SPORT 1913 - 2013

days after the 1994 Winter Olympics in Lille- hammer, Norway (United Nations 1993). Sim- ilar resolutions have been passed for every subsequent Games. In 2011, all 193 member countries endorsed a six-week Olympic Truce calling for a ‘cessation of hostilities’ for the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Lon- don. It is the first time the resolution has won universal support (United Nations 2011). If the ultimate measure of the Truce is a ‘cessation of hostilities’, these efforts have had limited success. While there is some evidence that in 1994 the Sudanese National Olympic Committee brought about a temporary truce between the Sudanese Government and the rebellious National Sudanese Liberation Army in keeping with the Olympic Truce, the Truce has failed to stop the major powers’ interven- tions in Iraq and Afghanistan, the civil wars in Africa, states’ actions against their own peo- ples, and the attacks of non-state actors at the time of the Olympic and Winter Olympic Games. In fact, during the 2012 Olympics, the civil war in Syria became so violent and in- tractable that former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan resigned as a peace envoy. More- over, the only way that the Olympics have been able to achieve a secure, neutral site is through expensive, heavy-handed surveil- lance and security. In London, the cost has been estimated to be more than 1.1 billion British Pounds. These expenditures unwit- tingly encourage a discourse of fear and dis- trust and strengthen those institutions and corporations with a vested interest in conflict.

It is unclear whether the current leadership of the IOC makes any attempt to reduce world tensions through preventive diplomacy, let alone address conflict that could spill over the Games by meeting with the governments that support the non-state actors who might mount an attack upon the Games. Apart from the promulgation of the Truce, they make no visible effort to call upon the world to ensure that the Games be held without incident. I am convinced that the Olympic Movement can do more to create a climate of public opinion against military intervention and war, and re- duce the huge expenditures for surveillance during the Games. It is instructive that there has been minimal ‘security” for the Youth Olympic Games, with even the IOC’s hotel open to the public. That being said, there is clearly a limit to what the sport movement can do to bring hostilities to an end. At the time of writing, even the United Nations Security Council is deadlocked on a solution in Syria. The Truce puts the leadership of the Olympic sports clearly on the side of ‘dialogue for peace and reconciliation’ and against the denigration of the ‘other’ that historically has contributed to the readiness for war, an im- portant commitment in a troubled world. The Truce has also prompted the establishment of an Athens-based non-governmental organiza- tion (NGO), the International Centre for the Olympic Truce. The ICOT conducts education- al programs about the importance of peace, dialogue and reconciliation. A recent initia- tive has been the introduction of an anti-bul-

lying program, to link the ideals of peace to the day-to-day experiences of children with other children, to give them the skills and confidence to minimize if not eliminate child- to-child harassment and violence, particularly assaults based upon difference (ICOT 2011). The ICOT thus joins a wide range of school- and community-based programs conducted under banners such as peace education, Olym- pic education, ‘fair play’ and anti-racism, which seek to give children and youth the mo- tivation and skill to respect and affirm differ- ence and mediate conflict. Yet like other Olympic education programs, they are direct- ed primarily at children and youth, not at the athletes, coaches, officials and organizers who constitute the most visible face of contempo- rary sport. It would be much more effective if it directed these activities at top-level sports, especially during the Olympics and other ma- jor games, and to engage prominent athletes and sports officials in public discussion and advocacy about disarmament and peace. Sport for Development and Peace The renewed dialogue between the IOC and the United Nations also contributed to the ef- fort to bring the appeal and methodologies of sport to some of the most difficult tasks of the contemporary world, including the realization of the UN’s Millennium Development Goals and the stabilization and rebuilding of war- torn societies. This effort is known as Sport for Development and Peace or SDP. While SDP is a new expression of the current version of

42