Footballer Jack Wilshere has stoked up intense debate within the UK media following his comments that 'only English players should play for England'. Questions about what does it mean to be English, who qualifies as English have dominated radio waves and newsprint, with calls for him to clarify what it means to be English.
Think then of the Bosnian team, poised to qualify for the FIFA World Cup in Brazil, their first ever major international tournament.
The conflict that consumed Bosnia in the early 1990s at the break up of Yugoslavia saw three different ethnic groups fighting each other; Bosnian Muslims (more commonly known as Bosniaks), Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats. Since the war the Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats have tended to ignore their national team, electing to support Serbia and Croatia instead.
However, whilst the supporters of the Bosnian national team have tended to be Bosniaks, the team itself boasts players of all ethnicities and is often cited as an example of one of the few genuinely multi-ethnic organisations in Bosnia. The teams recent successes have just encouraged Bosnians of all ethnicities to play for them, whereas previously Bosnian Serbs or Croats with eligibility to play for Serbia or Croatia have chosen the higher profile teams (the best known example for British Premier League followers would be Aston Villa's Savo Milosevic, born and raised in Bosnia but won the Euro 2000 Golden Boot for his goals for Serbia).
Listening to the debates about what it meant to be English in order to play for England, I couldn't help but think of the Bosnian situation. The conflict, some 20 years ago, led to an estimated 2 million people in Bosnia leaving their homes, many of whom became refugees. Whilst a fair number of refugees have returned to Bosnia since the end of the violence, a good number have not and there are large numbers of Bosnians living abroad particularly in countries such as Sweden, Germany and the United States.
The young players of Bosnians 'golden generation' today reflect this. Some players could only be regarded as Bosnian; Edin Dzeko was born and bought up in Sarajevo and began his career in the Sarajevo team of FK Željezničar. Others have a more cosmopolitan outlook. Stoke City's goalkeeper, Asmir Begovic, was born in Bosnia, but was bought up in Germany and Canada. Bosnians continue to thank their lucky stars that he was not bought off the bench to play for Canada against Iceland in 2007, which would have rendered him ineligible to play for Bosnia. Roma's Miralem Pjanic who similarly left the country as a baby, played for Luxembourg national youth sides before choosing to represent Bosnia for his senior career. Bosnia's talismanic captain, Zvjezdan Mismovic was born and raised in Germany and only came to play for Bosnia in 2004 after being approached by a representative of the Bosnian national side.
Of course the core of the English debate and the Bosnian one are different. Jack Wilshere is reluctant to see those who have come to England as English. The Bosnians are concerned that those who have left theirs might consider themselves something other than Bosnian. At the heart of it remains individual footballers whose careers depend upon visibility and who want to play at the highest level. But those whose have led lives which allow them to ally themselves with more than one country do not feel any less passionate about the country they choose to represent. Those who support their national teams still embrace those who have made an often difficult choice as their own.
Today Bosnians applaud the efforts of their national football association which actively recruits abroad for Bosnian talent. The effects of the war twenty years ago mean that the diaspora are flung far and wide across the globe and the Bosnians mean to ensure that they come 'home' to represent their country. Perhaps regretting letting the legendary Zlatan Ibrahimovic through their fingers, who is widely rumoured to have offered to play for Bosnia before representing Sweden, the Bosnian management are encouraged by their supporters who compile lists of young talents who could possibly be recruited to play for Bosnia.
Attracting the brightest and the best Bosnians to their team has had two effects. The first is that those who might have been tempted to play for a different country are now choosing Bosnia. Bosnian Serb, Miroslav Stevanovic, hails from Zvornik, a city right on the border between Bosnia and Serbia.His ethnicity, his locality and his Serbian club pedigree all suggest that he would play for Serbia, but he has chosen to play for Bosnia.
