just to click that afterwards button near the top of the page. ♪♪ ♪♪ >> book tv continues on a c-span2, television for serious readers.

>> welcome to the american enterprise institute and i'm delighted you are joining us on "soccer diplomacy". what we will do today is talk about the recent book "soccer diplomacy", international relations and football since 1914, which offers reflections on the role of the sport has played in international relations. we are joined by the editor, heather dichter who is an associate professor of a support history sport management at de monfort university as well as by two contributors roy mccree, a senior fellow at the sir arthur lewis institute of social and economic studies at the university of the west indies and a professor of contemporary history at the university. finally, last but not least we are joined by myoi colleague who

is here as a resident scholar so we will talk about the book in general, about specific chapters and some other issues related to the concept of "soccer diplomacy". if you have questions, please submit them either by twitter, e-mail and details are on the event's stage. with that, welcome to our esteemed panelists. i'm going to start with a few questions for heather. you are the editor of the volume explain what y is the idea behid the volume, what are the topics you try to cover, what is the mission of the project. >> thanks so much for having us to talk about "soccer diplomacy" at this point, in a lot of

different scholars who worked on "soccer diplomacy" so i think it brings together so much different work that spans the entire globe and that is important and widespread through a wealth of the popular sport and an important issue in politicscs diplomacy and how widespread it is andnd so every scholar wrote their chapter and then when they came together just seeing what came out of all this and-- [inaudible] the different ideas is the key appearance throughout the past century and even more than a century of soccer diplomacy. while none of the chapters focus

on it, it's kind of an underlying-- especially when you get to the issues of today, big events, the world comp or other events and it adds so much that soccer really has been so important and such a presence in diplomacy and the different soccer federation, organizations trying to meet diplomacy themselves. >> what are some of the ways in which soccer has played that role within diplomacy so i s thk the two things that people probably think of most immediatelyy are basic marketing for the country or regime and maybe attempts to construct soft power, but you could think of other things. i don't know, can you talk about that, just a range of different

ways in which soccer and diplomacy are intertwined that you highlight? >>hl absolutely in the first thg you pointed out, it's with these mega events through world cup, and others in various other competitions that the hostom country and often it's a country and not a city like the olympic games, it's really that soft power and how the country wants to portray itself to the world and in some cases it's countries that are on a rising trajectory and kind of use the event to show, we have arrived on this world stage and other times it might be about changing a perception or affording a different view of the country, a specific view of that country to see the world and along with her that there can also be in more

recent times more marketing sponsorship kind of business side two things where it may come into play with that, so that is one of the areas we see soccer really coming into-- it's happening throughout much of the past century. >> one question that i have is, so how effective is this instrument of diplomacy? is there a way to assist that that you find particularly convincing, what your broad take away? this work focusing on four ministries, for national governments, what do you think the take away is? >> it's always a difficult question and with each country having organizations having their own goals, you know national soccer governing body may have a different goal for hosting then that country or

government having a different role someone might bere more effective in achieving success than perhaps the other. it proves difficult and it's one where you really aren't going to be able to make that decision a week after the tournament ended to say like yeah, it was a specific in respect. organizations often say at the end of the event this was our most successful event, the greatest event we have had with x number off spectators and we paid this much money, had this many global viewers, but from a diplomatic side of things it takes more time to make those determinations and i think that ise something as historians as time passes and seeing what else happens or what initial goals-- [inaudible] sometimes it's a mix.

>> and i think dailbor will want to start off. let's talk also about the chapter you your self have contributed to the book which is about germany and his participation in international soccerpa games and the role of nato and letting that happen or not letting that happen. can you talk a little bit about -- and how it relates to great power competition more generally. bring us up to speed on the situation in germany. >> absolutely. in the early 1960s, germany-- east germany was recognized by fifa in the olympic movement. [inaudible]

so, for olympic execution east and west germany would play against each other and whichever team one thatt would be the team that would represent germany or this combined team and seven preparation for the olympics the east german beat the west german team and east germany team was able to ultimately travel to nato countries to try to qualify for the only fix, but when it came to competitions where like fifa recognized east germany separate from west germany and other fifa competitions the east german team was not allowed to travel to nato countries for really any sport. if it was a team that represented east germany it went against nato regulation and

particularly after the berlin wall went up and restrictions really were made tighter and so became confusing in some respects to the general public likewise east germany allowed to play soccer now, but not for other times and it had a confusing level-- >> just for background, did not apply to other countries, so this is east germany specific issue and is so with the nato members say it forfeited their games? is that how it worked? >> yes. when west germany joined nato all of the nato members agreed to support west germany policy not recognizing east germany, so all the other warsaw pact needed to also--

