Lots of inevitable politics in any international competition, and the Cup is no exception. The negative stuff like doping, terrorism and hate-mongering usually make the headlines but the "positive" aspect is often underplayed by the media.

The Cup offers a great opportunity for political opponents to blow off steam playing for bragging rights instead of the right to control each others fates or possessions.

Today's match highlights that as Old Europe plays New Europe wannabees (Netherlands v Serbia & Montenegro), two well-known pre-Columbian cultures compete (Mexico v Iran) and, a WC favorite: pitting colonizer against former colony (Portugal v Angola).

I think that it's great when there's money to be made by using sport as a highlighter of cultural differences that don't have to involve military conflict, even though there may be just as many examples of how "football" and other sports have increased tensions as much as relieved them.

The international play and sportsmanship of these games are one of the World Cup's greatest attractions. Watching the captains of the competing teams present each other with cultural gifts is heartening; yes, it's only a gesture, but that tiny gesture also reflects upon our common humanity, and capacity for civility, hospitality, generosity, and friendship.

Actually Mexico is a mix of multiple cultures, and is a modern country, as is Iran, despite the former's inept leadership and the latter's crackpot government. The Netherlands, like so much of Europe, is facing an internal crisis concerning the clash of citizenship, nationality and religious affiliation; Serbia and Montenegro is a case study in itself, as the Montenegrans have voted to secede and become independent. The Ivory Coast is facing an ongoing civil war. Ukraine continues to encounter problems with its former overlord, Russia. And on it goes. The World Cup won't solve any of this, or drive away Germany's numerous demons, but it is a time to celebrate the possibilities of international cooperation, and the sheer beauty of human talent and achievement.

I suppose one could be cynical about the gesture made by the Iranian goalie and team to Mexican goalie Oswaldo Sanchez who lost his father shortly before the Mexico-Iran game today. But I think the gift was given and received in an honest spirit of sportsmanship that was initiated by the players and not their political representatives in their home countries. A class act by the Iranian team.

I was pleased that ABC's commentators didn't shy from noting that Mexico allows foreigners who might otherwise be denied Mexican citizenship to play on its team, especially in light of the current issues concerning Mexicans' emigration. We'll read more of this in the sports pages over the next few days, I'm sure.

I thought the ABC announcers were a bit over the top about the whole political situation in Iran and how it deals with the game.

The worst thing I heard was how Iranian president Ahmenijad(sp) was "threatening" to come to Germany for the game.

A leader of a nation is planning on coming to a sporting event involving his country and that is considered a "threat"?? The man certainly has his unpopular opinions, but the terminology used by ABC announcers was a bit harsh.....

Supposedly the Iranian president denies the Holocaust happened, and as such there are Jews (and Germans) who are prepapred to protest should he go to Germany.

Canmark, the President of Iran HAS denied that the Holocaust ever occurred, which is a crime in Germany, and in some other European nations. Say what you will about the wisdom of criminalizing opinions, however ridiculous they may be in light of the facts, but in Germany it is a crime for which he, or anyone else voicing that opinion, could be arrested. His vow to wipe Israel off the map could also be prosecuted as anti-Semitism under that law. Query if he'd have to repeat either on German soil in order to be prosecuted, and how his diplomatic immunity might play a role in insulating him even then. Some interesting legal questions here ...

From two sites quoting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter to George W. Bush, the quote concerning the establishment of the state of Israel: Sources: A South Korean news site and a Canadian one.

Is interesting that the headlines in the two sites make different assumptions and guide the readers' thoughts in opposite directions.

Edit: Less political intrigue in today's games, though Australia v Japan should be one of the more interesting. Since eliminating it's white-only immigration policy relatively recently Australia has been fairly inundated with very competitive Asian minorities - a fact that may have driven their successful attempt to be removed from the Oceania division of FIFA as much as the desire to improve their chances of getting into future Cup competition (Oceania has a lower automatic qualification level than most other divisions).

