Sports, Politics and Human Rights
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Sports, Politics and Human Rights The Greek Junta and the participation debate in front of the 1969 European Athletic Championship Karl Jostein Heyerdahl Nyquist Master`s Thesis, Peace and Conflict Studies Department of Archaeology, Conversation and History UNIVERSITY OF OSLO 23 May 2016 II Sports, Politics and Human Rights The Greek Junta and the participation debate in front of the 1969 European Athletic Championship Karl Jostein Heyerdahl Nyquist Supervisor: Jan Eivind Myhre Master`s Thesis, Peace and Conflict Studies Department of Archaeology, Conversation and History UNIVERSITY OF OSLO 23 May 2016 III © Karl Jostein Heyerdahl Nyquist 2016 Sports, Politics and Human rights – The Greek Junta and the participation debate in front of the 1969 European Athletic Championship Karl Jostein Heyerdahl Nyquist http://www.duo.uio.no/ Print: Reprosentralen, Universitetet i Oslo IV Abstract This dissertation examines the relationship between politics and sports in Norway during the Cold War in general, and in particular the debate in front the 1969 European Athletic Championship on whether Norwegian athletes and the Norwegian media should boycott. Norwegian foreign policy, was in the postwar era, concentrated on security and defense due to the Cold War climate and the threat of Soviet expansion. In the 1960s, we can see a trend were states became more concerned about international human rights, also in Norway. Conducting a foreign policy based on moralism and at the same time, protecting strategical self-interest was challenging for Norwegian authorities. In 1967, a military junta seized power in Greece. The new regime was quickly accused for violating basic human rights, evoking strong reactions in Norway. At the same time, Greece was the host of an international sporting event. The question was whether sports should be separated from politics, or if sports should become a part of Norwegian foreign policy protesting against the human rights violation within the regime. This thesis contains a descriptive section, which examines the debate in detail, as one important part of this research was to map out major actors and arguments, and understand the process which eventually led to Norwegian participation in the championship. The analytic part discusses the empirical findings, and aims at understand the political interaction with sports. I have found out that the push to politicize the championship came from the Norwegian labor movement, which in 1969 wanted to use sports to react against the regime. Their commitment against participation is an early example of international human rights activism. However, Norwegian sports leaders wanted to make individual choices, and allowed participation. Conservative forces supported the decision. The embedded norm at the time was that politics should be kept out of sports. This is one factor explaining why the non- socialist government chose to stay out of the debate. However, Norwegian participation became a concern for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Their policy concerning the championship was divided. In the public, the Ministry did not want to politicize the championship. Behind closed doors, diplomats received orders for how to behave during the events. V VI Acknowledgment The relationship between politics and sports is of personal interest. As a former competitor in sports, and today a student in international relations it felt natural to combine these two interests. However, I owe my gratitude to the Director of the Norwegian Institute for Defense Studies, Sven G. Holtsmark, for his guidance in the developing phase of this project. Without our conversations, this project would have never come to light. Your interest in this topic gave me the confidence to pursue this thesis. I would like to thank my supervisor Jan Eivind Myhre for showing sincere commitment to this project. Our interesting conversations have helped a lot. I also want to thank my fellow students at the Peace and Conflict Studies program for valuable comments to my ideas during our seminar sessions. Thanks to James, Elliot and Molly for correctional reading, I really appreciate it. Thanks to Maren and my family for the love and support through this process. Finally, I am profoundly grateful to Arne Kvalheim and Helge Pahro for our conversations, and that both wanted to share their personal thoughts behind the decision to boycott the the 1969 Championship. Your knowledge about the debate in front of the championship was highly valuable. Karl Jostein H. Nyquist Oslo, May 2016. VII VIII Abbreviations AUF The Workers´Youth League (Arbeidernes Ungdomsfylking) IAAF International Association of Atheltics Federations IOC The International Olympic Committee IR International Relations FIFA Fèdèration Internationale de Football Association LO Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (Landsorganisasjonen i Norge) MFA Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization NIF Norwegian Confederation of Sports (Norges Idrettsforbund) NFIF Norwegian Athletic Association (Norges Friidrettsforbund) NOK Norwegian Olympic Committee (Norges Olympiske Komitè) NRK Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (Norges rikskringkasting) UN United Nations IX X Table of contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Starting point – the military junta and the IX European Athletic Championship ....... 3 1.2 Current research situation and theoretical considerations ........................................... 5 1.2.1 Sports and politics – Norwegian literature ........................................................... 7 1.2.2 The history of human rights and Norwegian foreign policy ................................ 9 1.2.3 Sports and International Relations ..................................................................... 10 1.3 Research questions .................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Limitations ................................................................................................................. 12 1.5 Sources and methodological considerations .............................................................. 13 1.5.1 Archives ............................................................................................................. 14 1.5.2 Newspapers ........................................................................................................ 15 1.5.3 Interviews ........................................................................................................... 16 1.6 Structure..................................................................................................................... 17 2 Background: sports, politics and human rights in the early Cold War ............................ 18 2.1 Sports is politics......................................................................................................... 18 2.1.1 Controversies 1945-1969 ................................................................................... 20 2.2 Norwegian foreign policy 1945-1969 ........................................................................ 23 2.2.1 Reflections on the human rights aspect in foreign policy .................................. 23 2.2.2 Norway prioritize NATO ................................................................................... 24 2.2.3 Norway and the development of human rights .................................................. 26 2.3 Norwegian reactions to the Greek regime ................................................................. 27 2.3.1 The Nast-case ..................................................................................................... 28 2.3.2 The Council of Europe and NATO .................................................................... 28 2.3.3 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 30 3 The process leading to participation in Greece ................................................................ 32 3.1 Actors within Norwegian sports ................................................................................ 33 3.2 Political actors ........................................................................................................... 34 3.3 Newspapers ................................................................................................................ 35 3.4 The participation debate ............................................................................................ 36 XI 3.4.1 Escalation ........................................................................................................... 38 3.4.2 Athletes boycotts the championship ................................................................... 41 3.4.3 NIF reconsiders its decision ............................................................................... 44 3.4.4 Reactions to final decision ................................................................................. 45 3.5 Concluding Remarks ................................................................................................. 48 3.5.1 Why did the NIF approve participation? ............................................................ 49 3.5.2 Why did Kvalheim and Pharo boycott? ............................................................. 50 4 The Media debate ............................................................................................................