admin
WITH just less than a week until the election to replace Thomas Bach, the seven contenders have made their positions clear: politically correct, evasive on sensitive issues and with significant differences that could redefine the future of the Olympic Movement.
After the president of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) announced at Paris 2024 that he would not be seeking re-election after 12 years at the helm of the world’s most prestigious sports institution, the succession of the 1976 Montreal Olympic fencing champion began to take shape.
Bach was previously elected at the Buenos Aires Congress in 2013.
A considerable amount of time has passed since that day in the French capital, and the process leading up to the election of a new leader of the Olympic Movement has been marked by a number of significant events. The IOC will elect its 10th president at a meeting in Greece on March 20, marking the final stage in a countdown that will determine the future direction of Olympism for years to come.
Looking ahead to the new chief, who will take office in June 2025, the International Sports Press Association (AIPS) organised exclusive interviews with the seven candidates over the last two weeks, with Inside The Games involved through its member journalists.
The interviews revealed both similarities and significant differences.
The virtual conferences, in which journalists from all continents had the opportunity to speak directly to the candidates, had one common denominator: the contenders focused primarily on presenting their manifestos and general ideas, without delving deeply into specific proposals.
Despite persistent questions seeking details on how they would implement their plans, most responses were vague or evasive, avoiding in-depth discussion of key issues.
This was particularly evident in crucial areas such as inclusion, sustainability, views on war and its impact on sport, and adapting the Olympic Movement to the challenges of the 21st century.
However, there was also space for the candidates to express interesting and distinctive concepts.
In general, they came across as dialogue-driven individuals, open to a more democratic and inclusive IOC in decision-making, more transparent and accessible to the media (not just those with rights or large historical corporate affiliations). Nevertheless, they also expressed their respect for history and conservative values, maintaining the guidelines to be followed, with the sustainability advocated by Bach as a banner to be continued.
Among the differences, several ideas emerged where each candidate placed more emphasis, such as decentralisation of the Olympic Games, sustainability and technology, focus on gender equality and inclusion, more participatory governance, continuity with evolution, support for developing countries, and integrity and well-being of athletes.
There were conflicting positions on e-sports.
Johan Eliasch and Sebastian Coe called for caution in its inclusion in the Olympic Games, always respecting the Olympic values.
Feisal, on the other hand, took a more open approach, highlighting its potential to attract new audiences, especially young people, as a way of modernising and extending the reach of the Games.
Common points between the candidates
During the 10 hours of combined conferences between all the candidates, they shared their visions of the challenges and opportunities that Olympism will face in the future, highlighting common points.
One of these was a firm stance against doping. All agreed on the need to continue the fight against this scourge that undermines the integrity of sport.
Zimbabwean Kirsty Coventry, Johan Eliasch and Feisal Al Hussein emphasised that the fight against doping should go beyond sanctions, promoting a preventive approach and strengthening cooperation with international organisations, such as Interpol.
Regarding the inclusion of women in sport, everyone expressed a strong commitment to work towards greater equality, not only in competition but also in governance.
Coe, Morinari Watanabe and Juan Antonio Samaranch Jr stressed the importance of ensuring that women have equal leadership opportunities within sports organisations, an issue that was also addressed at length by Feisal, who stressed the need for stronger global policies to reduce the gender gap.
Respect for the rights of transgender athletes was also a common theme. Although there were nuances in their responses, all agreed on the need to ensure that participation in sport is inclusive but also fair to women who may be affected. The idea of creating a regulatory framework that balances inclusion and fairness in competitions was a common point in almost all contributions.
All candidates mentioned sustainability as a key issue, but from different perspectives. Eliasch focused on the impact of climate change on winter sports, Watanabe on decentralisation to make the Games more accessible and Samaranch Jr on continuing the line set by Bach with a more developed approach.
Most contenders, such as Eliasch, Samaranch Jr, Prince Feisal Al Hussein and Coe, have reiterated the importance of maintaining political neutrality within the IOC.
They all agree that politics should not be involved in sport and that the Games must be a place of unity, not division.
Despite similarities in their commitment to advancing Olympism, the differences between the candidates for the IOC presidency are clear.
Each has put forward innovative proposals and unique approaches to the challenges facing the Olympic movement.
From decentralising the Games to integrating new technologies, the candidates’ visions reflect a wide range of possibilities for the future of Olympism.
Kirsty Coventry: Conservative approach
Coventry, the only female candidate, hasn’t given any radical answer to ongoing issues that surround IOC.
“We need to work with federations, medical teams and experts to find a solution that protects the female category without excluding anyone,” she said, stressing that IOC should keep working in the same direction towards searching a solution but without suggesting one.
In the exclusive interview with Inside The Games, her answer to this question was “I do believe we should do that with the international federations. There are some sports where this conversation is really not relevant. In equestrian, you have men and women competing against each other. So it’s not really here nor there. But in most of the other sports, they have really done an incredible job of looking at their specific sport when it comes to medical and scientific research, and they’ve come up with their rules and regulations. I don’t think the IOC needs to rewrite anything or redo work that’s already done. I think we can bring the international federations together and all agree on a common framework that will move us forward.”
