The Effects of World Politics on Olympic Games

Sports and Politics: An Interconnected Relationship

Sports and politics are regarded as different activities and cannot affect each other. However, contrary to this popular belief, politics has affected sporting activities in different nations across the globe. World politics have influenced sports both positively and adversely, which was evident during the Cold War. Here, world politics resulted in several nations boycotting the major Olympic events. The International Olympics Committee was unsuccessful in preventing politics from interfering in the Olympics Games during the Cold War[1]. Political interference was very visible, especially in the 1980 Moscow and the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, respectively. At this point, sports became a political tool to advance political ideologies for the Communist and Capitalist Nations. The Olympics were at the centre of world politics and were used to spearhead the Cold War. America boycotted the 1980 Summer Olympics while Russia boycotted 1984 games. This paper analyses the 1980 Moscow and 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, to argue how world politics has interfered with the Olympic Games.

Negative Effects of World Politics to Olympic Games

Planning of the Olympic Games

The world politics have affected the planning of the Olympic Games. In this case, the Cold War brought many uncertainties during the planning of the 1980 and 1984 Olympic events. The planning of the 1980 Olympics was greatly affected by the withdrawal of the United States of America. In this case, American athletes were not happy with the decision of their president to boycott the competition despite it being a matter of peace for the whole world. Although the events continued as planned in Russia, they did not bear the intended results. There was a minimum number of athletes who participated in the event. The minimum participation by athletes was because the United States of America used the Cold War politics to encourage other countries not to attend the Moscow event. Therefore, it is clear that Cold War politics was a nuisance to the planning and organization of the Russian Olympic Games in 1980.

In 1980, the Soviet Union and the United States were at the heart of a predominant Cold War between them. Each state claimed that its foreign policy was the most effective for promoting peace across the world. However, a year before the Olympic Games, in December 1979, the Soviet’s invaded Afghanistan and the US saw this as a threat to world peace and security[2]. Therefore, the only action required the US to uphold economic and political sanctions against Russia, and therefore, the Olympics boycott was used as a move to counter Russia’s invasion of Afghanistan[3]. Most people were against the move to boycott the Russian Olympics, but the US continued to influence the international community and succeeded in convincing 62 more countries not to participate. According to them, it was a success in the Cold War, but to the world of Olympic games, it was a great undermining to the planning of sports event across the world. Moreover, it was evident that world politics had succeeded in interfering with the planning of the Olympic Games in Moscow 1980.

Moreover, the planning of the 1984 Olympic Games in Los Angeles met another blow when Russia pulled out of the competition. Russia claimed that its athletes were at risk when participating in the competition due to the planned victimization of Russian people and athletes cited security concerns [4]. However, it was considered another effect of Cold War politics where the Soviet Union was reciprocating the actions of the United States of America when they boycotted the Moscow 1980 Olympic Games[5]. The matter brought about differences between the International Olympic Committee, The Los Angeles Olympic Committee, and the Soviet Union Olympic committee. Despite these differences, the Los Angeles Olympic committee wanted to make the competition a success story for the United States of America and capitalism. Political interference was evident, meaning that the Cold War politics were interfering with the planning of the Los Angeles Olympic Games. Capitalism and communism politics could not be distinguished from the competitions, implying that world politics had an adverse effect on the planning of the Olympic Games.

Interfering with Airing and Broadcasting of Olympic Games

World politics interferes with airing and broadcasting of Olympic Games across the world. The broadcasting of the 1980 Olympic Games was greatly interfered with, by the increased propaganda by the United States, which resulted in fewer airing hours for the event. In Britain, the British Independent Television reduced its airing hours from 157 hours to about 40 hours, and they did not even broadcast the highlights. Also, the case was observed in Japan and other media houses across the globe. The Olympic boycott by America had a motive to prolong its Cold War against Russia. Therefore, the US did everything necessary to make sure the Russian Olympics failed. The US government was greatly against communism, which was the face of the 1980 Moscow Olympics where the Communist States were to emerge victorious. The Americas used negative publicity to influence media houses to reduce the airtime for the 1980 Olympics. The move was considered as barbaric and incoherent with sports objectives. Therefore, this fact proves that world politics prevented the spread of Olympic news across the world due to the conventional Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States of America.