As the Bosnian national team gets better and better, and continues to select players of all ethnicities, Bosnians of all ethnicities are getting behind it. Perhaps Bosnia's pioneering footballers are succeeding where politicians have failed after all. Just maybe if they can win in Lithuania tonight and book their tickets to Brazil, where their Bosnians of all nationalities (including the Swedish, German and American ones) will do likewise, just maybe the footballers will show the politicians that division and mistrust can be overcome. Their footballers come from everywhere, but they are making the very divided country feel Bosnian.
The effect may only last for as long as the players are on the field; national identity is notoriously transient. The teams success may be hiding a myriad of problems within the country and the organisation itself. But to have Bosnian Serbs and Croats openly supporting their national team is something that no one would have predicted just 5 years ago. The Bosnian politicians should take note; whilst they remain stuck in a debate about separate ethnic identities, the general population has worked out a way to reconcile their ethnic, historic and cultural differences and will all be cheering for their national team tonight.
Tuesday, 15 October 2013
Tuesday, 29 May 2012
Ljajic: Or what's in an anthem?
The Serb Adem Ljajic has been suspended from the Serbian National team for refusing to sing the Serbian national anthem at a pre-Euro friendly against Spain. A Muslim from the Sandzac region of Bosnia, Ljajic stated that he didn't join in for 'personal reasons'.
Like those of Bosnia, the Muslims of Sandzac are descended from those who converted to Islam during the Ottoman occupation. Sandzac is a region of Serbia; those born in the area are Serbs. Yet herein lies a complex relationship. Historically the Serbian Orthodox church has come to represent what it is to be Serbian. Although todays Serbs are about as church going as the British are, part of being a Serb is to be Orthodox. It is what defines them, sets them apart from the others in the region. The Sandzac Muslims are an historical anomoly; Serbian, but also Muslim. Many have left, driven away during the Balkan conflicts of the 1990s or searching for an area where they are in less of a minority.
The Serbian national anthem is, like most, fairly jingoistic, entreating God for protection and strengthening of the Serbian race. But even with only scant knowledge of Serb history it is easy to see whom the Serbs are hoping for protection from and victory against. Much of Serb history and subsequent mentality has been defined by the loss of the battle at Kosevo Polje in 1389 against the Turkish Ottoman Sultans. Serbian literature and epic poems celebrate their feats in battles against the Ottomans and, in the case of The Mountain Wreath, could be seen to call for the extermination of those who had converted to Islam. In nationalist Serb mentality to be Serb is to be standing firm against Islamic intrusions.
You can understand Ljajic's reluctance to sing but many Serbs won't. They are proud of their country and their heritage. But in much the same way that many English are surprised to find their anthem irritates the Scots by occasionally including the line 'rebellious Scots to crush', Serbs tend not to connect the Muslim enemies of their ancestors with their Muslim friends and neighbours.
But with the appointment of Siniša Mihajlović as manager of the Serbian national team in April 2012 the clash between Ljajic and the Serbian FA was almost inevitable. Mihajlovic, perceived by many to be at the more extreme end of Serb nationalism, was bought up on the Croatian side of the border of Serbia and Croatia, close to the ill-fated town of Vukovar. After the brutal seige of Vukovar came to an end his parents, aware of the atrocities committed against Serbs in the area in World War 2 and that their successful footballing son made them high profile Serbs in a Croat dominated area, arranged to leave, many believe they were spirited away by the notorious Serb paramilitary, Arkan. Mihajlovic's nationalist tendencies are understandable (Wilson, 2007). There is no doubt that he is passionate about Serbia and all he believes Serbia to stand for. He made it a requirement for the players to know the words to the national anthem when he became manager. His politics may seem distasteful to many in Western Europe but there are many in Serbia who feel like him; last weeks elections in Serbia saw a surprise victory for the nationalist politician Nikolic. What he has failed to do is to understand that not all Serbs have the same history, the same politics and the same ideals. There are differences between them, but that doesn't mean that they are not all Serbian.
Serbia is hardly the only country with this conflict. England regularly asks itself what does it mean to be English. The ban on Ljajic on playing again for his country until he sings this national anthem that represents neither him nor his identity, despite being Serbian, is an example of how Serbia struggles to manage tolerance of difference within itself.
