[英国 Spiked 北京2008系列 之四] 污蔑中国 运动受挫

dakelv

                                                                                                   
【标题】Beijing 2008: choking on China-bashing北京2008： 污蔑中国 运动受挫
【来源】http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/4892/
【翻译】dakelv
【声明】本文翻译仅限Anti-CNN使用，转载请注明译者及出处。
【译注】本文是Spike Online 的 “2008北京：挑战对中国的污蔑”系列文章之四。全系列一共有二十篇文章。

【原文】

Beijing 2008: choking on China-bashing

Claims that the great Beijing smog will possibly kill Western athletes are based more on hot air than hard facts.

Tim Black

For those nursing an ethically repackaged fear of the‘Yellow Peril’, the Beijing Olympics are proving invaluable. Whateverthe occasion for moral posture, be it the authorities’ suppression ofpolitical dissidents or China’s relentless industrialisation, there itis, hanging over China - the threat of an Olympic Games boycott. Beingthe Olympics host, it seems, requires inviting not just the world’sbest athletes, but its sanctimony, too.

Most recently, of course, it has been the plight of the Tibetans thathas prompted murmurings of an Olympics no-show (1). Never far away,however, are the pleas for non-attendance that cite China’senvironmental record. The most recent instance of this involves thedecision of the Ethiopian marathon world record holder, HaileGebrselassie, not to compete in the Olympic marathon (2). His reason?‘The pollution in China is a threat to my health and it would bedifficult to run 42 kilometres in my current condition.’ (3) By‘current condition’, Gebrselassie is referring to his exercise-inducedasthma. Unfortunately, coming on the back of Belgian tennis playerJustine Henin’s withdrawal last September for the same reason - theyare both asthma sufferers - his announcement has received a moregeneral interpretation: the Beijing Olympics are bad for people’shealth. The Sydney Morning Herald even felt it necessary to advise its readers on ‘How to combat Olympic fever’.


Yet while China’s air is still of a lower quality than that in manyadvanced Western countries - it has 16 cities ranked in the world’s top20 most polluted - the claim that it might threaten the health, notonly of asthmatic athletes, but every athlete who heads to Beijing thissummer, does not stand up to scrutiny. Analysis of data sets takenduring test events held in August 2007 - including humidity, wind,ozone and particulate matter - showed athletes’ health to be largelyunimpaired by environmental conditions. Furthermore, team physiciansreported no health issues relating to air quality (4).

Nevertheless, Beijing’s smog is becoming big news. As BBC sportscorrespondent Gordon Farquhar said last August: ‘All the talk has beenabout human rights but there has been a growing realisation thatBeijing has a smog problem.’ (5) Indeed, from the moment China won theright to host the 2008 Olympics seven years ago, the social andenvironmental costs - though not the massive benefits - of its rapidindustrial development have come under increasing scrutiny. In a sensethis was predictable. When it won the bid in 2001, the Beijing Olympiccommittee played up its environmental conscience, placing greatemphasis on staging a ‘green’ Olympics. As the International OlympicCommittee (IOC) noted at the time, Beijing has ‘an ambitious set ofplans’ to ‘improve its environmental condition’. Although these planswere not ‘dependent’ on hosting the Games, the IOC argued, the factthat the Games were taking place in Beijing would provide an ‘impetus’,a ‘catalyst’ for their implementation (6). In its desperation to stagethe Games, China made itself hostage to the cultural climate in theWest.

And what a climate. Demoralised, anxious and desperately wantingpurpose, Western elites have sought ever-deeper refuge in the semblanceof a rationale offered by environmentalism. In such a context, economicgrowth and development, once the source of capitalist legitimacy, haveacquired a threatening aspect. As one of the most rapidly developingnations on earth, under Western eyes, China appears as merely the mostpotent symbol of baleful modernity.

