BACKING BEIJING

A South China Morning Post (SCMP) feature says the Parisian bid to host the 2008 Olympic Games is "hard to match" and that "the race looks easy for Beijing's main rival". Prima facie maybe, but nothing more, responds this magazine's editor, Les Charlton. He argues that Beijing's sterling achievements in its quest for the Games more than match those of Paris and the other three contestants.

Naturally enough, all five cities competing to host the 2008 Olympics are putting the highest possible spin on why they deserve the honor. Hence the initiative of the SCMP's Mark O'Neill in tripping off to Gay Paree and (one might anticipate) lining up future sojourns to Beijing's other rivals, Osaka, Istanbul and Toronto, to illuminate their attractions also for Beijing's benefit. Or should it be chagrin?

Why he did not put Paris on hold while first telling the world about Beijing's superb facilities and multifarious charms is puzzling. After all, he lives here and is probably more au fait than most with the city's "new look" and preparedness for the Games, even at this early stage. For example, all of Beijing's main stadia have been completed ahead of schedule, creation of and improvements to the city's infrastructure are proceeding apace, and the international heads of sports organizations have given existing and planned facilities an unequivocal thumbs-up.

While O'Neill's article gives full play to the Paris bid, he highlights the strongest argument in favor of Beijing and dark-horse Istanbul -- that Asia has hosted just two of the 27 Games (Tokyo, 1964, and Seoul, 1988) since the founding of the modern Olympiad in 1896. The rest went to the West, invariably to wealthy countries, including France in 1900 and 1904. The republic has staged the Winter Olympics on three occasions. The 2004 Olympic Games will again be held outside Asia, in Athens.
So, the argument goes, if there's any justice, Asia -- for which read Beijing -- is the only possible choice for 2008.

This could well be the case in an ideal world, only there isn't one. Landing the Games is now more hit and myth, to coin a pun. Even though Beijing and Paris have emerged as the front runners, it is a dubious honor because it's nothing more than a media judgement based on little else than Beijing's loss of the 2000 Games by a mere two votes, and the shrewd claim by Paris that -- with abundant facilities already in place, the leftovers from the soccer World Cup and other major sports events -- it would need only to fine-tune a few other details to host an Olympics.

This dangerous media accolade is, rightly, ignored by the vigorous Beijing 2008 Olympic Games Bid Committee (BOBICO), which needs no reminding of the strengths of all four of Beijing's competitors. Led by its astute executive vice-president Liu Jingmin, who is also the city's vice-mayor, BOBICO also knows Beijing's strengths, and promotes them to the full at every opportunity to the people who really count, primarily members of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) who will cast their final votes on the choice of the 2008 venue in Moscow next July 13.

BOBICO also knows the drawbacks, notably China's oft-negative image overseas despite the enormous positive changes that are constantly taking place both in policy and practice. The SCMP article quotes an ordinary Parisian, Francois Moreau, as saying: "Yes, Beijing is our main competitor. But they cannot give China the Games. It has no human rights. People are not free. You cannot hold the Olympics in such a country."

Pretty much the same thing was being said about Moscow before it was chosen to host the 1982 Games.

Today, any comparison between that event and Beijing's Olympics aspirations is valid only in political terms -- what might be termed (claimed) Goodies versus (alleged) Pariahs. Even allowing for advances in sports technology and athletes' performances, the facilities, organization and all else about the Moscow Games pale into insignificance against what Beijing can guarantee in 2008.

O'Neill's article says the matter of human rights will be in the minds of IOC delegates. "pponents of Beijing's bid argue that the communist government would use the event as a propaganda tool," he writes. "Supporters turn the argument on its head, saying the prospect of hosting the Games would discipline the government, limiting its behavior for fear of losing the event."

Maybe. Maybe not. Who can possibly tell? The finger could equally be pointed at nations all over the world should political expedience or a US presidential whim require. The pity is that mere mention of China all too often triggers knee-jerk criticism, even if totally unjustified. Far more relevant is that, seven years ago, China was devastated when Beijing so narrowly lost out to Sydney for the 2000 Games. Far from sulking and becoming bitter, the government and people set out to secure the 2008 Games, again for Beijing. In so doing, and to its credit, the capital has tried very hard to face its faults and shortcomings head-on, instead of attempting to disguise or cosmeticize them.

Its current bid is not in itself just about its Olympic sports venues and other facilities. It is equally to do with a great, historic city's desire to become more environmentally friendly, culturally appreciative and technologically advanced -- aims that will prevail even if its 2008 bid is unsuccessful.

Critics should realize that this approach by Beijing is significant, for it has never in the past been a prerequisite for bidding nations to put the environment, humanities, technology and the Olympics themselves into such a context. Rather, the conditions for application to host the event were seen as a mirror on a nation's quality of life, standard of living and desire for improvement on as many fronts as possible.

Mounting a successful bid of this stature is a far greater challenge than can be imagined. The IOC lays down stringent requirements which, if properly met, should guarantee as perfect a Games as it is possible for man to organize. The requirements go way beyond provision of top-notch sports facilities, suitable accommodation for athletes and a trouble-free transportation system. As well as telling the IOC their plans on environmental and other matters, the five contesting 2008 cities had to respond, in detail, to a new IOC bidding document with 150 questions in 18 categories. "They will be wanting to know the color of our underwear next!" quipped one BOBICO member.

These challenges apart, Beijing is bound to have impressed the IOC with its plan for a Games whose main theme will be "New Beijing: Great Olympics" -- at base a Green Olympics on the same globally-lauded environmental level as Sydney's. Just as the Australian city provided a perfect environment for the Games on all fronts by, among other achievements, renewing badly polluted areas before building the infrastructure and stadiums, so Beijing is now embarked on its "Action Plan for a Green Olympics" and pouring tremendous effort into giving Beijing arguably the world's most expensive facelift. In a report to the IOC, BOBICO has deemed the city's environment as important as the sports facilities and infrastructure themselves.

"Whether Beijing wins the bid or not, the plan will be of great significance to the development of the capital,"says its advocator, Liao Xiaoyi, a winner of the prestigious environmental Sophie Prize. "It is unprecedented in the history of Beijing's environmental protection.?It has been estimated that, by 2008, Beijing will have spent some 100 billion yuan on pitching for the Games, greening the city, vastly improving air quality and seeing through every aspect of the Great Clean-up -- including getting residents to properly dispose of their garbage.

I am far from alone in bidding Beijing well.