To have Japan trip them up right off the bat would piss the Aussies more than most IMO. Japan's resurging nationalism may inspire them as much as it worries their neighbor China, suffered more than most nations from the atrocities on their territory during WWII.

Italy v Ghana will be shadowed by the anti-immigration issues that color Italian politics as much as any of Europe. I have to admit I like Ghana in this one. The Italians have to prove they aren't distracted by internal politics and corruption against a Ghana team that is surprisingly free of controversy for their region.

USA v Czech - what can I say? We need this one - a friendly nation but not a "friendly" game. I fear things could easily go badly for USA.

[ June 12, 2006, 04:05 AM: Message edited by: sportinlife ]

ABC World News Sunday night had a rather ugly story about the on going racism problem alot of teams and their members are having to deal with. That is disgusting. They showed video of some fans, not sure if they were German or not, throwing bananas on the field at some players. That is simply not acceptable and not tolerable. As I understand it, they said that unlike in the US, that in Europe as a whole, there is or has been no kind of civil rights push...a damn shame if you ask me! But the behavior of some of the fans is just disgusting to me.

In Western Europe there's been almost no civil rights push because, outside of the Britain and France, and the non-integrated Roma population, there were very small non-white populations until fairly recently, and it's still the case that Britain, which has practiced something akin to the US style racial pluralism/multiculturalism, and France, which does not recognize differences of any sort, at least officially, have the largest non-white populations still. I think we in the US sometimes forget that the black and Latino populations, if combined, are larger than the total populations of almost every European country, except Russia, so there a sheer quantitative difference in terms of size, as well as history.

Unlike the US or most of Latin America, which not only had a Native population (that was killed or displaced), most of the European slave population either dispersed or integrated; it sounds bizarre to say, but there were African slaves in Britain, France, Spain, etc. but nowhere near the numbers as in US, Brazil, Haiti, etc. As a result when each of the European countries ended slavery (France did it during the French Revolution, beginning in 1789, Britain later, around 1820, I think, etc.), their Black populations either integrated or went to their colonies, but they were not legally disadvantaged as was the case in the US or Brazil, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. Since the 1960s, the rising numbers of non-whites, especially Arabs, Turks, sub-Saharan Africans, Asians, and so on, is forcing the European countries of the West and East (Czech Republic, Poland, Russia, etc.) to confront racial and ethnic differences. The irony is that the whites of many of these countries experienced overt oppression, sometimes based on ethnic lines (the Germans against the Slavs, etc.), during their history.

But we as human beings never seem to learn--maybe we will someday.

I'll post this in the World Cup thread, but Australia came back and walloped Japan 3-1! Japan just fell apart. It doesn't bode well for the battle against Brazil. As for the US, I am really rooting for them--I want them to match their 2002 start, and win in splashing fashion. Speaking of colonialism, what was up with Portugal yesterday? Its team seemed really off in its match against Angola, which looked like it didn't really belong there. It was almost as if the history between the two was really affecting Angola.

We're getting in to the hot and heavy portion of the Cup now. I've been following the standings on this AOL site and it's obvious they deliberately put the Brazilians near the end of the preliminaries to build up tension - good move commercially.

But the most passionate team, and therefore the most fun to watch in my opinion, are the French who while they may not have Brazil's record on the pitch, bring all the flare that one would expect from a people who brought the world impressionist painting and equally surreal classical music.

They never seem to live up to their talent in the Cup but god are they fun to watch. And you could not spend five minutes talking to one of them about football without drifting off into a philosophical tangent that verges on a religious experience.

Wikipedia has the best history of the Cup on the web and the chart featuring the runners-up makes it obvious that the French do not like to settle for second. It just wouldn't be...french.

Well not much political intrigue in tomorrows games.

It will be interesting to see if Spain can dazzle without all those expensive imports on Real Madrid and other Spanish pro teams. Hard to imagine Ukraine giving them much of a contest.

And Tunisia v Saudi Arabia sounds like a sleeper. Yet another team full of expensive imports from Saudi Arabia, except they actually become citizens to play in the Cup for the national team. The Saudis can certainly afford it - reason enough to root for Tunisia.

