Sports Diplomacy. Michał Marcin Kobierecki
of sport as “we’re not playing” or “you’re not allowed to play” and classified them as examples of the traditional sports diplomacy.78 Such activities can also be regarded as part of public diplomacy and at the same time, may directly serve foreign policy goals. Generally speaking, they might influence societies of foreign countries in a way typical for public diplomacy. For example, when the United States and its allies boycotted the Olympic Games in Moscow, Soviet citizens were supposed to receive a message about international condemnation to the Soviet Union’s policy. To some extent, this goal was achieved. One of the Soviet spectators of the Games was reported to have said that he had noticed that more than half of the world protests against the USSR and that the Olympics planted doubt whether Soviet leaders were doing the right thing.79 Measures undertaken by African states aimed at excluding South Africa from the international sport in response to apartheid policy can be perceived similarly—they were supposed to show white South Africans that their government’s policy was wrong.
At the same time, it would have been naïve for American decision-makers to expect that after sports boycott Kremlin would have changed its policy as a result of Soviet citizens’ dissatisfaction. In nondemocratic countries, the will of the people is reflected in official policy in a limited way. From this perspective, a boycott should be perceived as a form of sending a message to political leaders of another country about dissatisfaction with its political decisions. Diplomatic sports boycotts that may involve political leaders resigning from participation in opening ceremonies of sports events held in contested states are similar. Such absence is immediately noticed by public opinion, but most directly, it aims to communicate to the authorities of such country.
Sports diplomacy perceived this way can be described as a means of shaping relations with other states, in connection to attempts for political rapprochement or to communicate condemnation for other state’s policy. It is very much interconnected with Murray’s concept of traditional sports diplomacy defined as the use, exploitation, and sometimes abuse of elite sport, sportspeople, or sports events to advance foreign policy objectives,80 but limited to one goal—managing relations with other states. This type of sports diplomacy is usually pursued directly by governments, but it can also be the result of grassroots initiatives. Such sports diplomacy is a clear example of the use of sport within public diplomacy and targets both public opinion and authorities of another country.
Sports Diplomacy as a Means of Building an International Image and Prestige of States
One of the fundamental goals of sports is to create a favorable international image of a state that pursues it. It stems from the fact that public diplomacy involves coordinated use of soft power resources, while sport can be classified as such resource. Therefore, apart from shaping interstate relations, the objective of sports diplomacy is to build an international image and prestige of a state. In this context, sports diplomacy may sometimes go beyond the scope of public diplomacy and involve activities more typical for nation-branding (if considered as distinct from public diplomacy).
Nation-brand can be defined in many ways, for example, as a “unique, multi-dimensional blend of elements that provide the nation with culturally grounded differentiation and relevance for all of its target audiences.”81 People shape their opinion on a particular country based on sources such as media releases, stereotypes, contacts with its residents, stories told by people who visited it, or their observations. Their opinion can also be the result of a mixture of these elements.
The issue of an image of a state and its shaping connects with Joseph Nye’s concept of soft power. States attempt to increase their soft power to enhance their capabilities of affecting the international environment, which stems from the way the foreign public perceives them. There are several tools for shaping the external perception of a state within nation branding and public diplomacy. The most common ones include the quality of products manufactured in a country, its attractiveness concerning tourism and the possibilities of studying and working, the temperament of its citizens, shape of foreign policy, cultural aspects including sport, etc. A state can affect these factors in different ways, and sport belongs to those that governments can affect quite strongly, of course, having regard to physical limitations such as wealth or population.
Sport belongs to popular means of increasing soft power since few things attract the attention of people so strongly. About sport’s capabilities of shaping the image of a state, it is believed to be one of the essential phenomena of mass culture. It triggers powerful emotions and as a result leads to the creation of associations.82 Reaching a high level in sport and hosting sports mega-events allows to win international recognition and achieve geopolitical objectives.83 Enhancing national prestige is mentioned as one of the critical means of the political use of sport alongside securing legitimacy, compensating for other aspects of life within their boundaries, and peacefully pursuing international rivalries.84
When sport is considered as a tool of shaping the international image of a state, the most common tools include successful performance in sport, sports exchanges, sports development aid, hosting sports events, and participation in international competition—in case of small and microstates or those with limited international recognition. Other methods include intensive sports investments or having globally known athletes, although in this case, the level of state’s influence is limited. Below each of them will be described shortly.
The importance of the results athletes achieve in international sport is often raised in considerations on shaping the state’s international image. Sports victories traditionally have been used by many countries to build their prestige. This aspect connects to the issue of sportive nationalism, defined as “the use of elite athletes by governments to demonstrate national fitness and vitality for the purpose of enhancing national prestige.”85 Even though traditionally, this way of the political use of sports was associated with propaganda, it can also be assessed as a tool of public diplomacy regardless of whether democratic or nondemocratic states are concerned.
Sports victories are sometimes perceived as an indicator of the success of state authorities or the general abundance of a state. Countries that are successful in the Olympic Games or FIFA World Cup are usually best scored in nation-brand rankings in the field of culture.86 Michał Kobierecki and Piotr Strożek also observed the positive association between the results achieved on the Olympic Games and the image of a state.87 Sport provides an arena for competition, in which a country can win international prestige using other means than expansionist nationalism,88 and at the same time, it can present its national identity. The use of sports victories in building a positive image of a state as a mechanism corresponds with the use of sport as a tool of national consolidation. Sports victory is in such cases similar as successfully hosting a sports event, as a “parade of national achievements.”89
Sports victories depend on many factors, and governments have viable possibilities to shape the majority of them.90 Therefore, a high sports level can provide proof of states’ vitality and power. The world’s media report sports victories, so they are a source of international publicity and present such countries in a good light. Excellent sports performance also includes a high level of sport in a country, in the form of, for example, a strong football league. Contemporary football clubs are global brands with large numbers of fans worldwide, so since they do not act in isolation from their country of origin,91 they also contribute to building positive associations with such states. It refers to individual athletes as well, who can be described as global sports celebrities. Their sports achievements and sometimes even private life generate worldwide interest, which, as a result, boosts their homeland’s publicity as well.
Sports achievements is a versatile means of affecting the way the international public perceives a state. The problem lies in the state’s capabilities of boosting the number of sports victories since various states have a different amount of necessary assets. It, on the other hand, is connected to the level of hard power. With regard to the globally known athletes, states with a high level of sport are more likely to raise such champions, although it is not entirely under their control. Interestingly, global recognition of athletes can also be considered as an individual method of image-building sports diplomacy.
Sports exchanges comprise another method