The year 1936 has gone down in European history as the year of the Berlin Olympics under Nazi Germany. Three years before the outbreak of the Second World War, these Olympic Games were seen by Hitler as a propaganda tool to send a strong message to the world: Aryans are superior athletes. This belief was rooted in the eugenics theory that racial superiority could be explained by genetics. Of course, eugenics is at the heart of Nazi ideology and these Olympic Games of the past were the ideal opportunity to prove the hegemony of Aryan athletes; and thus defend the relevance of this ideology. However, African American athletes enjoyed enormous success in 1936, in particular Jesse Owens, famous for being the first African-American athlete to win four gold medals at the same Olympic Games. His success also left its mark on history, as Adolf Hitler refused to acknowledge Owens’ victories or shake his hand. Indeed, this famous episode, experienced as a humiliation by Hitler, underlines a major theme in sports and politics: the instrumentalization of sports by authoritarian regimes.

 But why is this so important today? Sports have been, and still are, an important form of soft power used by authoritarian and democratic rulers all over the world. In this article, I will attempt to analyze the limits and dangers of the instrumentalization of sports by authoritarian states and propose a broader description of sports as an effective geopolitical weapon for democratic states.

What does “Authoritarianism” really mean ?

Authoritarianism is a vague concept to a lot of folks. Its true meaning is poorly understood, yet roughly 40% of the world’s countries are ruled by an authoritarian leader. Simply put, authoritarianism is a political system whose main objective is to maintain the power of the ruler, come what may. regimes ignore the rule of law and democratic principles and their mandate does not depend on the consent of the people. To stay in power, authoritarian leaders use a range of strategies, from violent coercion to propaganda. Sports are a soft power tool used by authoritarian rulers to convey an ideology. But is this method effective? ? 

Firstly, sports bring people together and help build a nation. Secondly, it promotes the state’s official ideology and reinforces authoritarian narratives of national greatness. These characteristics are particularly true of totalitarian states such as Nazi Germany or present-day North Korea, whose ultimate goal is to create a utopia. In this sense, sports can be a vehicle for the state sponsored ideology. Nevertheless, sport is not always used as a means of conveying an ideology, and many authoritarian states see it simply as an effective weapon, an extension of the state’s political and economic power.

Sport and Authoritarianism: Dangers and Limits? 

These days, sports are primarily a revenue platform for authoritarian states. Several Middle Eastern countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, are increasingly financially involved in all kinds of sports, particularly soccer and Formula 1. In 2024, sports are attracting considerable attention and have become a global phenomenon that appeals to more and more people. The amount of money invested in and the revenues generated by the sports market are increasing rapidly, with an expected growth in revenues of over 60% by 2028. However, as sports revenues rise, so does the economic cost of hosting sporting events. 

A common trend has been observed over the past decade: unstable democracies and authoritarian states are increasingly hosting major sporting events. These states are often oil-rich countries such as Qatar, Bahrain or Saudi Arabia. As explained previously, these states use sports to convey broader political messages and achieve popular cohesion. Unfortunately, staging major events such as Formula 1 races, the World Cup or boxing matches, is financially draining and does not always benefit the economy as a whole. In fact, in many cases financing global sporting events ends up creating a greater financial burden for the population. For example, the 2022 World Cup in Qatar cost 220 billion American dollars, a huge sum that will take decades to repay, and has contributed to  the financial disparities within the country.

The protection of human rights is another major concern when it comes to authoritarian regimes hosting sporting events. In fact, most authoritarian countries lack the appropriate infrastructure and facilities to host sporting events, so they usually build these infrastructures from scratch, specifically for the events in question. Construction is often very intensive and these regimes do not hesitate to violate international laws. Most recently, Qatar, which hosted the 2022 World Cup, was targeted by numerous international organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Right Watch over the abuses committed against migrant workers and the hundreds of workers injured during the construction of half a dozen brand-new stadiums in the space of just a few years. The Qatari government has denied most of the allegations. Therefore, Qatar’s problematic situation has given rise to a real debate on the legitimacy of authoritarian regimes hosting such sporting events. 

But Why should Democratic States Care?

Colossal amounts of money are involved in hosting major sporting events, often creating significant conflicts of interest. Despite the mobilization of athletes and humanitarian organizations to denounce the abuses of host countries, democratic states have often turned a blind eye to the issue of sports in authoritarian countries. Recently, the situation has changed somewhat with the resumption of war in Ukraine. The Russian invasion of Ukraine represents the biggest ground war in Europe since  World War II. In this context, sports represents one of the many points of tension in the conflict. Sport became a veritable soft power weapon, helping to raise Russia’s profile. 