Compromising Peace and Security of Athletes

World politics may be used to compromise the security and peace of athletes during the Olympic Games. In this case, the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union was considered to be a threat to peace and stability in Afghanistan and other neighboring Southwest Asian countries. The United States of America considered the move by Russia as inconsistent with ideals of maintaining peace across the world. Nevertheless, the United States of America took the opportunity to warn Russia of its impending danger that it would cause to athletes due to the continued aggression. The US believed that the aggressions would prompt an attack on the traveling fans and athletes since they may be at the center of an attack. Due to this, the US used the 1980 boycott to justify compromising the peace of athletes. Moreover, the Soviet Union feared for its involvement in the 1980 Los Angeles Olympic Games as a result of threats to attack Russians. They withdrew out of the competition stating that the security of the Soviet athletes and people got not be protected in the hands of Americans. The Soviet Union Olympic Committee protested that its athletes and people were at risk in the United States and the government could not protect them.

Spreading of Political Ideologies

On the other hand, world politics used the Olympic Games to propagate ideologies. The ideological movement is against the principle of sports to promote peace and coexistence among nations. The Russian ideology was to promote a socialist foreign policy while the American ideology was to uphold capitalism among all nations. Therefore, Russia wanted to move the communist ideology using the 1980 Olympics in Moscow while the US wanted to spread capitalism using the Los Angeles Olympics. In 1980, communist states were encouraged to participate in large numbers and emerge victorious at the event. Eventually, most of the communist nations participated and were exemplary[6]. The Soviet Union wanted to use the avenue as an opportunity to show the world that the socialist foreign policy was the most effective policy in the world. Any loss would mean to them that capitalism is superior[7]. Therefore, the Soviet Union performed well amassing most of the gold medals. However, in 1984 it was a different story where a capitalist nation hosted the games. The event’s opening ceremony was graced by President Ronald Reagan who emphasized capitalism as the best policy[8]. The Los Angeles Olympic Games were highly commercialized through the sale of tickets and broadcasting rights. The strategies brought much revenue after the competition which labeled capitalism as the best ideal for hosting the Olympic Games. No losses were incurred as was the case in Moscow and many athletes participated compared to those in Mexico. The Los Angeles Olympics was a justification of which ideology was superior-communism or capitalism-yet it was clear that capitalism was the best ideology since it brought about a lot of profits. However, sports were to be used to promote peace but not to enhance political ideology differences.

Discouraging Participation by Some Nations in Olympic Competition

Moreover, world politics may discourage some nations from participating in the Olympic Games. In this case, I consider states that were allied to the United States of America and those allied to the Soviet Union. During the 1980 Olympics, the US boycott greatly influenced a total of 62 states discouraging them from participating in the Moscow Olympics. Also, during the 1984 Olympic Games in Los Angeles, Russia influenced 14 communist nations from attending the competition held in America. The warring nations, that is, the Soviet Union and the United States used their ideological differences to persuade other nations from participating in the Olympic competition. Despite ideological differences, some countries did not just agree with the invasion of Afghanistan, for example, Saudi Arabia. They withdrew from the 1980 Olympics as a result of the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979. Also, they were joined by other nations from Asia and Africa who did not participate in the Moscow 1980 Olympics. In some of the western allied nations, the Olympic committees disagreed with government decision to boycott the 1980 Olympics in a protest to political interference in sports events. Therefore, there is a need to prevent world politics from interfering with the Olympic Games so that it may not discourage other nation’s participation in the Olympics. Olympic Games are meant for all countries in the world to participate and uphold the status of its athletes. They are viewed as a competition between individuals but not a competition among nations.

