The WTA Women’s Tennis Association has canceled its tournaments in China because Chinese player Peng Shuai disappeared from the scene after accusing a high-ranking politician of sexual violence on the Internet. To date, she has not left China. The association is taking a much more confrontational path than sports associations in general, says sports and geopolitical expert Carole Gomez from the French Institute for International and Strategic Affairs IRIS im Dlf.
In an interview, Gomez explains that it is not yet clear whether the WTA approach or the defensive stance of the International Olympic Committee will be more successful and why major sporting events offer extremely important opportunities for foreign policy – both in front of and behind the scenes. Here is the translation of the entire conversation with Gomez.
Due to time constraints, we only broadcast part of the interview on Deutschlandfunk; here you can read and hear the entire conversation.
Matthias Friebe: The WTA, the tennis association, no longer plays tournaments in China after the fall of Peng Shuai. Is that a role model for sports organizations?
Carole Gomez: It was a great surprise to hear this news yesterday and this week. That was something completely new. The tension has been very high over the past week. Steve Simon (President of the WTA, editor’s note) has issued the threat. And he actually did what he announced. It’s a very big step – an impressive step by the WTA. In some ways it might not be a role model, but it could be a key point in the history of the sport.
Friebe: The men’s association, the ATP, does not participate. They know that sport can have a positive impact on society. But they believed that with a global presence they had the best chance of implementing this, says Andrea Gaudenzi, head of the ATP. Is there not some truth to this argument?
It was a very strong statement that the WTA made on Wednesday. But now we have to be very careful about what the next step will be and how the other organizations will react.
The IOC has made its position very clear in its statements: It definitely does not follow the path of the WTA, but remains in the position of silent diplomacy.
Friebe: What is your experience? Silent diplomacy, can it still work?
Gomez: This is something of a new concept that the IOC developed seven years ago. It was about the silent diplomacy. Now we are hearing about silent diplomacy. To be honest, it could be efficient. Many diplomatic questions can be solved more easily if they are not in the limelight, but rather are dealt with in informal discussions. So it might well work. But at the same time – given the urgency of the situation – I don’t know which position is the best, which strategy is the best: a very harsh statement like the WTA or a quiet diplomacy from the IOC. I think the future will soon tell us what the best option was: but definitely the WTA has taken a big step, a very important step in this area.
Friebe: Find the IOC ducking away.
Gomez: It was very interesting to see the WTA announce the declaration. On Wednesday the fact that they won’t play a tournament in China. And on Thursday morning we saw the IOC say it was continuing talks with China about Peng Shuai. And they announced that they had a meeting with her and that everything seems to be fine. But there is no evidence, there is no hint, there is no explanation, no press release about what they were talking about. More importantly, they did not talk about Peng Shuai’s allegations or possible prosecution for her rape allegations against a top Chinese politician. So it’s a difficult situation for the IOC because it wants to do something. A couple of weeks ago, she was video calling Peng Shuai. Something no one had ever succeeded in doing. But at the same time it said nothing about very important things like the rape of Peng Shuai and her situation, her safety in China.
Gomez: Because that’s a tough question. Part of the success of sport is that it is in its DNA not to have any connection with politics. We can see that in the IOC charter, we can see it in the statements made by FIFA.
But there is definitely a strong link between sport and politics. And even if Thomas Bach and many officials say that politics and sport do not go together – to be honest, for me it is something like mythology. Every single day, every single sporting event shows that sport and politics are intermingled. We just have to be very pragmatic here. And my opinion: the international associations have to deal with this area. And nobody will believe them anymore if they tell something like that. So, in my opinion, the international associations have to be much more pragmatic and just say: ‘Okay, so sport and politics definitely mix. So let’s find a way to make it work and not just say that it doesn’t exist or that it doesn’t mix because everyone knows that’s not the truth. ‘
Friebe: But if you say there is a strong signal from the WTA to withdraw the events from China – will that do anything? Does a government like the Chinese really learn anything from it?
Gomez: It is very difficult to say and exactly how the Chinese government will react. Shortly after the WTA’s statement, I saw a statement from Chinese Foreign Minister Wang that he disagreed with the politicization of sport.
But he didn’t mention anything else. So we definitely have to wait for the Chinese government to take the next step. And we also have to wait for news from Peng Shuai or from Zhang Gaoli, the former minister who Peng Shuai said he raped.
Friebe: On the subject of China: the upcoming Winter Olympics. The US in particular has brought a diplomatic boycott into play. Is that more than just a symbol?
The first was a sports boycott. But pretty quickly that option was no longer on the table. And a few months ago I remembered a comment by US politician Mitt Romney in an American newspaper calling for an economic boycott. And then we saw several options. And above all the diplomatic boycott proposed by Nancy Pelosi or the current President of the United States. We can definitely see that something is going on. But the most important thing about a boycott is that if you want a political or diplomatic boycott to be effective, you have to join forces with other nations, with other actors. If you are alone, the situation won’t change. And the situation will be against you. Because then you are all alone and cannot point out what is wrong in some countries. So it will be very interesting to see how the USA or other countries will try in the next days, weeks, months before the Olympics and Paralympics to rally people, states and interest groups to form a great movement against China . But again: It’s not about a sports boycott. Not like in Moscow, Los Angeles or Montreal. It will be more of a diplomatic boycott. This means that no one in politics – presidents or prime ministers, etc. – will travel to Beijing to support the opening of the Olympics.
Friebe: In general, there is a lot of money behind major sporting events, and so is geopolitics. Do you think sporting events are one of the most important international policy areas for many countries today?
Gomez: It’s pretty hard to tell if that is the case. But a lot of countries, a lot of heads of state, a lot of civil societies and a lot of people watch these Olympics and Paralympics. So if you want to have a global message, if you want to reach thousands of people, you can definitely do something at the Olympics and everyone will see it live or in the paper a few hours later.
So in my opinion it is very important, more precisely, it is a very important public authority. But you can also have very important, very decisive conversations, not in front of the camera, but shortly before or after the games. So it is also a great stage for politics and diplomacy.
Friebe: What is the responsibility of sport in this area?
Gomez: It was very interesting to see how sport interferes more and more with politics. There has always been a connection between sport and politics. But today we see that hosting a major sporting event is not just about welcoming athletes and tourists on your own soil. You have to deal with political, diplomatic and ecological questions and face new problems. So you definitely have to be clear about what is going on in your own country or in another country when you visit it. In my opinion, that wasn’t the case a few decades ago. But now, for ten or 15 years, it has definitely been the case. Mainly because the sport grows and grows. Today it is a very important event in economic, political and diplomatic terms.
