Ideally, I think everyone should boycott the Beijing Olympics, but as has been stated, the issue of whether you approve of another country isn't black and white. You mention Pakistan and Musharraf - the fact is that Musharraf and the army, undemocratic and corrupt as they are, are the only thing holding that country together as a functional state. If they were ousted and the religious loonies over the got into power then we're all for a **** of a time - and the Pakistani people are in for a worse time. They're probably the best option for the Pakistani people, and as such are probably the lesser of the evils available for the time being.
China regime is abhorrent in many ways, but is again different from Zimbabwe. They are working to significantly improve the standard of living for people in China, with notable successes, and while that doesn't excuse their human rights violations, it does, in combination with their increasing willingness to act as a mature and constructive international citizen, mean that its worth trying to work with them to lead them to a better way of behaviour.
Or is the cosying up to China more likely to be a case of economic convenience ? We all lknow that Western companies want to take advantage of China's lower labour costs.....from Boeing moving its construction plants to the likes of Microsoft instituting their research centres in Beijing and Shanghai. With so much money invested there, surely human rights details pale into insignificance.
China has showed no sign of giving up Tibet or renouncing its claim to Taiwan. It continues its arms buildup at an alarming rate and has sought to build bases and influence throughout SE Asia and the Pacific.
Amnesty International itself has admitted that China, despite increased globalization has not resulted in any great improvement in press freedom or basic human rights if at all.
You'd be seriously deluded if you think China's character has changed simply because they have de-regulated their economy.
As for Pakistan, dude I'm Pakistani myself......if you seriously think Musharraf is the only possible good ruler Pakistan can have, you don't know very much about Pakistan I'm afraid.
Pakistan is basically run by MUsharraf and his set of cronies who have economic and personal interests invested in Western countries such as the UK and the USA. the USA needs Musharraf in place so that Central Asian gas can flow from the Uzbek and Kazakh republics to the ports of Gwadar and Karachi. In return, they guarantee the safety of his interests.
So in effect, you have a "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours". situation.
Democracy, or the lack of it, is completely irrelevant to all parties concerned.
The whole "Pakistan is a religious tinderbox" issue is seriously overplayed by the media......most of those ultra-religious parties have very little real influence despite their rhetoric.
Real Power in Pakistan remains in the hands of the select few.....
I should also point out that the USA has always supported miltary dictatorships in Pakistan even well before 9/11......so the argument that Musharraf is being supported because he is the best option because of these these troubled times doesn't really hold much water.
