Olympics: Armbands too political?

• Amy Bass: IOC mulled letting Ukraine athletes wear black armbands
• IOC said politics not allowed at Olympics, but Bass says history shows otherwise
• She says Olympics inherently political and IOC has taken contradictory stands many times
• Bass: Yes, Olympic truce is central to Games, but it doesn't mean politics have no place

Editor's note: Amy Bass, a professor of history at the College of New Rochelle, has written widely on the cultural history of sports, including the book "Not the Triumph but the Struggle: The 1968 Olympics and the Making of the Black Athlete." She is a veteran of eight Olympics as the supervisor of NBC's Research Room, for which she won an Emmy in 2012. Follow her on Twitter @bassab1.

(CNN) -- As the Russian hockey team imploded, Kiev exploded.

Protests against Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych's administration had turned deadly, and Ukrainian athletes at the Olympics in Sochi, Russia, wanted to wear black armbands to commemorate the dead. Initial reports indicated the International Olympic Committee declined the request.

Later, when a few Ukrainian athletes indicated they were leaving Sochi in solidarity with the protesters, IOC spokesman Mark Adams told reporters the decision against the armbands had been mutual, and the Ukrainians instead opted to observe a moment of silence in the Olympic Village: "They weren't forbidden to wear armbands. ... They discussed what should be done, and they reached the conclusion there were other ways of marking this moment."

The muddled situation is par for the course when it comes to politics and the Olympics, where the positions of the Olympic committee are often contradictory. Already in Sochi, the IOC told skiers they could not wear helmet stickers honoring the late Canadian halfpipe skier Sarah Burke, and Norway could not wear black armbands to memorialize an athlete's brother who had trained with the team. To support such decisions, the IOC trots out Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter: "No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted."

And in 2012, the IOC denied the Israeli delegation's request for a moment of silence in the opening ceremony to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the massacre in Munich, substituting instead a private ceremony -- but it had allowed a tribute in the ceremony to the victims of the London bombing attacks in 2005. And at the last Winter Games in Vancouver, the Georgian delegation was allowed to wear black armbands in the opening ceremony to honor luger Nodar Kumaritashvili, who had died that day in a training run.

Despite the IOC's nagging insistence it is apolitical, the Olympics have been fraught with politics since their inception. Avery Brundage, the only American ever to head the IOC, opposed a U.S. boycott of the Berlin Olympics in 1936 because "the Olympic Games belong to the athletes and not to the politicians." But as the entry to competition is based on national identity, the Olympics are inherently political.

Truce ends, death toll rises in Ukraine

McCain: Sanctions needed against Ukraine

Protesters: 100 dead in Ukraine

The Cold War magnified their political potential, providing a battlefield for the superpower struggle between communism and democracy to take place over medals, such as the controversial basketball final in Munich in 1972 in which the Soviets were given no less than three chances to make the game-winning basket over the United States, and the "Miracle on Ice" in 1980 when the United States defeated the Soviet Union in hockey.

Sochi was ripe with politics in the months leading up to the Olympics, with controversies regarding the environment, corrupt budgets and stray dogs. Political oppression stood front and center, particularly in the imprisonment of members the women's punk band Pussy Riot and the anti-gay legislation that had made Russia a dangerous place for many. Some called for a boycott of these Olympics, while others agreed that it would be for the athletes to take a stand once there.

With the Ukrainian situation, Sochi has become even more political, but not for the reasons anticipated. While transgender Italian activist Vladimir Luxuria has been detained in Olympic Park for her flags and rainbow attire, the athletes have mostly kept quiet. Early on, pictures of Alexey Sobolev's snowboard, adorned with the likeness of Pussy Riot, gave Bob Costas something political to talk about, while ski jumper Daniela Iraschko-Stolz, the first "out" athlete to win a medal in Sochi, expressed her disapproval of Russia's anti-gay laws. This past week, snowboarder Michael Lambert also chimed in, deeming Russia a problematic host because it "has people suffer, shuts people up." He speculated that perhaps only Scandinavia had the potential for a "perfect" Games.

Above all, through the scandals, conflicts and corruption, the IOC sees itself as a peacemaker. But there are inconsistencies. In 1968, it pressured the U.S. Olympic Committee to take action against sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos after the duo raised black gloved fists during the victory ceremony of the men's 200-meter race to protest racial oppression. Four years later in Munich, the IOC did not wait for the U.S. Olympic Committee to take action, banning U.S. sprinters Wayne Collett and Vince Matthews for their "disrespectful" behavior on the podium.

