After all I’ve written about China and its human and civil rights violations, why shouldn’t I offer an opinion about the sudden Olympics controversy?

To recap, this week’s Olympic torch relays across Europe and North and South America have been disrupted by protesters outraged over the Chinese government’s appalling six-decades-long conquest of Tibet, as well as its implicit support for the Sudanese government’s ethnic cleansing policies in Darfur.

The protests have been embarrassing to China’s grandiose plans for hosting the Summer Olympics later this year. And, various officials and opinionators have chimed in to declare that the President of the United States should not dignify the Chinese regime by attending the Olympics.

Were I the president, I think I would not go, but in fact I don’t know what I’d do.

Being president changes one’s obligations in regard to public policy, and personal objections may not be permitted to enter the equation. It’s not clear to me that the U.S. can afford the high-profile insult of the Chinese that would be interpreted by the president’s refusal to attend. It may have unexpected economic (trade) or political (Taiwan) consequences.

It’s also clear to me that this Olympic spectacle is not meant by the Chinese to deflect our attention from their abuses. The Olympics are their way of asserting that their path to global influence is nothing of which to be ashamed. The Games, the spectacle, will go on and President Bush’s presence is a mere afterthought.

It’s worth noting, though, that President Bush’s decision is being used by other politicians (Sens. Clinton and McCain, are two) to score their own sanctimonious points. They have the same freedom from obligation that I have to declare outrage. The liklihood is, if Bush goes to Beijing, his critics will pile on the scorn; if Bush does not go, he’s already so despised that they will not credit him for moral courage.

More important, China has already been absolved of consequences for its abuses by the world that is so eager to engage with it, the President's presence would be inconsequential to that fact. It may even trivialize the significance of all that China has done — and continues to do.

China’s abuses have been manifest for decades, and every organization, corporation, and individual that engages with that regime bears some obligation for helping to launder its global reputation.

If there is to be some outrage over these Olympic Games, let’s address it at the International Olympic Committee, an imperious organization that styles itself as the world’s conscience, and yet for decades has collaborated with dictators, tyrants, and other enemies of freedom. They granted the Chinese the privilege of staging this hideous spectacle, and specifically claimed their decision would improve China’s human rights record.

If there’s to be some action that shows our outrage, let’s start with the IOC. If Bush should not attend the Olympics, we should not watch this spectacle on TV. Let NBC and its advertisers know we’re not interested in the Games and appalled by China’s use of the event to portray its new wealth and sophistication as any justification for its numerous abuses of freedom.

China may not care, but the IOC and the world will be reminded of what it costs to subordinate human and civil rights.