Like those of Bosnia, the Muslims of Sandzac are descended from those who converted to Islam during the Ottoman occupation. Sandzac is a region of Serbia; those born in the area are Serbs. Yet herein lies a complex relationship. Historically the Serbian Orthodox church has come to represent what it is to be Serbian. Although todays Serbs are about as church going as the British are, part of being a Serb is to be Orthodox. It is what defines them, sets them apart from the others in the region. The Sandzac Muslims are an historical anomoly; Serbian, but also Muslim. Many have left, driven away during the Balkan conflicts of the 1990s or searching for an area where they are in less of a minority.
The Serbian national anthem is, like most, fairly jingoistic, entreating God for protection and strengthening of the Serbian race. But even with only scant knowledge of Serb history it is easy to see whom the Serbs are hoping for protection from and victory against. Much of Serb history and subsequent mentality has been defined by the loss of the battle at Kosevo Polje in 1389 against the Turkish Ottoman Sultans. Serbian literature and epic poems celebrate their feats in battles against the Ottomans and, in the case of The Mountain Wreath, could be seen to call for the extermination of those who had converted to Islam. In nationalist Serb mentality to be Serb is to be standing firm against Islamic intrusions.
You can understand Ljajic's reluctance to sing but many Serbs won't. They are proud of their country and their heritage. But in much the same way that many English are surprised to find their anthem irritates the Scots by occasionally including the line 'rebellious Scots to crush', Serbs tend not to connect the Muslim enemies of their ancestors with their Muslim friends and neighbours.
But with the appointment of Siniša Mihajlović as manager of the Serbian national team in April 2012 the clash between Ljajic and the Serbian FA was almost inevitable. Mihajlovic, perceived by many to be at the more extreme end of Serb nationalism, was bought up on the Croatian side of the border of Serbia and Croatia, close to the ill-fated town of Vukovar. After the brutal seige of Vukovar came to an end his parents, aware of the atrocities committed against Serbs in the area in World War 2 and that their successful footballing son made them high profile Serbs in a Croat dominated area, arranged to leave, many believe they were spirited away by the notorious Serb paramilitary, Arkan. Mihajlovic's nationalist tendencies are understandable (Wilson, 2007). There is no doubt that he is passionate about Serbia and all he believes Serbia to stand for. He made it a requirement for the players to know the words to the national anthem when he became manager. His politics may seem distasteful to many in Western Europe but there are many in Serbia who feel like him; last weeks elections in Serbia saw a surprise victory for the nationalist politician Nikolic. What he has failed to do is to understand that not all Serbs have the same history, the same politics and the same ideals. There are differences between them, but that doesn't mean that they are not all Serbian.
Serbia is hardly the only country with this conflict. England regularly asks itself what does it mean to be English. The ban on Ljajic on playing again for his country until he sings this national anthem that represents neither him nor his identity, despite being Serbian, is an example of how Serbia struggles to manage tolerance of difference within itself.
Tuesday, 15 November 2011
Turkey vs Croatia = violence in Bosnia?
In 2008 Turkey and Croatia played one of the most thrilling finishes to a football game I've ever seen. Minutes before the end of extra time Croatia scored to look as if they would go through to the semi-final. With the very last kick of the game the Turks equalised and went on to win the penalty shoot out, putting the Croats out of the Euro 2008 tournament.
Bosnia is neither Turkey nor Croatia. But the Bosnian Croats support Croatia with some passion. Most of Bosnian Muslims support Bosnia, but as a second choice team some choose to support Turkey, reflecting their Ottoman history.
The Bosnian town of Mostar suffered heavily during the Bosnian conflict of the 1990s, with particularly fierce fighting between the Bosnian Croats and the Bosnian Muslims. Some 16 years after the Dayton Peace Accords were signed, the antipathy between the two groups in Mostar is still evident.
The Turkey Croatia game reflected these tensions. With such a close game, so much to play for and such unexpected last minute drama, feelings were running high. The Bosnian Croats were vocal in their support of Croatia, the Bosnian Muslims on the other side of town were passionately supporting Turkey. When the game had finished and Croatia had been eliminated, riots began across the city.
