Utterly contradictory stories are emerging about how long Tibet will remain shut down to tourists.

I bet it will stay sealed off till after the Olympics in August.

You may recall how China said a few weeks ago that Tibet would reopen May 1. But officials later seemed to think better of that plan. They postponed the opening date indefinitely. Some foreign tour groups apparently got antsy, and the central government probably didn’t want to completely destroy the Tibet tourism industry. So before the weekend, state media announced that Tibet would reopen “soon.”

Here’s what China Daily said:

The Tibet regional government on Friday rejected reports it has abandoned a plan to reopen the region to foreign tourists on May 1, saying it "will open soon", without giving a specific date.

In a written statement sent to China Daily, the information office of the regional government said: "The Tibet tourism bureau is doing its utmost to prepare for the reopening of all scenic spots."

The same day this news came out, I heard on very good authority that top diplomats at the U.S. Embassy don’t believe Tibet will reopen till September. After all, why take needless risks that foreigners will embarrass China when the Olympic torch passes through Tibet later this spring? Or worse yet, mount some sort of protest during the Games themselves?

Speaking of the torch, I wrote a story last Friday about how the relay has turned into a debacle for China and for the advertisers. As I was reporting the story, I contacted Dick Pound, a name that might ring a bell for some of you. Mr. Pound is a Canadian lawyer who made quite a name for himself with his aggressive tactics while serving as chief of the World Anti-Doping Agency. He remains an International Olympic Committee member.

I didn’t hear from Mr. Pound until after my deadline. But I don’t want to waste his remarks on why he thinks the global torch relay is a bad idea. So here’s the email he sent me:

I have always had doubts about the value of an international torch relay, especially when a super-power is the host country. My Olympic Games Study Commission recommended against anything but a domestic relay.  The costs, logistics and risks far outweigh any possible benefits. What Olympic “uptick” can possibly result in foreign countries where the torch spends half a day?

The IOC should have been more alert to the problems that are now being encountered.  It is very easy for pressure groups to attach their issues to a vulnerable and peaceful symbol such as the Olympic flame.

The violence of the protests on this occasion have, however, removed all the moral high ground from underneath the protesters.  It is not credible to protest against violence by resorting to violence in other countries.
    RWP