the Olympic truce, a resolution not always respected

0

A head-first descent in the midst of climbing. Friday, February 11, Vladyslav Heraskevych was talked about but not for his place in the standings of the skeleton event at the Beijing Olympics. Just after the third round of the event, the Ukrainian appeared in front of the cameras with a sign crossed out with the message “No war in Ukraine”, (“No war in Ukraine”) against a background of his flag. nation. In recent weeks, tensions between Russia and Ukraine have reached a near breaking point, after more than 100,000 Russian troops were stationed along the border between the two states. In the midst of the Olympic Games, a universalist symbol par excellence in the world of sport, Heraskevych’s sign did not go unnoticed.

The Olympics are traditionally a time of gathering. To guarantee this, the International Committee and the UN promulgate every two years an “Olympic truce”, a tradition born of ancient Greece then undermined by permanent wars between cities. An official resolution is thus taken by the United Nations in order to guarantee this truce, which extends from February 4 until March 20, that is to say one week after the end of the Paralympic Games. She “Calls on all Member States to join in the work of the International Olympic Committee and the International Paralympic Committee to make sport a tool for promoting peace, dialogue and reconciliation in conflict areas during the Olympic and Paralympic Games and after.“

The Olympic Games, great periods of living together? On the front, the principles could not be more commendable. But behind the veneer hides a much less rosy reality. “When we look at the last editions, the Olympic truce does not seem to have any weight, it is even quite the opposite, and each time in connection with Russia moreover“, analyzes Lukas Aubin, doctor in geopolitics and specialist in the geopolitics of Russia and sport. The international community fears an imminent Russian military intervention, while Vladimir Putin continues to show his hostility to an entry into NATO from nations of the former Soviet Union.

“In 2008 during the Summer Games already in Beijing, Russia responded militarily to an attack from Georgia and reached Tbilisi within hoursrecalls Lukas Aubin. We also saw in 2014 the impact of the Ukrainian conflict, and the tension that was mounting between the two states in Sochi. The Olympic truce is a myth that is not respected.“

“The IOC seeks to pursue a policy of apoliticism”

Lukas Aubin, specialist in the geopolitics of Russia and sport

at Franceinfo

Faced with the facts of history, declarations of good intentions are shattered. Vladyslav Heraskevych, he gets tapped on the knuckles. Because if the IOC promotes its truce, it at the same time prohibits the slightest “political, religious or racial demonstration or propaganda“to athletes in Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter.”This is my position. Like all normal people, I don’t want warreacted the Ukrainian athlete. It’s my point of view so I fight for it, I fight for peace. Jdecided before the Games that I will show my position to the world.Heraskevych was ultimately not sanctioned by the IOC. But he was also not allowed to show his sign again in the competition.

“It is the illustration of the schizophrenic character of the CIO, it is absurd, even Kafkaesqueconsiders Lukas Aubin. We try to say something but sometimes we do the opposite.” The researcher believes that the Olympics, like all major sporting events, aim to minimize the intrusion of politics and geopolitics into sports. “Since the creation of the modern IOC in 1894, it has been walking on eggshells. The CIO seeks to pursue a policy of apoliticism, and to have a neutral showcase while it is perpetually caught in the crossfire. Being for inclusion, against racism or homophobia, is already a political decision“. And to recall that at the genesis of the modern Olympics, “when Pierre de Coubertin says that the Games should be apolitical, he is also saying that the Games should not be open to women or colonies.“

Instead of taking positions, the IOC tries to prefer a step back in the shadows to preserve the image of the Olympic Games as that of a haven of peace. However, several major nations have refused to send a diplomatic delegation to Beijing this year, “a first breach of the truce“, recalls Lukas Aubin. “But we are far from 1976, 80 and 84, which led to boycotts for various reasons. Today, we signify an intention, but we don’t go as far as a sanction.“

Faced with the threat of war, the non-aggression pact during the Games is a very meager bulwark. Beyond the commitment of the Olympic nations to the truce, this in no way protects the competition from other threats, criminal or terrorist. The taking of hostages of Israeli athletes (11 will be killed) by the Palestinian movement “Black September” during the Olympic Games in Munich in 1972 or the bomb attack in Atlanta in 1996 are proof of this.

In addition to these “extra-Olympic” risks, the lifespan of this truce limited to a few weeks of sports festivities cannot be a guarantee of maintaining order. At the time of the Russian-Ukrainian crisis in 2014, Vladimir Putin had respected this Olympic truce. “It took the time of the Olympics, then the time of the warexplains Lukas Aubin. A few weeks after the end of the Sochi Games, Crimea was annexed by Russia. When deploying 115,000 men at a border, believing that Russia will stop at an Olympic truce would be illusory“, he concludes.


source site-29