By the end of the night over 20 people had been hospitalised and damage to property throughout the city centre was evident. Some 16 people were arrested. The police were not unaware of the likelihood of violence, earlier Croatian games had also led to football related violence in the city centre and a Croatia Brazil game in the 2006 World Cup had also lead to major clashes after the Bosnian Muslims supported Brazil.
When Turkey played Croatia on Friday night, there was concern that the events of 2008 could be repeated. However, with Bosnia in action against Portugal, there was less of a sense of fans supporting Turkey, less of a sense of bitter rivals facing each other.
The antipathy between groups is not the same across the country. In Jajce for example, also an area of intense fighting during the conflict, people were reporting that Bosnian and Croatian fans, fully decked out in their respective regalia, stopped to congratulate each other about their sides performances at half time. But in Mostar there was once again violence. Not on the same scale, but 150 supporters were involved in incidents that included stone throwing.
Football, it appears, offers an opportunity for some to manufacture a situation at which historic antipathies can be replayed, to the detrimental effect of those trying to create a stable peaceful environment.
Bosnia is neither Turkey nor Croatia. But the Bosnian Croats support Croatia with some passion. Most of Bosnian Muslims support Bosnia, but as a second choice team some choose to support Turkey, reflecting their Ottoman history.
The Bosnian town of Mostar suffered heavily during the Bosnian conflict of the 1990s, with particularly fierce fighting between the Bosnian Croats and the Bosnian Muslims. Some 16 years after the Dayton Peace Accords were signed, the antipathy between the two groups in Mostar is still evident.
The Turkey Croatia game reflected these tensions. With such a close game, so much to play for and such unexpected last minute drama, feelings were running high. The Bosnian Croats were vocal in their support of Croatia, the Bosnian Muslims on the other side of town were passionately supporting Turkey. When the game had finished and Croatia had been eliminated, riots began across the city.
By the end of the night over 20 people had been hospitalised and damage to property throughout the city centre was evident. Some 16 people were arrested. The police were not unaware of the likelihood of violence, earlier Croatian games had also led to football related violence in the city centre and a Croatia Brazil game in the 2006 World Cup had also lead to major clashes after the Bosnian Muslims supported Brazil.
When Turkey played Croatia on Friday night, there was concern that the events of 2008 could be repeated. However, with Bosnia in action against Portugal, there was less of a sense of fans supporting Turkey, less of a sense of bitter rivals facing each other.
The antipathy between groups is not the same across the country. In Jajce for example, also an area of intense fighting during the conflict, people were reporting that Bosnian and Croatian fans, fully decked out in their respective regalia, stopped to congratulate each other about their sides performances at half time. But in Mostar there was once again violence. Not on the same scale, but 150 supporters were involved in incidents that included stone throwing.
Football, it appears, offers an opportunity for some to manufacture a situation at which historic antipathies can be replayed, to the detrimental effect of those trying to create a stable peaceful environment.
Monday, 7 November 2011
Are Bosnia's 'pioneering footballers succeeding where politicians have failed'?
In November 2009 I went to the industrial town of Zenica, where Bosnia play most of their home internationals, to see Bosnia play Portugal in the FIFA 2010 World Cup playoffs. I was in Bosnia anyway, researching the effects of football on reconciliation processes there. It was a hugely exciting event; if Bosnia won they would qualify for their first major international fooball tournament and for the first time there was a real sense that everyone in Bosnia was rooting for their national side.
Later that month the respected Bosnian blogger Tim Clancy wrote:
Forget the euphoria and naive predictions that we were going to destroy Portugal. It FELT GOOD to be a Bosnian or at least from Bosnia and Herzegovina for a little bit. It worked. People clicked. They shed themselves of the fear and idiocy that has dominated here for so long. It did have the 'gel effect.'