In Athens in 2004, the IOC failed to censure world champion Iranian judoka Arash Miresmaeili, who carried his country's flag in the Parade of Nations and then withdrew from competition after drawing an Israeli opponent. Yet it banned South Africa in its apartheid era and Afghanistan when the Taliban took power, pressured Saudi Arabia to field female athletes and has long recognized teams from Puerto Rico and East Timor and Palestinian territories as independent national delegations.

In Sochi, IOC President Thomas Bach urged the Ukrainians to demonstrate how "sport can build bridges and help to bring people from different backgrounds together in peace." IOC member Sergey Bubka, the great pole vaulter who represented both the Soviet Union and his native Ukraine in competition, echoed Bach's sentiments on Twitter, urging his compatriots to remember the Olympic truce and lay down their weapons. Canada's Globe and Mail agreed, running the headline, "Shadow cast over Sochi as Ukraine violence shatters Olympic truce."

What is confounding is the impression that until the most recent outbreak of violence in Ukraine, the Olympic truce was intact in these Games. The ancient Greeks invested in the Olympics as a diplomatic tool, as the spirit of ekecheiria stipulated laying down arms for athletic competition; they used sport to interrupt the progression of war. With the relatively recent creation of the Olympic Truce Centre, the IOC says it wants "to encourage searching for peaceful and diplomatic solutions to the conflicts around the world."

Black armbands do not seem to fit within the IOC's definition of peaceful and diplomatic. And perhaps they will become unnecessary if the continuing violence can finally be quelled.

But that does not mean we are left with sports without politics.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Amy Bass.

Read More

Detained journalists in Egypt court

• Three detained Al Jazeera journalists appear in court as their trial opens in Cairo
• No evidence is presented in court; the trial is adjourned until March 5
• Peter Greste, Mohammed Fahmy and Baher Mohammed are among 20 accused
• Authorities say they have ties to the banned Muslim Brotherhood organization

Cairo (CNN) -- Three Al Jazeera journalists were among eight who appeared at a hearing in a Cairo prison court Thursday, accused along with 17 other defendants of spreading "false news" and having links to the Muslim Brotherhood, which Egypt declared a terrorist organization in December.

"Tell her I love her. Big wedding when I get out," Al Jazeera English journalist Mohamed Fahmy told journalists in a message to his fiancee, appearing in high spirits on the first day of his trial, despite a worsening shoulder injury.

Fahmy, a former CNN freelance producer, is accused of being a member of a terrorist group and airing false news about Egypt to give the impression of a civil war. A prosecutor has also charged Al Jazeera English correspondent Peter Greste, producer Baher Mohammed and 17 others. Al Jazeera said nine on the list were on its staff.

The charges were read out Thursday as the case opened, but no evidence was read in open court. The prosecution had been expected to outline the evidence supporting the charges.

Egypt's crackdown on journalists

Video shows journalists getting arrested

Journalists stand with imprisoned peers

The case against the journalists comes amid a crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood after the ouster of the country's first democratically elected president, Mohamed Morsy. The accused have denied the allegations against them, with the journalists saying they were simply doing their jobs.

On the stand at the police academy in the Tora Prison complex, Fahmy, Greste and Mohammed appeared with five others. "We didn't even know their names until we met them here," Fahmy told reporters asking about their relationship with the other defendants.

They include Anas El Beltagy, son of jailed Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed El Beltagy. His mother, Sanaa Abdel Gawad -- standing outside the court wearing a badge with a picture of his sister, who was killed in August -- said their arrest was "a vendetta against his father."

Sohaib Saad, a student defendant claiming no relation to Al Jazeera, told reporters he was receiving "repressive treatment" at the Aqrab (Scorpion) Maximum Security Prison, including a ban on food and visits.

Fahmy and Mohammed were originally in solitary confinement in that prison. In their new prison, the Tora Farm Annex, they share a cell with Greste, allowed one hour of outdoor time a day and no books.

They complained that conditions inside are "psychologically unbearable," but they remained defiant. "If justice happens, we will be free soon," Greste said. Speaking in a metal cage and separated from journalists by rows of wooden benches and a line of police conscripts, his voice was barely audible.

"We need everyone's support," he said.

Fahmy had to repeat his words in a louder voice. "Tell my parents I love them," he said.

Mohammed told journalists to tell his wife to stay away because she's pregnant. Along with other relatives of the defendants and other reporters, she stood outside the prison complex early Thursday morning with their two children. She and Fahmy's family couldn't get inside.