[inaudible] in general the warsaw pact west germany was able to enter and play. it was always complicated and dependent on the sport being played when there was team or individual and how strong was the soviet union in that event as to what all the other eastern bloc states would do. when east germany was not allowed a lot of the soviet teams would enact-- withdraw and boycott and often wait until very close to the competition began to have-- you know it's the biggest distraction to the capitalist west even when they decided several weeks earlier they would withdraw, but there were instances particularly when the soviet team was really good at certain sports and they

didn't want to lose out on that and occasionally they still played. obviously, individual sports, there is always less distraction because it's an individual escort, but team sports like soccer would have that greater level of deception because you have a groups and now all of a sudden you have an even group and sometimes at the last minute they would have to reorganize the group and one group would have two teams and play each other and thatld was it. itit did become complicated for the organizers. >> i see. salvador, what you think, should we have taiwan and the people republic playoff before every sport event? >> thank you for inviting me to visit and i'm not quite sure how i deserve to be here. i really enjoy this volume. i commend highly to our viewers.

i was intrigued i have to say by the chapter. you have highly polarized country, which is facing sort of a new geopolitical environment and its using soccer as a tool of engagement. germany in the 20s and then as a sort of place of intensifying competition particularly with the regime in italy. at the world cup in france and interestingly enough as competition intensified.

[inaudible] i was intrigued to sort of think through the parallels and differences between the cold we are-- cold war era and the present day especially now as every confrontation-- conversation with china you have beijing winter olympics next year and how should it be approached, should we boycott it , should we-- clearly sports will be one of the front lines. i think it's one difference from the past and the present is that soccer is not necessarily i centric to american popular culture, but more urban central to-- >> china is pretty bad.

>> actually, china has invested heavily into soccer. international players with a professionally. had pretty bad reputations for corruption and the international teams-- [inaudible] they were some pretty embarrassing incidents, syria 2018 resulting in an uproar resulting in riots when the chinese one five, so there are clearlyp differences where soccr is not goingff to be the balance

but other sports are and sort of interesting and i would love to know more about the political reality of the republic as sort of polarizing with the united states--ed [inaudible] we have seen the efforts of public diplomacy being haphazard and sort of all aspects of public outreach, pretty divisive and so that might not be perhaps the best place for a starting point for showcasing liberal democratic sportsmanship in opposition to the rising democratic powers of the world.

would like to hear from the authors and their thinking about the parallels particularly between the cold war era in the place where we are right now in the message that could be drawn from how big sporting events could be battered by democratic governments going forward. >> paul, do you want to go first and tell a little bit about what is in your chapter? >> yes. i don't think if i have to answer now about the comparison between the two. i think the difference between the two periods is that sports was used in france about the cold war--

[inaudible] sports was a way to display the power of the u.s. at the beginning of the period france had army in europe and france intervened, for instance, in 1923, so sports was a display -- i think at least during the 20s it was more than the 50s or the 60s. we can say that in the 30s it was different because a lot of the political. [inaudible] we know at the end you can

consider polarizing sports is in a way beginning of the war which is occur in 1959. during the cold war, where was inconceivable between the u.s. where it was nuclear war, so the end of the world. i can continue if you have a questionon about my chapter, but in fact i think the chapter maybe is interesting because we are used to consider that the sport diplomacy invented in the 30s by italy or germany or even by great britain--

>> i was going to ask because the way your chapter readsur is very much france comes up with it and it backfires completely. >> it's something which is a new i've written about, but yes we can wonder why france would begin, because first of all sports organization like fifa-- [inaudible] after the first world war it was a way for the french to support german propaganda.

at the beginning of the 20 sports was used as a way of displaying remaining power for germany, so it was a way-- and it was a way of displaying the country, which was still strong after four years of terrible or. the country was completely destroyed. one medium and a three hundred thousand young people died, so it was a way. [inaudible] france was able to be the power

in europe. demonstrate this through soccer was not easy because the french team-- for instance, there was a game between the french national team anden hungry and the french very strong-- very and the reshaping of hungarian territory so in 1927 the french team lost 13-one.

for the french it was not an easy position, beaten by the hungarians, so it was a problem for the french, but it was a way [inaudible] the major power was not-- >> this comes back a few times throughout the book that the question of for soccer diplomacy to be effective do youoo have to be successful at soccer. it's not totally obvious, i mean, i think for certain purposes it doesn't really matter, but if you are trying for relations the soccer diplomacy and the inter- world period, i mean, if it comes to an end because of world war ii so i think people are somewhat

familiar probably with german and italians efforts at deploying scores for public diplomacy purposes, but can you maybe talk a little bit about the 1938 world cup and how it all comes to an end anyway? >> it was first of all the world cup in which-- [inaudible] very good organization and at the end-- for french competition it was different because the frencht government refused to. [inaudible] and there was some impact that could not be compared. the atmosphere was mixed because

