Studying the Relationship between Sport and Foreign Policy on the Basis of Pierre Bourdieu’s Field Theory

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran, Iran

2 PhD in International Relations, Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Modern Sport has a significant role and position in current international system, and can be considered a multi-faceted phenomenon with political, economic, cultural and geopolitical aspects and clear consequences for domestic and foreign policy of most states. In spite of the claim made by international  sport organizations about the separation of  sport and politics and the lack of political manipulation of sport events, one should acknowledge the substantial impact of internal-external politics on sport. Accordingly, modern sport has gradually played a significant role in all sorts of interactions among states. In fact, sport has become an international and global phenomenon which can be a large part of foreign policy agenda of most states. There has been a large number of studies, primarily conducted by sociologists regarding the nature and extent of relationship between sport and politics. In fact, there is a specific sub-discipline called sociology of sport, which aims at studying the social aspects of sport. However, a review of literature covering books and articles written by scholars concerning theories of international relations in the academia reveal that scant attention has been paid to the linkage between sport and foreign policy. In general, there has been a degree of inattention and neglect of the political aspect of the phenomenon of sport in the theories of international relations. Since a theoretical and conceptual framework is needed to better understand the importance of the role of sport in foreign policy, the authors design a conceptual model inspired by Bourdieu's field theory in their quest to describe and explain the nature of foreign policy-sport linkage. The main research questions are: 1. What is the nature of the relationship between sport and foreign policy? 2. To what extent can sport influence diplomatic relations, and the advancement of peace in the international system? In the research hypothesis, it is  postulated that international sport, as an effective instrument of foreign policy, contributes to goodwill and the advancement of peace in international system by creating opportunities for public diplomacy and shaping soft power of countries. For hypothesis-testing, the authors adopt a qualitative approach, and focus on sports as a political phenomenon. Based on a careful analysis of available evidence and written material, and the use of the two elements of "field and capital" in Bourdieu's theory, they explain how various governments may use sport diplomacy and soft power to achieve their foreign policy goals. The main conclusion of the research show that international sport has been used by states to fulfil their foreign policy objectives. The more successful countries are the ones which have endeavored to invest more in national capacity-building in order to become more competitive in international sports events, instead of stressing the use of force and coercion in their interactions with other international actors. They have reaped the benefit of increasing ‘capital’ (in the form of prestige, dignity, acceptability, attractiveness, influence and economic benefits), and then using the ‘capital’ to attain their goals and secure their national interests in an increasingly competitive international arena. No country should ignore the issue of sport, particularly international sport as a useful source of soft power. Furthermore, international relations scholar should be more attentive to the role of international sport in national foreign policy agenda settings, and international power politics.   