'It's just ridiculous'

In an interview, Andrew Greste told CNN how he had visited his brother Peter in Egypt's notorious Tora prison.

"There was the ability to communicate," he said. "I guess that's the only way we feel we can get through this: is trying not to get too bogged down in the emotions and the conditions that Peter is enduring, because that becomes paralyzing for us."

The family was shocked by what has happened, Andrew Greste said. "I mean, a journalist of Peter's credibility, it's just ridiculous," he said.

He said he had taken food and clothing into prison for his brother, since it was not provided by the state.

Peter Greste, an award-winning journalist, was in Egypt only to cover for a colleague, his brother added.

The Egyptian government has faced a tide of criticism about the case, from professional journalism organizations and human rights groups.

Salil Shetty, secretary general of Amnesty International, last month described the prosecution as a "major setback for media freedom in Egypt."

He added, "The move sends the chilling message that only one narrative is acceptable in Egypt today -- that which is sanctioned by the Egyptian authorities."

Apparent mix-up

The case relies on simmering sentiment against Al Jazeera TV, deemed biased to the Muslim Brotherhood. One lawyer told the court that there is a mix-up in investigations and other case documents between the Jazeera Mubasher Masr, banned by Egypt, and Al Jazeera English.

"Which Jazeera?" the judge asked before taking notes.

"We believe that we have not been distorting Egypt's image at all," said Heather Allan, head of Al Jazeera English newsgathering, before the trial started.

"They said we fabricated footage before they even looked at my camera," Fahmy said.

'It is a matter of breaking the law'

Salah El-Sadek, chairman of Egypt's State Information Service, said the Al Jazeera journalists did not have the proper legal documents to work in Egypt, creating suspicion about their activities -- although their reports aired nightly on TV.

"We have 1,100 correspondents and journalists accredited here, legally representing 200 agencies in this country," he told CNN. "None of them have been exposed to that because none of them have broken the law. So it's not a matter of freedom of speech in this case. It is a matter of breaking the law."

The Al Jazeera network has said its employees were not accredited in the country but argues that is no excuse for imprisoning them.

"Lack of credentials is not a criminal offense. ... Usually you get a slap on the wrist and a walk to the airport," Allan said.

Criticism from journalists

The case has put Egypt in the spotlight, further fueling criticism about freedom of expression and the challenges facing journalists.

"Egyptian authorities in recent months have demonstrated almost zero tolerance for any form of dissent, arresting and prosecuting journalists, demonstrators and academics for peacefully expressing their views," Human Rights Watch said in a prepared statement released Wednesday.

The Committee to protect Journalists listed Egypt as third deadliest country for journalists in 2013. Journalists face deadly police force and violence by mobs on the street.

"Things are getting worse on so many levels," said Lina Attalah, chief editor of Mada Masr, which describes itself as an independent Egyptian news website.

"On a practical level, we are not able to do the job. But also on a formal censorship level, with the prosecutions that are politically motivated as we all know. It just makes us think that we can be targeted from any side and by any means."

The journalists' trial was a reminder of what awaits dissent or different voices, Attalah explained, and it has become an "embarrassment" to the state and the judiciary.

But the chairman of Egypt's State Information Service disagrees about such a crackdown on dissent. "Who said they are punished for criticizing the government? If you watch the private and even the formal or the governmental channels, you will find criticism that has been said about the government and its actions and it was way of running things more than we've ever had in our whole life," El-Sadek said.

For others, the media has been almost unanimous in its support of the current military-led government, which is often blamed for fueling xenophobia and polarization to violent levels.

International support

The trial has also garnered international solidarity with protests in Nairobi, London and other cities in support of Egypt's arrested journalists, not all of whom are included in this trial.

Greste, Fahmy and Mohammed were happy to hear the news of such demonstrations. Fahmy raised his fist in the air in excitement. "Wait until I get out," he shouted. The three have been in detention for more than 50 days.

The procedural hearing was adjourned to March 5, to bring in prosecution witnesses, provide a translator for Greste and allow lawyers to acquire case documents. Evidence will be examined at the March hearing, and lawyers have requested an independent expert to examine the footage the prosecution said was edited to portray a false image.

They praised the work of the Canadian and Australian embassies in Cairo but wanted the governments of these two countries to do more.

'They want to shut us up'

Besides the three detained on December 29, a number of Al Jazeera journalists were charged in absentia. Among them is Briton Sue Turton, who has previously worked for Britain's Sky News, ITN and Channel 4.

Speaking at a protest against her colleagues' detention in London, she said the Egyptian authorities' actions were an attempt to silence reporting of views opposed to theirs.

