Are the Olympics Dead?

A new and lamentable Olympic record was getting as much attention throughout the world last week as the feats of Nadia Comaneci. "Nations boycotting: 25." That grim statistic raised severe doubts about the future of the Games themselves. There was widespread resentment against Canada for kowtowing to Peking and thereby forcing 42 athletes from Taiwan to withdraw (TIME, July 26). There was both consternation and anger over an African walkout directed against New Zealand because it sent a rugby team to South Africa.

"A global wrath against the Canadian government is certain," wrote the Frankfurter Allgemeine. "In a confrontation between sports and politics, sports proved to be powerless." "Politics should not be an issue any more than religion," said Edward W. ("Moose") Krause, athletic director at Notre Dame. "This just makes me sick." Lord Killanin, head of the International Olympic Committee, was sick too. "Government interference is the most serious problem we face," he declared. "We're scarred, and I, as president, have had my eye blackened."

Nowhere was the disappointment greater than in Africa, where popular sentiment was strongly opposed to the political decision to withdraw the teams. A number of African athletes telephoned home to say they were considering forfeiting their citizenships and settling in the U.S. "I'm fed up with black politics," said a member of one team. "At the next Olympics I hope to be competing as an American." Added a coach: "If my boys wanted to play politics, they would run for Parliament. To wreck their sporting careers for petty political points is not only unfair--it is criminal." Lamented Tanzania's great Filbert Bayi, world record holder in the 1,500 meters: "Four years of hard work have been wasted."

sb

The fact is that nationalism long has been an aspect of the Games, and deliberately so. Nor has this been as bad a thing as pundits often paint it, at least to the degree that nationalism equates with patriotism. Politics too has long been a part of the Games, without dealing them fatal harm.

The modern Games had hardly begun when the U.S. outraged the British by refusing to dip the flag to King Edward VII during the 1908 opening ceremonies in London. (Nor did the U.S. dip the flag to Queen Elizabeth II last week; she was not offended.) The Finns, then under the domination of Imperial Russia, sought the same year to emphasize their strivings for national identity by refusing to march under the Russian flag. Hitler tried to use the 1936 Berlin Games as a display of the supremacy of the Aryan race.

In the past there have also been walkouts and bannings; Italy and France pulled out of the fencing in the 1912 Stockholm Games after a dispute over the rules. In 1956 Egypt, Iraq and Lebanon did not compete because of the Suez crisis. In the 1920 Antwerp Games and the 1948 London Games, the loser nations from the world wars were barred. Following the Bolshevik Revolution, the Soviet Union stayed out of Olympic competition until the 1952 Helsinki Games. But never before have strictly pragmatic political considerations, as in the case of Canada v. Taiwan, been thrust upon the Games, and the consequences are explosive.

sb

"We are victims of our own success," says Douglas Roby, a U.S. member of the IOC. "We have created the greatest forum in the world for political statements. What happens on our stage attracts more attention than what happens at the United Nations." Television, which estimates the audience for the Montreal Olympics at more than a billion, has been a major factor. Munich demonstrated fully the shock value of the Olympics as the stage for global drama. The Black September terrorists who attacked the Israeli team in the Olympic Village knew their act would command the world's attention as none other possibly could.

The precedent set by Canada in Montreal gives far too much power to politicians. Until now the IOC has held the exclusive right to determine which nations should participate; it has banned both South Africa and Rhodesia for practicing apartheid in the selection of their Olympic teams. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in effect annulled the IOC's power when, to placate Peking, he ordered that Taiwan could not compete under the name Republic of China. For the first time, the host country was superseding the supranational IOC.

Similarly, the magnitude of the African boycott has placed the Games at the mercy of political blackmailers. The threat of some future withdrawal from the Olympics by a bloc of nations puts great pressure on the IOC--and now also on the host government--to exclude the object of the boycotters' wrath, especially if it is only one small country. The Montreal walkout in protest against New Zealand was, to say the least, highly selective, totally symbolic. For one thing, it was aimed at the presence in South Africa of a racially integrated New Zealand team playing a non-Olympic sport. For another, at least 25 other nations participating in this year's Olympics, including France and the United Kingdom, have also sent teams to compete in South Africa. An American gymnastics team is scheduled to go there this week.

The developments of the past fortnight are all the more alarming because the 1980 Olympics are scheduled for Moscow. Judging from Soviet newspapers last week, the bitter political legacy from Montreal could have profound--and potentially disastrous--effects on the Games in Moscow. Commenting on the Montreal events, Moscow's authoritative Literary Gazette wrote: "The Olympic Games are not just a major sports festival but are one of the fronts of fierce struggle between the supporters and opponents of international cooperation and mutual understanding." By supporters, the Soviets mean their allies and Third World nations; opponents are everybody else.

sb

This attitude raises a number of gloomy questions. What if, for example, the Soviets decided to exclude a number of countries from participating? New Zealand might be barred from competition if the Soviets bowed to pressure from the Africans. Chile and South Korea are archvillains on the Soviet list.

The West Germans almost certainly face problems since their team includes members from West Berlin. The Soviets contend that West Berlin is an independent political entity and must have no ties with West Germany. And what about Israel? The Arabs claim that Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian soil. Would the Soviets invite a team from the P.L.O. and bar the Israelis? Even if only a small part of this scenario developed, what might be the U.S. response?

"The Olympics have become too politicized," says Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who rejected an invitation to visit the Montreal Games because of the disputes. "They are supposed to be a sporting event for athletes. It is the responsibility of the International Olympic Committee to decide which athletes compete. The host country only provides the facilities and should have no say over the athletes' participation." The State Department considered pulling the U.S. team out of Montreal in protest over Canada's handling of the Taiwan issue. Said a high State Department official last week, the potential complexities of a Moscow Olympics obviously in mind: "One thing is certain, if politics is not removed--and quickly--the Olympic Games have no future."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.