In the early 20th century, the father of the modern Olympic Games, Pierre de Coubertin, wrote that the competition ought to be “free from political interference”. Yet it’s often hard for champions to escape world affairs. Take the example of Algerian judoka, Fethi Nourine, who withdrew in from the Tokyo Olympics in July 2021 to avoid facing his Israeli counterpart on the grounds of “his support for the Palestinian cause”. Within two months, he and his trainer were handed a 10 year suspension by the International Judo Federation.
Like other suspensions, the Federation had based its decision on the Olympic Charter’s controversial rule 50.2:
“No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.”
An issue dividing the Olympic world
That sentence alone has managed to sharply divide the Olympic world ever since the Charter was published in July 2020.
Concerns were running so high that in June 2020 the International Olympic Committee Athletes’ Commission (IOC AC) launched a consultation with over 3,500 athletes on Rule 50.2. The results of the study, delivered by Publicis Sport & Entertainment in April 2021, appeared to back the rule, with 70% of athletes considering it inappropriate to express their views on the field of play and at official ceremonies, and 67% on the podium.
However, a different survey dated February 2021 highlighted “a clear lack of understanding” of the passage. It stated that:
“The term ‘demonstration’ is perfectly clear for 62% of respondents, but not for the others.
The term ‘propaganda’ is perfectly clear for 70%, but remains opaque for the rest. The term ‘protest’ was ‘not’ or ‘absolutely not’ clear to 49% of respondents.”
This raises the question of whether the interviewed athletes had all the information they needed to make up their minds on the rule. In any case, the IOC has decided to follow the Athletes’ Commission’s recommendations by relaxing the rule, while still curbing athletes’ expression during the period spanning the Olympic Games, ranging from ceremonies and podiums to anthems.
Protests that have gone down in Olympic history
At several recent US competitions, sportspeople, following the example of Colin Kaepernick, have raised their fists or taken the knee during the national anthem in support of the Black Lives Matter movement.
These acts of resistance are strongly reminiscent of the black-gloved fists raised by John Carlos and Tommie Smith on the podium at the 1968 Olympics, in support of the Black Power movement.
While the two athletes were expelled from the Olympic Village and banned for life from the Olympic Games, their image is now part of Olympic history.
Olympism: an ideological movement?
Are these acts incompatible with the Olympics’ principle of political neutrality? The debate came to the fore in July 2020, when a group of 150 academics, sportspeople and sports specialists signed an open letter to call on a ban of the rule:
Beyond the controversy surrounding Rule 50.2, we might ask whether the Olympic movement has, since its creation by Pierre de Coubertin, engaged in propaganda by conveying the vision of a better world through sport. This is not to say that the word has a negative connotation, but rather that it refers to a unifying ideal, “the great Olympic idea”. The word was even used explicitly in the June 1933 Bulletin of the International Olympic Committee:
“With the renovator of the Olympic Games, we all believed and certainly thought that the peaceful meeting of peoples on the field of sport would bring nations together to such an extent that the Olympic Games in their modern form would become a powerful propaganda element for the idea of world peace”
In this respect, couldn’t the speech by IOC President, Thomas Bach, at the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games on 23 July 2021, be considered “political ideology”? It presents a vision of the world and expresses an ideal, that of the “Olympic community”, united around the same belief system.
Solidarity is given pride of place and embodies the essence of Olympism. This solidarity goes beyond the traditional values of Olympism of excellence, respect and friendship because it involves recognising shared humanity. As Thomas Bach reminded us in his speech on 23 July 2021:
“Solidarity means much more than mere respect or non-discrimination. Solidarity is about helping, sharing and caring for one another.”
A holistic vision
Solidarity guarantees unity; the term “together” is repeated 10 times in Bach’s speech, and the adjective “united” appears 6 times. Thomas Bach emphasises the strength of this unity, which enables us to rise above individuals taken separately to form a “true community”, the “Olympic community”.
The Olympic movement, as conceived by Pierre de Coubertin, exists in service to a better, ethical and more fraternal world, as stated in the 1958 Olympic Charter.
“The aim of the Olympic movement is to exalt in young people both the physical effort and the moral qualities which are the foundations of amateur sport, and also, by inviting all the world’s athletes to a four-yearly, disinterested and fraternal competition, to contribute to the love and maintenance of peace between peoples.”
This solidarity and unity is was fully integrated into the Olympic movement in 2021, thanks to the new wording of the Olympic oath and the addition of the term ‘Together’ to the motto:
Searching for the term “together” within a corpus of institutional texts such as charters, codes and conventions dating from before the Olympic Games reveals the proximity of “together” with “solidarity”, as well as with “ethical”, clearly showing the strong association of these values in the sporting spirit.
Solidarity is also the guarantor of peace in the world, as Thomas Bach emphasised in his speech. The close partnership between the IOC and the United Nations has brought together, for the second time in the history of the Games, the Olympic Refugee Team. This team includes 29 political refugee athletes, “an exceptional group of individuals who inspire the world”, as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi said in June 2021:
“Having survived war, persecution and the anguish of exile already makes them exceptional people, but the fact that they are now excelling on the international sporting stage fills me with immense pride”
Thomas Bach expressed similar sentiments in Rio de Janeiro in 2016, when the refugee team was first established:
“These refugees have no home, no team, no flag, no national anthem. We will offer them a home in the Olympic Village alongside athletes from all over the world. This initiative … is a signal to the international community that refugees are human beings and an enrichment to society”
So, far from being “apolitical”, the Olympic Games carry a strong ideology, which is reflected in the IOC’s Charters and official texts.
So when will Rule 50.2 disappear from the Olympic Charter to better reflect the Olympic spirit? Perhaps 2024 Paris Olympics will provide the answer. Will we see kneeling sanctioned, or will this controversial rule buried once and for all
