The Other Side of The Olympics




  • In Archive
  • 2014-02-21 22:27:43
  • By
  • 274 Views
As the excitement around the Winter Olympics continues, members of the AUBG community, including president Michael Easton, gathered in Panitza Library on February 19 for a presentation regarding the role the biggest sports forum plays in international relations. Prof. Nicholas Spina and Prof. Cosmina Tanasoiu talked about the political aspect of the Olympics.  The lecture was organized by the The Department of Politics and European Studies & AUBG's Political Science Club. Tanasoui started off by explaining how besides being a sports event that unites states around the world, the Olympics are a stage of contest between them about influence and credibility. It's the fight between them that doesn't include guns and army. She explained how the games have been used to build up national pride and accomplish economic and social benefits. Spina continued with details about the IOC (International Olympics Commitee) which organizes and stages the Olympics. He stated that though it’s a non-governmental organization, it plays a significant role in international relations. It's in fact a political actor, just like any other state, the EU and UN. The IOC provides the rules, standards and drug testing. And most importantly, they choose where the Olympics will be held. The problem is that the IOC is neither democratic, nor transparent.  Its members do not represent states, they represent the idea of the Olympics, but it's not an accountable organization and they don't need to answer to anybody. It's a self-recruited club, with disproportionate representation of states, genders, royalties, independents and actual athletes. Spina noted that the last are, in fact, poorly represented. "It’s supposed to promote people and not states, but we know that in the end, that’s not the case." said Spina. “You really can’t talk about the IOC without talking about corruption - it’s been in the heart of the game since its creation in 1894” He explained how due to the fact that a group of people grant such a highly profitable event the necessary media attention, they’ve been subject to different types of bribes over the years.Doping is another big problem of the Olympics, as the statistics clearly show how many people have been caught taking supplements. The expenses that come with putting up an Olympic Game event mean that it’s limited to a few contries that can actually afford to participate. Moreover, it's reserved for states which can spend so much without fear of losing credibility in the eyes of the population.  The Sochi 2014 are by far the most costly Olympic Games, with its expenses being estimated at more than 40 billion dollars. Spina noted that cases of people changing their nationalities in order to compete under a different flag is not uncommon, which has raised questions about the ethics of the games. In terms of diplomacy, an interesting aspect of the games is the idea that during the course of the Olympics, the states that are part of the UN have agreed not to fight against each other. This may seem nice, but on the other hand there’s the other rule that political, religious and social demonstrations are forbidden in the city where the games take place. Which means that the IOC, which is a non-elected, non-transparent and non-governmental organization is telling the sovereign state what to do. It’s handing over soft power to a state. The expenses that come with setting up an Olympic Game event mean that it is limited to a few countries that can actually afford it. Moreover, it's preserved for states which can spend so much without fear of losing credibility in the eyes of the population. “Is such a state democratic?” asked Spina. Political boycott has also been present over the years. The Olympics are, along with everything else, a commercial event. The logo itself and the broadcasting rights are worth billions. Tanasoiu then brought attention to the opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympics. She described them as “highly choreographed moments of national propaganda”. Their purpose is to project an image about how the state wants to be perceived by the world. The Sochi 2014 was no different – Russia did its best to show the excellence of what they do with a lavish display of cultural references. The opening ceremony was their chance to point out their accomplishments over the course of history and we are yet to see what they’ll think of for the closing. Tanasoiu made a comparison between this year’s Olympics and the London 2012 Games in order to show the different approaches the two states had. Tanasoiu also talked about the patterns in the outcome of Summer and Winter Olympics. She explained how the geographical factor determines at large the sphere in which the athletes can gain excellence. An example was that if you live in Madagascar and you want to run, you can just go out and do so, but skiing is another thing. Still, in terms of numbers, the great powers hold the top in the Summer Olympics. But different states have proven to be prominent in winter sports, like Norway which holds the record for golden, silver and bronze medals. A common practice is for a state to specialize in a certain sport in which it dominates, like the skeleton for Britain and hockey for Canada. Another difference between the Summer and Winter Olympics is the emphasis on individual and collective sports. “They say the loneliest place in the world is to be a skater in the middle of the ring when you start your routine” said Tanasoiu. After the presentation the audience was encouraged to ask questions. A student asked Spina what was his opinion of the Olympics after all that's been said. He answered that despite everything, it's still the largest peaceful event in international relations.