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.

FLF is a nonprofit organization dedicated to global ministry. Their mission statement is: “The Future Leadership Foundation (FLF) develops Christian leaders globally, collaborating with churches, ministry organizations and religious entities by addressing needs and goals that facilitate reaching people for Christ and equipping them for ministry.”

By partnering with Jewell, FLF is able to provide seminarians and students at Ukraine Baptist Theological Seminary in Lviv, Ukraine and Baptist Seminary in Minsk, Belarus with gently used iPads at a greatly reduced cost.

Left to right: Lan Guo, WJC Director of Information Technology, Rev. Chris Cook (’93), Richard Burns, Servers and Systems Administrator at Jewell.

All Jewell students are given iPads upon registration. After two years, students exchange their first iPads for newer models. The returned iPads are refurbished and resold. According to Steve Hemphill, member of the FLF Board of Directors, the organization buys iPads from Jewell at an one-third discount. Then both the seminaries and students receiving the iPads and FLF pay the remaining cost. So far, FLF is the only organization to which Jewell sells old iPads. 

The first installment of iPads was delivered this past June. Jewell alumni, Rev. Chris Cook ‘93, John Jackson ‘68 and Hemphill ‘78 personally delivered them while attending the FLF European Summit of Baptist Leaders from across Eastern Europe. This summit was held at Ukraine Baptist Seminary, allowing leaders from Russia, Moldova, Belarus, Romania, Poland and Ukraine to meet together for the first time.

The seminaries were chosen for the project based on their preexisting relationships with FLF.

“The FLF is committed to helping train church leaders all over the globe. The Baptist seminaries in Lviv, Ukraine and Minsk, Belarus are growing at phenomenal rates and need help. The seminary students in the Ukraine are hungry for technology, but the economy is such that none could afford a new iPad,” said Hemphill.

Part of FLF’s mission has been to work with these individuals and their churches over the past several years. 

“There are exciting things happening in churches all across Eastern Europe. It’s inspiring to see their growth, and we are honored to help,” said Hemphill.

Having iPads will allow seminarians, students, pastors, faculty and church leaders easier access to ministry resources. iPads will enhance classroom experiences and allow for collaboration and communication within the seminary and between churches. Overall, this technology will open up new areas of ministry and assist students in applying their education to practical ministry.

So far, FLF has delivered around 200 iPads and with another 100 ready. In a recent press release, Cook commented on the goal of the initiative.

“We are nearing our goal of delivering 500 iPads to the students in Ukraine and Russia. They are extremely grateful for them,” said Cook.

The hope is for this to be a long-term partnership.

“There is a continual need to support the seminary students in Eastern Europe and hopefully the Future Leadership Foundation will be able to continue this project,” said Hemphill.

Individuals are encouraged to get involved in the global mission of FLF. Those interested in their mission can visit their website to learn more.

Crimea has a history of being controlled by neighboring forces due to its arable land and advantageous position on the Black Sea. Russia originally annexed the region in 1783. It achieved independence for a brief period after the 1917 October Revolution but soon became part of the Soviet Union in 1921 and an administrative territory of the USSR in 1945. Nikita Khrushchev forfeited the Crimea to Ukraine in 1954; however, the region maintained close ties with Russia. Ukraine continued to allow Russia to operate military bases in the Crimea. In 2014, 60 percent of Crimeans spoke Russian. In “Crimea: Path to the Homeland,” Putin maintains that he would not have invaded the peninsula if Crimeans had not demanded it. He also claims that Russia is not currently stimulating a pro-Russian uprising in eastern Ukraine.

In April 2014, pro-Russian separatists in Eastern Ukraine declared independence and assumed control of sections of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. More than 6,000 people have died since the fighting began.

Ceasefire deals were struck Sept. 5 and on Sept. 19, but both failed to hold in the face of persistent fighting. The most recent cease-fire agreement began Feb. 15 and called for an immediate armistice in sections of Donetsk and Luhansk, a withdrawal of major weapons on both sides and an establishment of a ceasefire line that will be supervised by The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. However, the agreement maintains the existing status of the Ukrainian border until the end of 2015, allowing Russia to continue to supply separatists with reinforcements. It is clear that Russia desires autonomy for Donetsk and Luhansk; some officials speculate that Russia’s aim is to achieve autonomy in Eastern Ukraine while maintaining membership in Ukraine’s Parliament. This would allow pro-Russian seats to disrupt Ukraine’s ambitions to join NATO and the European Union.

In response to the annexation and the continued fighting in eastern Ukraine, President Obama issued an executive order in December that bans US exports to Crimea and disallows US funding for Crimean businesses. The European Union enacted similar sanctions.

Crimea’s economy is largely in disarray. The territory is still dependent on Ukraine for its electricity, food and other amenities. Between Western sanctions and the insurgence in eastern Ukraine, Ukraine is experiencing a shortage of supplies and a fall in tourism. Russia replaced the Ukrainian hryvnia with the Russian ruble causing a rise in the price of goods for Crimean consumers.

In September, amidst the chaos of the Russian takeover, the United Russia party won a majority of votes in Crimea’s first election since the annexation. Russia continues to strengthen Crimea’s defenses and recently declared its right to allocate nuclear weapons to the Crimea.

As of yet, President Obama has only approved economic sanctions on Russia and Crimea; he has stood beside Chancellor Merkel of Germany and other European nations who oppose sending arms to eastern Ukraine. This week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a non-binding resolution urging President Obama to send lethal weapons to Ukraine to help end the fighting.