6 Mar 2014

Boycott on cards as Putin visits Sochi Paralympics

There is a rumour doing the rounds that President Putin is now in Sochi. More than a rumour – a strong suggestion that he will be at the athletes village in person to formally welcome Russia’s Paralympic team. Nothing unusual or untoward there. The president of the Paralympic host nation like any good patriot getting behind his boys and girls.

But let us consider what is going on behind the scenes for a moment. Clearly, this evening –  at least for a few moments – sport and politics will be mixing.  Literally and metaphorically.

Yet the position so often stated by sports administrators – the International Paralympic Committee included – is that sports and politics should not cross paths. There are often good reasons for this.  Athletes should have the chance to compete whatever obstacles politicians may place in the way.

But what about when the matter at stake is potentially of global significance?

Do not doubt that Russia’s protection/occupation/invasion of Crimea, call it what you will, is casting an inescapable shadow over these games.

The legality of events aside, in sporting terms, one thing is abundantly clear.  The Ukranian Paralympic Committee has issued a stern and distinctly political ultimatum. Russian troops must get out of Crimea (presumably they mean the ones that weren’t there already as part of Russia’s Black Sea fleet) by tomorrow, or they will boycott the games.

We’ve heard a lot about boycotts already – western politicians, british included, are refusing to attend the Sochi games in protest at Russia’s recent actions in Ukraine. But politicians staying away is one thing.

One doubts whether President Putin will lose much sleep over Britian refusing to send its sports minister.  But what Ukraine is threatening something of a different magnitude altogether – a sporting boycott.

image

The kind of thing that the Moscow and LA Olympics will forever be remembered for. The height of the Cold War.

Would a Sochi boycott cause embarrassment for President Putin?

Maybe, maybe not. He’s not known for playing to the gallery outside his country. Like most successful politicians, he realises it’s the people who are able to vote for him that count. Although many have observed that voting is in itself not without controversy here in Russia, given Putin’s uncanny ability to keep a firm grip on power.

But back to the small matter of political change across the border in Ukraine.

Russia’s justification for their presence in Crimea is to protect Russian citizens. Many Ukrainians feel and speak Russian. Crimea was not that long ago part of Russia. So for the Ukranian team to refuse to play with their Russian brethren on the field of sporting competition is a big deal.

Which is where it gets more interesting still.

The president of the Ukranian Paralympic committee – is a sportsman yes, but a politican too.  And by all accounts a keen supporter of the new europhile west-leaning administration.  The very administration Putin says stole power in a court d’état.

It’s not that surprising then that he’s apparently ready to take a political stand.

He told me this afternoon that at 1pm tomorrow the team will hold a press conference and reveal their decision.  to boycott or not to boycott.  Let’s face it though, it’s unlikely this threat will have forced Russian troops back across the Crimean border by then.

And the latest noises off suggest the Ukranians may be moving back from the brink. Ukraine had been refusing to finish their Paralympic paperwork all week but apparently they’ve now nominated a flag bearer – they’re ready to compete if they choose to.

Which is what the IPC of course desperately want to see.

This is the biggest professional challenge many of these athletes will ever face.  They are a sporting organisation, and in pure sporting terms, supporting a boycott is arguably a bit like asking a politician to stand down on the eve of an election.

So the IPC position is that if the Ukraine team do boycott, they’ll look at finding ways for individual athletes to still compete.  That is only fair.

For identity is nothing if not complex.

What if some of the athletes consider themselves as Russian as they are Ukranian? What if they want to ‘defect’ as it were? What if they take no political stand whatsoever, and just wish to do their jobs?  Could they, for example, compete under an IPC flag?

The IPC are looking at the options, I was told today.  But until Ukraine make a formal decision, they just don’t know.

So, the topic at hand.  Sport, and politics – like oil and water, supposedly just not meant to mix.

Far from it. They are so often one and the same.

A few minutes before President Putin was due to arrive to welcome his team in the athletes village, the Paralympics witnessed the most curious scene.

Russian troops saluted the Ukranian team (they do this for all teams, by the way) with the Ukranian anthem pouring from the tannoy.  But then, they abandoned their ceremony early, turned on their heels and wheeled out.

The Ukranian athletes, to a man and woman, chanting this as they passed their military guard of honour: “peace to Ukraine”.

Watch this space.

Follow @nzerem_c4 on Twitter

Tweets by @kemenzerem

3 reader comments

  1. H Statton says:

    It is a sad state of affairs that another boycott of a sporting event may take place due to political reasons, but it is not at all surprising. And it is not the first time, if indeed it happens. It would be a shame for all of the athletes that have trained so hard to get there and compete.

    Sixty-five countries boycotted the 1980 Moscow Olympic Games although some could not participate for economic reasons. As far as I can make out only Qatar did not receive an invitation.

    The boycott was initiated by the US in protest to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. The US hoped it would instigate a worldwide political reaction. The Soviet Union returned the compliment during the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games with up to eighteen other Communist-friendly countries boycotting, with the exception of Romania.

    What I find rather astonishing is the attendance of countries at the 1936 Berlin Olympic Games. Prior to the Games, anti-Semitic propaganda was publicly removed to downplay the state’s political and racial position. Some Jewish athletes were discouraged from attending the Games as they were not completely aware of the full extent of feeling by the Nazis. When Germany was under the spotlight its condemnation of the language and laws of Jews, Gypsies, and Blacks was muted. How can the world have not noticed what was going on? They knew.

    During the award ceremony for the 200m in the 1968 Mexico Olympic Games the ‘Black Power’ salute was used by Tommie Smith and John Carlos. Both they and Peter Norman the Australian athlete wore the ‘Olympics Project for Human Rights’ badge. Tommie Smith has stated that the raising of their hands as a salute was for human rights, and not simply for ‘Black Power’. It was none the less condemned.

    The international Olympic committee deemed it an inappropriate gesture and against the spirit of the Games. It was considered a ‘political’ issue whereas at Germany’s situation was considered a ‘national’ issue. # WT4!

    Will the sports arena ever be free of political comment? I doubt it. It seems OK for politicians to protest by proxy, but not the athletes themselves.

  2. I Trust Sport says:

    It’s a very difficult situation indeed for the Ukraine team. However, if the IPC can overcome the huge diplomatic and operational challenge, the Sochi 2014 Paralympic Winter Games could prove a significant episode in Paralympic history: http://www.itrustsport.com/blog/could-the-paralympic-winter-games-emerge-stronger-in-the-shadow-of-the-ukra

  3. Philip Edwards says:

    Keme,

    “…casting an inescapable shadow over these games…”

    Well, yes…..because “journalists” like you have made sure it does – just as you tried to do with the Sochi games (and failed).

    So you know when the Commonwealth Games roll up in Glasgow, will we be hearing from you about potential bombs in toothpaste, the security threat and invasions of national sovereignty?

    After all, Scottish soldiers were involved in the invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, plus via NATO in Libya and doubtless (ongoing in) Syria. Each of these bloodbaths make Ukraine look like a Mad Hatters Tea Party.

    Well…………?

Comments are closed.