IHT reports about the growing conflict that many 2008 Summer Olympic athletes have between their personal social conscious and the desire to compete and win at the games. Note, though, that this is not just about the recent Tibet action, but also over China influence in Darfur.

Whether speaking to a group of young softball players or plying her teammates with literature, Jessica Mendoza, a 27-year-old outfielder on the United States Olympic softball team, does not hesitate to speak her mind about the killings in Darfur.

But Mendoza stops short of publicly condemning China, which has close ties to the government of Sudan, because she says it is impolite to criticize her Olympic hosts and because one of her sponsors, Nike, has a major marketing presence in China.

With growing protests in Tibet and pressure mounting on Olympic sponsors to denounce China for its policy on Darfur, socially conscious athletes said they were struggling to figure out how to honor their beliefs while also respecting the purpose of the Olympic Games — the celebration of athletic excellence.

The complexity of this comes not only from internal views, but external pressures such as a country’s own Olympic body or perhaps even an athlete’s sponsor:

Rule 51 of the Olympic charter, the constitution of the Olympic movement, forbids athletes from participating in a “demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda” at Olympic sites. When the International Olympic Committee identifies a possible violation of Rule 51, it asks the Olympic Committee of the athlete’s country to investigate. Depending on the outcome, Olympians can be disqualified or sent home.

The question of whether Olympic athletes will have the right to express political views in Beijing erupted in February, after news that Britain and New Zealand were planning to require that athletes sign contracts barring them from speaking about politically sensitive issues. Both countries quickly reversed course.