I live here on the border of RS and Federation in Dobrinja. When Serbia plays football here its a like a gypsy wedding on my street. It's a proper party. When Bosnia played it was like a funeral. An eery silence occupied the neighbourhood. Not this time though. This time was different. And it was different everywhere in Bosnia.
Two years later there is a certain sense of deja vu. Bosnia, again on the very edge of qualifying for a major international footballing tournament have again drawn Portugal in the playoffs. Again there is a hint of expectation in the air and a sense that almost all the Bosnians are hoping for a victory for their national side. This is not a given; for a long time the Bosnian Serbs have only supported Serbia whilst the Bosnian Croats have waved the šahovnica.
But this time Serbia hasn’t qualified and people are hoping that the Bosnian Serbs will throw their passion behind Bosnia. This isn’t a given; the political antagonisms in the country are as serious now as they have been since the 1992-95 conflict and the nationalistic politicians are continuing to whip up ethnic tensions.
Can football then be a tool that is used to counter the political nastiness? The seasoned Bosnian observer, Ed Vulliamy wrote an article for the Observer lauding the Bosnian national team for 'succeeding where the politicians had failed'. In it he talks of how, despite the ban on away fans at all Bosnian Premier League games following 4 instances of nationalistic violence, the Bosnian national team is a fully functioning multi ethnic organisation, a rare beast in Bosnia.
In many ways he is right. The best players are routinely picked for the national team, irrespective of ethnicity but this shouldn’t come as a surprise. It is in everyone’s interest for Bosnia’s national team to do well. The players can showcase their skills to the big European club teams and those who work in football all stand to benefit from a strong Bosnian performance. Bosnian Muslims have always wanted institutions that are multi-ethnic, for they have never wanted to have a state that is exclusively Bosnian Muslim. They have always wanted to select Bosnian Serbs and Croats but the Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat players have traditionally played for the stronger teams of Serbia and Croatia thus gaining their chance to play at major international tournaments. It is only now, with Bosnia as strong as Croatia and Serbia that players are able to choose to play for Bosnia without jeopardising their potential career.
The Bosnian Football Federation (N/FSBiH known to all as Savez) is also a functioning multi-ethnic organisation - just. Until earlier this year it reflected the structure of the political arena, with Bosnian Serbs, Croats and Muslims all operating their own separate fiefdoms and a system of quotas for key positions in the overall national organisation. FIFA and UEFA, who had thought this was a temporary structure to accommodate ethnic sensitivities immediately following the conflict, realised they needed to take action to stop it from becoming permanent, and Bosnia was suspended from both organisations until it had reformed.
Many people thought that it wouldn't reform, the organisations within Savez would never agree. But they had forgotten that the people working for Savez have a personal interest in having a strong Bosnian team qualifying for a major international football competition. Against all expectations a new structure was agreed upon, a FIFA imposed ‘normalisation committee’ formed and Bosnia was readmitted to the fold in June 2011.
Corruption in Savez is endemic; the General Secretary and Finance and Marketing Secretary were sentenced to four years in prison for tax evasion and misuse of Savez funds. The general Bosnian population believes that the remaining officials are just as bad. I asked a friend who works for Savez whether the newly reformed Savez was any better and whether the new structure would hold.
'Don't hold your breath' he said 'we Bosnians are good at looking like we are complying with what we have been told to do but in reality doing nothing. Look at our politicians!'
For 90 minutes football can bring people together, but after that things revert very quickly to the status quo. The Bosnian Serbs might support Bosnia for this game, but they still love Serbia more. I interviewed a very senior executive in Savez who admitted that he supported Serbia first and then Bosnia, and I doubt he is the only one. What these football matches do do however is provide a snapshot of how people's sense of how they view Bosnia is changing. The November 2009 play off match mentioned earlier was the first time there was a palpable sense of Bosnian support across the country including the Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat areas. I'm imagining that it will be a little more defined this time, even with the increased political tensions, because there is a possibility that Bosnia will be the only ex-Yugo country to reach the Euro 2012 finals. In the current Yugo-nostalgia evident across the region, people will support other countries from the area in the absence of their own.
