The purpose of this book is to critically enhance the appreciation of diplomacy
and sport in global affairs from the perspective of practitioners and scholars.
The book will make an important new contribution to at least two distinct
fields: diplomacy and sport, as well as to those concerned with history,
politics, sociology and international relations. The critical analysis the book
provides explores the linkages across these fields, particularly in relation to
soft power and public diplomacy, and is supported by a wide range of sources and
methodologies. The book draws in a range of scholars across these different
fields, and includes esteemed FIFA scholar Professor Alan Tomlinson. Tomlinson
addresses diplomacy within the world’s global game of Association Football,
while other subjects include the rise of mega-sport events as sites of
diplomacy, new consideration of Chinese ping-pong diplomacy prior to the 1970s
and the importance of boycotts in sport – particularly in relation to newly
explored dimensions of the boycotts of the 1980 and 1984 Olympic Games. The
place of non-state actors is explored throughout: be they individual or
institutions they perform a crucial role as conduits of the transactions of
sport and diplomacy. Based on twentieth- and twenty-first-century evidence, the
book acknowledges antecedents from the ancient Olympics to the contemporary era,
and in its conclusions offers avenues for further study based on the future
sport and diplomacy relationship. The book has a strong international basis
because it covers a broad range of countries, their diplomatic relationship with
sport and is written by a truly transnational cast of authors. The intense media
scrutiny of the Olympic Games, FIFA World Cup and other international sports
will also contribute to the global interest in this volume.
According to the International Olympic Committee and FIFA, the independence
of sport is one of the most sacrosanct principles. Proclaimed in the Olympic
and FIFA Charters, the ‘autonomy’ of sport has to be protected and
preserved. Yet, in light of the financial dimension of sport alone, its
separation from politics is in reality a myth. In the social stakes, sport
has become a classic field of intervention for politics. In this light sport
may be seen as an ideal way to sanction or punish a state that is considered
unacceptable. The sports boycott then becomes a diplomatic tool to be
wielded alongside other political tools. The chapter presents a conceptual
understanding of boycotts and their place in global diplomacy, as well as
familiar examples from the Cold War and more recently.
critical analysis. That it has
ended by pointing to this wide range of areas that require further attention suggests a
burgeoning field of study.
1 Aaron Beacom, International Diplomacy and the Olympic Movement: The New
Mediators (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012).
2 Richard Epsy, The Politics of the Olympic Games (Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press, 1979).
3 Iver B. Neumann, Diplomatic Sites: A Critical Enquiry (London: Hurst, 2013), 121–46.
4 Alison Holmes and J. Simon Rofe, GlobalDiplomacy: Theories, Types and Models
evidence today has increased the number of people doing diplomatic work enormously, and has lent to globaldiplomacy a much, much more socially dense quality than it had only a hundred years ago. Whereas the number of diplomats on the eve of the First World War could be counted in four-digit figures, diplomats working for the state today are counted in six-digit figures, and if we add international civil servants, activists in non-governmental organizations, consultants, spin doctors and so on, we probably reach a seven-digit figure.
Group, 2007), 5.
30 Woodhouse, ‘Peacekeeping, peace culture and conflict resolution’, 488.
31 Soeters and Manigart (eds), Military Cooperation, 6.
32 Tresch, ‘Cultural and political challenges’, 10.
33 J. Simon Rofe, in Alison Holmes with J. Simon Rofe, GlobalDiplomacy: Theories,
Types and Models (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2016), 39.
34 Tresch, ‘Cultural and political challenges’, 11.
35 See, for instance, G. Lloyd and G. van Dyk, ‘The challenges, roles and functions
Concepts and history
circulated outside of the region, in this case in Belgium and the Netherlands
(1993–1994).24 These tours were sponsored by the Peruvian or Colombian
governments and coincided with major cultural initiatives,25 which acted
as ‘intricate, multilayered engines of globaldiplomacy’.26 These spectacular blockbuster exhibitions, from their lenders’ points of view, attempted
to garner national prestige, project a glorious past, reassert culture as the
cornerstone of national identity and promote commercial interest, thereby
making them an integral part of soft diplomacy
.), Japan’s GlobalDiplomacy: Views from the Next Generation (The Henry L. Stimson Center), pp. 43–53.
Tsuruoka, M., 2016. ‘ Ō sh ū ni okeru d ō mei, sh ū dan b ō ei, sh ū dantekijieiken — aratana ky ō i e no nat ō EU ni yoru tai ō ’ [Alliances, Collective Defence and the Right of Collective Self-Defence in Europe: NATO and EU responses to New Threats], Kokusai anzen hoshou [ The Journal of International Security ], 44(1): 64–82.
Walton, D., 2008. ‘Australia and Japan: Towards a New Security Partnership?’, Japanese Studies
many of its founders believed.
Foreign policymakers charged with making war and peace will continue to think
in these terms. Neumann argues:
If it had not been a Christian variety of the theme that we are all God’s children that
had informed globaldiplomacy, it would in all probability have been some variation
on the same theme. (Neumann 2011, 311)
Does this leave us trapped? Neumann continues:
As Foucault (1997, 147–8) once remarked, the important question ‘isn’t whether
a culture without restraint is possible or even desirable, but whether the system or
remain one, it made
sense to preserve its nuclear force as an insurance policy and as
leverage into globaldiplomacy and arms control negotiations (Quinlan 2011 : 220; Stocker 2007 ).
Critics wonder whether strategic reasoning should really be so casual;
nuclear weapons as afterthoughts (Stephens 2006 ).
This wide span of argument is not replicated in the same
way in the US and hardly evident in France – Europe’s only
other nuclear power – nor within nuclear-armed Israel. There is
no discernible public
to Build Ten Patrol Boats for the Philippines with ODA’ [Zosenote no JMU, Firipin mukejunshisen 10 sekijuchu, ODA de], Nikkei Shimbun , 4 June.
Onodera, I., 2014. ‘Speech at the 13th Shangri-La Dialogue: Advancing Military-to-Military Cooperation’, 30 May.
Satake, T., 2015a. ‘Japan-Australia Relations: Toward Regional Order-Building’, in Tatsumi, Y. (ed.), Japan’s GlobalDiplomacy (Washington DC: The Stimson Center).
Satake, T., 2015b. ‘Why a Strong Japan-Australia Relationship Matters