Darfur Group Grades Olympic Companies

New York-based group Olympic Dream for Darfur plans to unveil a report today grading 19 Olympic sponsors and suppliers on their response to the crisis in Sudan, one more signal of the increasing politicization of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games as China's activities abroad face greater scrutiny.

Over the past six months, Darfur activists have lobbied these companies to use their influence with the International Olympic Committee and the Chinese authorities to pressure Khartoum to reduce the conflict in Sudan, where a four-year-long clash between government forces and rebels has resulted in widespread killings and displacement of millions of people.

China has been linked to the issue because of its close economic and political ties to Sudan. Recently, China has also been similarly criticized for its close ties to the Myanmar regime, which used force to quell civilian unrest.

In such cases, activists have attempted to pressure China by using the Olympics, an occasion that Beijing hopes will showcase the nation's accomplishments.

The Darfur group has awarded points to Olympic sponsors and suppliers if they appeared to demonstrate interest in the issue and took action, such as by lobbying, or donating to humanitarian organizations. Only six companies out of the 19 received passing grades, by the group's reckoning, and none fared well in the report.

General Electric Co. fared best, with a 'C+' grading. The company has received points for its $2 million contribution to humanitarian causes in Darfur, for speaking to the International Olympic Committee about the situation, and for 'appearing to understand the situation,' according to the report.

Adidas AG and McDonald's Corp., both received 'C' grades for efforts to discuss the issue with the German foreign ministry and the IOC respectively.

Three companies, Coca-Cola Co., Johnson & Johnson and United Parcel Service Inc., were awarded 'D' grades for responding to the group's overtures. In Coca-Cola's case, the company donated $750,000 to the Red Cross and Red Crescent for Darfur humanitarian causes. The beverage giant also said it plans to hold a series of forums engaging stakeholders on doing business in zones of conflict, with the first on Sudan to be held before the end of the year, Coca-Cola spokeswoman Christina Lau said.

The Darfur debate puts the IOC in a delicate position. 'It is not our role to politicize the Games, no matter where they may be held,' IOC spokeswoman Giselle Davies wrote in an e-mail. Nonetheless, the IOC feels the Beijing Games may help focus greater positive international attention on Darfur, she said.

The IOC hasn't been apolitical in the past. During the 1964 Tokyo Games, for example, South Africa was banned because of apartheid.

In the Darfur group's report, the majority of the companies, ranging from beer giant Anheuser-Busch Cos. to car sponsor Volkswagen AG were awarded failing grades for not addressing the issue 'in any meaningful way,' said Jill Savitt, the group's director.

Three of the sponsors who failed -- French software company Atos Origin SA, Samsung Electronics Co. and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., which owns the Panasonic brand -- didn't respond to the group's overtures at all, the report said.

Atos and Matsushita said they didn't think it was appropriate for them to comment on political matters related to the Olympic Games. A Samsung spokeswoman said the company wasn't certain who the Darfur group had contacted within the organization.

Aside from Lenovo, the Darfur group said it didn't contact Chinese sponsors and suppliers, largely because of language difficulties.

Almost all the companies said they believed that the Olympic Games would be a catalyst for more constructive dialogue between China and the rest of the world.

Companies that had received more favorable ratings on the report downplayed their roles as lobbyists. GE spokeswoman Deidre Latour said the company spoke to the IOC on a variety of issues, of which the Darfur issue was just one.

Adidas's global director of social and environmental affairs, Frank Henke, who described the nature of the company's discussions on Darfur as 'fact-finding, not lobbying,' said, 'I think they are exaggerating a little bit.'

Echoing many of the sponsors, GE's Ms. Latour said she thought the Darfur resolution should be conducted at United Nations level. 'It's not an Olympics issue,' she said.

In the past, Beijing has resisted pressure to improve its human-rights record both domestically and abroad. But the coming Summer Games have prompted China's leaders to respond to criticism, particularly over the country's handling of Darfur.