Victory for Bosnia on Friday, with Dzeko their talismanic superstar leading the charge will be a bright, bright spot in an otherwise dismal economic, social and political climate. Football alone can never bring about reconciliation, but it can serve to highlight how things are changing. If they beat Portugal on Friday most of the country will celebrate, and 15 years ago that was an unthinkable thing.
Later that month the respected Bosnian blogger Tim Clancy wrote:
Forget the euphoria and naive predictions that we were going to destroy Portugal. It FELT GOOD to be a Bosnian or at least from Bosnia and Herzegovina for a little bit. It worked. People clicked. They shed themselves of the fear and idiocy that has dominated here for so long. It did have the 'gel effect.'
I live here on the border of RS and Federation in Dobrinja. When Serbia plays football here its a like a gypsy wedding on my street. It's a proper party. When Bosnia played it was like a funeral. An eery silence occupied the neighbourhood. Not this time though. This time was different. And it was different everywhere in Bosnia.
Two years later there is a certain sense of deja vu. Bosnia, again on the very edge of qualifying for a major international footballing tournament have again drawn Portugal in the playoffs. Again there is a hint of expectation in the air and a sense that almost all the Bosnians are hoping for a victory for their national side. This is not a given; for a long time the Bosnian Serbs have only supported Serbia whilst the Bosnian Croats have waved the šahovnica.
But this time Serbia hasn’t qualified and people are hoping that the Bosnian Serbs will throw their passion behind Bosnia. This isn’t a given; the political antagonisms in the country are as serious now as they have been since the 1992-95 conflict and the nationalistic politicians are continuing to whip up ethnic tensions.
Can football then be a tool that is used to counter the political nastiness? The seasoned Bosnian observer, Ed Vulliamy wrote an article for the Observer lauding the Bosnian national team for 'succeeding where the politicians had failed'. In it he talks of how, despite the ban on away fans at all Bosnian Premier League games following 4 instances of nationalistic violence, the Bosnian national team is a fully functioning multi ethnic organisation, a rare beast in Bosnia.
In many ways he is right. The best players are routinely picked for the national team, irrespective of ethnicity but this shouldn’t come as a surprise. It is in everyone’s interest for Bosnia’s national team to do well. The players can showcase their skills to the big European club teams and those who work in football all stand to benefit from a strong Bosnian performance. Bosnian Muslims have always wanted institutions that are multi-ethnic, for they have never wanted to have a state that is exclusively Bosnian Muslim. They have always wanted to select Bosnian Serbs and Croats but the Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat players have traditionally played for the stronger teams of Serbia and Croatia thus gaining their chance to play at major international tournaments. It is only now, with Bosnia as strong as Croatia and Serbia that players are able to choose to play for Bosnia without jeopardising their potential career.
The Bosnian Football Federation (N/FSBiH known to all as Savez) is also a functioning multi-ethnic organisation - just. Until earlier this year it reflected the structure of the political arena, with Bosnian Serbs, Croats and Muslims all operating their own separate fiefdoms and a system of quotas for key positions in the overall national organisation. FIFA and UEFA, who had thought this was a temporary structure to accommodate ethnic sensitivities immediately following the conflict, realised they needed to take action to stop it from becoming permanent, and Bosnia was suspended from both organisations until it had reformed.
Many people thought that it wouldn't reform, the organisations within Savez would never agree. But they had forgotten that the people working for Savez have a personal interest in having a strong Bosnian team qualifying for a major international football competition. Against all expectations a new structure was agreed upon, a FIFA imposed ‘normalisation committee’ formed and Bosnia was readmitted to the fold in June 2011.
Corruption in Savez is endemic; the General Secretary and Finance and Marketing Secretary were sentenced to four years in prison for tax evasion and misuse of Savez funds. The general Bosnian population believes that the remaining officials are just as bad. I asked a friend who works for Savez whether the newly reformed Savez was any better and whether the new structure would hold.
'Don't hold your breath' he said 'we Bosnians are good at looking like we are complying with what we have been told to do but in reality doing nothing. Look at our politicians!'
