|
 |
Main Page | Month Archive | Email Updates | RSS Feed | Print Version
THE WORLD CUP: GLOBAL UNITY AND NATIONALISM
AUG 3, 2006 - 4:28PM PDT
by Jade Miller
Peter Winter provided research support for this report.
In the summer of 1969, El Salvador and Honduras, two nations with a history of animosity, met on the soccer pitch during the qualifying games of the World Cup. As heckling became increasingly vicious and violent, hostility between fans rose from a simmer to a boil. Less than 24 hours after the end of the match, this antipathy had translated into military operations; the two nations were engaged in a full-on war (later known as the "Football War"), which left over 6,000 dead and 15,000 injured.
While most World Cup rivalries do not, thankfully, end in war, World Cup matches frequently involve more than just a match of skill and sportsmanship. The 2004 Asia Nations Cup final between China and Japan, for instance, sparked rioting in China and further 2004 Asia Nations Cup. On the other hand, the World Cup has also been credited with bringing nations together. Korea and Japan's joint hosting of the 2002 World Cup, for instance, is often credited with helping bilateral relations between the two countries.
Soccer, arguably the world's most popular sport, has the power both to unite the people of the world in a shared passion, and to divide citizens of opposing countries in unfettered nationalist zeal. While the 2006 World Cup did not produce any political results as dramatic as the "Football War" of 1969, much has been written in the world press about both the positive and negative implications of the tournament in today's climate.
The potential of the Cup to bring about global unity and peace have been extolled by many. Commentators, including Kofi Annan, have acclaimed the tournament's potential to unite citizens of different nations, so often at odds, in a shared passion. Some have suggested that the World Cup might even work towards peace in countries engaged in civil war, such as the Ivory Coast, by uniting warring parties under one shared flag. Others have suggested that the Cup can bring about increased liberties in authoritarian countries now forced to exist on world stage, as has been the case for Iranian female sport spectators.
While the lack of interest in the sport among American citizens is famous in its own right, the failure of the U.S. to dominate in the World Cup has been highlighted as an opportunity for less powerful nations to have at least a symbolic victory over the world’s only superpower, as proxy for victories in other venues, while the appearance of Team USA in the Cup at all has been noted as an excellent opportunity for the State Department to engage in "soccer diplomacy" with soccer fans around the world.
Of course, the flipside of this international shared passion for soccer is the nationalistic fervor that goes along with national team World Cup fandom. In the traditionally ethnically homogenous nations of Western Europe, the appearance of immigrant players on national teams has challenged conceptions of what constitutes national identity, and spawned some anti-immigration taunting and even demonstrations. The controversial head-butting incident involving France's star player Zinedine Zidane has been linked to such sentiment. Many have suggested that Marco Materazzi, the Italian player on the receiving end of the headbutt, brought on the attack with the use of inflammatory racial slurs, calling Zidane the "a dirty terrorist," or "son of a terrorist whore." Both Zidane and Materazzi have denied that the insult was racially or ethnically based, however. One interesting corollary of the incident was the connection some critics made between Zidane's headbutt and American policy in the Middle East, coining the phrase "headbutt diplomacy" and comparing the actions of the U.S. government to Zidane's famous headbutt, despite a lack of any other connection between Zidane and the U.S.
Other controversies dividing teams have also caused or highlighted consternation and resentment between the people of competing nations. Although neither the Israeli nor Palestinian national teams qualified for the World Cup, for instance, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict still made it to the tournament. When Ghanian player John Pantsil waved the Israeli flag after scoring a goal (he plays for an Israeli team and said he waved the flag to thank his many Israeli supporters), much of the Muslim world was aghast, and some declared the end of their support for Team Ghana. Citizens of some nations that did not make it to the World Cup also had grievances on the world stage. Many have questioned why African nations, typically thought of as a hotbed of soccer talent, are so under-represented in the World Cup, year after year.