This month, the government, which buys two-thirds of Sudan's crude-oil output, sent a small peace-keeping unit to Darfur. In May, China appointed Liu Guijin, a senior diplomat, as special envoy to Darfur. It has also committed 40 million yuan, or about $5 million, in aid to Darfur, according Chu Maoming, spokesman for the Chinese embassy in Washington D.C.

In a letter published in April in The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Chu said China's economic ties with Sudan have benefited the Sudanese people. 'To blame China for the problem in Darfur not only attacks the wrong target, but is also most irresponsible,' he wrote.

So far, the biggest success of the Darfur activists appears to have been in swaying investors. Over the past year, pressure from such groups has prompted some U.S. colleges and investment funds to divest billions of dollars from companies linked to Sudan.

But Olympic sponsors may prove harder work. Despite paying for a significant portion of next year's Games running costs, many sponsors claim they don't have much influence with the Chinese government.

The Beijing Olympics have set records in sponsorship fees, with some sponsors paying more than $100 million, because many companies are eager to use the opportunity to tap China's booming markets, as well as to make vital connections within the Chinese government.

The Darfur group's Ms. Savitt said the group plans to step up activities as the Games approach, with planned demonstrations outside sponsors' headquarters, a consumer write-in campaign, and possibly even ads aimed at sponsors and the IOC. The group also plans to follow the Olympic torch relay, which will step off in Athens this March.

Ellen Freudenheim, who conducted research for the Darfur report, said the group hadn't demanded much from sponsors, merely that 'they raise the issue.' 'Olympic sponsorship should mean something. If you bask yourself in the halo of the Olympics, you have responsibilities.'

纽约激进组织“达尔富尔奥运梦”(Olympic Dream For Darfur)计划于周五发布一篇报告，根据19家奥运会赞助商和供应商在苏丹危机上的反应给它们打分；此举进一步表明，随着外界越发关注中国政府在海外的一举一动，将北京2008年奥运会政治化的氛围也日渐浓厚.

在过去六个月中，达尔富尔问题活动家一直在游说这些公司运用它们对国际奥林匹克委员会(International Olympic Committee, IOC)和中国政府的影响力，向苏丹政府施压，缓解当地冲突。苏丹政府军队与叛军之间已长达四年的内战导致了大范围的屠杀事件，令数百万人流离失所。

中国之所以与达尔富尔问题挂上钩是因为两国政府在经济、政治领域有着密切的关系。最近，中国还因与动用军队镇压平民的缅甸政府过从甚密而招致了类似批评。

由于北京方面满心希望奥运会能成为一个展示自己成就的大舞台，所以面对这些事件，激进分子都在试着利用奥运来向中国政府施压。

如果奥运会赞助商和供应商对苏丹人道危机表现出了关注并采取了行动，例如进行游说活动或向人道主义组织捐款等，那么达尔富尔奥运梦组织就会给他们加分。经过该组织的计算，19家公司中只有六家“及格”，而且没有哪家公司能拥有较高的得分。

通用电气公司(General Electric Co.)得分最高，为“C+”。报告称该公司的加分点在于其为达尔富尔人道主义事业捐出了200万美元、与IOC讨论过达尔富尔形势，而且该公司“表现出了对当前形势的理解”。

阿迪达斯(Adidas AG)和麦当劳(McDonald's Corp.)得分均为“C”，因二者分别与德国外交部和IOC讨论了达尔富尔问题。

可口可乐公司(Coca-Cola Co.)、强生公司(Johnson & Johnson)和联合包裹运送服务公司(United Parcel Services )因对该组织的建议作出回应而得到了“D”。可口可乐为达尔富尔人道主义事业而向红十字会与红新月会(Red Cross and Red Crescent)捐款75万美元。这家饮料行业巨头还表示计划举办一系列股东论坛，讨论在冲突地区开展业务的问题，可口可乐发言人Christina Lau称首场苏丹问题论坛将于今年年底前举办。

