The Red Lines Between Beijing 2008, 2022, Olympic Governance, Games Investors & Athletes Demanding Cultural Revolution
Sunday Essay – Editorial – Hell would have to freeze over before Olympic organisers and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) would have us all nodding in agreement with its summary of a Games but the red lines between truth and propaganda have not been as stark since swastikas were all the rage at Berlin 1936.
No surprise, then, to find Xinhua, the Chinese state news agency reporting today the words of Beijing 2020 organising committee executive vice-president Zhang Jiandong: “The Beijing Winter Olympic Games has gone smoothly and has been highly praised by the international community”, to which China had made a “solemn commitment”. Xinhua, no red lines in sight, added the explainer, ” … by successfully hosting the Winter Olympic Games as scheduled amid the COVID-19 pandemic”.
That’s one take on it. Here’s another, from a Games review and outlook statement by Athleten Deutschland, representing athletes from one of the big hitters among the best winter sports nations of the world, Germany, second on the medals table in Beijing to Norway, a northern minnow compared to China in population, landmass and much else but a giant in the realm of skills on snow and ice. Says Athleten Deutschland in a sea of red lines from the home country of heavily criticised IOC president Thomas Bach:
The IOC must critically analyse the awarding and running of the Games and engage in an open debate on the future of the Olympic Movement. The international associations must meet their human rights responsibilities based on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
In the future, there will have to be red lines drawn in award decisions, with decision-making criteria based on human rights strategies. The previous gigantism must give way to credible sustainability concepts.
There must be a real separation of powers in world sport, with independent arbitration and independent supervisory organisations that take consistent action against doping, corruption and abuses and stand up for the protection and rights of athletes.
Democratic openings (opportunities for democratic process to lead to fair representation of athletes in governance) and a substantial strengthening and co-determination of independent athletes’ representatives in world sport are necessary for this change.
States and sponsors must consistently link their financing of sport to the implementation of these reform projects.
The latter, the last of the red lines in a statement in German here, with an English translation in full at the foot of this article, is a critical point that investors in the Games – and even the IOC – will surely get.
It leads us to the next take in contrast that of Beijing organisers, one cited by AP, the American news agency, in a piece explaining why “these Olympics were a disaster” for key Games broadcaster NBC, which back in 2014 bought the American media rights to the Olympics through 2032 for $7.75 billion:
“One woman on Twitter proclaimed the Olympics were “over for me. My lasting impression will be fake snow against a backdrop of 87 nuclear reactors in a country with a despicable human rights record during a pandemic. And kids who can look forward to years of therapy.”
Reflecting that view is a worldwide library of red lines in headlines that starting gathering pace last month with the likes of “How Beijing Is Playing the Olympics”, in The New Yorker, before scraping and clattering through a barren snow-free landscape leading to a summing up that included “Opinion: Beijing 2022 Will Be Remembered As The ‘Scandal Olympics’
“, in The Washington Post, and “Opinion: Kamila Valieva, Thomas Bach and the hypocrisy of the Olympic Games” at Deutsche Welle in the land of Bach, who faces a cacophony of criticism at home that can be summed up by the DW standfirst: “There are no winners in the tragedy that engulfed 15-year-old Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva … Ultimately, the IOC’s hypocritical president, Thomas Bach, must take responsibility.”
All of that in the wash of a stream of tears running through foothills of Olympic history summed up in a USA Today commentary by Rushan Abbas topped by this: “My people, the Uyghurs, suffer genocide while the world plays games at the Winter Olympics … In 1936, the Berlin Olympic Games were a platform for Nazi propaganda. This year, the Winter Games give China cover for its own ongoing genocide.”
The Red Lines Of Olympic Investors
As the snow canons are dried off and stored away in China, attention turns to what it all means for the Olympic Games and those who finance them.
Don’t expect a rush to devalue their investment further but commercial partners who must surely have been aware of the red lines staring back at them as they turned distinctly quiet over their associations with Beijing 2022, and broadcasters, such as NBC, must have noticed the blood flowing from a wounded Olympic brand. The self-inflicted cut gets deeper with each hand shake of a dictator and dubious world leader, each gunshot to the heart of the neutrality the Olympic Charter insists on but Olympic bosses have torched in a pandemic of Compromat.