It is from this perspective that pollution, the problem of‘Beijing’s smog’, is too easily understood not as a practical problemwith a practical, technological solution, but as an indictment ofChina’s economic development, and of China itself. Hearing ofGebrselassie’s withdrawal from the marathon, political activist PeterTatchell declaimed: ‘The Beijing air is so toxic that no athlete canparticipate safely at this summer’s games.’ Not only will athletescollapse, he rapped, ‘some may die’. Clearly having reached the correctshrill pitch he concluded:  ‘Pollution in the host city is now at suchalarming levels that the International Olympic Committee should do theright thing and cancel the 2008 Olympic Games. The city is dangerousfor athletes and everyone [else]… It is far too late to make theOlympics safe or to save the lives of the many Beijing residents whoare sick - or dead - because of their government’s policy of abusingthe environment.’ (7)

Increasingly, news reports and commentaries about the BeijingOlympics cannot do without a reference to the environmental situation.As the New York Timesput it, China is ‘choking on growth’ (8). Rapidly slipping between thefactual and the figurative, pollution provides the metaphoricalframework with which to condemn the Chinese - growth becomes synonymouswith man’s pollution of the environment (to the extent that China issaid to have a ’policy of abusing the environment’), anddevelopment comes to be seen as indissociably toxic. Take the report onGebrselassie’s Olympics withdrawal from The Times (London). Thestart of the article addressed the practical problem of pollution, butit concluded with a quote from Reggie Littlejohn, a US lawyer advisingHuman Rights without Frontiers International: ‘China’s toxic airreflects its equally foul human rights record. It appears doubtful thatBeijing will take the robust and decisive measures required to ensuresafe air for the Olympics.’ (9)

Contrary to such pessimism, China is actually making a considerableeffort to lower pollution levels in time for the Olympics. A UnitedNations report, Beijing 2008 Olympic Games: An Environmental Reviewshows that the Chinese authorities are making some headway in theirattempt to improve air quality. Older modes of transport have beenscrapped, major industries have been refitted and relocated, and manycoal-burning boilers have been replaced by ‘cleaner’ fuels. The effecthas been pronounced: in 1998, the number of days with air quality equalor above national standard was just 100; in 2001, the year Beijing wasselected to host the Games, it had risen to 185. By 2006, it was 241(10). Such improvements are reflected in the fall in the annual meanconcentration of all airborne pollutants: carbon monoxide, sulphurdioxide, nitrogen dioxide levels and particulate matter. However, whilecarbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide all now meet theWorld Health Organisation guidelines for air quality, concentration ofparticulate matter is still too high, sometimes by as much as 200 percent (11).


Problems clearly remain in China’s environment, but there is littledoubting China’s effort to clean up and also to please the West. Byimplementing a number of initiatives, the UN report stated, ‘the city[of Beijing] can boast significant achievements’ (12). The executivegeneral of the United Nations Environmental Programme Achim Steiner waslikewise fulsome in his praise: ‘The more than $12 billion spent by theMunicipal Government and Government of China, appears to have been wellspent - and will be even more well spent if the lessons learnt andmeasures adopted are picked up by municipalities across the country soas to leave a real and lasting nationwide legacy.’ (13) The IOC alsoechoes this favourable view of Beijing’s efforts, with Arne Ljungqvist,the IOC’s top medical officer, announcing on Monday that ‘theconditions will be good for athletes’, before adding the qualifier‘although they will not necessarily be ideal’ (14).


Not that such broadly positive reports have inhibited theChina-bashing. So virulent is the green fear of the Yellow Peril thatfor some commentators, the Beijing Olympics are damned before the fact.There is a sense that whatever China does, it will not be enough. Forin the West, China’s air pollution is not being seen as a particularpractical challenge, but as the affirmative Other of Westernself-loathing. In other words, while developed nations make anenvironmentalist virtue of economic restraint, they simultaneously makea sin of economic growth and industrial development. As a hostage tosuch Western pessimism, China either has to conform or be vilified.


Tim Black is senior writer at spiked.


