In the 21st century, to suggest that elite sport isn’t being used as political warfare, would be simply wrong. We have moved well past the days of sport being about pure athlete talent and entertainment for the fans. It is at the heart of politics and in the 21st century this has surged to levels never seen before.

The promotion of culture, welcoming others into their countries, hosting major tournaments for the first time and boosting the economy, these are all as a result of soft power. However, there is too a dark side of soft power; from Russia’s denial of human rights violations amid the fanfare at the 2018 World Cup, the Middle East’s desperate attempt to cover up the deaths of hundreds of migrant workers amongst the Region’s supposed glory days and even using a Formula 1 event to hide away from mass repression. This article will explore the good, the bad and the ugly of soft power’s influence on 21st century sport.

Soft power

Soft power is a vital tool to many countries around the world. It is a subtle movement that they use, almost hiding in the shadows, a way that allows countries to truly express who they are, or a way for them to shape the way that they are perceived by the unknowing. Not only can the use of soft power significantly enhance a country’s reputation, it is a smart way to boost an economy – attracting tourists and opening opportunities to do business with other countries around the globe.

In soft power, ‘winning hearts and minds’ is a reference to persuading people to view something in a particular way, rather than by out of fear.

Not through coercion, but through attraction and persuasion. Joseph Nye, author of the Power and Independence book, once defined soft power as: “The ability of a nation to shape the preferences, perceptions and behaviours.”

This is in complete contrast to hard power. Hard power is where a country uses coercion, force and manipulation in order to achieve their goals – usually done via military action.

Hosting sporting events is a soft power instrument

Hosting major sporting events, such as World Cups and the Olympics poses an opportunity for a country to completely reshape how their country is viewed around the world and in terms of using soft power, these events are the equivalent of striking gold.

One of the more notable uses of soft power in the Twenty-first century was when China hosted the 2008 Summer Olympics in their capital city, Beijing. Beijing was awarded the rights to host the 2008 Summer Olympics in 2001, fending off competition from other major cities, such as Paris and Istanbul. It was from this point, the Chinese government seized the opportunity to revolutionise Beijing as their country’s pride. Knowing that the whole world would be watching on, with thousands upon thousands travelling to the heart of the country, China begun to construct a modern world-class city.

These constructions included the erection of the ‘Bird Nest Stadium’ – a futuristic stadium which China built to host the opening and closing ceremonies of the Summer Olympics. It was a one-of-a-kind stadium, symbolising how ahead of their time China was during 2008 – an excellent adaptation of soft power. This wasn’t the only soft power-motivated architecture that was built in the city, the famous ‘water cube’ (Beijing National Aquatics Centre) was opened for the beginning of the 2008 games, with the purpose of holding all the games’ water events, this again was part of China’s architectural ambition.

China took a unique, never-seen-before approach to clear air pollution around Beijing. They banned over 3.3M cars from the streets in an effort to clear smog – an intense form of air pollution. This was very much a last-ditch attempt, but one that saw the country receive high praise due to their apparent fight against pollution, even though it was most likely a soft power move.

The 2008 games came off the back of decades of economic growth in China, beginning in the Twentieth-century, carrying on into the Twenty-first, they utilised the money to boost their reputation through soft power.

Heading into the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics, China were facing scrutiny regarding multiple issues in the country at the time, such as censorship claims, repression and human rights violations. There was also an alleged crackdown on particular minority communities in the country. The Games allowed for China to almost sweep these issues under the carpet, move on and reshape perceptions.

The 2008 Games were significantly beneficial and massively boosted China’s reputation. Their diligent opening and closing ceremonies, alongside the erected Water Cube, Birds Nest Stadium and much more world-class architecture, as well as attempted positive change to the climate worked to perfection, leaving people around the world amazed. Perceptions of the country were utterly shifted.

