Most Chinese haven’t heard what was probably most important to Andrew Parsons. “Peace,” yelled the President of the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) at the end of his speech at the opening ceremony. “I am appalled by what is happening in the world right now,” he had previously said. But his statements on the political world situation were apparently censored by the state broadcaster CCTV. The IPC asked the broadcaster for an explanation.
Right at the start of the 13th Winter Games for people with disabilities last Friday, those critics who, like the Olympics, consider the Paralympics in China to be a scandal because of human rights violations and a lack of freedom of expression, were confirmed. And now, after the first competitions, another premonition regarding the organizer has been confirmed. However, it is one with a positive connotation: the hosts won seven gold, eight silver and ten bronze medals on the first three days of the games.
Previously, China had only won one medal since the Winter Paralympics premiered in 1976 – gold in curling in 2018. In view of the potential of more than 80 million people with disabilities, however, it is “not surprising that you can also develop at the top,” says Friedhelm Julius Beucher, the President of the German Disabled Sports Association (DBS).
Even in sport, there are very few messages from the Chinese Communist Party that are taken up halfway uncritically in the West. One of them: the 2008 Summer Paralympics strengthened the rights of disabled people in the People’s Republic. Beijing repeatedly refers to the “awakening” of that time, the construction of barrier-free infrastructure in the metropolises, the passing of laws in education and health care, the establishment of disabled sports. It is a narrative that the regime now wants to continue.
“If you don’t make it to the top, the system will spit it out again.”
Stephen Hallett is a good judge of what’s behind the facade. The scientist from the University of Leeds lived in China for a long time and set up an educational radio program there in 2006 with visually impaired journalists. “At that time, interesting networks emerged in civil society,” says Hallett. “That has led to some progress.”
With a view to 2008, the world’s largest training center for disabled sports was built in a suburb of Beijing. “The talent scouting ranges from the national level to the provinces and cities to the villages,” says Chinese health expert Wei Wang, who teaches in Perth, Australia. “Hospitals, charities and schools are involved.”
The result: Since 2004 in Athens, the People’s Republic has dominated the medal table at the Summer Paralympics – at no other sporting event can it leave its political rivals so far behind. And while there were still blatant weaknesses at the Winter Olympics in February, despite a record result, China’s dominance is now also showing at the Winter Paralympics, especially in the absence of the Russian team, which was suspended due to the war in Ukraine.
The Chinese regime interprets this superiority as a symbol for the care of the welfare state. But: “In fact, the Paralympics in China have little impact on the population,” says scientist Hallett. “On the contrary: they are a symbol of isolation.” Athletes recruited for elite sport would have to spend months in spartan training centers. “Those who don’t make it to the top will be spat out by the system,” he says. “Even medal winners get little support after their career.”
The perception of people with disabilities is changing only slowly in China, also because of centuries-old traditions. In Confucianism, healthy and “productive” children are considered ideal because they can nurture their ancestors and continue the family line. In recent history, radical political upheavals such as the Cultural Revolution have created millions of people with disabilities. Currently, environmental damage and earlier abortions as a result of the one-child policy are also affecting health.
Away from the big cities, funding ends: “The government has done too little to establish sport as part of rehabilitation.”
Three quarters of disabled people live in the countryside, far away from the metropolises, far away from the prestigious medal production. “The government has done too little to establish sport as part of preventative health care and rehabilitation,” says Hallett.
This is precisely the origin of the Paralympic movement. As early as the 1940s, the neurologist Ludwig Guttmann emphasized the positive effects of sport on disabled people. In England in 1948 he organized an archery competition for war veterans – the foundation of what later became the Paralympics.
There were also setbacks in other host nations. After the 2000 Paralympics in Sydney, the Australian government expanded accessibility building codes, but sport funding was scaled back. In 2014 in Sochi, the sports facilities were regarded as model buildings, but far away from the Russian metropolises, disabled people are still at a disadvantage when it comes to health care and job searches. Before the Rio 2016 games, the Brazilian government drew up an anti-discrimination law, but in the favelas people with disabilities often cannot leave their homes.
In terms of content, the topic in China is dominated by the state-affiliated Association of the Disabled. “This organization is relatively closed and has few employees with disabilities,” says Hallett. In recent years, the association has supported the search for Paralympic coaches and technical experts from Europe, an Italian for the alpine team and a Belarusian for the Nordic disciplines are examples.
That athletes with and without disabilities benefit from the same sports facilities, bonus rules and further training, as is now often the case in sports promotion in western societies, is still a long way off in China, says Hallett. And the effects of the Paralympics on the inclusion of disabled people without a chance of winning a medal should also be limited.