"Certainly we are one of the only channels in Egypt that's watched widely that gives very much an opposing view to the military-backed government," Turton said.

"The domestic media doesn't, the domestic press and TV doesn't. They want to shut us up, and the best way to do that is to arrest some of our people in the hope that that will stop others from reporting from there."

CNN is among the journalistic organizations that have signed a petition asking for the release of the Al Jazeera journalists, two of whom have worked for CNN.

READ: 8 Al Jazeera journalists charged by Egyptian authorities, network says

READ: Detained Al Jazeera journalist: 'Our arrest is not a mistake' by Egypt

READ: International media demand that Egypt release detained journalists

CNN's Sara Sidner reported in Cairo and Laura Smith-Spark wrote in London. Journalist Sarah Sirgany contributed to this report.

Read More

Is Crimea Europe's next war?

Police intervene as Russian supporters gather in front of the parliament building in Simferopol, Ukraine, on Thursday, February 27. Armed men seized the regional government administration building and parliament in Ukraine's southern Crimea region. The area is the last large bastion of opposition to new political leadership in Kiev after President Viktor Yanukovych's ouster.

A man adds fuel to a fire at a barricade on Kiev's Independence Square on February 27. Dozens of people were killed last week during clashes between security forces and protesters.

Pro-Russia demonstrators wave Russian and Crimean flags in front of a local government building in Simferopol during a protest February 27. Simferopol is the capital of Crimea, an autonomous republic of Ukraine with an ethnic Russian majority.

Barricades in front of a government building in Simferopol on February 27 hold a banner that reads: "Crimea Russia." There's a broad divide between those who support the pro-Western developments in Kiev and those who back Russia's continued influence in Crimea and across Ukraine.

Protesters stand in front of a government building in Simferopol on February 27. Tensions have simmered in the Crimea region since the Ukraine president's ouster.

Protesters in support of the president's ouster rally in Kiev's Independence Square, which has been the center of opposition, on Wednesday, February 26.

Security forces stand guard during clashes between opposing sides in front of Crimea's parliament building in Simferopol on February 26.

Pro-Russian demonstrators, right, clash with anti-Russian protesters in front of a government building in Simferopol on February 26.

A police officer gets pulled into a crowd of Crimean Tatars in Simferopol on February 26. The Tatars, an ethnic minority group deported during the Stalin era, is rallying in support of Ukraine's interim government.

A man places flowers at a barricade near Kiev's Independence Square on February 26.

A woman holds a photograph of a protester killed during the height of tensions on February 26 in Kiev.

Police guard a government building in Donetsk in eastern Ukraine on February 26.

Protesters remove a fence that surrounds Ukraine's parliament in Kiev on February 26.

People sing the Ukrainian national anthem at Kiev's Independence Square on Monday, February 24.

Gas masks used by protesters sit next to a barricade in Independence Square on February 24.

A woman cries February 24 near a memorial for the people killed in Kiev.

People wave a large Ukrainian flag in Independence Square on Sunday, February 23.

Two pro-government supporters are made to pray February 23 in front of a shrine to dead anti-government protesters.

A man and his daughter lay flowers at a memorial for protesters killed in Independence Square.

Former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko speaks at Independence Square on Saturday, February 22, hours after being released from prison. Tymoshenko, considered a hero of a 2004 revolution against Yanukovych, was released after 2½ years behind bars.

Tymoshenko is greeted by supporters shortly after being freed from prison in Kharkiv on February 22.

A protester guards the entrance to Yanukovych's abandoned residence outside Kiev on February 22.

Anti-government protesters guard the streets next to the presidential offices in Kiev on February 22.

Anti-government protesters drive a military vehicle in Independence Square on February 22. Many protesters said they wouldn't leave the square until Yanukovych resigned.

Ukrainian lawmakers argue during a session of Parliament on Friday, February 21.

Men in Kiev carry a casket containing the body of a protester killed in clashes with police.

Protesters cheer after news of an agreement between the opposing sides in Kiev on February 21.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

• Armed men seize parliament building in Ukraine's Crimea region
• Crimea is last big bastion of opposition to new government in Kiev following President's ouster
• Tensions have simmered since President Yanukovych's overthrow last week
• Forbrig: Ukraine must decide if it's worth risking recent progress over restive Crimea

Editor's note: Joerg Forbrig is a Berlin-based program director and Eastern Europe expert with the German Marshall Fund of the United States. The views expressed in this commentary are solely his.

