Pan Am reprimand a conciliatory note
These have been terrible times for the U.S. Olympic movement: days, weeks, months and years marked by horrifying acts of sexual assault, dreadful leadership and remarkable and completely understandable athlete mistrust.
But in their midst, a ray of hope appeared Tuesday. It came in the form of a discerning and conciliatory decision that just might become a template for not only a new, better version of the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee, but a signal for how leaders and organizations should handle athlete protests in the fraught era of Donald Trump.
USOPC CEO Sarah Hirshland, who is just completing her first year on the job, could have thrown the book at the two Pan American Games athletes who protested Trump, racism, gun violence and the treatment of immigrants on the medal stand during the playing of the national anthem 11⁄2 weeks ago. Fencer Race Imboden and hammer thrower Gwen Berry were clearly in violation of the agreement that they and every U.S. athlete signs to refrain from demonstra
tions that are political in nature as members of an American team under the auspices of the USOPC.
But Hirshland wisely did not do that. She formally reprimanded both athletes, telling them in letters obtained by USA TODAY Sports that they were considered to be “in a probationary period for the next 12 months.” She added that this means they could face “more serious sanctions for any additional breach of our code of conduct than might otherwise be levied for an athlete in good standing.”
But her letters were most notable for what they did not do. Imboden and Berry are not suspended or otherwise punished. They are not prohibited from competing, practicing or participating in any other similar activities, now or in the future.
Hirshland, in effect, slapped their wrists and told them not to do it again. And then she let them go on their way.
There’s more. As she wrote, “You have made clear that you were demonstrating to bring attention to the current state of affairs in our country and to call for change. I applaud your decision to be an active citizen. It is admirable. Regardless of one’s viewpoint, it is a fundamental freedom and important obligation that we each hold to participate actively in the pursuit of a better country and a better world.”
She went on in a similar vein for another paragraph, brilliantly sending a message to Imboden, Berry and hundreds of other U.S. athletes who are hoping to represent the country at next summer’s Olympics in Tokyo that she stands with them in these fractured and divisive times. The last thing Hirshland wanted to do was lose the trust of the athletes who will perform on that grand stage next year in Tokyo. By writing the letter she wrote, she likely ensured that she now has that trust, along with dollops of goodwill.
In a further nod of respect to the wave of athlete protests that have swept the nation during Trump’s presidency, Hirshland wrote that she plans to work with the International Olympic Committee and International Paralympic Committee as well as athletes themselves to “more clearly define for Team USA athletes what a breach of these rules will mean in the future.”
While it’s easy to get caught up in the moment and say every athlete should be able to do whatever he or she wants on a Pan Am Games or Olympic medal stand in these historic times, even the fiercest Trump opponent should pause and consider what that might look like. It would be chaotic at best, madness at worst – a kaleidoscope of opinions across the spectrum, likely accompanied by pins, banners, flags, even bumper stickers. This would be playing out in the midst of the 2020 presidential campaign in the United States, so for every anti-Trump protest on a Tokyo medal stand, there could be a pro-Trump protest. And it wouldn’t be just U.S. athletes but those from every corner of the globe who could, say, refuse to stand with those from countries they abhor, be it for political or religious reasons, and get away with it. Athletes’ performances would be lost in a sea of controversy and protest, turning the Games into a circus.
In her letters to Imboden and Berry, Hirshland said that her action was “not related to the content or legitimacy of your grievance, but rather to the context of where it occurred and the obligation each of us has to abide by the policies we agree to in order to ensure the Games succeed in their purpose for many years to come.”
She added that she wants “to be part of finding more robust opportunities for athletes to use their voices in a meaningful way.”
Some U.S. athletes have long since discovered those opportunities, all well within the rules. Ironically, the athlete whose dissent will be best remembered this summer is Megan Rapinoe, who called herself a “walking protest” of Trump in her many interviews and social media posts, but abided completely by the guidelines she signed as a member of the U.S. women’s soccer team while standing with her hands clasped behind her back, not singing the national anthem.
While the medal stand might beckon for Rapinoe and so many others, it could well be the microphone that has the farthest reach.