the french were very happy, so there were some political atmosphere. the public was shouting and on the other hand the italian players made the salute at the beginning of the game. [inaudible]

at the end of the competition there was mixed feelings with great admiration towards battalions-- italians. theth idea of union nation, onen a very old nation, the french during the 30s, the number of deaths outside the number of births, so at the end was mixed feelings. the french to be considered-- [inaudible] there was a feeling in which it

was deteriorating. >> that was the sense i got so just like any other foreign policy move i guess there is a risk. heather, before we go to roy can i ask you some questions because obviously nato is central to your chapter appeared do you think thereie are any takeaways for today and what data was trying to do paid off in any sense? what's your thinking? >> not just soccer but how nato approached easto germany as a whole was quite challenging for them because the policy again germany and the travel

restrictions was not just on athletes. it was o on academics and all sorts of people. the problem was if the scientists werehe given travel o a conference on their science field, that didn't really need the news whereas a big athlete, when they couldn't go, that made thema news, not just in east germany and behind the east iron curtain but very much in the country that was hosting the event. in many ways the policy kind of backfired from a pr sense within the nato countries because nato has long struggled with its image and perception. countries have to pay a lot of money towards nato and is supporting it, n but what did ty get in returnn and then with acs nato not allowing soccer teams to come and now our event is

ruined, you know why is that so it became his pr battle within nato and that nato and its government or ministry were constantly trying to set forward a different line, getting the nato line with restrictions in response to the east german political actions and their prevention of blocking travel between eastern and western germany themselves, with creation of the wall and so trying to make sure that the continued pr campaign on this became basically all the country , so it was quite challenging and ultimately them recognizing east germany again easing travel restrictions and that obviously east germany racompetes in every sport quite

strong for the last couple of decades as a country. >> interesting. one thing i noted and we chatted about this a bit before, the webinar, the dutch government was trying to get nato to be more flexible on this front and yet couldn't really make it happen despite the fact the secretary-general of nato at the time so really shows you what those international positions get you in terms of actual power. with that, let's move a little bit closer to the present. roy has a great chapter in the book that is more about diplomacy within the sports than across countries, i would say. the central figure of the chapter is jack warner who some of our audience may have heard of. roy, do you want to talk about the chapter a bit and talk about

the figure of jeff-- jackbi warr and some of the things you discussed? >> sure appeared thanks to the viewers and listeners. i went to start for thinking the organizers of this event and the editors as well for allowing me too be involved in this book and the contributors also. before i can became involved with the book i was aware of the use by sports and nations to pursue a put-- particular lyrical interest. not all of them involve the use of diplomacy. as heather might say the ping-pong diplomacy of china and the u.s. in the 70s and another incident not so much

diplomacy but the use to help to legitimize and dismantle their system. [inaudible] the extent to which a contributing to apartheid, the jury is still out. the example i use has to do with the u.s. boycott of the all of the games in 1980 following the russian and soviet union at the time invasion of afghanistan and in 1984, soviet union boycott of the olympic games in l.a. in response to the u.s. government invasion of grenada. before starting the book i was well c aware of how we nation it

speaks using a sports to shape or reshape relations. this book, however, exposed me too a whole new concept called sports as diplomacy or soccer is diplomacy in itself which is speaking to how nonstate actors like fifa, like the ioc, invasion, communication, negotiations with state and nonstate actors like the media, sponsors and state in particular it was an eye-opening for me. i think sports as diplomacy, soccer diplomacy rarely enable us to see how small islands and people like jack warner could have an opportunity to enter the

fortunes of bigger nations into the world of soccer and how they can leverage to pursue their own material and political interests in a soccer. true soccer diplomacy, we see how the entire world the system in general the world soccer system in particular can turn on its head as small islands had the opportunity to influence the running of things, decision-makingg to hold whatevr political tournament or when a fifa's prized tournaments, the big world cup competition for the smaller and the like. this particular concept

impressed me so much that i'm looking to do a follow-up fifafo examination of the 2007 critic-- cricket world cup involving the international cricket concert in negotiation with over 12 small islands to the particular cricket tournament and also involved in engaging with companies like media companies that cover cricket, so that's the next project on my agenda and just coming out of this discovery of mine to be involved in this book that sports constitutes its own form of diplomacy in itself and i think it's been a definite contribution.

