Just back from a press conference at the Chinese Embassy in London which turned out to be a justification of China's involvement in Darfur, lots of humanitarian aid and working hard to bring peace to the region.

Then Ambassador Liu Guijin dropped a bit of a bombshell: Steven Spielberg never WAS the artistic adviser to the Beijing Olympics.

The Ambassador, who told us he has enormous personal respect for the Hollywood film director, said that Mr Spielberg was offered the post and had to reply by last May (ie sign a contract). He didn't.

The Ambassador met the film director last September to discuss Darfur, and says Mr Spielberg knew at the time that he was not advising the Chinese on the opening and closing ceremonies for the Games.

It therefore came as "a great surprise" to hear that Steven Spielberg had resigned.

"There could be no question of resignation", said the Ambo.

The Chinese are clearly stung by the international criticism over Darfur and the lack of recognition for what they say is all the good work they are doing in Sudan. Now, they are accusing Steven Spielberg of resigning in a blaze of publicity from a position he never actually held.

And how does any of this help stop the Darfur genocide? Search me.

Comments

[josh, london 26 Feb 2008 14:17:10]

I find it rather sad that people have chosen to dismiss the cause of those in Darfur (where at least 200,00 people HAVE actually been killed) to make a statement regarding Israel and the Palestinians. It seems to me that although the plight of the Palestinians is a very hard one, it beggars belief to compare the two. The Palestinian people receive more charity than any other on earth. there has never been a recorded or proven genocide relating to them (excepting when the Jordanians killed 30,000 of them in 1964). It is my opinion that desire to constantly focus on this issue has more to do with being anti-Israel than pro-Palestinian.How can you dismiss a real genocide in Darfur because you don't like Isarel...it doesn't make any sense...

[The Morning Post 24 Feb 2008 16:13:27]

Merv

Its a self promotional publicity stunt no more no less!

[waine uk 24 Feb 2008 12:28:40]

I find it astonishing that the bloggers on here are so concerned about human rights in China, but couldn't care less about human rights for Palististinians. This is just playing politics for the Americans, whoe's own human rights record is disgracefull.

[waine uk 24 Feb 2008 12:23:48]

If those who blame the Chinese for the aggro in Darfur, called for a complete withdrawal of trade with Beiging, they might be on the right track, but of course that is'nt going to happen. After all we can't have Darfur comming before our profitable dealings with the Chinese can we. Hypocricy comes to mind.

[Steve Ballinger 22 Feb 2008 13:10:39]

‘I would like to mention that Beijing’s bid for the 2008 Olympics will do good. Every country has their own human rights problem and china will certainly pay more attention to human rights.’
Liu Jingming, Vice-Executive President Beijing 2008 Olympics Bid committee, April 2001
- I wonder if we'll soon hear that he hadn't signed his contract either?

China made promises to improve human rights when it bid for the Olympics and so far it has failed to do so - if anything, repression in the country is getting worse. David Miliband is in Beijing this weekend - will he speak out about human rights where Gordon Brown failed to?

[Merv. Beszant, Dubai 22 Feb 2008 09:11:59]

If the latest publicity results in any progress towards a solution in Darfur, then that is to be welcomed, by I do agree with a blogger on a previous thread who stated that Spielberg should have made his views known when he was first approached by the Chinese to be an artistic advisor.

[Jen, writer 22 Feb 2008 09:04:57]

I don't see any reason why Spielberg would lie about something like that. However, it is possible that he has been offered the position and some people have found a way to just say he never held it in the first place. The offer might not have been formalized yet. And what good work are they doing in Sudan? From what has been going around, they are supposedly the ones funding the weapons in Africa's largest country.

[Ian, Lancashire 21 Feb 2008 22:05:18]

I'm afraid that Steven Spielberg's points are the least that can be said about China. Frankly it's obscene that they got the Olympics in the first place with their record on human rights and many other issues on which they behave atrociously. It is only because of the nature of the IOC that they were chosen.
Frankly I hope the games flop, just watch as the Chinese authorities start detaining awkward elements just before the games start.
Who knows, it may be as successful for China as the 1936 games was for Herr Hitler.

[carol-ann livepool 21 Feb 2008 21:49:03]

I understand that saving 'face' is really important to the Chinese; however, I think this is one of those occasions when less is definitely more.

Isn't the fact that they are going to the trouble of holding a special press conference about it, drawing even more attention to it?

Yes, we will be happy to hear that the Chinese are helping the people of Darfur - although that hasn't quite hit the ground, yet, it seems, in Darfur (further proof needed!) but this smacks of petty revenge and not the 'dignity' that I associate with the Chinese.

I think the Chinese embassy should be concentrating on the humanitarian agenda: that is what will make them really 'save face' AND inspire more respect in the West.

[alan mcpartland dublin 21 Feb 2008 21:40:15]

I am very wary of using words like "genocide" to describe the Darfur situation. The West is very selective about the "genocides" in which it takes an interest. It strikes me that Darfur is a convenient issue with which to beat up on the Chinese. There is no doubt that over the next few years we will be treated to a massive propaganda campaign against China as it draws level and eventually overtakes the USA as the world's leading economy. Let's face it, the big playground bully never likes being challenged by another. There are of course massive reserves of natural resources in Africa and it seems Africa is in for yet another period in which a new cold war will be fought by proxy within it's borders. So let's not pretend we are interested in the welfare of Africans, because we are not. We simply want to be sure we can screw them effectively and get our share of the spoils still to be had from that continent. If Spielberg is so worried about "genocide" he can find another contender much "closer to home", namely in the occupied Palestinian territories and the Gaza strip. Perhaps of course he is too close to the situation there to see the wood from the tress.

[Khalid 21 Feb 2008 18:39:55]

Oh dear, next he'd be telling us he fell of his directors chair, suffers from [Blind Vision] and has a belly like [Blancmange. ET Go home...............