kingdom and canada all followed suit. china in turn warned countries would pay a price for their boycotts. what does all of this mean? joining me again, anne applebaum and ian bremmer. ian, this move with china does seem to be part of a kind of expression of the balancing act that the united states is now trying to play with china. on the one hand, athletes are participating in a sense the united states is participating, but there won t be any government officials there. it feels like an effort to metaphorically have the same policy towards china, which is some deterrence, some toughness but at the same time recognizing the reality it s a big trading partner. and recognition if biden loses votes at home and he s seen too soft on china, like they did in 2020 as a consequence of the whole biden asia trope.
expression of the balancing act that the united states is now trying to play with china. on the one hand, athletes are participating, in a sense the united states is participating, but there won t be any government officials there. it feels like an effort to metaphorically have the same policy towards china, which is some deterrence, some toughness but at the same time recognizing the reality it s a big trading partner. and recognition that biden loses votes at home and he s seen too soft on china, like they did in 2020 as a consequence of the whole biden asia trope. so they did move ahead with a diplomatic boycott. but, frankly, it s not just that the athletes are still going. there s no economic going or sponsors to pull out of the olympics. we ve seen a number of different signs, small but matter, that show the american and chinese are trying to find ways to