Today marks one year since Russia invaded Ukraine and plunged Europe into one of the bloodiest conflicts since 1945.
At this time, there is little indication that the war will end soon as talk of peace has not advanced beyond the most basic of stages. Thousands have died. Millions have fled from their homes to safety in other European countries. To talk of sport in such a world seems small.
Nevertheless, there is a conversation to be had.
That conversation revolves around the presence of Russian athletes going forward.
In December 2021, World Triathlon sanctioned Russia for its significant number of doping cases, effectively banning it from the sport for one year.
In the wake of the invasion, World Triathlon subsequently banned Russian and Belarusian athletes and officials indefinitely. This followed the recommendation of the International Olympic Committee (IOC). The ban for the invasion would be reviewed in light of the war however given the lack of progress in peace negotiations, it seems unlikely the ban will expire soon.
The Russian Triathlon Federation has said that is has been in constant contact with World Triathlon over the return of its athletes in 2023.
Whether the athletes will be allowed to race this year has implications for next year’s Olympic Games. The First Period of Olympic qualification in triathlon ends in May and no Russian athletes will have scored points in that time. There is every likelihood that if the ban continues there will be no time for any Russian athlete to score points in the Second Period either.
Beyond the world of triathlon, though, moves have been afoot regarding Russia’s participation in the 2024 Paris Olympics Games.
A few weeks ago, the IOC announced that they would stand by the sanctions currently in place.
This came a week after the IOC apparently gave Russian and Belarusian athletes a green light to qualify for the Olympic Games. Said green light was the result of the Olympic Council of Asia approving the participation of Russian and Belarusian athletes in qualifying competitions they hosted.
This announcement prompted out-cry from many quarters and resulted in the IOC reaffirming their commitment to the bans in place.
Nevertheless, it seems that the IOC is searching for some loophole to enable Russia to compete in Paris. This resembles how Russian athletes were able to compete at the previous Olympics under a supposedly neutral flag after the Russian Olympic Committee was banned due to state-sponsored doping offences.
There are two contrasting factors to consider here.
The first is that Russia has historically placed immense value on the success of its elite athletes for propaganda purposes. The infamous Sochi Winter Olympics of 2014 was perhaps the greatest example of how Russia sought to assert itself on the world stage through the success of its (often chemically enhanced) athletes.
To allow Russia to participate in Paris, or by extension in international triathlon, will only enable the Russian government to parade any success under a similar guise. Even if Russian athletes compete under a neutral flag, it will be impossible to stop Russian media from spinning their presence and potential success for propaganda purposes.
In the modern international arena, legitimacy has become a fiercely contested battleground. To let Russia back into elite sport is to cede precious inches in that contest.
The other side of this coin covers the athletes. While there are athletes such as Olympic champion swimmer Evgeny Rylov that publicly supported the war (and he was banned for it), there are countless Russian athletes that do not support the war.
It is important to note that Russia is not an open society and freedom of expression is far more curtailed than many comparable countries. Many of the athletes are trying to simply go about their lives.
The Olympic boycotts of 1980 and 1984 did far more damage to the athletes than they did to the status quo of the Cold War. In the same vein, it will be athletes that suffer from any ban now and not the Russian government.
In tennis, most tournaments decided against banning Russian players for risk of blaming them for the actions of their government. The Lawn Tennis Association took a different tack and banned Russian and Belarusian athletes from Wimbledon last year.
There is thus no clear-cut model of including or excluding the athletes.
At some point, the debate between what helps Russian propaganda and what helps the athletes will have to be reconciled.
The war is a tragedy and in the face of the lives lost and damage done international sport means precious little. However, given its importance to issues of propaganda and legitimacy, the matter of sport cannot be completely sidelined and global bodies will need to make decisions in the near-future about how to deal with Russian and Belarusian athletes.