Nowhere has the specter of strong nationalism been as troubling as in Germany, the hosts of this year's World Cup and a nation reticent since World War II to display overtly patriotic sentiments. Yet the tournament was, by most reports, full of German national pride and patriotism, exhibited on a world stage. External commentators praised this as an opportunity for Germans to rise above the constant shadow of World War II and shed their uptight image in favor of an image of a fun-loving rejoicing people. Within Germany, however, this rejoicing was controversial, with some (largely older Germans) finding such patriotic celebrations inappropriate while others (largely younger Germans who don’t remember the war) saw no problem with such behavior.
The following is an aggregation of World Cup coverage focusing on issues important for public diplomacy. If you would like to post your reactions and ideas about this issue, you can add your comments at the bottom of this page.
Global Unity and Peace
World Cup Economics
(Branko Milanovic, TomPaine.com, July 6, 2006)
This year’s World Cup has proven once again that football is the world’s most popular sport; it has also proven that football is probably the world’s most globalized profession. It is inconceivable that Brazilian, Cameroonian, or Japanese doctors, computer scientists, blue-collar workers, or bank tellers could move from one country to another as easily as Brazilian, Cameroonian, or Japanese football players do.
Beyond the World Cup: "Can You Feel What I Feel Today?"
(Danny Schechter, CommonDreams.org, July 6, 2006)
"Football is still only a game; a temporary respite from the trials and tribulations of daily life but never a substitute for having a life." These popular contests also mask a deeper change in the world and substitute for the more intractable conflicts underway and out of sight, at least on TV. Just as the World Cup comes to a close, so is the era of the nation state. Look around: the real battles in the world are not between nations but within them. Look at our own fractured and divided country, the elections in Mexico, the fighting in Iraq, or the battles in Gaza.
Why Can't the World Be More Like the World Cup?
(Joyce Marcel, CommonDreams.org, June 21, 2006)
Many of us get a tearful feeling of one-world happiness during the Olympics, but they are just a little country fair compared to the World Cup. The World Cup, now being played in Germany and watched by three billion people on televisions around the world, is the closest the world ever gets to a universal passion. I must say I like the way it feels. I'm not alone.
So When Shall We Have a UN Cup?
(Kofi Annan, Libération, June 19, 2006)
How we envy the World Cup at the UN. You could very well ask yourself what a UN Secretary General can write about soccer. But the World Cup makes us green with envy at the United Nations. As the showcase for the only truly "global" sport practiced in every country, by every ethnicity, every religion, it is one of the rare phenomena as universal in scope as the United Nations itself. One could argue that it is even more universal: FIFA comprises 207 members; we only have 191.
Embassies get kicks from World Cup
(Bob Cohn, The Washington TImes, June 10, 2006)
At the Serbian Embassy, politics will be mitigated by sport. Montenegro declared its independence from Serbia two weeks ago, the final division of what used to be Yugoslavia. Yet the soccer team continues to be called Serbia-Montenegro because that's the name under which it qualified. Not only does this essentially create a division among players on the same team, it also creates a split among fans. But members of the diplomatic and administrative staffs from both countries, and their guests, will be welcome when the embassy shows tomorrow's game against the Netherlands on a big screen at 9 a.m. "We invited our friends from Montenegro because they don't have an embassy," said Jelena Cukic, the Serbian Embassy press counselor.
The Global Game: What Football Says about Our World
(Spiegel Online, June 6, 2006)
It's a game, and yet so much more. If the World Cup is a success, if the terrorists stay away, if Iran competes, if the hooligans are kept in check and if doping isn't an issue; if it's a true football fest, then the gradual disintegration of our world might be slowed a little. And in today's environment, a little would count for a lot.
Soccer & Civil War: The Ivory Coast's War of the Elephants
(Ullrich Fichtner, Spiegel Online, May 29, 2006)
Politics and sports often aren't meant to mix. But many in strife-torn Ivory Coast believe the national soccer squad can help end the country's civil war.