【截图】

【译文】


北京2008： 污蔑中国 运动受挫

北京的巨大烟雾可能致西方运动员以死地的说法是没有事实根据的无稽之谈。

对于那些扶植从道德上重新包装过的“黄祸”威胁论的人来说，北京奥运会实在是一个不可多得的机会。无论道德姿态以何种借口来摆 --是当局对不同政见者的压迫，抑或是中国毫无止息的工业化进程 --中国的头上都有一个威胁，那就是对奥运会的抵制。奥运会的主办国似乎不仅要邀请世界上最好的运动员，而且同时也要邀请世界上最出名的卫道士。


导致抵制奥运的最近的借口当然是西藏的状况，但是以中国的环境记录为借口来呼吁抵制奥运的声音也一直犹言在耳。这方面最新的一个实例就是埃塞俄比亚马拉松世界纪录保持者，黑•格布雷希拉希耶，做出了不参加奥运马拉松比赛的决定。他作此决定的原因？“中国的污染对我的健康是一个威胁，就我目前状况来看，很难跑完42公里。”格布雷希拉希耶所说的“目前状况”指的是他在训练中所患的哮喘病。遗憾的是，和另外一个也是患有哮喘病的、在去年九月以同样原因退出比赛的比利时网球运动员JustineHenin相比，他退出比赛的声明得到了更泛泛的解释，那就是北京奥运对人们的健康不利。《悉尼预言晨报》甚至觉得有必要提醒其读者“如何对付奥运发烧”。

虽然中国的空气质量仍然低于很多西方发达国家（全世界20个污染最严重的城市中中国占有16个），但是说它不仅对患有哮喘病的运动员，而且对今夏参加奥运的所有运动员都会造成威胁，这种观点是站不住脚的。在2007年进行的对包括湿度、风、臭氧和颗粒物等指标进行的测试结果进行的数据分析表明，运动员的健康总的来说不受环境状况的影响。而且，随队医生也没有报告与空气质量有关的健康问题（4）。

然而，北京的烟雾越来越成为一个大事件。正如BBC的体育记者GordonFarquhar去年八月份所说，“一直以来大家都在讨论人权问题，但是现在人们越来越意识到北京还有烟雾问题。”（5）确实，从七年前中国赢得2008奥运举办权的那一刻起，其工业发展做带来的社会和环境代价（但是却不包括它带来的巨大收益）就一直成为人们审视的对象。从某种意义上讲，这是可以预见的。当北京奥组委在2001年赢得举办权时，它在环境意识上大做文章，强调办一届“绿色”的奥运。虽然这些计划并不“依赖于”举办奥运，但是国际奥委会说奥运在北京举办这一事实应该为这些计划的实施提供“动力”或“催化剂”。由于中国急切地想主办奥运，结果使自己成为西方文化环境的人质。

那是怎样的一种环境。饱经挫折、焦虑不安而又毫无目标的西方精英们终于在环境保护主义者所提供的合理的外表中找到了自己的避难所。在这种情况下，经济增长和发展，这些一度是资本主义合法存在的源泉，此时却平添了具有威胁性的一面。作为世界上发展最快的国家之一，在西方眼里，中国仅仅是最有害的现代化的象征。


从这个角度讲，“北京烟雾”问题往往被理解为不是一个可以通过实际的技术手段来解决的实际问题，而是一项对中国经济发展以及中国本身的指控。当听到格布雷希拉希耶退出马拉松比赛后，政治活跃人士PeterTatchell声称，“北京的空气毒性太大，以至于没有运动员可以安全地参加夏季奥运会。”然后他又悲天悯人地指出，“运动员不仅会晕倒，有的还可能丧命。”最后，他以下面这段话完美地完成了他的高音部：“奥运举办城市的污染现在已经达到了惊人的地步，国际奥委会应该做件好事，取消2008奥运会。这个城市对运动员和其他人来说都是危险的。由于中国政府破坏环境的政策，现在想把奥运变得安全并拯救那些生病或者死亡的北京居民以为时晚矣。”（7）


越来越多的新闻记者和解说员每每评论北京奥运时，就不可避免地要提到环境状况。如《纽约时报》所说，中国正“因发展而受挫”（8）。污染问题使事实和比喻之间的界限快速模糊，并因而为西方人提供了一个谴责中国的修辞框架。在这个框架里，经济增长成了人类污染环境的同义词（以至于有人竟说中国有一个“破坏环境的政策”），而发展则变得和毒害密不可分。让我们看一下伦敦《泰晤士报》有关格布雷希拉希耶退出奥运会的报道。报道的开头讨论了污染这样一个实际性的问题，但是结尾却引用了Reggie Littlejohn（记者无国界的美国法律顾问）的话，“中国的有毒空气体现出其同样肮脏的人权纪录。看起来北京很难采取有力而果断的措施来保证奥运期间空气的安全。”（9）