Stars as Ambassadors

Sometimes athletes can become so popular that their country uses their achievements as a soft power. Footballing stars such as Lionel Messi has certainly raised more awareness of Argentina. Messi, seen by millions as the greatest footballer of all time, is not shy for his love of his home country, who in 2022 he captained to their first FIFA World Cup since 1986. Messi is a symbol of his country, with his skill entwined with his nationality. Messi’s fame has certainly used a soft power in Argentina, who have been able to cover up the millions in poverty in the South American country, due to the coverage of Messi.

Megan Rapinoe, depending on how you want to look at it, is seen as a controversial figure – yet a great example of soft power.

Rapinoe, a hugely successful footballer in the United States, is very outspoken on her opinions about racial equality, LGBTQ+ rights and stance on equal pay in football. Many people believe that in her position as a footballer, she should focus on the footballing side of the game and there was outrage when in a posy-match interview following the USA’s Women’s World Cup final defeat to Sweden she said: “At least there is a chance for equal pay.”

The USA certainly do not see her as controversial, it is very much the opposite. Her words have certainly been influential amongst many communities who see themselves as underrepresented and the US government have noticed her as a symbolic individual, making sure that she is featured in the media, through interviews, punditry opportunities and more. Unlike a majority of high-profile athletes, Rapinoe’s role also highlights a nuanced nature as it enhances US soft power, but also caused division and controversy from a political standpoint.

The role of diplomacy in sport and its global affect

As defined by Sports and Development sports diplomacy goes way past what happens on the pitch. It is the intentional use of sport as a tool for international relations, as well as cooperation. It suggests that sport has a very unique way to unite communities through the shared love of sport. Although tailored for fans and communities, sports diplomacy does not have any relation to on-field matters to begin with, although ultimately the on-field play is what unites everyone. It unfolds between countries and between governments, who use sporting matters as a way to build trust and shape a reputation, suggesting that the playing field is the basis of it all, centre stage almost.

In the Twenty-first century, sports diplomacy has been a must for smaller or underrepresented nations, who have been able to use sporting successes in their country in order to amplify their global presence. The West Indies has used cricket as a diplomatic power for decades and this was boosted when they hosted the 2007 edition of the Cricket World Cup. Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago and Barbados were the countries to host. This World Cup was highly successful for the region, expressing their ability to be able to host such a prestigious tournament, whilst at the same time promoting tourism.

Not all cases of sports diplomacy are orchestrated, sometimes the pure talent of a small nation’s habitants capture the globe’s eyes. Such was the case with Iceland’s heroic EURO 2016 team. A small Nordic country, with a population of little over 300,000 at the time in 2016 – the smallest ever country to qualify for the EURO’s, Iceland were written off before a ball was kicked. Letting their feet do the talking, Iceland’s heroic run to the quarter-final will be talked about from a sporting point of view for centuries and from the perspective of a country, this tournament put them and their culture on the map.

Remarkably enough, Iceland finished second in their Group Stage, advancing to the Round of 16, where they shocked the world, knocking out an England team that featured players like Wayne Rooney 2-1. England, accused of complacency, were left with heads in hands, whereas Iceland, co-managed by a qualified dentist, saw their ability and culture shine on the grandest stage.

Post-match saw the Iceland team gather at the end of the stadium where their travelling fans were, performing their synchronised ‘Viking clap’ – this soon became a viral sensation, with many teams across the globe adopting this themselves, as seen recently with Cristiano Ronaldo and the Al Nassr fans.

Tourism in the country soared to levels never seen before, the country were able to form partnerships and sponsorships with global brands, all down to a team’s on field performance, turned sports diplomacy.

Soft power in elite sport – The bad.

It is without doubt that soft power in elite sport has massively assisted countries in shaping how they want to be perceived, but sometimes this backfires and the factual information and lies that a country is trying to hide come to light.

When Qatar welcomed the world to the Middle East in the 2022 World Cup, the occasion was meant to be a historical moment, with the country being the first in it’s region to ever host a major football tournament, but it became historical for its off-pitch issues.

