SEOUL, Korea—Western activists pushing for a boycott of the Olympics in Beijing make the claim that Beijing is using the games to celebrate itself and its autocratic ways. Coining terms like ‘genocide Olympics,’ (NY Times) they link the games to Beijing and its domestic and foreign affairs, which is where they fail.

For millions of Chinese the games are a celebration of sports yes, but more importantly they are a celebration of China, the idea of China and its two-thousand years of history and culture. For them the games highlight their country’s reemergence from a century or more of struggle, poverty, and yes, Western imperialism.

Human rights are critical, the sentiments of a people who feel ground in the dirt by a government they have until now been powerless to resist are real, and must be respected. But hijacking the Olympic Games to leverage Beijing to change its policies is not only a misguided strategy, it is also very short-sighted one.

The games are a passing event. They will be over by summer’s end, and groups like Dream for Darfur have admitted they will close shop once this happens. Of all the flaws of China’s leaders, being short sighted is not one of them.

For Beijing the games are significant, but they will not make or break the nation or its leadership. (There are challenges aplenty that threaten to do that already.) Neither will the absence of French President Sarkozy, who perhaps has forgotten about a restive population of young French Arabs who feel just as discriminated and downtrodden as Tibetans in China do.

An article in yesterday’s International Herald Tribune pointed out that nationalism is at the heart of Chinese reactions to Tibetan unrest. It is this same nationalism that has provoked criticism of a biased Western media and “naïve” human rights groups with Internet videos like this one. However just the cause, it is perceived by many Chinese not as pro-human rights, but as anti-China.

Threatening to turn the Olympic Games into an embarrassment for Beijing will only draw the line deeper, which will only work against the causes of human rights groups, whether for Tibet, Darfur, or the Chinese themselves. Long-term pressure that aims at genuine change without the perceived air of ‘anti-Chinese’ sentiment that comes along with it to my mind seems to be a far more effective approach.