Since 2022, many Russian athletes have been denied the right to take part in sporting competitions, with the aim of penalizing Russian “soft power” and sending a strong message of support for Ukraine. One of the first victims was tennis player Danil Medvedev, who was unable to take part in a number of major tennis tournaments, including Wimbledon 2023. Despite being ranked No. 2 in the world, Medvedev and his fellow Russians and Belarusians were banned from that year’s Wimbledon. Similarly, the Russian and Belarusian delegations were banned from taking part in the 2024 Paris Olympics, a heavy sanction seen as a humiliation by both countries. Nevertheless, sports seem to be increasingly used by many as a way to condemn injustice and punish acts of impunity. For instance, Seven-time Formula 1 world champion Lewis Hamilton has repeatedly spoken out to call out Formula 1’s involvement with authoritarian and repressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia, which fail to respect human rights.

With all that said, the financial and ideological stakes of sports make it a powerful weapon for sanctioning authoritarian states and defending liberal democratic ideals, notably the protection of human rights and freedom of expression. The current state of Putin’s war in Ukraine transcends any concept of human justice and in this context, the instrumentalization of sports to attack Russia’s image and soft power seems more than appropriate. While the intersection between sports and geopolitics is not intuitive, it is essential to understanding complex power dynamics. As guardians of democratic values, it is imperative that democratic states reclaim sports as a platform to oppose oppression, foster international solidarity and lead a global commitment to justice and human dignity.

The move has been anticipated for some time. The circumstances of Hemenway’s hiring in 2014 have long fueled rumors of Russian meddling. Multiple fake news outlets published intriguing accounts of Hemenway’s accomplishments while he was in the process of applying to the College. One such account involves Hemenway wrestling a brown bear and winning without a single scratch, a feat sure to impress any potential employer. As it turns out, Hemenway might be woefully unqualified, merely a holder of a doctorate from the University of Michigan with conducting experience at several institutions.

“This is not merely an issue of fake news or falsified credentials,” said Dr. Alan Holiman, chairman of the panel. “Dr. Hemenway likely colluded with the Russians to get his job and continues to communicate directly with the Kremlin to undermine the prestige of William Jewell College. We can see the results of it on-campus. The band, for example, has played a repertoire by Russian composers during his time here. Moreover, the choir has sung lyrics in Russian, which leads normal Americans to suspect that those lyrics might have contained coded messages to Russian agents in the Kansas City metropolitan area. If not that, it is also possible that those mysterious foreign notes were actually insults aimed against America. This is very complicated. George Gershwin was the son of Russian immigrants. So was Irving Berlin. Think about that. The implications are disturbing.”

In particular, Holiman was referring to the Symphonic Band’s 2015 performance of Dimitri Shostakovich’s “Folk Dances”.

“It’s awfully suspicious. We should also not discount the fact that the Harriman-Jewell Series continues to feature Russian performers. Is this a coincidence? Inquiring minds want to know,” Holiman said.

The committee also claims to have found a photo not yet released to “The Hilltop Monitor” that features Hemenway at an RT gala in Moscow.

“He’s there, right next to Jill Stein and Michael Flynn. If you squint, it really does look like him. He is not as well dressed as the others, but it’s Hemenway,” Holiman said.

When reached for comment, Hemenway unexpectedly bragged about his alleged connections.

“Yeah, the RT galas are pretty fun. What’s so bad about having a little fun?” Hemenway said. “But Putin didn’t get me this job. I mean, he’s a great guy, very smart, the best, believe me, but he didn’t give me this job.”

A committee press release hinted at the possibility that other professors and college personnel are under suspicion and might be subject to investigation and possible indictment.

“This investigation might lead to more connections at the college to the Putin government,” said Holiman. “For example, during the recent Achievement Day Celebration, the official printed program noted that the audience would sing the national anthem, but we did not do this for the first time in the 20 years that I have been on the faculty. Was this an accident or something more? Moreover, the new Etrieve System, while on the surface an ‘improvement,’ clearly lacks essential functionality. The IT Department might have been hacked unawares and ‘The Hilltop Monitor,’ due to its mysterious inattention to these matters, gives every indication of having turned into a fake news outlet for Russian propaganda.”

President Donald Trump has asked his son-in-law Jared Kushner to correspond with Holiman in the ongoing probe, provided that Kushner himself is not indicted by the Justice Department in the interim. Paul Manafort, who volunteered his services suddenly to the Office of Advancement, could not be reached for comment. Press Secretary Sean Spicer, when asked by the Monitor’s White House Correspondent Drew Novak to comment on these investigation, labeled the entire matter “fake news.”