The Olympics and Political Presence

Throughout the twentieth century, there was hope that sports would improve foreign relations and create a model for cultural, economic, and political relationships. However, recent history shows that most nations use sport to pursue self-interests rather than international understanding (Coakley, 2007). There is a certain level of prestige associated with hosting global sporting events, such as the Olympic Games. This prestige is the subject of most nations’ objectives in establishing a global initiative toward sport. The theory goes further to reveal the politically–based competitive nature of participating nations. The Olympics can provide international recognition and the platform to exercise political power through sport.

It is not difficult to prove that events like the Olympics hold global political influence. If anything, the Olympics can provide a platform for political and cultural ideologies to be set forth. In the 1972 Munich Olympic Games, members of the Israeli Olympic team (see image below) were held hostage and executed by a Palestinian militant group associated with Yasser Arafat’s Fatah organization. Since it had only been 27 years since World War II had ended, an Israeli team participating in the Olympics being held in Germany was significant in many ways. The Jewish team members felt they were taking a stance against the Nazi’s of the past, by showing the resilience of their people. As in this case, nations often link political and religious ideology. On a global impact, the 1972 Olympic Games created an unimaginable display of political influence in sport.

In 1980, the Moscow (Soviet Union) Olympics saw the largest boycott ever by the United States and 61 other countries, protesting the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Many nations participated in a secondary event in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania called the “Liberty Bell Classic”. Fifteen countries that participated in the Moscow Olympics, protested in the Opening Ceremony by marching the Olympic flag rather than their national flags. When competitors won medals, the Olympic Hymn and Olympic flag were used.

In 2001, talk began to center on Beijing and the 2008 Olympic games. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) granted Beijing the Olympics under the proviso that human rights in China would improve. However, many countries considered boycotting the games altogether. During the games, it was difficult to hide the competitiveness between China and the United States for the medal race. According to Sports Illustrated, following being awarded the games, China launched “Project 119” which was an initiative designed to improve their medal take in the 2008 Olympics. The project was representative of the 119 gold medals that were awarded in the 2000 games, of which China only received one. At the end of the 2008 Olympics, China received the highest ever – a total of 100 medals (51 gold). The United States received 110 total medals, only 36 being gold (Meyer, 2009). The political power implications in this case are undeniable. China is a communist nation, hosting a global initiated sporting event, driving economic growth and competing as a top-tier athletic organization in the Olympics. Representation of political power can be achieved through the Olympics, case and point – China.