NBC is already looking past the red lines to the sunny uplands of Paris, Los Angeles and Brisbane for salvation. What is to worth saving and salvaging is another question: why would any ethical movement or organisation want to help place a derailed gravy train back on its tracks? Why would it be acceptable to arrive even in Paris with this short glimpse from Global Athlete head Rob Koehler on a long list of ailments and wounds still in need of urgent surgery, healing and rehabilitation if the Olympic Games is to have a healthy future:
Global Athlete has been busy highlighting one of the red lines: the depth of difference between $7.75 billion of revenue from one broadcaster alone and the plight of the likes of Elisabeth Vathje, Canadian Olympic Skeleton Athlete, World Championship Medalist:
It’s not much different for fellow skeleton competitor Mirela Rahneva: the Bulgarian-born athlete, who receives $14,000 a year from the Canadian government’s Athlete Assistance Program, tweeted a spreadsheet of costs incurred this season, totalling $26,585, along with: “We saw $0 in support this important year”. She also told The Canadian Press: “A lot of the athletes have been really struggling, not only financially but mentally with the difficulties of competing.”
An organisation very much in the black. An Olympian fending off the red lines of reality as an athlete.
And that’s before we get to the other matters on Global Athlete’s list, like freedom of expression being restricted; like having sign away away their image rights; like having critical personal sponsors barred from mention during the Games because that would clash with rights that bring in the big dollars for the blazers.
Global Athlete pinned its Beijing 2022 manifesto to the mast of its twitter feed:
Like Beijing, Tokyo hosted its Games during a pandemic. Some of the same red lines that Olympic bosses need to heed the call for review and reform from Global Athlete, Athleten Deutschland (and partner representative organisations around the world, including the fledgling International Swimmers’ Alliance) are highlighted in this Japan Times wrap of Beijing 2022, headliners “Controversial Beijing Olympics reach finish line” in the country that also hosted a Games in a pandemic.
The Japan Times notes: “China’s notorious human rights record, including its widespread suppression of free speech, a crackdown on pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong and accusations of genocide against the minority Uyghur population in Xinjiang province, pushed several nations, including the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada, to declare a diplomatic boycott of the Games.
Fearing repercussions from Chinese officials, athletes were also urged to avoid making statements on human rights or political issues that could be considered a violation of Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter, which bans any “kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda.” Several delegations further asked athletes to leave personal electronic devices at home, fearing the potential for cyberespionage.
A lack of political statements by athletes left China free to make statements of its own. The opening ceremony controversially featured Uyghur skier Dinigeer Yilamujiang lighting the Olympic cauldron at Beijing’s National Stadium, while organizing committee spokesperson Yan Jiarong declared Thursday that “Taiwan is an indivisible part of China” during a daily press briefing.
Meanwhile, back in 2008 about three months after we’d witnessed the spectacle of Michael Phelps rocketing to a record eight golds medals at the WaterCube that would become the IceCube in 2022 and the scene of skating scandal, the IOC issued a statement entitled “Lessons from Beijing”: as “a key part of the IOC’s transfer of knowledge programme” there would be an official debrief of the first Olympic Games in China.
Late November dates were set for a gathering in 2008 in London, the next Olympic host.
The Beijing debrief was described as “a key component of the IOC’s Olympic Games Knowledge Management (OGKM) programme, which consists of three main elements: services, personal experience and information”.
There would be sessions on “planning, operational and technical elements of organising an Olympic Games, such as sport, accommodation, transport, culture, education and logistics. There will also be elements of the debrief addressing the various stakeholders’ experience, for participants at the Games such as athletes, spectators, workforce and the media. A full technology debrief will also be held in London the week before.”
And: “A highlight of the week will be IOC President Jacques Rogge giving the 2008 Pierre de Coubertin Lecture on 24 November. Presented by London 2012 in conjunction with the Royal Society of Arts and the British Olympic Foundation, the President will deliver a speech entitled ‘Advancing the Games: the IOC, London 2012 and the future of de Coubertin’s Olympic Movement’.
The Olympic cup runneth over in a realm void of red lines.
Or perhaps it was just that the red lines were there in the guise of Dickensian children: seen but not heard. Not a single drop of energy in all of that 2008 debrief, at least officially, was devoted to the issues raises by Global Athlete and Athleten Deutschland today.
The Beijing 2022 debrief needs to look like a different planet to where the IOC was after Beijing 2008, the Games we were told would open China up to the world, create greater freedoms and transparencies for her people.
The public relations exercise went the wrong way and in 2022 we have been treated to propaganda of the kind that reminds us of Berlin 1936.
Caveat Emptor!
Athleten Deutschland Statement In Full
Against that troubling backdrop, here is the statement in full, quick-fire English translation by me, from Athleten Deutschland:
Berlin, February 19, 2022. The Olympic Games in Beijing are coming to an end. The achievements and sporting successes of the athletes inspired us. We congratulate them on their impressive results and pay them our utmost respect. Behind the participation in the Olympic Games and every sporting achievement there are personal stories that we hold in great esteem for each and every one of them.
The disastrous human rights situation in China, security concerns and the special circumstances of the pandemic cast a shadow over the games in advance. We are impressed by the will and perseverance of all the athletes who made their way to Beijing. All athletes are expected to return home safely. We wish that they can fall back on sufficient mental support, which is particularly important after career highlights such as the games.
