Thursday, 05 October 2006Games that could raise Poor NationsOPINION: Olympic Spirit
The Hong Kong Olympic Committee is to be congratulated for securing the equestrian events of the 2008 Beijing Games for our paddocks and soon-to-be built obstacle courses. The media have been full of arguments against holding the events here, and while the debate may continue, it perhaps reflects much larger questions regarding the purpose and the spirit of the Olympic Games.Chandran Nair and Thomas Tang
A tradition of athletic excellence continues from the first modern Olympics in Greece in 1896 to today. But what have the Olympics as a whole now come to represent for people, apart from all the politics and the cash? Is it a marketing extravaganza to fuel consumer gluttony, or a huge sporting spectacle built to a frenzy by 24-hour television coverage? As enjoyable as the Games are when they arrive, are we missing the point?
When Baron Pierre de Coubertin thought about staging the first modern Olympic Games, the world he had grown up in was struggling with disillusionment and a moribund spirit: France was still recovering from a military defeat. His dream was to rebuild that spirit through education - focusing on sport and how it could be harnessed to develop a platform for peace and brotherhood through physical excellence.
It is time to put the Olympic spirit back into the Games. One of the original tenets of the modern Olympics was to provide a fair and even basis for men and women of all races and creeds to compete. The International Olympic Committee would do well to review its policies on egalitarianism. How can poorer countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia ever hope to compete against the developed first world to win the right to stage an Olympic fortnight?
The decision to host the 2012 Olympics in London is praiseworthy, but the IOC might well give serious consideration to holding future Games in countries where the host cities and their people can truly benefit from the investment in infrastructure arising from the sporting spectacle. Sanitation systems and roads, affordable housing and telecommunication networks may not seem as glorious as showpiece athletics parks, but they would form a solid foundation for improved hygiene and living standards, release entrepreneurial potential and the means to build a city's economy.
But who funds it all? Why not get the wealthy countries to pay to support a developing nation's bid? Sponsorship funds would constitute part of that country's international aid budget, and the size of the bid would reflect the realities of post-Games use: modest stadiums whose cost need not be clawed back through high fees, and which could serve as community focal points.
The prestige connected with staging the Olympics lifts a city in the eyes of its neighbours, boosting the pride of the host country. That new hope, under the right conditions, should be strong enough to generate a wave of economic growth that will turn into something lasting.
Under this scheme, Olympic host cities would be chosen 12 years in advance instead of eight - reflecting the need for the more extensive work required. This would be true aid, and would not require an Olympian effort from the global community.
Athletes the world over have one thing in common - their fame is fleeting. Few may remember Spyridon Louis, the Greek shepherd who won the first modern Olympic marathon. But many more would cherish for years the medical services provided at the Bujumbura Olympic Hospital in Burundi built by the Games of, say, 2032.
Chandran Nair is founder and chief executive of the Global Institute For Tomorrow, and Thomas Tang is its managing director. GIFT is a pan-Asian, Hong Kong-based think tank.
www.globalinstitutefortomorrow.org/
This opinion was printed in the South China Morning Post, Wednesday, 27 July 2005
URL:
