Geopolitics on the Podium: Olympism, Political Neutrality, and the IOC’s Bold Stand Against Russia
When the flame is lit to mark the beginning of the 2024 Paris Olympic Games, Russian athletes will not compete under their nation’s flag.[1] In October 2023, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) banned Russia from official participation in the Games in a decision which delineated the poignant intersection of sports and international law.[2]
Russian President Vladimir Putin labeled the decision “ethnic discrimination” and contrary to the apolitical ideals of the Olympic Movement.[3] Putin’s allegations track the Olympic Charter, the codification of the Movement’s rules, bylaws, and fundamental principles.[4] The Charter reads, “The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have access to the practice of sport, without discrimination of any kind in respect of internationally recognized human rights within the remit of the Olympic Movement.”[5] The Charter further notes, “Recognizing that sport occurs within the framework of society, sports organizations within the Olympic Movement shall apply political neutrality.”[6] Putin’s remarks allude to Western nations’ outsized political and commercial influence on the IOC, which has historically allowed those actors to set international human rights and governance norms.[7]
Notably, the IOC maintains that its decision was not a response to Russia’s 2-year invasion of Ukraine – geopolitical conflicts between member nations, far from grounds for exclusion from the Olympics, represent the “diplomatic ends'' of the Olympic Movement whereby the IOC “provide[s] a setting where otherwise disengaged or even warring parties can meet on neutral ground.”[8] Rather, Russia’s penalty resulted from a territorial encroachment by incorporating four sports councils as its own in recognized Ukraine territories in Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia.[9] Breaching the territorial integrity of another recognized National Olympic Committee constitutes a breach of the Charter, even where political neutrality could otherwise carry the day.[10]
Despite this rationale, the IOC continues to face criticism for its inconsistent approach to “political neutrality” on the global sports stage.[11] The most infamous example occurred in 1920, when the IOC banned the nations defeated in World War I from participation in the Antwerp Olympics.[12] By contrast, a century later, IOC President Thomas Bach took a decidedly neutral stance on China’s alleged humanitarian violations at the outset of the 2020 Beijing Games.[13] Furthermore, in 2016, the IOC did not impose discipline on Russia for a nearly identical territorial violation on Crimean sports councils.[14] Put simply, it has become increasingly difficult to pinpoint when the IOC will exercise neutrality and when it will facilitate international political posturing.
Detractors of the political neutrality stance have long characterized it as a fiction, noting that sports are inextricably linked to geopolitics.[15] Like other fields of scientific or cultural progress, sports represent “a tool to showcase national superiority and political agendas”[16] and a platform for illustrating “the relative supremacy of a team and by extension . . . a people and their political system.”[17] With this in mind, the IOC’s political selectivity has rightfully garnered widespread attention.
These Olympics may further spotlight the issue. The terms of compromise for independent Russian athletes may constitute a massive departure from the Movement’s political neutrality principle. The IOC – with approval from the G7 leaders – decided to allow Russian athletes to compete independently without sponsorship from the Russian Olympic Committee.[18] Bach remarked, “Individual athletes cannot be punished for the acts of their governments.”[19] However, the IOC conditioned their participation on whether they had openly supported the invasion of Ukraine or were affiliated with Russian military or security services.[20] These parameters create unique problems: first, the “neutralization” of athletes deprives them of the opportunity to represent their country on the global stage – one of the foundational honors of the Olympic Movement. Second, this requires that “neutral” athletes essentially showcase their dissent against their own governments through participation in the Games. Neither outcome truly allows the athletes to avoid punishment.
As the 2024 Paris Olympic Games draw closer, several questions remain: do the IOC’s rules for Russian athletes’ conditional participation violate the Olympic Charter’s “politically neutral” principles? Furthermore, can (or should) an organization as influential as the IOC truly ever remain “neutral” while simultaneously espousing global unity and humanitarianism? Ultimately, the international community’s shifting goalposts leave us with more questions than answers on the role that geopolitics should play in the Olympic Movement.
Brendan Murphy is a staff member of Fordham International Law Journal Volume XLVII.
[1] Gabriel Tetrault-Farber, Putin Casts Shadow Over Russian Participation at 2024 Olympics, Reuters (Dec. 14, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/sports/putin-says-russians-should-go-2024-olympics-conditions-must-be-assessed-2023-12-14/.
[2] Id.
[3] Id.
[4] Int’l Olympic Comm., Olympic Charter 2023 (Oct. 15 2023), accessible at https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/General/EN-Olympic-Charter.pdf.
[5] Id. (emphasis added).
[6] Id. (emphasis added).
[7] Doriane Lambelet Coleman, The Olympic Movement in International Law, 114 Am. J. of Int’l L. 385, 386 (2020).
[8] Id. at 387.
[9] Graham Dunbar, IOC Suspends Russian Olympic Committee for Incorporating Sports Councils in Ukrainian Regions, PBS News Hour (Oct. 12, 2023), https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/ioc-suspends-russian-olympic-committee-for-incorporating-sports-councils-in-ukrainian-regions#:~:text=The%20International%20Olympic%20Committee%27s%20executive,four%20regions%20in%20eastern%20Ukraine.
[10] Int’l Olympic Comm. [IOC], Q&A Regarding the Participation of Athletes with a Russian or Belarusian Passport in International Competitions (Oct. 25, 2023), https://olympics.com/ioc/media/q-a-on-solidarity-with-ukraine-sanctions-against-russia-and-belarus-and-the-status-of-athletes-from-these-countries [hereinafter Russia Decision Q&A].
[11] See Sriram Mukund, What’s the IOC – and Why Doesn’t It Do More About Human Rights Issues Related to the Olympics?, U. of Conn. (Feb. 22, 2022), https://sport.education.uconn.edu/2022/02/22/whats-the-ioc-and-why-doesnt-it-do-more-about-human-rights-issues-related-to-the-olympics/; see Stephen Wade, Russia Invasion Upends Olympic ‘Neutrality’ — If It Existed, The Associated Press (Mar. 15, 2022), https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-covid-entertainment-sports-business-b582e99039184d9d0171b1f3c6141665.
[12] Id.
[13] Id.; see also Chui Ling Goh, Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter and Freedom of Expression, The Regulatory Review (Mar. 22, 2022), https://www.theregreview.org/2022/03/22/goh-rule-50-of-the-olympic-charter-and-freedom-of-expression (explaining the IOC’s blanket restrictions on political activism and demonstrations).
[14] Dunbar, supra note 9.
[15] See Wade, supra note 11.
[16] Goh, supra note 13.
[17] Coleman, supra note 7.
[18] See Russia Decision Q&A, supra note 10.
[19] Thomas Padilla, ‘Politically Neutral’ Russian Athletes Can Now Enter the Olympics – But Don’t Expect Many to Compete, The Conversation (Dec. 18, 2023), https://theconversation.com/politically-neutral-russian-athletes-can-now-enter-the-olympics-but-dont-expect-many-to-compete-219796.
[20] Dunbar, supra note 9.
This is a student blog post and in no way represents the views of the Fordham International Law Journal.