关于达尔富尔的争论令IOC陷入两难境地。IOC发言人吉塞尔•戴维斯(Giselle Davies)在一封邮件中写道：“我们不应该将奥运会政治化，无论它是在哪儿举行。”但是她又表示，IOC觉得北京奥运会可能有助于让达尔富尔得到积极的国际关注。

IOC过去并非对政治漠不关心。比如1964年的东京奥运会时南非就因奉行种族隔离政策而被禁止参赛。

在达尔富尔组织的报告中，从啤酒巨头安海斯公司(Anheuser-Busch Cos.)到汽车赞助商大众汽车(Volkswagen AG)在内的大多数公司得分都不及格。该组织负责人吉尔•萨维特(Jill Savitt)说，这是因为上述公司对这个问题没有采取任何有意义的行动。

报告称，法国软件公司Atos Origin SA、三星电子(Samsung Electronics Co.)和松下电器产业公司(Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.)这三家企业没有对该组织的提议作出任何回应，因而也被评为不及格。

Atos和松下表示，它们觉得自己不宜评论与奥运会有关的政治事件。三星的发言人则称其不清楚达尔富尔组织是与公司什么人探讨这一问题的。

达尔富尔奥运梦组织称其没有联络除联想(Lenovo)之外的中国赞助商和供应商，主要是因为存在语言障碍。

几乎所有公司都表示，它们相信奥运会将促使中国和世界其他国家进行更具建设性的对话。

在报告中获得较高评级的公司只是轻描淡写地谈到了自己的游说者角色。通用电气发言人迪德尔•拉图尔(Deidre Latour)说，公司就很多问题与IOC进行了讨论，达尔富尔问题只是其中之一。

阿迪达斯全球社会和环保事务主管弗兰克•亨克(Frank Henke)将其就达尔富尔问题的探讨定性为“寻求事实而非游说”，并表示他觉得达尔富尔组织略微夸大了这一点。

拉图尔表示她认为达尔富尔危机的化解应该在联合国层面进行，这并非与奥运会相关的问题。她的观点与许多赞助商不谋而合。

过去，中国政府在要求其改善国内外人权纪录的压力下一直呈抗拒姿态。但即将来临的奥运会促使中国领导人开始对批评做出回应，尤其是在达尔富尔问题方面。

中国这个苏丹三分之二原油产量的买家于本月向达尔富尔地区派遣了一小支维和部队。今年5月，中国任命资深外交官刘贵今为达尔富尔特使。此外，中国驻美大使馆发言人储茂明表示，中国还承诺向达尔富尔提供4,000万元（合500万美元）的援助。

在4月份发表于《华尔街日报》的一封信中，储茂明称中国与苏丹的经济关系令苏丹人民受益。他写道：因达尔富尔问题而指责中国不光是弄错了靶子，而且是极不负责任的行为。

迄今为止，达尔富尔激进分子取得的最大成就似乎就是令投资者改变了主意。去年，来自此类组织的压力已促使美国一些大学和投资基金从与苏丹有关的公司那里撤走了数十亿美元的投资。

但要影响奥运会赞助商可就更难了。虽然明年奥运会的举办费用中有相当大的一部分是由赞助商“埋单”的，但它们当中许多企业都表示无法对中国政府施加有力影响。

北京奥运会的赞助费已连创纪录，一些赞助商的赞助金额超过了1亿美元，因为许多公司急切地想要利用这个机会在中国繁荣的市场中一显身手，并与中国政府建立起至关重要的关系。

达尔富尔组织的萨维特说，随着奥运会的临近，该组织计划加强抗议活动，已在计划中的活动有：在赞助商的公司总部外游行、举行消费者签名活动，甚至还可能针对赞助商和IOC发放广告。该组织还计划跟随将于明年3月从雅典开始的奥运会火炬接力。

主持此次达尔富尔报告研究的艾伦•弗洛德海姆(Ellen Freudenheim)表示，该组织并没有向赞助商要求太多，只是要求他们重视这个问题。弗洛德海姆指出，奥运会赞助商这个身份是有意义的，这些企业沐浴在奥运光环之下，他们肩上理应承担一份责任。

• 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