Athletic events such as the Olympics are often viewed 
as mere entertainment or sports competition. However, 
they have historically occupied a powerful middle ground, 
functioning as links between alienated countries 
and tools for diplomacy. Beyond medals and glory 
lies a system of soft power ties, where sporting 
events can become symbolic representations of 
conflict and struggle between nations. 

For instance, during the 1969 Civil War in 
Nigeria, the nation held a 48-hour truce to let 
civilians watch Pelé, a three-time FIFA World 
Cup winner, play soccer; this truce ended combat, 
although temporarily, and enabled both sides 
to honor those who lost their lives and visit their family. 
Alternatively, following qualification for the 2006 World 
Cup, Didier Drogba, an Ivorian Coast soccer player, delivered 
a plea for peace during the First Ivorian Civil War, which 
resulted in a ceasefire shortly afterwards. Similarly, the 
Olympic Games functioned as a global event capable of 
reintegrating countries into the world community. Following 
the fall of the Berlin Wall and German reunification, a unified 
German team participated in the 1992 Summer Olympics 
in Barcelona, Spain. In these moments, sport served as a 
universal language and platform for peace. It brought the 
world closer together, one match at a time.

However, sports and major events such as the Olympics 
have been used by authoritarian regimes to mask their 
dark sides and atrocities behind an innocent facade. This 
practice, now coined as “sportswashing,” dates back almost 
a century with the first notable example being the 1936 
Olympic Games in Germany. The Nazi regime utilized 
the Games and their image as propaganda to present a 
prosperous image of Germany and a civilized regime to 
an international audience. Meanwhile, they continued to 
perform mass atrocities across Europe.

In the same way that sporting events are seen as 
representations of a country, athletes themselves often 
become even more direct symbols of national identity. 

Alysa Liu’s path to the Olympic gold at the 2026 Olympic 
Winter Games and her return to competitive figure skating 
have also made her a symbol of national pride, garnering the 
adoration of millions of Americans with not only her skills 
but also for what she stands for outside of the rink, openly 
advocating for immigrant rights following 
her victory. Similarly, both athletes and their 
accolades have demonstrated how athletes can 
influence global narratives in ways that 
politics cannot.

While geopolitical tensions 
have always existed, the pressures 
surrounding athletes today have 
evolved. The modern development of 
social media has amplified criticism, 
prejudice, and discrimination while 
also making them more common by 
creating echo chambers and creating 
stereotypes through mass media, which 
expedites the spread of fact and propaganda 
alike. As a result, athletes are subject to scrutiny 
by millions of online viewers worldwide, with 
opinions varying greatly by region. 

In the past few weeks, debates surrounding 
Chinese-American freestyle skier Eileen Gu’s 
decision to represent China have become more prominent 
online. Born and raised in the United States by a Chinese 
mother, Gu chose to compete for China, 
stating that she wishes to connect with 
her heritage and help grow winter sports 
in the country. 

While she has been celebrated as a 
national hero in China, her decision has 
sparked controversy among American 
audiences. Comparisons to Alysa Liu, a 
Chinese-American athlete who chose to 
represent the United States, have fueled 
nationalistic tensions on social media. 

Spectators have framed the two athletes as opposites, with 
Liu juxtaposed as a contrast to Gu’s perceived abandonment 
of commitment to her country, despite the fact that both 
athletes are simply following the path they feel most 
comfortable with. In light of these comparisons, social 
media and citizens' frenzied patriotism serve as doubleedged swords for modern athletes. While they can elevate 
athletes into cherished symbols of a nation’s values, they can 
also recast them as “traitors” when their choices complicate 
narratives of national allegiance.

Nevertheless, sport has also become a key component in 
soft power with nations leveraging the privilege of hosting 
of events to increase their influence while opposing nations 
push back against these actions. Notably, the 2026 
World Cup has come under scrutiny with Iran 
threatening to boycott matches held in the United 
States in light of recent conflicts.

Ultimately, sport is one of the few universal 
languages of humanity — it’s far easier to relate 
to the thrill and excitement of supporting a team 
or star player than to understand the fragile realm 
of politics. When other means fail, sport can still 
transcend borders and ideologies to forge vital 
connections with each other despite our differences. The 
aforementioned universality is one of the many reasons 
why we are so fascinated by sports. On the other hand. these 
events can never be perfectly apolitical, as sportswashing 
is practiced more than ever, and athletes are targeted by 
ideological campaigns, which are enabled through the rise 
of social media. Nonetheless, as social media amplifies the 
effect of rumors and echo chambers, the influence of sport 
grows. Often times, an exhibition match or a friendly game 
can do more than months of tiresome negotiation. The true 
power of sport lies in its ability to unite when words cannot.

Ferran Kotschick's Work