Undermining the Role of International Olympic Committee and Individual State Olympic Committees

The world politics undermine the role of international sports organizations in the execution of their roles. The role of the International Olympic committee was greatly undermined due to the events of the 1980 Olympic boycott by the United States of America. The International Olympic Committee has the responsibility of organizing and planning Olympic competitions in different countries across the world. The committee coordinates the role of individual state Olympic committees on matters relating to Olympic Games. During the 1980 boycott, The US president Jimmy Carter tried to persuade the chairman of the IOC to move the competition from Moscow to anthems in Greece.[9]

The matter was not greatly received by the IOC which claimed it could not move the event from Moscow since the US was using politics to influence Olympic Games. They adamantly claimed that the Olympic Games are held among individuals and not nations. Therefore, this was another instance of world politics interfering Olympic Games. The games are organized by independent international organizations which should not be influenced by politics in any country.

Additionally, apart from undermining the role of International Olympics Committee, the world politics affects the role of local or individual state Olympic Committees. The role of the United States Olympic Committee was much affected by politics during the 1980 Olympic boycott. President Jimmy Carter directed them not to participate in the Olympic Games since the Moscow Olympic s was a political risk. Although some of the committee members were displeased with that decision, they uphold the president’s direction to boycott the games in Moscow. The athletes felt betrayed and were greatly agitated by the Olympic committee actions. They expected it to act independently of government decisions. Also, during the 1984 Olympic boycott by Russia, the Soviet Union government influenced the Soviet Union Olympic committee to withdraw from the Los Angeles Olympics. The committee was advised to claim the existence of security risk of Russian athletes in America. They claimed the US government actions of the US and the Soviet Union government showed how politics affects Olympic Games. However, in some western ally nations, the Olympic committees disagreed with government opinion of Olympic boycott. Britain, France, and Belgium participated in the 1980 Olympics claiming there should be no political interference in sporting activities. The committees showed a great intent of independence and resilience to avoid political intervention in sports.

Undermining the Role of Athletes

Finally, Olympic boycotts of 1980 and 1984 showed how world politics undermine the rights of athletes to exercise and showcase their talents and gifts. In 1980, the United States athletes were denied a chance to participate in the Moscow Olympics despite preparing adequately for the event. They were agitated by the government’s decision and were disappointed by the decision. The boycott showed that the government ignored the role of athletes in upholding the name of a country and raising its flag higher. Athletes use Olympic competitions as revenue-generating activities since it is a form of employment for them[10]. Moreover, in the US African-American athletes believed it was only through participating in sports that it would reduce the oppression by the whites in the country. They felt denial of their right to exercise a sovereign duty to fight for their space in the United States. Moreover, when athletes participate in the Olympic Games they are used to foster peaceful coexistence between nations hence at that opportunity both American and Russian athletes would come together and uphold peace among them. Recently in 2016, cases of politics undermining the role and rights of athletes were experienced in South Korea where athletes were banned from participating in the summer Olympics in Rio, Brazil.

Other Effects of World Politics to Olympic Games

However, as much as the world politics influence Olympic games, negatively there are cases of positive impact. First, in the United States of America, it was clear that the Olympic Games can be used as an income-generating activity. The politics in place was the application of the capitalism foreign policy which was mainly spearheaded by the United States[11]. The events generated revenue of over $200 million which meant that the Olympic Games could be commercialized. The success of the Los Angeles Olympics brought about a new era of Olympics in which a new ideal was adopted. The US proved to the world that Olympic games are an avenue to generate profits. The profits were obtained through the selling of broadcasting rights and tickets. Most of the tickets were sold since there were many participating nations at the Olympics. Nowadays the Olympic Games are not only used as avenues for recreation but also, they are used to create employment opportunities and increase the market for the hosting nation’s products.

Therefore, all countries need to ensure their politics do not interfere with the Olympic Games hosted in that country.