与这种悲观观点正相反，北京为了减少奥运期间的空气污染做出了很大的努力。联合国的一份题为《北京2008奥运会：环境评论》的报告显示，中国官方正在为改善空气质量做出努力。老式的交通工具被淘汰，主要工业基地被改建或者迁移，还有很多燃煤锅炉被燃净油锅炉替代。其结果也是显著的：在1998年，北京全年空气质量相当于或者超过全国水平的日子只有100天；在2001年，北京赢得奥运举办权后，这个数字增长到了185天。到了2006年，有增长到241天（10）。这种改善也体现在秋天里所有通过空气传播的污染源的平均浓度。这些污染源包括：一氧化碳，二氧化硫，二氧化氮和微尘物。然而，虽然一氧化碳，二氧化硫和二氧化氮的含量现在达到了世卫组织有关空气质量的标准，微尘物的浓度仍然很高，有时高达200%（11)。

中国的环境存在明显的问题，但是中国为清理环境和让西方人高兴上所做出的努力也是不容怀疑的。联合国的一项报告表明，通过实施一系列的措施，“[北京]市现在可以毫不讳言取得的重大成就。”（12）。联合国环境项目总执行官 Achim Steiner对此也是同样地赞誉有加：“北京市政府和全国其他市政府所投入的120多亿美元被证明是卓有成效的投入 --如果全国其他城市能从借鉴这些城市的教训和措施，那么这些投入的成效将会更大，而且也会留下一份真实的全国性的遗产。”（13）。国际奥委会对北京所做的努力也同样持可定态度，国际奥委会的首席卫生管Arne Ljungqvist在星期一宣布“【北京的环境】状况对运动员是有利的，”虽然他紧接着又说，“当然这种状况不一定是理想的”（14）。


这种广泛的正面报道并没有使对中国的污蔑停止。对黄祸的绿色恐惧的毒害是如此之深，以至于对于某些新闻解说员来说，北京奥运在开始之前已注定要失败。有一种观念，那就是无论中国做什么，总是不尽人意。因为在西方，中国的空气污染不是被看成是一种特定的实际性的挑战，而是被看成是对造成西方自惭形秽的“另外一方”的肯定。换言之，当西方发达国家通过限制经济发展而做出一件环境保护的善举时，他们同时也犯下了一宗经济增长和工业发展的罪。作为西方这种悲观情绪的人质，中国不是向西方屈服就是任其诽谤中伤。

Tim Black是spiked的高级撰稿人。



(1) See Tibet poses dilemma for Beijing, BBC News, 14 March 2008
(2) Gebrselassie expects more athletes to bow out of Olympics because of air pollution, International Herald Tribune, 17 March 2008
(3) Beijing too polluted for me to run the marathon, says Haile Gebrselassie, The Times, 11 March 2008
(4) IOC analyses Beijing air quality data, Olympic Movement, 17 March 2008
(5) Pollution risk for Olympic events, BBC News, 8 August 2007
(6) Beijing 2008 Olympic Games – an environmental review, UNEP, October 2007 p.86
(7) The pollution marathon, Guardian 12 March 2008
(8) See Choking on growth part IX - Beijing’s Olympics quest: turning smoggy sky blue, New York Times, 29 December 2007
(9) Beijing too polluted for me to run the marathon, says Haile Gebrselassie, The Times, 11 March 2008
(10) Beijing 2008 Olympic Games – an environmental review, UNEP, October 2007 p.88
(11) Beijing 2008 Olympic Games – an environmental review, UNEP, October 2007 p.93
(12) Beijing 2008 Olympic Games – an environmental review, UNEP, October 2007 p.96
(13) ’Greening’ of 2008 Beijing Olympic Games Impressive says UN Environment Programme report, United Nations Environment Programme, 25 October 2007
(14) Beijing Olympics no threat to athelete’s health - IOC, Guardian, 17 March 2008

[ 本帖最后由 dakelv 于 2008-9-8 23:54 编辑 ]