Refine Search

A Death Knell for the Olympics?

May 8, 1984:

“The National Olympic Committee of the U.S.S.R. is compelled to declare that participation of Soviet sportsmen in the Games of the XXIII Olympiad in Los Angeles is impossible.”

THUS the bombshell fell on the world of Olympic sports. The Soviets had withdrawn from the Los Angeles Olympic Games. Within a few days other communist nations had imitated their example.

What provoked the sudden withdrawal of the U.S.S.R. from the Olympic Games? According to the official Russian statement put out by the Soviet news agency Tass, the chief motive is SECURITY. They alleged, “Political demonstrations hostile to the U.S.S.R. are being prepared, undisguised threats are made against the U.S.S.R. National Olympic Committee, Soviet sportsmen and officials.” They added that the attitude of the U.S. authorities had been a “gross flouting of the ideals and traditions of the Olympic movement.”

But was security really the only motive behind the Russian action? In the labyrinth of devious international politics, could there be other motives? Analyzing this move in the superpowers’ world “chess” game, the Western press offered other possible causes for the Soviet dropout. They can all be summed up in one word​—POLITICS.

The British weekly The Economist stated: “Ever since the Americans stayed away from the Moscow Olympics in 1980, a Soviet reprisal was a possibility.” Thus many observers see the Russian action as simply a tit-for-tat revenge move but with additional ramifications. 1984 is presidential election year in the United States. Thus U.S.News & World Report stated: “Once again a weary world watched in dismay as the Olympic Games . . . were held hostage to big-power politics. . . . the real impact of the boycott is political.” It then added, “The prime target in the pullout was Ronald Reagan.” Newsweek said that Moscow’s bombshell “was also a harsh signal of the Kremlin’s deepening antagonism toward Ronald Reagan.” A New York Times writer offered the view that “the Kremlin’s decision was inseparable from the deep hostility that has settled over Soviet-American relations in recent years.”

This is already the fifth consecutive time that the Olympic Games have become a victim, in one way or another, of politics. Since 1968 the Olympic Games have been tainted by political overtones. They have been used more and more as a vehicle to express political protest and resentment. Terrorists have converted the Olympic arena into a scenario for their bloodletting. The two superpowers have now demonstrated how the Olympic Games can become a pawn in their struggle for supremacy. And the logical question is, What effect will all of this have on the future of the Games?

Long-Term Effects

Will the Olympic Games survive this additional dent in their image? Some officials are still optimistic. William Simon, president of the United States Olympic Committee, is reported as saying, “The Olympic movement is strong. With all its warts, it is still a positive force for peace.” Others, however, have a more somber view. Said Alberto Salazar, holder of the world marathon record, “I’m just sad that this has happened and feel that it’s going to be a death blow for the Olympics.” Newsweek ventured the opinion that “it may foreshadow the final destruction of the modern Olympic movement itself.”

Certainly, serious questions are now raised about future sponsorship of the Games. What city or business consortium will want to accept the financial liability of organizing the Games if they are always to be sacrificed like a pawn in political squabbles? Will athletes still want to prepare so hard if their participation cannot be guaranteed because of international politics? These are just some of the doubts now being expressed. But there are other questions​—What about nationalism? The use of drugs? The participation of sham amateurs? In other words​—Are Olympic ideals on the wane? Or on the way out?