(CNN) -- The world's eyes may have been focused on the breathtakingly fast political changes unfolding in Ukraine's capital Kiev this week, but it is the Crimean peninsula, where dozens of gunmen raised the Russian flag over parliament Thursday, that should now be the primary source of concern for Ukraine's fledgling government and world leaders.

READ MORE: Gunmen seize Crimean parliament

Crimea is an autonomous republic whose history has long been marred by political tension. Gifted to Ukraine by Soviet Union leader Nikita Khrushchev in 1954, its population is ethnic Russian by just over half and Ukrainian by a quarter, while more than ten percent are Crimean Tatars who are fiercely anti-Russian as a result of Joseph Stalin's repression of the group a half century ago.

Russia's strategically important Black Sea naval fleet is hosted at Sevastopol, the region's largest city, an arrangement that controversially extended until 2042 by the ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was last seen fleeing Kiev. His whereabouts are unknown.

The large Russian population of Crimea has long viewed the central government of Ukraine with suspicion. In recent days the mood has turned into aggressive hostility towards the new authorities in Kiev. Crimean Russians see the newly-powerful opposition movement as illegitimate, sponsored by the West, and even fascist. Anti-Ukrainian protests are being held, Russian vigilante groups have sprung up across Crimea, Russian flags have been hoisted on government buildings, clashes have broken out between Russian separatists and loyalist Tatars and Ukrainians, and the Russian military has been seen patrolling key buildings and infrastructure.

Gunmen seize Crimean parliament

Tensions rise over Crimean peninsula

Putin call behind Yanukovych truce?

Fears of Ukraine split sparks protests

READ MORE: Eyewitness to Kiev massacre

The Russian Federation has done precious little to contain this dangerous dynamic. On the contrary, its state-sponsored media have covered the unrest in Crimea extensively and reiterated the Kremlin's view of the events in Kiev as a coup d'état. Envoys from Moscow have descended on Crimea to promise Russian citizenship to all who want it and even the region's re-integration into Russia proper.

Meanwhile, Russia's foreign ministry is warning of violations of the human rights of ethnic Russians in Ukraine, while the Russian military is reportedly preparing lists for the evacuation of the families of seamen serving at Sevastopol. Snap military exercises have been ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin close to Ukraine's borders. In short, the Kremlin is stoking the fires of the building separatism that can be observed in Crimea, despite its official commitment to non-interference and the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

This situation bears all the hallmarks of several long-standing, often referred to as "frozen", conflicts in Eastern Europe. In Transnistria, a breakaway region of Moldova, in Nagorno-Karabakh, which is contested by Armenia and Azerbaijan, or in Abkhazia and South-Ossetia, which have seceded from Georgia, Russia has long propped up separatists, providing political backing, military support, funding and passports. This undermines the stability of its smaller neighbors, challenges those nations' sovereignty, blocks domestic reforms, and impedes European integration.

READ MORE: Putin's disastrous week in Ukraine

By underwriting Crimean separatism, Russia is taking the first steps toward repeating such a scenario in Ukraine. So while many in Kiev and in Western capitals are pondering what Russia will do next, the the Kremlin has already made its decision.

Russia's choice of tactics is no coincidence. Rather, it is based on a sober analysis of the post-Euro-Maidan situation in Ukraine, particularly Kiev, and of Russia's limited leverage there. The hoped-for public mayhem and political stalemate have not materialized. Western acceptance of the new government thwarts Russian claims of its illegitimacy. The country's industrial east shows little inclination to move closer to Russia, and Western financial aid is shaping up to reduce Ukraine's dependency on money from Moscow. In this constellation, Crimea is the "weakest link" in Ukraine today.

This leaves the new Ukrainian government with a very difficult choice. It is obliged by the constitution to defend the territorial integrity of Ukraine, to re-establish public order in Crimea, and to guarantee the safety of its citizens there, irrespective of their ethnic background. However, the central government is only just regaining control over the situation, and faces enormous political, economic and social challenges. Its resources are already stretched without having to deal with a strong separatist movement and its even stronger external backer. What is more, Europe and the U.S. will be of very limited help in confronting Crimean separatists and their Russian masters.

Ukraine's choice, then, is between consolidating the gains of the Euro-Maidan revolution across most of the country, and risking it all to maintain control over a historically reticent part of Ukraine that may already be lost. The question that has to be answered now is whether Crimea is a price worth paying for getting Ukraine on track for democracy and European integration.

READ MORE: What the West owes to Ukraine

The views expressed in this commentary are solely those of Joerg Forbrig.

Read More