Franz Beckenbauer: "Football has an Incredible Power Beyond Sport
(Spiegel Online, May 29, 2006)
Q: In the 1990s you predicted that the national team's significance would wane. Were you wrong?Beckenbauer: I was wrong. At the time I asked myself: Who wants to watch Germany play San Marino? We'll actually have to play them in the upcoming European Championship qualification. But no, people flock to such games as well, even though you don't get to see a match between equal sides. It seems national sentiment has become stronger, the sense of "We."
Soccer: The Delicate Overlap Between Sports and Politics
(Rob Hughes, International Herald Tribune, April 26, 2006)
However, little by little, the sport of soccer lifts a veil of oppression. It is less than a year since 100 Iranian women braved the ban to watch a World Cup qualifier, surrounded by 80,000 males at the Azadi Stadium. Azadi means "freedom." The Iranian women had been given strength for their protest by Irish women who insisted on their right to attend, and applaud, the Ireland team when it played a friendly in that stadium.
Team USA
One World Cup
(Steve Sailer, The American Conservative, July 17, 2006)
This World Cup in Germany offers the soccerati the opportunity to flaunt their cosmopolitanism...Ironically, while the World Cup is an occasion for globalist preening in the U.S., in the rest of the world it’s a prime locus for jingoism.
World Cup of American Antipathy
(Nancy Snow, POV (PBS), July 10, 2006)
I've no doubt that team USA would have been a favorite to cheer against. We just aren't popular these days. What if one of our American guys head-butted an opposing player as French player Zinédine Zidane did to an Italian player in the waning minutes of the game? I'd hate to think about the global reaction to such an aggressive and bullying move like that. But that's what the world has come to expect of American now. If a Frenchman does it, it's just out of character from the grace and charm we expect from that nation. If an American were to do it, it would be on par with our current global indictments.
World Cup boosts growth, binds ties, even sparks war
(Mark Rice-Oxley, Christian Science Monitor, July 9, 2006)
The World Cup enables small nations of the world who ordinarily have little say in that other great international sport - diplomacy - to settle scores and resolve questions of status and national identity with a few cathartic kicks.
More than Sport at Stake
(Walter Pless, MercatorNet, June 6, 2006)
The world's biggest sporting event is a reminder for the US of the potential benefits of soccer diplomacy.
For ABC/ESPN, a Big TV Audience Gained and Lost
(World Cup '06 Blog, The New York Times, June 28, 2006)
As much as everyone makes fun of American TV coverage of the World Cup — including Budweiser ads in the U.K. — it is also true that the ratings for this World Cup are through the roof in the U.S., more than double those of 2002.
Hey Guys, It's Just a Game
(Dave Zirin and John Cox, The Nation, June 20, 2006)
The World Cup has historically aimed to be a counterweight to the passions of war. But Team USA player Eddie Johnson's comments comparing the World Cup to war and Team USA to the US military are consistent with the militaristic spirit that some US fans have brought to the games. Without question, England, Poland, Germany and other teams have their share of fringe hooligans, some openly racist. But Team USA's most prominent fan club calls itself "Sam's Army." While the fan club explicitly rejects racism and soccer hooliganism, its website is replete with martial imagery and belligerent anthems . Johnson's comments illuminate a crucial difference between how Americans and Europeans think about war--and sport.
Why America's not watching
(Jonathan V. Last, The Philadelphia Inquirer, June 18, 2006)
An American loss in the World Cup is basically a requirement for international stability.
The politics of football
(Roger Cohen, International Herald Tribune, June 15, 2006)
America does not have Brazil’s soccer fever. But at a time when anti-Americanism is perhaps the world’s most effervescent idea, it’s inevitable that a crushing defeat of a U.S. team, like the Czech triumph earlier this week, is going to cause some gloating -- or worse. Not often does the world get to see the dominant political, economic and cultural power humiliated on so public a terrain.