Also, world politics used the Olympic Games to spearhead global peace. The American boycott was a move to stop Russia from its aggression in the east. The US used the boycott to influence nations that did not agree with the foreign policy used by Russia[13]. Russia had invaded Afghanistan, and this had angered the US. Therefore, to ensure peace, President Carter had to instigate an Olympic boycott to prevent Russia from continuing with its aggression in other countries[14]. Moreover, the boycott was considered the most effective political action that could not lead to military action between the Soviet Union and the United States of America, countries at the center of the Cold War. President Carter was against military action since the people considered him as soft and one who believed in the promotion of human rights and reduction in arms production[15].

Also, world politics helped to identify the role of the Olympics in culminating the Cold War[16]. The Olympic Games were used as a tool for war by the Soviet Union and the United States, and it is through the Olympics where the best foreign policy was identified. The Soviet’s believed that socialism or communism was the best foreign policy. However, during the Moscow 1980 Olympics, it resulted in losses, and very few athletes participated in the competition. On the other hand, in the Los Angeles Olympics, capitalism was used and yielded profits for the Olympic competition. Henceforth, it was believed that the United States of America had won the Cold War since capitalism was the best foreign policy. Due to this, capitalism was adopted in gracing Olympic events afterward due to commercialization and increased broadcasting[17]. However, the Olympic Games need not be used as a tool for politics, but it helped the world to end the Cold War which led to the invasion of innocent nations in the world. The boycott by the United States helped to reduce threats to peace in Southwest Asia. Therefore, Olympics should be used to promote stability and peaceful coexistence among nations. For example, recently, the winter Olympics in Russia helped to loosen ties between the United States and Russia.

Conclusion

All in all, politics affects sports both positively and negatively. In 1980, politics influenced sports adversely. Some countries were discouraged from participating in the events. On the other hand, politics was beneficial to the sporting events in 1984. The Capitalist Approach led to the amassment of profits during the Olympics in Los Angeles. Consequently, this made politics to be crucial to sporting events as evidenced by the analysis of the 1980 and 1984 Olympics Boycott. The effects are not imperative to the participating nations but also directly to the participating athletes. Although the International Olympics Committee maintains that politics does not have any space in sports, it was evident from the 1980 and 1984 Olympics that it does. The Olympics were used to execute political plans by the nations involved in the Cold War. The Cold War happened between the Soviet Union and the United States[18]. The US used the Olympic Games as a strategy to emerge victorious with its Foreign Capitalist Policy against the Socialist Policy of the Soviet Union. Sports were used to drive these policies for the warring nations, and thus, the United States used Olympics as a strategy to win the Cold War. Therefore, we should strive to distinguish world politics and Olympic games since they both play different roles. Olympic games should be enforced on principles of fostering international peace and coexistence thus there is a need for minimal political interference in Olympic games.

Bibliography

Journal Articles

Bart, Jeroen. “From Offense to Defence: The Political Discourse and Use of Sports in Putin’s Russia from a Historical Perspective.” (2017).

Hao, Yuxiang. ”The International Olympic Committee faced with political interference: winning the battle between the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of China, 1952-1979.” Ph.D. diss., 2015.

Lane, Deserae. ”Sports and foreign policy: President Jimmy Carter and the 1980 Moscow Olympics boycott.” (2018).

Mandelbaum, Michael. ”Foreign policy as social work.” Foreign Affairs (1996): 16-32

Ojala, Markus, and Mervi Pantti. ”Naturalising the new Cold War: The geopolitics of framing the Ukrainian conflict in four European newspapers.” Global Media and Communication 13, no. 1 (2017): 41-56.

Sykes, Jen, and Lisa Tiersten. ”Running a Political Campaign through the Olympics: Carter and the Boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics.” (2017).

Newspaper Articles

Caraccioli, Tom, and Jerry Caraccioli. Boycott: Stolen Dreams of the 1980 Moscow Olympic Games. New Chapter Press, 2008.

Carter, Ashton B., and William J. Perry. Preventive defence: a new security strategy for America. Brookings Institution Press, 2000.

Tomlinson, Alan, and Christopher Young, eds. National identity and global sports events: Culture, politics, and spectacle in the Olympics and the football World Cup. SUNY Press, 2006.

