It’s Just Sport, Right – Or is It?

admin — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:24:56 +0000

Didier Drogba to play for France in the next world cup; Lionel Mesi to switch citizenship and join Spanish squad; Samuel Eto’o to wear England Color in South Africa 2010.

If any of those titles were to grace the cover on international Newspapers, many in Argentina, Cameroon and Cote d’Ivoire would scream treason, betrayal and call for murder. The horror of seeing their prodigal sons represent the color of a foreign nation will undoubtedly pierce the heart of their countrymen, dash the hopes of international recognition and generate such a frustration capable of engendering the most heartfelt nationalism.

Why would such be the case? Shouldn’t people choose the team or country they want to represent? What are the criteria that would permit an immigrant to represent his or her adoptive country?

In some circles, the debate rages up to the boiling point of anti-immigration, and anti-Semitism. Especially if the immigrant has distinctive features (some say race) that singles him or her as a definite foreigner.

Arguments range from patriotism, nationalism, ethnocentrisms, pro and anti-immigration, degrees of ancestry, contribution to the nation, birthrights and length of stay. Mind you that those arguments rarely surface when it is about carrying a gun and going to war…but that’s another topic…

So who’s right, who’s wrong? During the Euro 2008 soccer tournament, The Turkish team boasted five foreign-born players, including Colin Kazim-Richards, originally of England. Portugal also had five. Croatia and France had seven each. And four of the five strikers on the German national team were not born in Germany. France is very notorious for sleeping with foreigners who can run behind a ball, and ditching those who ran after a work permit.

The issue is very divisive, and often generates racial and political fallout. What’s the big deal, one may say, everyone should choose where they want to play if the rules allow it; well, they could actually if we’re talking about the Professional club level, the issue is quite different at the international stage, and a lot more hypocritical.

No big deal when Nigerian-born NBA superstar Hakeem Olajuwon was naturalized U.S citizen and played for the 1996 U.S Olympic squad, but what a controversy when WNBA star Becky Hammon chose Russia over the U.S

Another interesting case was those of brothers Salomon and Bonaventure Kalou who almost ended up playing in the same world cup representing two different countries.

While those cases reflects the growing meaninglessness of citizenship as well as the opportunity to break down misplaced nationalism, it offers a glance at a very familiar issue: it is all about the moolah, l’argent, le peze, mbongo, the money, paper, le fric…

When guns, diplomatic channels, sanctions, and other traditional means by which governments often interact are inefficient, nations use soft power to convey messages of supremacy and prosperity.

Nations compete for the right to host International events such as the Olympics and the world cup. Masquerade in the costumes of nationalism and patriotism, those events mainly generate revenues. They attract tourists, they create jobs, they present a different image of a country, and they offer potentially long-term investments.

The budget for the 2012 London Olympics has risen to 15 billion; China invested 40 Billion in infrastructure projects for the 2008 Olympics. There is a lot of money to be made in those events, and not just for the governing bodies. Countries with winning teams get on top of prize money, recognition and fame that translate into positive national image, boost in merchandise sales, and one of the most effective tools for recruitment and defection.

Politics is never too far from those games because along with the national image is attached the perception of economic, technological, health and prosperity wellness.

Many Western leaders flirted with boycotting the opening ceremony under pressure over a host of politically awkward issues involving China, a move that wouldn’t have been the first sporting boycott due to political reasons.

Sporting events successes produces prestige, which is then transformed into financial gains, which often result in political posture. The mark of a great nation is to succeed in every category; to achieve that, some are willing to bypass the symbolism that is attached with the cultural exchange supposed to be conveyed in those events. Some will go along with naturalization, as far as doping, sabotage or political pressure.

The cultural element of the event has been substituted by the corporate hold on the event. For some, it doesn’t matter who carries the flag as long as it represents their currency, for others, it doesn’t matter how high their flags is held because their bellies is touching their toes.

Claude Makelele was born in Kinshasa, but plays for France soccer national team, Yang Fen is now from Brazzaville Congo by way of China, and the African Champion of female table tennis…

Attachment to the color of a nation, or the bond between a team and the people it represents are les and less relevant, what matters today is who can win and for whom. International competitions are now governed by the same practices of professional clubs; while this is a sad time for the ultra patriot purist, it is a good thing for sport lovers, because when our colors are no longer worn by our own, and our own no longer wear our colors, we find less and less reasons to support a particular flag or a player, except for the very obvious reason…the sport they play.

So a Nigerian doesn’t play for Nigeria, and a Pakistani plays for Nigeria, for once it is no longer about nationalism, Patriotism, etc….it’s only about one thing:

Sport, right…or is it?

By: Regis Zoula

Soft Power » Anti Semitism

It’s Just Sport, Right – Or is It?