When soccer team loses, America wins
(Brendan Lowe, The Baltimore Sun, June 13, 2006)
The World Cup is a victory the United States can forgo. An American loss at the World Cup would be an American victory in the world of diplomacy.
For One Month Every Four Years, A New World Order Leaves America on the Touchline
(Simon Tisdall, The Guardian, June 7, 2006)
The U.S. is an 80-1 long shot this time and may struggle to overcome group stage opponents Ghana and the Czech Republic, let alone Italy. For Americans used to winning, there is something vaguely shocking about this. But US soccer-related insecurity is political and cultural, too. For four weeks, the world shows its back to the number one nation. The usual hierarchies of power are turned upside-down; the agenda is no longer Washington's to command. It is not often that old enemies, such as Mexico, or relatively new ones, such as Iran, get the chance to "beat" the US. But either may do so in Germany if their teams progress.
Drinking, Random Fellowship All Part of World Cup
(John Flinn, San Francisco Chronicle, June 4, 2006)
"They like us!" I thought. "They really, really like us!" All around me, Austrians were shedding their usual reserve and cheering lustily for the United States. When they discovered they had an actual American in their midst, I was affectionately thumped on the back and high-fived. I hoped someone would buy me a beer, but apparently this new bilateral love affair went only so far.
Nationalism and Immigration
Nationalism in Soccer: Immigration creates new mix
(Peter Berlin, International Herald Tribune, July 3, 2006)
As European politicians debate limits to immigration, many of their national teams have been taking the field in the World Cup peppered with immigrants, or children of immigrants, some far more visible than others. In this they reflect the countries they represent, which makes them lightning rods for those who do not want multiracial countries. There are refugees, returning emigrants, members of the same tribes playing for different countries and a growing number of players with parents from different countries or of different ethnic backgrounds. A national team raises questions of national identity anywhere, but the all- West European final four draws attention to what has been an increasingly ferocious political debate in Europe.
National hysteria could tear apart UK
(Matthew Engel, The Financial Times, July 2 2006)
Here lies the serious danger. Other countries are brought together by the shared emotions induced by the success or failure of their football team. This can be exaggerated, and usually is: there is a lot of airtime and newsprint to be filled. But the World Cup is a competition between nation-states with the lone exception of the United Kingdom which, for historic reasons, is split into its component parts...As football gets ever more significant, and the political and cultural implications of devolution sink in, this has the potential to destabilise the country in ways we cannot yet grasp. This might not bother Steve McClaren, Eriksson’s successor. It should worry Gordon Brown, the next manager of the UK.
World Cup: Root for your team, but nicely
(Peter Berlin, International Herald Tribune, June 30, 2006)
Nationalism is the motor that drives the World Cup. The fans and their flags and shirts provide the backdrop that reassures television audiences that they are watching a major event. The fans are happy to play their part... Yet the message is clear: patriotism is nice, but only if it is kept in proportion.
Frail Arab nationalism, between a ball and chain
(Michael Young, The Daily Star, June 15, 2006)
In recent weeks, as the WorldCup neared, numerous commentators saw an opportunity to hold up football as further proof that exclusionary nationalism remained alive and well, despite the suffocating rhetoric of concord that accompanies international sporting events.
Zidane's Headbutt
FIFA punishes Zidane, Materazzi
(Fahd Chafik, Morocco Times, July 21, 2006)
With its front-page headline reading, "Zidane-Materazzi 3-2, Italy is angry," the paper said it was "too low a punishment for Zizou," while Il Corriere dello Sport said it gave a "reward to violence." The Turin-based La Stampa described the sentence as "scandalous, and Rome's La Repubblica maintained "there is no law that can justify putting the provocation and the reaction on the same level." In France, however, the president of the country's football federation, Jean-Pierre Escalettes, was satisfied with the punishments, calling them "intelligent, measured and reasonable."