The last game is another matter. Cutey Lukas Poldoski and Cup-hero Miroslav Klose are both Polish-born but chose to play for Germany. Lot's of mixed emotions there but I expect they will play with the usual German efficiency.

Still, more than any other position in the game, and perhaps more than in most other sports, the position of striker is an art - dependent on instinct and inspiration. You can't fake that. And no amount of efficiency will replace it.

This could be interesting.

Lots of rhythm today. Ecuador and Costa Rica are both desperate for a win and will either put on a great contest or descend into a disorganized squabble for the bottom.

England v Trinidad & Tobago is the ultimate colonizer v colonized match. England needs this more than T&T and therein lies the danger. Tiny T&T has less to lose and will play like it. Hislop is the key and England will have to break through him quickly. Props to MLS'er hunky John Avery.

Sweden v Paraguay will be mostly eye-candy for me. And aint nothing wrong with that. wink

Couple of very interesting political angles to consider in the Cup:

One is the number of \"immigrants\" on the various teams in competition, and the impact they have had on this Cup. One that I have noticed in particular is that of the two German strikers born in Poland.

Perhaps of greater interest to us is
that little gay thing that came out of the tabloids (the only place we seem to be allowed in the media) not long before the Cup. Though this article makes a rather scandalous inference (I'm sure someone will say they "knew all along"), the listing of the level of gay tolerance of the various countries is actually a pretty good short summary.

BTW - the footballer pictured is one I've always thought was one of the hottest in England and the German team have been my pick as the most gay-friendly from the beginning.

Of course that in no way influenced my judgement when I picked them to win this Cup. wink Home team advantage is a proven boost, and they don't need much more than that.

But after seeing the performance of Argentina agsinst Cote d'Ivoire and Brazil's dominance of a very scrappy Australian side (they should be proud, and they are still not dead) that early evaluation is far from a certainty.

Most interesting political angle on the USA-Ghana game may have nothing to do with either country.

Since Ghanaian John Paintsil decided to curry favor with Israeli fans by carrying their flag in a game that Ghana lost, his act has apparently been a political embarassment for the Ghanaian football association, and a target of criticism in the Arab world.

So I guess we'll just have to settle for a hotly contested match between two well-matched teams who both desperately want to prove they belong in Germany this year.

Believe it or not, it will be a tough one for me to chose sides on this one. As much as I would like to see the USA come through finally, especially after that brutal foul against McBride in the Italy game, I would like almost as much to see an African team make a serious bid for this year's Cup before they all get "home-field" advantage in South Africa in 2010.

With any luck that might be my best chance to actually see the games since SA has been one of my dream trips for ages.

Race will be the off-stage issue in this Cup final. Immigration is the driver. France's Jean-Marie Le Pen has made his four-yearly condemnation of the predominance of blacks on the French national team. Italy's Parma has held an anti-discrimination campaign due to the fervent race-baiting among it's fans.

The French starters are mostly immigrant and of non-European descent. Support has been relatively lackluster but that's francais.

Defender Lilian Thuram's response to racist right-winger Jean-Marie Le Pen was excellent, so I'll quote a chunk of it:

Plus most of the French starters are not immigrants (though some of their parents and grandparents were), but were born in metropolitan France: Barthez, Ribery, Zidane, Thuram, Gallas, Henry, Abidal, and Sagnol were all born on French soil. Even the two subs, Trézéguet and Wiltord, are French natives. Makélélé is from Zaire, Malouda is from French Guiane, and Vieira is from Senegal, but the others are as native French people as Le Pen himself. Neither he nor France's political leaders appear ready to deal reasonably with the fact that France has the largest black and Arab populations of any European nation (and if European birth rate trends continue, France will be the second most populous European country after Russia by 2020, with many more black and brown French people than are alive now), but the team itself and its fans already have begun to do so.

Corrected: closed bold quote.

[ July 09, 2006, 09:48 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]