Finnish researchers Markku Jokisipilä and Vesa Vares were surprised by the strong reactions of the sport and the closure measures against Russia. The boycott of sport is a strong message to Russians and Ukrainians.
Since Russia launched its military offensive against Ukraine on Thursday, February 24, the sports world has reacted surprisingly quickly and unanimously.
Russian national teams are virtually excluded from international sports.
– It has surprised me that the reaction has been unanimous and strong at times. If we think of actors like the International Olympic Committee or the International Football Association, they have traditionally had difficulty making clear judgments about the human rights situation or the lack of democracy in Russia or China, for example. Now the reaction has been pretty decisive, says the historian Markku Jokisipilä.
A professor of political history follows the same lines Vesa Vares.
– The reaction has been stronger and more unified than I originally thought. My starting assumption was that sports follow a general reaction. If this had passed in a few days, the sports world would not have had time to react so much. Once the Ukrainians have shown their willingness and readiness to defend themselves, they have really received such support, Vares ponders.
For example, on Monday, the International Football Association Fifa and the European Football Association Uefa announced that they had completely excluded Russia from international football activities for the time being. The same was done by the International Hockey Federation, whose policy applies to national and national hockey teams in Russia and Belarus. President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko has supported Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Thus, the countries will not be seen in the men’s ice hockey World Championships to be played in Finland in the spring.
The International Olympic Committee recommended on Monday that international federations and sporting event organizers should not allow Russian and Belarusian athletes to compete.
Some sports organizations ‘sled completely turned’
Although the reactions from the sports world have been unanimously sharp, at first many were trying to take a more moderate line, Vares recalls.
The International Volleyball Federation (FIVB) first announced that it will not pull the World Cup away from Russia. Among other things, the CEO of the Finnish Volleyball Association Olli-Pekka Karjalainen knocked out the thought. Until then, on Tuesday, the FIVB announced that it would take away the hostage from Russia.
Fifa’s mind also changed the day it announced on Sunday that Russia would be allowed to continue playing international football matches, but not play games in its own country, and no tickets or national anthems would be allowed.
– The first statements were still evasive. Intermediate ways were sought for Russia to participate in the World Cup qualifiers, for example. Then the sled turned completely, Vares points out.
– This became a widespread boycott like no other. Perhaps by some sort of comparison, the exclusion of Serbia (then Yugoslavia) from the European Football Championships in 1992, but this scale and intensity is unique.
On the other hand, the sports world surprised
The united and sharp reaction of the sports world to Russia’s hostilities has been surprising, partly because the leaders of the major sports organizations have been sympathetic to Putin and other monopolies.
The money of the Russian oligarchs near Putin has so far been worthy of sports leaders. For example, the Finnish KHL team Helsingin Jokerit has been running with Russian money for years.
Experts see that the sled of the unions that avoided tough statements turned under the pressure of the general atmosphere. Global resentment of Russia and support for Ukraine has been strong. Economic sanctions also tightened from the first decisions.
– The pressure has also left the grassroots level of sport. As far as football is concerned, the countries that would have eliminated the World Cup against Russia all said they would not agree to play. Sport has followed the social flow, but on the other hand has shown a greater personal drive than previously seemed likely, says Vares.
Purely for sports, Markku Jokisipilä hopes that fresh, clear guidelines could be relevant in the long run.
– Such discussions would take place, as has been the case, for example, with the International Olympic Committee. Why has the Games been held time and time again in countries with clear human rights shortcomings? Why has sport been given as a showcase for various authoritarian systems?
– Some change is still visible. The world has long gone in one direction and the IOC in another. The opening ceremonies of the value competitions have been direct gathering times for heads of state for decades, Jokisipilä stated at the time.
“From the use of soft power to armed violence”
What influence does sport have now that Ukraine is at war? Sport has always been considered to be of special importance to the President of Russia To Vladimir Putin.
Putin has used sports such as the KHL League in hockey as a tool for soft power, and similarly, the 2014 Sochi Olympics have been seen as one of Putin’s displays of power to the world. The success of sport has been an important tool for Putin in raising national self-esteem.
But there is no more talk of instruments of soft power.
– Yes, now the thinking of Russia and Putin has shifted to a situation where sport has little opportunity to influence. Putin has traditionally had a love affair with sports, but has now shifted from the use of soft power, not just to hard use of power, but to armed violence. Sport is certainly of little importance to Putin at the moment, says Jokisipilä, who works as the director of the Center for Parliamentary Research at the University of Turku.
Vares also signs that the boycotts of the sport will not have an immediate effect.
– No armor will stop because of it.
“Full artificial arsenal in use”
The actions of the sports world are not insignificant, even if they do not have an immediate impact on Putin.
Sport must also be able to be sanctioned. Researchers say the indirect effects of boycotts could be important.
– Sport must be able to react at this point, because sport is not an island separate from the rest of the world. It would be a strange situation that, at the same time as the population of Ukraine is under attack, the Russians would be allowed to strive for success and represent their country in international sports competitions. Not to mention that international events would be held in Russia, Jokisipilä reflects.
– The actions of sport are significant as they are part of a cumulative effect. For Russia, they are signs of an overestimation of the scale of the protests and resentment in the world and the bitterness of this attack. In addition, it is of great spiritual importance for the Ukrainians to point out from this section that we are on their side, Vares believes.
Are there any means that the sports world could take in addition to what has already been seen?
– To address this immediate situation, the entire artificial arsenal is beginning to be operational. The fact that Russia will no longer be given the right to organize and then a more radical step, namely the exclusion of Russian athletes and teams from international competition – both of which are now widely used. Here is the package that is available for sports at this point, says Jokisipilä.