On the pitch, there was 172 goals across the 64 games at the tournament, the most in World Cup history. Lionel Messi also finally won the one trophy that had alluded him his entire career, cementing himself as the greatest footballer of all time in many people’s eyes. The tournament saw many monumental occasions, such as Saudi Arabia’s historic 2-1 victory over Messi’s Argentina, Morocco’s unprecedented run to the semi-final of the competition and of course Kylian Mbappe’s hat-trick in the final, despite France crashing out on penalties. But ultimately, the issues that existed pre-tournament, remained throughout and still exist post-tournament.

The tournament was supposed to be used as a soft power machine from a Qatari perspective, a chance to change the West’s stance on the Middle East, spending billions on brand-new stadiums, a whole new transportation system that allowed commuters to get from A to B in a more convenient way as well as creating hospitality packages for all matches, as well as world-class accommodation for fans and players alike.

But as the world’s eyes were on the pitch, the dark truth loomed in the distance. Qatar’s far-fetched sporting ambition wasn’t all as it seemed. Reports soon came out from human rights organisations reporting the deaths and working conditions on the migrant workers who were ‘slaved’ to work – with the official death toll, released by The Guardian at over 6,500.

The workers were forced to work under appalling conditions. Crammed accommodations, withheld wages, confiscated passports and false promises. Qatar’s attempt at soft power was built on the back of the blood of migrant workers.

The juxtaposition between Qatar’s intended image and the harsh reality really showed the soft power failure. In fact, people who were never aware of the human rights abuses in the country, were now aware, with the country facing media scrutiny and general backlash to levels never reached before. Although the Qatari government posed cultural change, world-class infrastructure and reputational change, the media’s coverage, in particular organisations such as The Guardian, were focused on the off field issues.

This queries whether there are limitations to soft power, asking the question ‘Can elite sport truly reshape global perceptions of a country through sport, or is it all just fabricated lies?’

Reflecting on key moments such as the Beijing 2008 Summer Olympics, FIFA World Cup 2022 in Qatar and instances such as Bahrain’s repression after the country announced they’ll be hosting a Formula 1 Grand Prix, it is clearly evident that sport has an extraordinary platform that allows for a shift in reputation. Although for these events, especially Qatar 2022, the shift in reputation seems to be limited to the time of the event taking place, with the facts being discovered after the events come to a close. Controversies such as human rights violations, sex and race issues or labour quickly resurface after the events end. So, to answer the question – it certainly is possible to shape a country’s reputation through sport, but only temporary, soft power is not sustainable in countries such as Qatar, who have extremely outdated views on certain communities.

Conclusion

To conclude, in the Twenty-first century, elite sport is most certainly at the centre stage of soft power, with this becoming more and more common.

As nations, for various reasons, aim to shift their reputation, attract tourists, project their country’s culture, sport has certainly became a tool for diplomatic language. As proven by the examples provided in the article, soft power in sport can work one of two ways – country’s either execute it perfectly, or the language can backfire on them and ruin the reputation more and is limited by the lies that have attempted to be swept under the carpet.

The implements of soft power used in elite sport are clear for all to see. Hosting major sporting events such as World Cup’s and the Olympics allows a country to present themselves to the globe in the way that they desire. This was on show during the build-up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics, with the Chinese government erecting world-class, futuristic architecture such as the Water Cube and the one-of-a-kind stadium like the Birds nest in order to symbolise how advanced as a country China are. China’s stance on clearing air pollution was too extremely positive for their reputation.

But in the shadows of these apparent changes, lies the deaths of migrant workers in Qatar, the human rights abuses in China and political annoyance in Bahrain. Soft power can only go so far and for so long. Most countries have failed to maintain their ‘changed’ reputation.

As a whole, soft power is a method that is used through sports, more than it is in most other sectors, but it usually is not enough to fully change a country’s reputation. A country must take active steps in order to change their outdated ways, such as Qatar’s views on LGBTQ+ communities and forcing people to work in unsuitable conditions for not even a bare minimum wage.

Soft power cannot function on its own, there must be actions to back up the words. This has to be sustainable.