In 1980, US President Jimmy Carter persuaded a number of African countries to boycott the Moscow Olympics, ostensibly because the then Soviet Union had invaded Afghanistan.

The result was total disaster, for the Games went right ahead, but Kenyan and Ethiopian athletes, renowned world-beaters, missed out on the action.

The Soviets didn't leave Afghanistan until they were routed many years later.

This time round, nobody is trying to persuade African countries to boycott the Beijing Olympics. However, there is a great deal of noise about China repressing Tibetans who are seeking independence for their region which China regards as one of its provinces.

What is happening is rather laughable. As if it will make any difference besides antagonising China, Western leaders led by US President George Bush, are vowing to boycott the Games' opening ceremony, while others like UK's Gordon Brown are saying they will attend only the closing ceremony.

We hold no brief for the People's Republic of China, and we cannot support its strong arm tactics against the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan people.

But at the same time, we condemn the hypocrisy evident in the West's self-righteous preachments about human rights abuse in Tibet. Why is nobody cutting sporting links with the US and the UK for invading and occupying Iraq?

When China tells the world to delink politics from sports, theirs are self-serving sentiments because they seem to favour suppression over dialogue with the Dalai Lama. But even he does not support a boycott of the Olympics. Why should Western leaders?