For 90 minutes football can bring people together, but after that things revert very quickly to the status quo. The Bosnian Serbs might support Bosnia for this game, but they still love Serbia more. I interviewed a very senior executive in Savez who admitted that he supported Serbia first and then Bosnia, and I doubt he is the only one. What these football matches do do however is provide a snapshot of how people's sense of how they view Bosnia is changing. The November 2009 play off match mentioned earlier was the first time there was a palpable sense of Bosnian support across the country including the Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat areas. I'm imagining that it will be a little more defined this time, even with the increased political tensions, because there is a possibility that Bosnia will be the only ex-Yugo country to reach the Euro 2012 finals. In the current Yugo-nostalgia evident across the region, people will support other countries from the area in the absence of their own.
Victory for Bosnia on Friday, with Dzeko their talismanic superstar leading the charge will be a bright, bright spot in an otherwise dismal economic, social and political climate. Football alone can never bring about reconciliation, but it can serve to highlight how things are changing. If they beat Portugal on Friday most of the country will celebrate, and 15 years ago that was an unthinkable thing.
Friday, 4 November 2011
Corruption in sport: How does it affect Sport for Development and Peace?
The jailing of 3 Pakistani crickets for 'spot fixing' has had me thinking about the role corruption plays in sports contribution to peace and reconciliation.
Obviously corruption within a sport is very disruptive to the sport itself: match fixing for the sake of gamblers destroys the public confidence in the sport as well as being illegal. Siphoning off of funds for personal gains is almost irresistible, particularly in countries where such practices are more common that would be desired. As the Economist said in a 2009 article "when dishonesty brings high rewards and low penalties, crime is likely". It isn't really surprising that many countries suffer from endemic corruption within their popular (and therefore influential) sporting federations.
Sport for Development and Peace (SDP) NGOs like to promote sport as a social building block. Participation in sport is said to promote all sorts of things, like teamwork, sense of fair play and leadership qualities. All useful stuff, particularly when scaled up to contribute to the fight against discrimination in fractured and vulnerable societies.
But my issue is this. Some SDP work is on-going, put together by committed volunteers who organise programmes that run and run (pardon the pun). But many NGOs prefer to operate workshops or one-off events. Many of these are very successful, with the participants taking on board some of the lessons being taught.
Then they go home and go back to playing and watching their domestic leagues, infiltrated with endemic corruption, cronyism and all that is bad with sport. The domestic leagues are there week in, week out and have been so for decades. The NGOs and SDP movement cannot hope to compete with the extent of their network or have their prominence. It seems to me that without addressing corruption within these networks it will remain a case of one step forward, 2 steps back and another opportunity to build peace falls by the way side.
Obviously corruption within a sport is very disruptive to the sport itself: match fixing for the sake of gamblers destroys the public confidence in the sport as well as being illegal. Siphoning off of funds for personal gains is almost irresistible, particularly in countries where such practices are more common that would be desired. As the Economist said in a 2009 article "when dishonesty brings high rewards and low penalties, crime is likely". It isn't really surprising that many countries suffer from endemic corruption within their popular (and therefore influential) sporting federations.
Sport for Development and Peace (SDP) NGOs like to promote sport as a social building block. Participation in sport is said to promote all sorts of things, like teamwork, sense of fair play and leadership qualities. All useful stuff, particularly when scaled up to contribute to the fight against discrimination in fractured and vulnerable societies.
But my issue is this. Some SDP work is on-going, put together by committed volunteers who organise programmes that run and run (pardon the pun). But many NGOs prefer to operate workshops or one-off events. Many of these are very successful, with the participants taking on board some of the lessons being taught.
Then they go home and go back to playing and watching their domestic leagues, infiltrated with endemic corruption, cronyism and all that is bad with sport. The domestic leagues are there week in, week out and have been so for decades. The NGOs and SDP movement cannot hope to compete with the extent of their network or have their prominence. It seems to me that without addressing corruption within these networks it will remain a case of one step forward, 2 steps back and another opportunity to build peace falls by the way side.