Keywords


  1. الف ) فارسی

    1. احمدی‌پور، زهرا؛ و دیگران. (1392، تابستان) «مفهوم‌سازی ژئوپلیتیک ورزش،» فصلنامه ژئوپلیتیک، 9، 2: 1-48، در: .<DOR:20.1001.1.17354331.1392.9.30.1.4>
    2. بابائی، رسول. (1390، پاییز) «امکانات سیاسی در نظریه جامعه‌شناختی پیر بوردیو: تولید نظریه سیاسی،» فصلنامه سیاست، 41، 3: 56-39. در: https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_29795.html
    3. بابائی، محمد. (1393) قدرت نرم در نظام ‌بین‌الملل و تأثیرات هم‌گرایانه در ورزش، پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه گیلان، ایران.
    4. بوردیو، پیر. (1381، تابستان) «کنش‌های ورزشی و کنش‌های اجتماعی،» ترجمه محمدرضا فرزاد، فصلنامه ارغنون، 20: 245-227. در: http://ensani.ir/fa/article/221183
    5. حشمت‌زاده، محمدباقر؛ سیدمحمدحسین اکرمی. (1395، تابستان) «ارتباط‌سنجی ورزش و سیاست با بهره‌گیری از نظریه آنتونیوگرامشی»، رهیافت‌های سیاسی و ‌بین‌المللی، 7، 11: 35-10. در:https://piaj.sbu.ac.ir/article_99356.html
    1. جلالی‌فراهانی، مجید. (1396) جهانی شدن، ورزش و قدرت نرم، گردشگری ورزشی. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
    2. جوانمرد، کمال؛ مهرداد نوابخش. (1393، تابستان) «بررسی جامعه‌شناختی کارکرد ورزش بر انسجام اجتماعی در ایران دهه هشتاد»، مطالعات علوم اجتماعی، 11، 41: 54-37. در:http://journal.aukh.ac.ir/article_527979.html
    1. داداندیش، پروین؛ افسانه احدی. (1390، بهار) «جایگاه دیپلماسی عمومی در سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران،» فصلنامه روابط خارجی، 3، 1: 173-143، در:http://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_123548.html
    1. ریتزر، جورج. (1374) نظریه جامعه‌شناسی در دوران معاصر، ترجمه محسن ثلاثی. تهران: انتشارات علمی، چ 2.
    2. زرگر، افشین. (1394) «ورزش و روابط بین‌الملل: جنبه‌های مفهومی و تئوریک،» فصلنامه تخصصی علوم سیاسی، 11، 31: 48-7. در: http://psq.kiau.ac.ir/article_523561.html
    3. سیدمن، استیون. (1386) کشاکش آراء در جامعه‌شناسی: نظریه‌های امروز جامعه‌شناسی، ترجمه هادی خلیلی. تهران: نشر نی.
    4. شامپاین، پاتریک. (1391) پیر بوردیو، ترجمه ناهید مؤید‌حکمت. تهران: پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی.
    5. شاه‌رضائی، فاطمه؛ رضا شیرزادی. (1395) «نقش ورزش در گسترش مناسبات ‌بین‌المللی جمهوری اسلامی ایران (1376-1392)،» مطالعات راهبردی ورزش و جوانان، 15، 32: 36-1. در:https://www.sid.ir/ fa/journal/ ViewPaper.aspx?id=316410
    1. شعبانی‌مقدم، کیوان؛ ابوالفضل فراهانی. (1394) سیاست و روابط ‌بین‌الملل در ورزش. تهران: سازمان انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی.
    2. صباغیان، علی. (1394، پاییز) «دیپلماسی ورزشی،» فصلنامه مطالعات فرهنگ- ارتباطات، 16، 31: 151-131. در:    http://www.jccs.ir/article_12599.html
    3. فکوهی، ناصر. (1384، بهار) «پیربوردیو: پرسمان دانش و روشنفکری،» مجله علوم اجتماعی، 2، 1: 161-141، <DOI:10.22067/JSS.V010.5251>
    4. فکوهی، ناصر. (1386، فروردین 27) «ورزش و قدرت،» در:     http://www.fakouhi.com/node/775
    5. لورمور، روگر و آدرین بودر. (1391) ورزش و روابط بین‌الملل، ترجمه سیدنصرالله سجادی و اکبر حیدری. تهران: نشر علوم ورزشی.
    6. محمدی‌عزیزآبادی، مهدی؛ رضا التیامی‌نیا. (1394، بهار) «نقش تبعی و تسریع‌کننده ورزش در فراهم کردن شرایط صلح در بین دولت‌ها»، فصلنامه تحقیقات سیاسی بین‌المللی، 22: 179-149. در: http://pir.iaush.ac.ir/article_556118.html
    7. ملکوتیان، مصطفی. (1388، تابستان) «ورزش و سیاست،» فصلنامه سیاست، 39، 9: 316-301. در:https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_20173.html
    1. نای، جوزف. (1395) آینده قدرت، ترجمه احمد عزیزی. تهران: نشر نی، چ 3.
    2. هادیان، ناصر؛ افسانه احدی. (1388، پاییز) «جایگاه مفهومی دیپلماسی عمومی،» فصلنامه ‌بین‌المللی روابط خارجی، 1، 3: 117-85، در: <DOR:20.1001.1.20085419.1388.1.3.4.3>.

    ‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ب) منابع انگلیسی

    1. Allison, Lincoln. (2005) The Global Politics of Sport. New York: Routledge.
    2. Allison, Lincoln; and Terry Monnington. (2005) "Sport, Prestige and International Relations," in Allison Lincoln, ed. The Global Politics of Sport. New York: Routledge.
    3. Bairner, Alan. (2001) Sport, Nationalism and Globalization. New York: State University of New York Press.
    4. Beacom, Aaron. (2000) "Sport In International Relations: A Case For Cross-Disciplinary Investigation," The Sports Historian 20, 2: 1-23, <DOI:10.1080/ 17460260009443366>.
    5. Beck, Peter J. (2013) “War Minus the Shooting; George Orwell on International Sport and Olympics,” Sport in History 33, 1: 65-80, <DOI:10.1080/ 17460263. 2012.761150>.
    6. Black, David. (2009) "Dreaming Big: The Pursuit of Second Order Games as a Strategic Response to Globalization,” in Steven J. Jackson and Stephen Haigh, ed. Sport and Foreign Policy in a Globalizing World. London: Routledge.
    7. Graham, Sara Ellen. (2014) "Emotion and Public Diplomacy: Dispositions in International Communications, Dialogue, and Persuasion,” International Studies Review 16, 4: 522-539, <DOI:1111/misr.12156>.
    8. Grix, Jonathan. (2013) "Sport Politics and the Olympics,” Political Studies Review 11: 15-25, <DOI:10.1111/1478-9302.12001>.
    9. Houlihan, Barrie. (1997) "Sport, National Identity and Public Policy,” Nations and Nationalism 3, 1: 113-137, <DOI:10.1111/j.1354-5078.1997.00113.x>.
    10. Kobierecki, Michał Marcin. (2013) “Sport in International Relations: Expectations, Possibilities and Effects,’ Interdisciplinary Political and Cultural Journal 15, 1: 49-74, <DOI:10.2478/ipcj-2013-0004>.
    11. Maguire, Joseph A. (2015) "Sport in Foreign Policy: Issues, Challenges and Opportunities,” IFA Culture and Foreign Policy. Stuttgart: Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen (IFA). Available at: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn: nbn: de: 0168-ssoar-51129-1 (Accessed 21 October 2020).
    12. Melissen, Jan. (2007) "The New Public Diplomacy: Between Theory and Practice,” in Jan Melissen, ed. The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. New Hampshire: Palgrave- Macmillan.
    13. Merkel, Udo. (2016) “Sport as a Foreign Policy and Diplomatic Tool,” in Bairner, Alan; ‎John Kelly, ‎and Jung Woo Lee, eds. Routledge Handbook of Sport and Politics. Available at: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/ 4324/9781315761930 (Accessed 3 May 2019).
    14. Murray, Stuart. (2012) “The Two Halves of Sports-Diplomacy,” Diplomacy and Statecraft 23, 3: 576-592, <DOI:10.1080/09592296.2012.706544>.
    15. Murray, Stuart. (2013) “Moving beyond the Ping-Pong Table: Sports Diplomacy in the Modern Diplomatic Environment,” Public Diplomacy Magazine 9: 11-16. Available at: https://paperzz.com/doc/8790880/moving-beyond-the-ping-pong-table (Accessed 3 May 2019).
    16. Murray, Stuart; and Geoffrey A. Pigman. (2014) “Mapping the Relationship between International Sport and Diplomacy,” Sport in Society 17, 9: 1098-1118, <DOI:10.1080/17430437.2013.85661>.
    17. Nye, Joseph S. (2004) Soft Power: the Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.
    18. Nye, Joseph S. (2007) "Notes For a Soft Power Research Agenda,” in Felix Berenskoetter and M. J. Williams, eds. Power in World Politics. London and New York: Routledge.
    19. Nye, Joseph S. (2010) "The Future of Soft Power in US Foreign Policy,” in Indeerjet Parmar and Michael Cox, eds. Soft Power and US Foreign Policy: Theoretical and Contemporary Perspectives. London and New York: Routledge.
    20. Taylor, Trevor. (1986) “Sport and International Relations: A Case of Mutual Neglect,” in Allison Lincoln, ed. The Politics of Sport. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
    21. Tomlinson, Alan. (2005) “Olympic Survivals: The Olympic Games as a Global Phenomenon," in Allison Lincoln, ed. The Global Politics of Sport. London and New York: Routledge.
Volume 52, Issue 1
July 2022
Pages 284-259
  • Receive Date: 24 August 2019
  • Revise Date: 24 November 2021
  • Accept Date: 13 July 2022
  • First Publish Date: 13 July 2022