Political boycott on the Olympic Games is a custom. Here are some historical facts.
In 1936, the Nazi rulers of Germany tried to turn the Olympic Games into a political springboard to state an ideal such as the Arian race's supremacy. Just one year before, several governments and sports institutions had threatened to proceed to boycott. In the end it was only the personal political beliefs that made some athletes not participate in the Olympics. In 1956, some states boycotted the Olympic Games in Melbourne to respond to the Suez crisis and the invasion of Hungary by the Warsaw Treaty troops. In 1968, during the Olympic Games in Mexico, two American athletes, Tommy Smith and John Carlos, in the very medal ceremony, raised their hands wearing a black glove and kept their heads inclined when their country's hymn was being played, as a means of protest against the racial segregation in the US and support for the Black Panthers move. In 1980, the US asked for an international boycott of the Olympic Games in Moscow to respond to the invasion of Afghanistan by Soviet troops. Given a threat such as the confiscation of passports, the American athletes were formally banned participation in competitions. Many countries reacted to it by not sending sportsmen to the USSR. And in order to react to this US initiative the USSR wouldn't participate in the 1984 Olympic Games in Los Angeles. The official reason: excessive trade with the Olympic Games and insufficient security guarantees for the Soviet athletes.
The points in common with the present state of things? Here is a major one: a political reason invoked to plot the boycott: China's disrespect for human rights. It is just that the international picture is completely different and the American initiative's effects can be real catastrophe. The Chinese response has been striking and dramatic: the announcement on a possibly complete destabilization of the US dollar when the Central Bank of China decides to sell US currency provisions and consolidate National currency. Can it be done?
At the end of March 2007, in the provisions of the Central Bank of China there were 600 tons of gold and $ 875, 1 billion. The intention is to improve the gold provisions up to 2,500 tons, because "more gold provisions will help the government prevent risks and resist emergency situations in case of international political turbulence in economy", as Tan Yaling, a scientific researcher employed by the Bank of China, was mentioning two days ago. Given these, China can easily destabilize the US dollar, anyway weak and with a worrying depreciation rate under normal circumstances.
Given the context, who will join the American decision? Who will take the risk of opposing such an economic trend and, furthermore, who will decide to get rid of the Chinese outlet and production market for a long time?
After the endless disaster in Iraq, the US is running the risk of provoking a major confrontation. Their tremendous loss is predictable, since China can take action, in a very dangerous synergy, on Russian banks and their huge gold and currency provisions.
Chinese wisdom has it that one must know how to avoid the Dragon tail hit. And it can lead to a chain collapse of many national economies. As usually, Romania's official view is cautious, which means it doesn't exist. Maybe just before President Basescu announces Romania is the unconditioned ally of the US this time too, at any costs.