DOUBLE STANDARDS: RUSSIAN BILLIONAIRE BACK IN FIE

img

In a move that highlights a glaring double standard in global sports governance, Alisher Usmanov, a Russian-Uzbek billionaire sanctioned for his connections to the Kremlin, has been nominated for a return to the presidency of the International Fencing Federation (FIE).

This comes despite his with­draw­al from the post fol­low­ing Moscow’s inva­sion of Ukraine—the war that led to inter­na­tion­al sanc­tions and scruti­ny on Russ­ian enti­ties and fig­ures.

Usman­ov, who has his­tor­i­cal­ly invest­ed heav­i­ly in fenc­ing through his Inter­na­tion­al Char­i­ta­ble Foun­da­tion for the Future of Fenc­ing, ini­tial­ly assumed FIE lead­er­ship in 2008, fol­lowed by re-elec­tions in 2012, 2016, and 2021. How­ev­er, his lat­est term was cut short in 2022 due to eco­nom­ic sanc­tions and a trav­el ban imposed by the Euro­pean Union. The gov­ern­ing body was tem­porar­i­ly led by Greek inter­im pres­i­dent Emmanuel Kat­si­adakis, who kept Usmanov’s posi­tion open. Now, in a move that has drawn crit­i­cism from var­i­ous quar­ters, Usman­ov has secured the back­ing of 103 nation­al fed­er­a­tions to seek re-elec­tion at the FIE con­gress sched­uled for Novem­ber 30 in Tashkent, Uzbek­istan.

His only chal­lenger, Swedish Olympian Otto Drak­en­berg, has gained atten­tion for push­ing trans­paren­cy and eth­i­cal gov­er­nance with­in the fed­er­a­tion. Drak­en­berg notably argued for a dis­cus­sion on human rights at the FIE’s 2022 con­gress, specif­i­cal­ly before the con­tro­ver­sial deci­sion to award Sau­di Ara­bia the junior world cham­pi­onships.

Adding to the com­plex­i­ty of Usmanov’s return bid is the FIE’s deci­sion last year to read­mit Russ­ian and Belaru­sian ath­letes to inter­na­tion­al competition—a deci­sion that made the FIE one of the first sport­ing bod­ies to reverse its ini­tial post-inva­sion ban. This move, along with Usmanov’s come­back, brings into ques­tion the insis­tence by many inter­na­tion­al sports fed­er­a­tions that “sports are beyond pol­i­tics.” Yet, as Russ­ian and Belaru­sian ath­letes faced mixed eli­gi­bil­i­ty at this year’s Paris Olympics, with none of the fencers ulti­mate­ly advanc­ing to qual­i­fiers under a “neu­tral” sta­tus, it’s evi­dent that these deci­sions often reflect polit­i­cal under­cur­rents.

The rein­state­ment of a sanc­tioned oli­garch and the reen­try of Russ­ian ath­letes clear­ly demon­strate the incon­sis­ten­cies per­vad­ing inter­na­tion­al sports. These actions not only con­tra­dict the so-called apo­lit­i­cal stance but also under­mine the sac­ri­fices made by ath­letes and coun­tries affect­ed by the ongo­ing war. The mes­sage sent to the inter­na­tion­al com­mu­ni­ty is trou­bling: influ­ence and wealth can over­ride prin­ci­ples when con­ve­nient, per­pet­u­at­ing an illu­sion of neu­tral­i­ty in a sports world deeply inter­twined with pol­i­tics.