The games in Beijing have rightly been discussed critically in recent weeks and months. We have also take a detailed stance on the human rights situation in China, the responsibility of the IOC, states, associations and sponsors. After the Peng Shuai case, we also called on the IOC to show their colours in a detailed analysis last year: the most powerful organisation in the world of sport must finally give top priority to its duty of care for athletes and its human rights responsibility.
Even before the games, the IOC missed numerous opportunities to satisfactorily and credibly fulfil its human rights due-diligence obligations. In addition, concerns about inadequate quarantine conditions, increased censorship activities by China or restrictions on internet and press freedom have proven to be justified.
The IOC has not distanced itself decisively enough from Chinese threats against statements critical of athletes. It has not credibly been able to put a stop to the danger of spying and espionage, not least because of the security gaps in the My2022 app that we know of.
Several incidents at the games have also made it clear that the culture of silence at the IOC urgently needs to be ended. It is still unsuitable, even counterproductive, for mastering the tightrope walk that is difficult for sport, not allowing oneself to be politically co-opted, appearing to be international and not betraying one’s values.
The IOC’s continued silence on China’s gravest human rights abuses and crimes against humanity lends them quiet acceptance. In dealing with Peng Shuai and Taiwan, the IOC has lent its hand to the Chinese government. As expected, China was able to use the Games as a platform for its propaganda campaigns, including right from the start when it chose a Uyghur torchbearer for the opening ceremony.
Athletes are the most visible group at the Games. However, they bear no responsibility for the situation in which the IOC has manoeuvred them and, collectively, they cannot do enough against the IOC and the international federation system at this point in time. As the games begin, it has become clear that the IOC is considering her as an actor in a play it is co-staging with China. Athletes are affected by decisions they were not involved in; are themselves exposed to human rights risks in sport.
None of the athletes are required to comment on the circumstances of the Games. However, everyone must have the right to express themselves safely and without disadvantage. We have already explained this position on the freedom of expression of athletes in detail. Some exercised their rights.
We understand if others have also censored themselves out of self-protection. We are disappointed that institutional players such as sponsors or associations failed to provide a continuous critical support for the games. A basic position of the DOSB on the human rights responsibility of sport in general and with a view to the games in China is still pending.
The games were also overshadowed by the case of an allegedly doped underage figure skater. The international sports system has long been too lax and inconsistent against the Russian doping culture. It would be inconceivable that a doped athlete from Russia could win an Olympic medal eight years after the Russian state doping scandal. She herself is the victim of a merciless system and now has to pay the price of being played by those around her. That is where the responsibility and blame lies, not with the underage athlete.
Her case makes you sad and angry, because violence and training methods that violate boundaries, especially in aesthetic sports, shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone responsible. We advocate that competition ages should be raised where appropriate. We welcome the fact that the IOC now also wants to have this discussion with the world associations. At the international level, the IOC and the federations urgently need to implement human rights strategies to proactively address the risks to human and children’s rights in sport.
It must also develop mechanisms to deal with rights violations and provide redress.
Associations cannot act independently and are subject to conflicts of interest. The handling of the IOC and the ISU in the case of the Russian athlete has also shown that international intervention is not and cannot be. Similar to the current Safe Sport debate in Germany, there is also internationally organised irresponsibility in the sports system.
Therefore, in the future, a global regime for safe sport will also be needed at international level, which secures the rights and protection of athletes, offers support to those affected and guarantees the power to intervene, investigate and sanction specific to the sport. This is particularly important when holding international competitions, but also where neither states nor associations adequately protect athletes at national or regional level.
However, measures like these are not sufficient to resolve the inherent system conflicts of international and national top-class sport. This system must no longer provide incentives to exploit athletes for sporting success while violating their human and children’s rights.
Athletes have a right to the best possible protection and humane top-class sport. This requires a far-reaching cultural and structural change, which is proving difficult even in Western countries like Germany.
The IOC must critically analyse the awarding and running of the Games and engage in an open debate on the future of the Olympic Movement. The international associations must meet their human rights responsibilities based on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
In the future, there will have to be red lines drawn in award decisions, with decision-making criteria based on human rights strategies. The previous gigantism must give way to credible sustainability concepts.
There must be a real separation of powers in world sport, with independent arbitration and independent supervisory organisations that take consistent action against doping, corruption and abuses and stand up for the protection and rights of athletes.
Democratic openings (opportunities for democratic process to lead to fair representation of athletes in governance) and a substantial strengthening and co-determination of independent athletes’ representatives in world sport are necessary for this change.
States and sponsors must consistently link their financing of sport to the implementation of these reform projects.