Basic HTML Version
this as "the beginning of the end" for
the Games.
The 1976 Montreal Olympics
were marred by yet another bitter
political dispute-this time over Tai–
wan. The People's Republic of China
- which had stalked out of the IOC
in 1958 over the issue of Taiwan's
representation- brought pressure to
bear on the Canadian government to
exclude Taiwanese athletes from
competition. Peking (Beijing) is one
of Canada's major trading partners.
Canada bowed to the pressure and
informed Taiwan that its athletes
would not be allowed to compete
under the name "Republic of Chi–
na." Moreover, the Taiwanese would
not be permitted to fly their national
flag nor to play their national anthem
at the Games.
A heated controversy erupted. The
United States threatened to pull its
team out in protest. A compromise
proposal was quickly drawn up: Tai–
wan would be allowed to fly its flag
and use its anthem, but it could not
call itself China. Though Taiwanese
athletes were already in Montreal,
their government refused the terms
and brought them borne rather than
bow to the humiliating condition.
(The same controversy erupted again
this year at the Winter Olympics
held in New York state.)
Once again, the IOC had aban–
doned its principies rather than jeop–
ardize the Games.
The 1976 Games also saw a mass
walkout of African counfries directed
against the par ticipation of New
Zealand. The reason? New Zealand
had sent a rugby team to play in
South Africa , which had been
banned from Olympic competition
since 1968 because of its interna!
racial policies.
Now- Moscow
The precedents set in the past few
Olympiads have raised fears that the
Soviet Union will attempt to impose
its own political terms on the XXII
Olympiad. Concern has been voiced
that the Kremlin might take discrim–
inatory action against athletes from
Israel, West Germany or elsewhere.
More at issue is the previously men–
tioned question of Soviet use of the
Games for propaganda purposes.
April 1980
The Soviets- as all past Olympic
hosts- will be on their best behavior
in August. Life in the "Worker's
Paradise" will be carefuUy portrayed
in its best üght- to present the most
favorable view possible of Soviet life
to the world. lt can be predicted with
assurance that not one dissident or
other troublemaker will be within
100 miles of Moscow and the foreign
press. The press will see what Mos–
cow
wants
it to see.
U.S. intelligence sources estimate
that Soviet expenditures for the Mos–
cow Games will total $3 billion–
twice the $1.5 billion spent for the
last Olympics in Montreal, Que. This
figure highlights the overwhelming
importance the Kremlin places on
the upcoming Games.
The object: a glorification of the
Soviet system- a demonstration to
the world of the superiority of Soviet
society over other systems and of the
physical superiority of the "new
socialist man or woman." Moscow
hopes to put on the most ostentatious
spectacle ever, to gain the greatest
possible propaganda mileage.
Symbollc World War?
In viewing the history of the Games
over the past 84 years, one is led to
the inescapable conclusion that they
are but a microcosm of larger-scale
international political relations.
Far from promoting international
peace and harmony, the Games have
instead served to spotlight and sorne–
times even aggravate the national
rivalries and animosities plaguing the
larger world today. During the
Games, victory on the field of sports
becomes a substitute for victory on
the battlefield.
Even the language of Olympics
sportscasting is reminiscent of war
and nationalism. Sportscasters speak
of "the battle of the week," of com–
petitors being "locked in combat," of
the "strategic advantage" of one
team over another. The contest in
1976 between America's Bruce Jen–
ner and the Soviet's Nikolai Avilov
for tbe decathlon gold meda! was
portrayed as a "superpower confron–
tation ." Sorne Olympics sportscas–
ters have commented that they have
felt almost like war correspondents!
This should come as no surprise.
The Olympic events of ancient
Greece were originally founded on
war skills-spear throwing, running,
wrestling, chariot racing, hand-to–
hand fighting . From the beginning,
the Olympics have essentially been a
"war in track shoes."
The Soviet Union and its East
European allies, especially, have long
regarded sports as a major front in a
worldwide political battle. Because of
the huge political stakes, Communist
governments have long subsidized
their promising "amateur" athletes.
"Find them young, train them hard"
has been their prescription for victory.
Sorne nations have even stooped to
outright cheating to achieve Olympic
success. The use of steroids and other
medica! aids by Olympic participants
has occasionally been uncovered. Such
measures clearly show that much more
than friendly competition is at stake in
the view ofsorne nations.
NewEmphasis
Is it possible at this stage to return to
the lofty ideals of the "Olympic
Spirit" as originally conceived by
Baron de Coubertin?
Many agree it would be possible to
denationalize and depoliticize the
Games
to a degree.
Sorne have sug–
gested, for example, that the IOC
could dispense with the display of
national flags and the playing of
national anthems after events. These
trappings only accentuate the national
aspects of the Games. Instead, the
individual athletes could come to–
gether from all corners of the world
under the
Olympic
flag, standing toan
Olympicanthem.
In this way, national
identification could be subordinated
and individual achievement spot–
lighted toa greater degree.
The news media could a lso serve
these ends by deemphasizing overall
national performances and stressing
individual records. This would entail
a new emphasis on the human effort
to overcome past limits of physical
speed, strength and endurance. Ath–
letes would be shown to be vying
together to achieve the greatest pos–
sible performance ever in these
areas- in a quest for ever-increasing
excellence in human physical accom–
plishment. The portrayal of athletes
(Continued on page 20)
17