Her approach is rather conservatory regarding transgender athletes in sports and less polarising than some of the other candidates, such as Eliasch, who take a harder line against full inclusion.
Her stance on this matter is to not change any direction set till this moment by the IOC current officials as reflected in the quotes. However, Coventry also presented a vision for addressing the inequality of women’s representation in leadership structures, arguing that women should not be an exception in the world of sport.
Morinari Watanabe: Decentralising the Olympic Games
One of the most radical proposals came from Watanabe, who suggested that the Olympic Games be held simultaneously in five cities on five continents, with a total of 50 disciplines.
The idea was to decentralise the Olympic event and give more countries the chance to host the sports in which they excel.
Despite the ambitious proposal, Watanabe acknowledged the logistical and financial challenges that such a project would face. However, his vision is based on global inclusion, arguing that Olympism should reflect the entire world, not just the major sporting powers.
Watanabe’s proposal has been supported by some, but also met with scepticism from others who fear that the high costs and logistical difficulties could threaten the viability of the Olympic Games.
Johan Eliasch: Sustainability and technology
Eliasch has focused on sustainability, with particular attention to climate change and its impact on winter sports.
As president of the International Ski Federation (FIS), he has emphasised the need to adapt Winter Olympic venues to more sustainable locations as climate change reduces the viability of regions such as the Alps to host winter events.
Eliasch has also highlighted the importance of the IOC adapting to new technologies, artificial intelligence (AI), to improve event management and enhance the fan experience.
His proposal to use AI to optimise resources and improve operational efficiency sets him apart from other candidates who have prioritised more traditional approaches to managing the Games.
Eliasch places particular emphasis on sustainability, proposing a rotation of venues to reduce costs, an issue not addressed as prominently by other candidates.
Prince Feisal Al Hussein: Decision making is key
More participatory governance Al Hussein of Jordan presented a vision centred on greater involvement of IOC members in decision-making, in contrast to the authoritarian style associated with Bach’s management.
His speech emphasised the need for more open and collaborative governance, where proposals are discussed constructively. This approach aims to rebuild trust between IOC members and society, especially among younger generations who feel that global institutions do not represent their interests.
Feisal also advocated a more inclusive approach to the selection of future Olympic host cities, suggesting that Africa and Latin America should be given a fair chance to host the Games, an issue not emphasised as strongly by other candidates.
His proposal for greater transparency and participation contrasts with candidates such as Samaranch Jr, who have focused more on the internal development of the IOC without such deep structural reform.
Juan Antonio Samaranch Jr: Continuity with evolution
Samaranch Jr, current IOC vice president, proposed continuity with evolution in the management of Olympism.
While praising Bach’s work in overcoming global crises such as the pandemic and promoting the inclusion of women, Samaranch suggested that IOC governance must evolve rapidly to adapt to contemporary challenges such as digitalisation and sustainability.
He also emphasised the importance of a pragmatic and scientific approach to gender issues and the participation of transgender athletes, stressing that decisions should be based on scientific evidence.
This stance resonates with some of the other candidates, but in Samaranch Jr’s case it is combined with a strong emphasis on the development of the IOC’s internal structures.
David Lappartient: Support for developing countries
Lappartient, president of the International Cycling Union (UCI), presented his vision for a more inclusive IOC in terms of support for developing countries. Lappartient highlighted the need to create regional training centres in Africa, Latin America and Asia to give athletes from these countries the same training opportunities as those from more resource-rich countries, and was the only candidate to focus on this aspect.
He also stressed the need to expand the Olympic Solidarity Programme, proposing to double its budget to ensure that less fortunate nations have access to adequate infrastructure and world-class coaches. This focus on equity and structural support for the most disadvantaged countries set Lappartient apart from others who focused more on the global management of Olympism.
Lord Sebastian Coe: Athlete integrity and well-being
Coe, current president of World Athletics, presented a proposal focused on the integrity and well-being of athletes. While all candidates agreed on the importance of integrity, Coe stood out for his focus on creating a “financial cushion” for athletes, ensuring they are supported not only during their careers but also in their post-sporting lives.
Coe is also one of the few candidates to strongly support the introduction of cash prizes at the Paris Olympics, an issue that has sparked debate among other candidates who prefer not to involve cash because of the inequalities it could create between athletes from rich and poor countries.
The Briton also stressed the importance of ensuring that smaller sports federations have access to the same technological tools as the larger ones, reflecting his commitment to the globalisation of sport and equality.
As we approach the March 20 election, it is clear that each candidate has a different vision of how Olympism should evolve. While some, like Watanabe, propose a radical change in the way the Olympic Games are organised, others, like Samaranch Jr and Coe, advocate a more gradual and pragmatic evolution.
Lappartient, on the other hand, proposes a revolution at the base of the athlete pyramid by creating regional centres of excellence in the poorest countries.
Nevertheless, all the candidates agree on key points such as the fight against doping, the inclusion of women in sport and the need for a more sustainable and accessible Olympism.
The decision on who will lead the IOC will shape the future of the Olympic movement, with proposals aimed at ensuring that Olympism remains a global benchmark for the future. – insidethegames/Sports Reporter
Online Reporter