Ukraine in the Olympics 2004 – dancing to the tune!!!  

by Mridula Ghosh

Klichko, Kravets, Oliynyk, Podkopayeva, Serebrianska, Sharipov, Taimazov - are just some who gave their life blood to make Ukraine prominent in 1996 as a free nation at the XXVI Olympics in Atlanta. With 23 medals, nine of them gold, Ukraine took 10th place in medal totals, finishing ahead of countries such as Britain, Canada, Brazil and Poland. Medal count in the XXVII Sydney Olympics 2000 remained the same, 23 medals – 10 bronze. All these were enough to hold 3 gold , 10 silver and aspires for more medals, with 243 athletes contesting, accompanied by 167 service personnel and the whole delegation consisting of more than 400 people. We cannot but admit that 2004 Olympics will differ from the previous ones. This is the first time it has coincided with the year of presidential elections. And therefore there are questions to be raised than answers to be found. Ukraine ’s head high in the international sports arena, where competition and winning gold is more important than anything else. What will happen in 2004? Ukraine

Financial issues. Material and financial stimulus continues to be an encouraging factor for Ukrainian athletes. Awards of 20 thousand, 30 thousand and 50 thousand US Dollars respectively to winners of bronze, silver and gold medals, are increased to 50 thousand, 75 thousand and 100 thousand US Dollars respectively. Without enquiring where this additional money comes from, we tried to look beyond. For us it was easier to find the level of budget financing from the State Committee for Sports and Physical Culture - a not so solid sum of more than 160 million Hryvnias in total for preparation, training, public information etc. - but it was difficult to calculate as the level of financing is not meant for Olympics only, but for the development of sports in general. The time frame also matters, whether the sum is for one year or for the whole four year period, is not clear. Anyway, these are some concrete figures to start our discussion with. The same is not true of the National Olympic Committee (NOC), which did not reveal sponsorship costs by companies (there are a lot of them enlisted on the website www.noc-ukr.org), telling that they are “confidential and bound by agreements between the companies and the NOC”. No fear of raised eyebrows at all! We know that commercialism at the international level has gradually turned the Olympics into an enterprise. Corporate interests penetrate the Olympics through sponsorship of the Games themselves and through sponsorship of athletes and use of athletes for commercial purposes. The media adds spices to this, promotes the Games as a giant spectacle, underlining their commercialization. Sporting success becomes a means of selling products. But in Ukraine has the NOC also become a victim of corporate interests? Why the companies are not interested in telling openly about their donations and sponsorships? In this atmosphere, how shall we talk of corporate responsibility and a culture of transparency?  

Political dividend from the Olympics. A dive into the website, where there are signatures and statements by all NOC members in support of the candidature of the NOC President, the current PM as a presidential candidate, made things clearer. We all know that Olympics have been an arena for international power politics. The 1936 Berlin Games used by the Nazi regime, the US government’s boycott of the 1980 Moscow Games to protest against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the Soviet government’s boycott of the 1984 Los Angeles Games in return. But for internal politics of a state which wishes to join European Union at the dawn of the 21^st century? And that during a pre-election period? And that too by one side, which has more authority and power over administrative resources and budget execution? What is absolutely unclear is that those who call themselves opposition have never come up with any criticism. Perhaps, had they been in power, they would have acted in the same way. Thus, using Olympics seems to have been taken for granted.     

Competition vs. participation. Obsession with Olympic success, emphasis on competition and victory marginalizes the value of participation. Aggressiveness of competition undermines the idea of peace. Sport can bring both physical and mental harmony for the whole society. This can only occur when the primary goal is participation, not victory in competition. The Olympic Games are competitions more between states than athletes. Ukraine’s preparation is along the same line - compete and conquer - now or never. The Olympic Creed reads: "The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well." But who cares? In the days of old Greece, when the “polis” style small city-states were brought together for peace at the Olympiad, you could think of all charters, rules, and other trifles. Now in the age of super technology our scales are huge, possibilities enormous and ambitions are bigger.

So, under the guise of entertainment and supporting one's favorite team or athlete, spectators today are told that life is a competition, that the rules are fair, that most of the rewards go to the winners, and that losers have only themselves to blame. These ideas are convenient for keeping people on the usual treadmill. It is the use of sporting metaphors ("the level playing field," "scoring") in non-sporting arenas, trying to show similarities between competitive sport and competitive business, while in reality it is the opposite. Enrichment and expansion of riches of entrepreneurs never meant benefits to the pocket of the average individual. Therefore, it is right to think that victory at the games will not make the society healthier and fairer. It will not bring warmth and care to more than a hundred thousand street children, stop massive labor migration for earning a meager living in the West, reduce high HIV/AIDS and drug abuse rates, deal with low levels of life expectancy and human development. These chronic problems will still be around when glorious victories will be announced and celebrated. A few gold medals will be too less to address them.

Critical analyses of modern Olympics are a rising movement calling for reform of the Olympics, it receives no attention compared to the massive governmental and commercial promotion of the Olympics. However, this does not mean that we criticize the dedicated and talented athletes and their supporters. Nor do they undermine the Olympic Games ideals. Rather, the argument is that there are such big problems both at the national and international level that it would be better to start talking about them. We really hope some day there will be standards and rules barring the use of  Olympics as a “weapon” in political fight. Peace is above war, sport should be above politics.