Zidane banned for three matches, Materazzi two over World Cup head-butt
(Baltimore Sun, July 20, 2006)
Former Italy captain Paolo Maldini said it was "scandalous to ban a player for having said something. It's the first time that it's happened and it's only because Materazzi is Italian and because they want to justify the gesture of a great champion, who made a mistake," he said at AC Milan's training camp.
To the French, Zidane still a hero, if no longer a 'god'
(Susan Sachs, Christian Science Monitor, July 14, 2006)
Mr. Zidane has long been the prime example of a "beur," as French people of North African descent are commonly called, who crossed over into mainstream celebrity status by way of professional sports. He was a source of pride in immigrant neighborhoods, a case in point for French politicians who insisted on the openness of French society and a bane to those on the xenophobic far-right who complained France was losing its white European identity. In the final score, Zidane became for some the embodiment of a quality admired in more than a few French circles: the willingness to sacrifice victory for pride.
Read my lips: the taunt that made Zidane snap
(Matt Hughes, The Times of London, July 11, 2006)
Rees claimed that Materazzi called Zidane “the son of a terrorist whore” before adding “so just f*** off” for good measure, supporting the natural assumption that the Frenchman must have been grievously insulted. As the son of two Algerian immigrants, the 34-year-old is proud of his North African roots, dedicating France’s 1998 World Cup win to “all Algerians who are proud of their flag and all those who have made sacrifices for their family but who have never abandoned their own culture”, so such a slur would certainly explain, if not justify, his violent response.
The Zidane mystery: What set him off?
(Jerome Pugmire, AP, July 11, 2006)
The Paris-based anti-racism advocacy group SOS-Racism issued a statement Monday quoting "several very well informed sources from the world of football" as saying Materazzi called Zidane a "dirty terrorist." It demanded that FIFA, soccer's world governing body, investigate and take any appropriate action.
Israeli flag-waving incident
Israeli flag incident may cost Ghana team a few Arab fans
(Vivian Salama Special , USA Today, June 22, 2006)
While the waving of an Israeli flag by Ghanian player John Pantsil resonated poorly with die-hard Arab soccer fans, most of them say they would rather root for Ghana than for the USA. “Arabs and Muslims will still support Ghana over the United States,” says Ibrahim El-Houdaiby, 22, an Egyptian soccer fan. “All that Ghana did was raise a flag in support of Israel, but what America did was kill hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Palestine. At least the Ghanaians apologized.”
You have your say
(Al-Jazeera, June 20, 2006)
It’s been a fantastic World Cup so far, with plenty of tense matches, great goals and some controversial talking points. None more so than Ghana's John Pantsil and his waving of the Israeli flag as his team trounced a stunned Czech Republic. Here's some of the feedback we've had so far.
Apology follows Pantsil gesture
(BBC, June 19, 2006)
The Ghanaian Football Association has apologised after defender John Pantsil waved an Israeli flag to celebrate the World Cup win over the Czech Republic...Pantsil plays in Israel for Hapoel Tel Aviv and wanted to thank the fans who travelled to support him, Abbey said."He's unaware of international politics. We apologise to anybody who was offended," said Abbey.
Fury in Egypt over Ghana's Israeli flag waver
(YNET News (Israel), June 19, 2006)
Egyptians supported the Ghanaian team all the way until the 82nd minute, and regretted it after the Israeli flag (waving)
African teams
One Step Backwards
(Martin Jacques, Guardian Unlimited, July 7, 2006)
The importance of football has grown in direct proportion to its ability to become genuinely global and not primarily European. Unlike virtually every other human activity - from politics and economics to universities and the military - football has managed to give a growing place in the sun to those who are normally marginalised and unrepresented. The growing importance of Africa and Asia in football are testimony to this. But, alas, not in this World Cup.