Electronic Source

Betty Glad, ”The Real Jimmy Carter,” Foreign Policy, January 1, 2010,

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/21/the_real_jimmy_carter?page=0,2

Books

Chien, P. Monica, Sarah J. Kelly, and Chelsea Gill. ”Identifying objectives for mega-event leveraging: a non-host city case.” Marketing Intelligence & Planning 36, no. 2 (2018): 168-184.

D’Agati, Philip A. 2013. Cold War and the 1984 Olympic Games: Soviet-American surrogate war New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hanhimäki, J.M., 2018. Threat or Opportunity?, Kissinger, Brzezinski, and the demise of the Soviet Union. In New Perspectives on the End of the Cold War (pp. 24-43). Routledge

MacLean, Malcolm. ”Artificially Natural: A Brief History of Modern Sport.“ In Design for Sport, pp. 47-66. Routledge, 2017.

Riordan, James. ”The impact of communism on sports.” In The international politics of sport in the twentieth century, pp. 58-76. Routledge, 2002.

Rossinow, Doug. The Reagan Era: A History of the 1980s. Columbia University Press, 2015.

[1] Hao, Yuxiang. ”The International Olympic Committee faced with political interference: winning the battle between the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of China, 1952-1979.” Ph.D. diss., 2015.

[2] Mandelbaum, Michael. ”Foreign policy as social work.” Foreign Affairs (1996): 16-32

[3] Carter, Ashton B., and William J. Perry. Preventive defence: a new security strategy for America. Brookings Institution Press, 2000.

[4] D’Agati, Philip A. 2013. The Cold War and the 1984 Olympic Games: Soviet-American surrogate war New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

[5] Hanhimäki, J.M., 2018. Threat or opportunity? Kissinger, Brzezinski, and the demise of the Soviet Union. In New Perspectives on the End of the Cold War (pp. 24-43). Routledge

[6] Lane, Deserae. ”Sports and foreign policy: President Jimmy Carter and the 1980 Moscow Olympics boycott.” (2018).

[7] Riordan, James. ”The impact of communism on sports.” In The international politics of sport in the twentieth century, pp. 58-76. Routledge, 2002.

[8] Rossinow, Doug. The Reagan Era: A History of the 1980s. Columbia University Press, 2015.

[9] Sykes, Jen, and Lisa Tiersten. ”Running a Political Campaign through the Olympics: Carter and the Boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics.” (2017).

[10] Caraccioli, Tom, and Jerry Caraccioli. Boycott: Stolen Dreams of the 1980 Moscow Olympic Games. New Chapter Press, 2008.

[11] Tomlinson, Alan, and Christopher Young, eds. National identity and global sports events: Culture, politics, and spectacle in the Olympics and the football World Cup. SUNY Press, 2006.

[12] Chien, P. Monica, Sarah J. Kelly, and Chelsea Gill. ”Identifying objectives for mega-event leveraging: a non-host city case.” Marketing Intelligence & Planning 36, no. 2 (2018): 168-184.

[13] Sykes, Jen, and Lisa Tiersten. ”Running a Political Campaign through the Olympics: Carter and the Boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics.“ (2017).

[14] Lane, Deserae. ”Sports and foreign policy: President Jimmy Carter and the 1980 Moscow Olympics boycott.” (2018).

[15] Betty Glad, ”The Real Jimmy Carter,” Foreign Policy, January 1, 2010,

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/21/the_real_jimmy_carter?page=0,2

[16] Ojala, Markus, and Mervi Pantti. ”Naturalising the new Cold War: The geopolitics of framing the Ukrainian conflict in four European newspapers.” Global Media and Communication 13, no. 1 (2017): 41-56.

[17] MacLean, Malcolm. ”Artificially Natural: A Brief History of Modern Sport.” In Design for Sport, pp. 47-66. Routledge, 2017.

[18] Bart, Jeroen. ”From Offense to Defence: The Political Discourse and Use of Sports in Putin’s Russia from a Historical Perspective.” (2017).