Thursday, 13 October 2011
Bosnians supporting Bosnia in Euro 2012?
It was all looking so good for Bosnia. One up against France and they were on the verge of winning their group and securing automatic qualification to their first major football tournament. They had come agonisingly close to qualifying for the 2010 World Cup, their campaign coming to an end one cold November night in Zenica as Deco scored for Portugal.
But it wasn't to be. Bosnia gave away a penalty, France equalised and won the group. Bosnia were heading for the play-offs again, to play Portugal again on what is bound to be another cold November evening. Its all a bit deja vu. But this time Serbia haven't qualified. Which means that this time, for the first time, the Bosnian Serbs (about 40% of the Bosnian population) might support Bosnia.
The Bosnians Serbs have by and large supported Serbia since the break up of Yugoslavia, shunning the poorly performing Bosnian national team (in the same vein the Bosnian Croats have tended to support Croatia). With Serbia flying high in world football, there has been no reason for the Bosnian Serbs to identify with their own national team. In fact, with the memory of the recent bloodshed still fresh, many chose to support whoever it was playing against Bosnia.
In November 2009, with World Cup qualification almost within the Bosnians' grasp, there was a palpable sense of change. For the first time the Bosnian Serbs wanted Bosnia to do well. Perhaps November 2011 will witness their whole hearted support and a rare moment of unity in this still divided country.
But it wasn't to be. Bosnia gave away a penalty, France equalised and won the group. Bosnia were heading for the play-offs again, to play Portugal again on what is bound to be another cold November evening. Its all a bit deja vu. But this time Serbia haven't qualified. Which means that this time, for the first time, the Bosnian Serbs (about 40% of the Bosnian population) might support Bosnia.
The Bosnians Serbs have by and large supported Serbia since the break up of Yugoslavia, shunning the poorly performing Bosnian national team (in the same vein the Bosnian Croats have tended to support Croatia). With Serbia flying high in world football, there has been no reason for the Bosnian Serbs to identify with their own national team. In fact, with the memory of the recent bloodshed still fresh, many chose to support whoever it was playing against Bosnia.
In November 2009, with World Cup qualification almost within the Bosnians' grasp, there was a palpable sense of change. For the first time the Bosnian Serbs wanted Bosnia to do well. Perhaps November 2011 will witness their whole hearted support and a rare moment of unity in this still divided country.
Monday, 10 October 2011
Preaching to the unconverted
I have a small secret. I'm not a believer. I don't subscribe to the view that 'Sport has the power to change the world'. Or, more accurately, I don't believe that sport can be used for peace, development or reconciliation without, at the very least, a wider understanding of how it does, and how it might not.
Take football. A marvellous game, watched and participated in with enthusiasm the world over. A game that can bring communities together. Or a game that can cement division as fans take to the streets to show their antipathy to the opposition. A game of pure simplicity, yet a game so often dominated and influenced by local politics and clouded by murkiness.
This blog is a chance for me to write about events that happen in the sports world which are examples of how sport can affect peace and reconciliation. Hopefully there will be plenty shining positive examples of how sport can change the world, I so very much want to be a believer. But, for now, I concur with the view of a man tasked with the development of football for peace programmes in Bosnia who asks 'how can an aim as pure and true as peace and reconciliation be achieved by an activity that is so rotten at its heart?'
Take football. A marvellous game, watched and participated in with enthusiasm the world over. A game that can bring communities together. Or a game that can cement division as fans take to the streets to show their antipathy to the opposition. A game of pure simplicity, yet a game so often dominated and influenced by local politics and clouded by murkiness.
This blog is a chance for me to write about events that happen in the sports world which are examples of how sport can affect peace and reconciliation. Hopefully there will be plenty shining positive examples of how sport can change the world, I so very much want to be a believer. But, for now, I concur with the view of a man tasked with the development of football for peace programmes in Bosnia who asks 'how can an aim as pure and true as peace and reconciliation be achieved by an activity that is so rotten at its heart?'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)