Africa Stands United Behind its Teams
(Timothy Kalyegira, Deutsche-Welle, June 22, 2006)
There is something striking about Africa. It is the only continent in the world that supports its teams as a continent...The World Cup is not only a collective African effort. It is also a deeply emotional and political event. It will never be simply an entertaining sporting event. For Africans, the tournament represents the noble and desperate struggle of a historically downtrodden, enslaved and impoverished man to assert himself -- to demonstrate that he too counts on the world stage.
Germany
Bring us the World Cup, Tony
(Alastair Campbell, The Times of London, July 11, 2006)
A number of myths have had to be revised. The idea of the Germans as insular, humourless and not the kind of people you want at a party: that one’s gone for ever. This has been one of the best parties of all time. But just as German people have projected a new image for their country so, to the football world, have the English fans. They have been bigger in number and better in humour than ever before.
World Cup has done much to dispel stereotypes of Germany
(Kris Kotarski, The Vancouver Sun, July 8, 2006)
One of the slogans of World Cup 2006 is: "It's time to make friends," and although it's not a particularly German slogan -- it's a little too hippy for that -- it has captured the atmosphere in sunny Deutschland during World Cup 2006.
Football strikes back
(Frank Lowy, The Sydney Morning Herald, July 8, 2006)
Has any other government program got more bang for its buck than the investment in the revival of football?**.. Our performance in Germany not only boosted our national spirit but gave us a new world presence. What this means for the Australian "brand" around the world is beyond measure... With the old ethnic rivalries behind us, football has become a symbol of a new Australia, and the game, which has the potential to advance our national interest in Asia and the world, has begun to flourish.
World Cup: Germany wins - just not the Cup
(Constanze Stelzenmüller, The International Herald Tribune, July 7, 2006)
Berliners and tourists alike have been lolling around in café chairs in front of them, eating, drinking and generally having an innocently good time in a way that an earlier generation of Germans would have considered positively immoral. For those who, like me, have been 38 for a couple of years and think that's a good age to stick with, this is all heady stuff. Let me put it this way: Germans Feeling Good About Themselves and Not Apologizing For It Every Minute is not what we grew up with.not what we grew up with.
Doubts voiced about World Cup boost for host country
(Roger Boyes, The Times of London, July 5, 2006)
The World Cup has broken through 60 years of German inhibition about openly demonstrating national sentiment... Germans have started to belt out the national anthem without stumbling over the words...Turks and other immigrants are apprehensive about the new patriotism that has developed over the past month of football. “The Germans are happy that we identify with them when we’re watching the games,” Ahmet Kalkan said. “But after the World Cup is over, maybe they will want to keep their patriotism for themselves and lock us out.”
Germans hope World Cup patriotism here to stay
(Tom Armitage, Reuters, July 5, 2006)
Officials are hoping that hosting the World Cup will boost Germany's image abroad and sweep away lingering prejudices about the nation, based on the World War Two and the holocaust. The number of Germans with memories of the war are dwindling and younger generations have begun to display an entirely natural relationship to their nation and their national flag.
Team spirit grips Germany
(Roger Cohen, International Herald Tribune, July 5, 2006)
But if a soccer victory on home soil will not be Germany's, another victory has clearly been secured in the sunlight of this well-organized tournament - over German reserve and rigidity and reticence and self-doubt and all the other manifestations of a heavy history.
City in a State
(The Economist, June 8, 2006)
Local politicians and businesses are hoping that the influx of visitors will play a role in helping to turn the city's struggling economy around.
 Read Comments:
Nnaemeka Chukwukezie on February 4, 2007 @ 7:46 am:
more news on sports and global unity
orji moses on February 5, 2007 @ 1:10 pm:
i want to know about sport
chiedozie nwaubani on February 7, 2007 @ 5:10 am:
importants of sports in global unity
nnenna on February 12, 2007 @ 7:52 am:
information on sports and global unity
okezie madubuko on March 7, 2007 @ 2:44 pm:
how has sports affected racism?
Add a Comment:
|
|
|
SEND TO FRIENDS
