The international Olympic torch relay is now a sorry sight. Far from bringing nations together in harmony ahead of the Beijing games, the relay has provoked confrontation and racial animosity and fanned the flames of Chinese nationalism.

Even as a visual spectacle – the torch journey was invented by the Nazis for the 1936 Berlin games – the 2008 version has been a flop. The event will be remembered not for long-limbed athletes holding the torch aloft but for protests over Tibet and the sight of Chinese security guards surrounding a succession of runners, including (next week) Hong Kong bureaucrats and tycoons, as they shuffle towards the next torch-bearer.

China has condemned the protesters for disrupting the relay. It is no doubt true that many fail to understand the details of Tibetan history. But human rights activists concerned by China's crackdown in Tibet and its support for the brutal governments of Burma, Sudan and Zimbabwe were never going to miss this chance to air their grievances.

Those that will suffer the worst damage to their reputations over the relay are not the demonstrators but the two groups most closely associated with the 2008 Olympics: the Chinese, and the multinational companies with interests in China.

China's refusal even to debate Tibetan grievances and its outraged response to legitimate protests abroad have damaged the China brand. Many foreigners have been shocked by the intolerance and visceral nationalism expressed by the Chinese people at home and (in the case of students) overseas.

This has left western companies, especially Olympic sponsors such as Coca-Cola, in an awkward position. Because of the torch relay, the world looks more divided than ever between the international market, where businesses are expected to show concern for human rights, and the China market, where businesses are expected to show support for China. Hence the balancing act performed by Neville Isdell, Coca-Cola chief executive, in his opinion column in the Financial Times last week, headlined: “We help Darfur but do not harm the Olympics.”

For the sake of the present and future Olympic hosts, for corporate sponsors and for the games themselves, it is time to admit that the Olympic torch relay is an idea whose time has passed, if it were ever a good idea at all.

The Olympic Games are inescapably a political as well as a sporting event, but the flames of the torch on its troubled passage have merely evaporated the little that remained of the elusive Olympic spirit.

如今，全球奥运火炬传递成了令人遗憾的一幕。这次火炬传递的本意是一次和谐之旅，在北京奥运会前把世界各国联在一起；但此举远远没有达到目的，反而引发了对抗和种族敌意，并点燃了中国民族主义的火焰。

即便把奥运火炬传递看作是一次视觉盛事（奥运火炬传递由纳粹为1936年柏林奥运会首创），2008年的火炬传递也是一个失败。今年奥运火炬传递在人们心中留下的记忆，将不会是四肢修长的运动员高举火炬，而是西藏问题引发的示威，以及中国护跑手簇拥着一个个火炬手的景象，其中还将包括下周登场的、举步挪向下一个火炬手的香港高官和大亨。

中国谴责示威者扰乱火炬传递。无疑，很多人并不了解西藏历史详情。但是，对那些关注中国政府在西藏的打压行动，以及中国政府支持缅甸、苏丹和津巴布韦等残暴政权的人权活动人士来说，他们可不会错过这一表达不满的机会。

在今年奥运火炬传递中，声誉遭受最大损失的并非示威者，而是两个与2008年奥运会密切相关的群体：即中国人和在中国有利益的跨国公司。

中国甚至拒绝就藏人的不满进行讨论，并对国外合法的示威游行反应激烈，这损害了中国的形象。中国人及海外华人（如中国留学生）表现出的不容忍，以及本能的民族主义，让许多外国人感到震惊。

西方公司，尤其像可口可乐(Coca-Cola)这样的奥运赞助商，则陷入两难困境。在国际市场，人们期望商界关注人权，而在中国市场，人们期望商界支持中国；而世界在国际市场和中国市场之间的隔阂，看上去因火炬传递而变得比以往更大了。因此，可口可乐首席执行官内维尔•艾斯戴尔(Neville Isdell)只好走钢丝——他上周在英国《金融时报》评论版撰文，题目是《我们帮助达尔富尔，但不会损害奥运会》(We help Darfur but do not harm the Olympics)。

为现在和未来的奥运会主办国、赞助商和奥运会本身着想，我们现在应该承认，奥运火炬传递是一个过时的想法，也许它从来就不是一个好主意。

奥运会是一个体育活动，也无可避免是一项政治活动，但在这次混乱的路途上，火炬之火仅是把那一点所剩无多的、缥缈的奥运精神“蒸发”了。

• 6小时掌握学英语的秘诀！——点击看答案
• 专治男女记不住单词的秘密