-Uighur atrocities and threats against Taiwan both registered at 6%.

We can extrapolate that Biden’s current diplomatic boycott enjoys very strong public support, as even the harsher athletic boycott received 50% support in this poll.

Unlike the diplomatic boycott, the United States government technically has no authority over whether U.S. athletes participate in the Games. Rather, it was the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) that officially withdrew American athletes from contention in 1980. However, the American public did speak via their elected representatives back then. They overwhelmingly backed a nonbinding resolution approving the decision to stay away from Moscow, with the House voting 386 in favor to 12 opposed, and the Senate passing a similar measure by 88 to 4. Therefore, public sentiment must have been overwhelmingly supportive and forced the USOC’s hand.

At least two U.S. legislators, Republican Congressman Byron Donalds (FL-19) and Republican Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee are calling publicly for an athletic boycott in 2022, with propaganda value and economic competition among Blackburn’s concerns:

When you go to these games and allow China to take the sports spotlight… then what you are doing is allowing them to glorify themselves, and… they’re going to use the Olympics to push forward the digital Yuan, which is their digital currency, and they want to have the world pegging to the Yuan and not pegging to the U.S. dollar.

The disappearance of Peng Shuai was seen by 9% of respondents as a sufficient trigger for an athletic boycott. The Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) took a brave stand, announcing the cancellation of all WTA tournaments in China until a transparent investigation is launched into Peng’s sexual harassment claims against a powerful Chinese Communist Party (CCP) official.

Meanwhile, International Olympic Committee (IOC), which organizes and oversees the games, has sought to avoid the Peng controversy, preferring “quiet diplomacy” and reaffirming that it maintains a “neutral” position on political issues. It remains to be seen if the USOC will diverge from this line.

It is unclear at this time if the Anglosphere diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Beijing Olympics will develop into a cascade of dozens of other democratic countries, let alone whether diplomatic measures will evolve into the full withdrawal of athletes as 65 nations chose to do in 1980. The WTA’s response to Peng’s disappearance showed that sports activism could undermine the position of a powerful totalitarian regime. If the IOC and USOC take the same strong line, it could lead to real accountability and change.

What’s certain is that these boycotts have already damaged Beijing’s fragile self-image, and they are lashing out. According to AFP, foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin told reporters, “The U.S., Australia, Britain and Canada’s use of the Olympic platform for political manipulation is unpopular and self-isolating, and they will inevitably pay the price for their wrongdoing.”