Deputies of the faction “A Just Russia – For Truth” in the State Duma discussed the development of domestic sports with experts on Thursday

Deputies of the “Fair Russia – For Truth” (FZRP) faction in the State Duma discussed on Thursday with experts the development of domestic sports in the current international situation. The meeting participants agreed that sport has become an instrument of political struggle, and athletes are its virtual hostages, but they disagree on ways out of the current difficult situation.

Party Chairman Sergei Mironov outlined the basic theses for the Right Russia party on the problems of Russian sports when opening the event. He said that the current International Olympic Committee is a “business structure” that dictates its rules to Russia under the influence of the United States, and therefore our country needs to follow the path of “developing its own international platforms.”

“Performances without a flag, without an anthem, seem to me, to put it mildly, something not very logical, honest and fair in relation to our SVO participants,” explained Mr. Mironov.

Deputy Alexander Aksenenko, a former professional hockey player, who moderated the meeting, was also forced to state that the purely sports agenda was secondary: “Unfortunately, sport has become a tool of pressure, a tool of influence on our country.”

The results of reconnaissance of sports terrain were described in more detail by Ilya Bronsky, a researcher of hybrid wars in the field of sports. He stated that the operational management of anti-Russian forces, including in the field of sports, is carried out in an organized manner by military and special services “closed to national elites.” Thus, back in the last century, ill-wishers filled international sports structures with their agents, including the IOC, which are now actively promoting the LGBT agenda, approved in the West, alien to Russia, and encouraging Russians to renounce state symbols at international competitions. And the President of the World Society of Ethnosport, Alexey Kyzlasov, even expressed the conviction that the Russian Olympic Committee, which is associated with the IOC, “is, in fact, a foreign agent,” since it “participates in discrimination against Russian athletes.”

Against this hostile background, the athletes themselves did not always express themselves unambiguously, State Duma deputy Biysultan Khamzaev (United Russia) complained: “The feeling is that athletes are a separate caste: as soon as the question comes to calling the athletes to modern realities took into account and understood how to deal with them, everyone was immediately excited: “You can’t touch them!” Such an aggressive lobby.” According to the United Russia member, the enemy is influencing Russia from within “at its own expense,” since the Russian authorities are steadily investing in professional sports. At the same time, a hypothetical refusal to participate in Olympic competitions is presented as “almost the collapse of the country,” Mr. Khamzaev was perplexed: “And this is nonsense, it’s just a question of how ready we are to take sovereign steps.”

“Since the 90s, our athletes have been specially hooked on doping—they call it the dollar,” said deputy Oleg Nilov (SRZP) from the other, but also understandable, side.

And he added that there is “no need to be afraid of parting with the “business corporation” that the IOC has become.” In return, the Right Russia, and after it the overwhelming majority of members of the expert council, proposed focusing on amateur sports and building an alternative, open system of international starts. Within its framework, experts advised the creation of anti-doping structures to replace the “original” ones, which had fallen into disrepair for political reasons.

Those who called to fight for the rights of Russian athletes within the existing international framework found themselves in a clear minority at the meeting. For example, the chief researcher at the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law, Sergei Alekseev, agreed that decisions to exclude Russians from competitions violate human rights and are politically motivated, but he called for protesting them in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS): “It makes many political decisions, but far from Not all”. Lawyer Tatyana Volkova agreed with him: “You can win in international courts, you can improve your work, you can appeal CAS decisions in an ordinary Swiss court. Moreover, what kind of money and what kind of prestige of the country is at stake are small amounts; in Europe, lawyers have very modest demands, but you need to be able to work with them.”

The Spravorossi politely refused to make public conclusions based on the results of the discussion. Oleg Nilov promised to forward the theses voiced at the meeting to the Ministry of Sports and the Russian Olympic Committee. But just in case, he added: the event convinced the party members that they were “following the right path.”

Grigory Leiba