so thank you for coming up with the concept and i think it's very useful concept to explain certain dynamics in fifa as well as nonstate actors as well as the dynamics between nonstate actors and state actors in the season international sports competition. >> if i could just jump in here, also. as the editor, following up on one of the things that roy said, what was so fascinating about the geographical spread in the chapter within the book is that it's not just kind of soccer power or the great powers politically and diplomatically where soccer comes into play with diplomacy, but it is so soccer power and especially the

men's team in the 1950s playing against iceland and that was important for u.s. icelandic relations and also for states that are not the great powers diplomatically in particular when it comes to regional relationships. i think this book really only starts to scratch the surface of thecr and i think what i'm excid for is that it involves even more research particularlyve regionally and i think looking beyond fifa world cup and more so at the continental and even scholar regional competition, there is so muchh more that is o come out that i think we will see a lot of the soccer diplomacy plane out at the regional level and neighboring states for states that you know i think this is where soccer

diplomacy really has an opportunity to provide more insight to everyone, really. >> roy, go ahead. >> to follow-up on that comment. fifa is very structured quote unquote democratic structure, you could be a country of 1 million, or the u.s. with 300 million, one country one vote, so this. [inaudible] jack warner was president. fifa boating is a block. african union could vote as a block. could vote as a block, so jack warner was leveraging this to

position himself in the intro sanctum of a fifa and to become a buddy when things were good. let's bear in mind this, fifa boys world cup in trinidad in 2001, fifa election president was in 2002. jack warner was voted in 2002. [inaudible] the structure within fifa to give them influence within the

operations of the organization, but then jack warner was so positioned that hene is now influencing the english bid, the german bid. positions him in a network of relationships within fifa and outside of fifa to exercise influence. [inaudible] there are different levels of impact, political impact, economic impact, psychological impact even though we have not one, trinidad was not horrified for the final but there were

other title benefits. he would ch minus impact that is measurable, that-- [inaudible] if you look at in terms of infrastructure, jack warner through his company constructed 40 stadiums in trinidad. they cost 17 billion united states dollars. jack warner company built those stadiums. then he got all the contracts to provide food and services during dthe tournament, travel agency,

brought alld the teams down to trinidad, so in terms of economic impact, he benefited. in terms of infrastructure, all new sports stadium and stuff like that, in termsom of politil impact, that's probably up in the air, but for jack warner, the individual and as a black man he had influence. to get the english team to come to trinidad, that's nothing less than a soccer move, a coup d'état. because of his position in fifa and because of the proximity, so ii think in terms of impact it's at different levels. it's a kind of balance sheet you

have to arrive at. what would it cost? the different levels of benefits, so the question about france and they lost badly and the psychological impact on the french to see that we are not dead yet and we are still alive is symbolic, symbolic effect. staging the tournaments and taking back these tournaments and even though you may lose badly, even though you may be out in the first round, countries and see a of pride, patriotism and power, the sense you get from the tournaments, but that is one of the impacts that these tournaments are. >> so, dailbor i think is

interested in something you just mentioned, in fifa as international organization. you wrote me an e-mail. do you want to say what you had in mind? >> sure. of all the things mentioned through i guess-- this question of how social scientists should think about the organization of the international sporting events, which are neither organized by a single government , a government sort of enterprise neither is it a market transaction, a highbred thing that involves multiple different actors, service associations, governments, sponsors all sort of intricately interacting with each other in

this ecosystem and there was always a soft spot for alan-- [inaudible] political scientists for her work on this emerging order that come as a result of i guess interplay of many different-- [inaudible] there has actually been some applied literature in the world of sports particularly on the olympics the various policies on the security side of the olympics and how the different actors interact. would love to read more on that, but one thing that strikes me as

interesting is that these big one-off international sporting events, the world cup or soccer tournaments, the olympics host are only a small part of the global arena. i think more people around the world have strong feelings-- [inaudible]he if you're interested in the role ofnt soccer is diplomacy in some way i suppose you have to pay attention to these subnational and transnational in some cases enterprises such as the premier league are the champions league and i think we are all reminded of when the european super league was mentioned a couple weeks ago particularly after

this extraordinary strong reaction by the uk government as it was a matter of national emergency, immediate response. there was g a, in a political magazine on it this and one thing he touches on which i find interesting is that the american super legs like leagues and in industry sports whether it's the nfl or mlb are strikingly parallel to the premier league are the champions league, i mean, you would find people around the world who know who lebron james is, but professional sports outside of america is far more limited than

the european culture. you have to wonder why this is. [inaudible] one thing you might look at is the sort of highly commercialized nature of the american super leagues. the new orleans jazz, utah jazz, brooklyn dodgers, you know the first one to break the barrier and baseball and just across the continent and los angeles dodgers so whether that is

something that you had the sort of status replaced by the super leagues may be more people around the world-- [inaudible] commercial front like you have all these teams, but anyway sort of teasing out political lessons for how this sort of subnational and transnational questions we have an interested in sort of a deal of diplomacy would be interesting. >> if i can jump in on this one for a second. i think really the idea behind the european super league, i

really think you should think about it in terms of industrial organization and the sort of corporate synergy of the teams because the american leagues are all quite closed, salary limits and like set up to maximize prophet in a way that european soccer leagues are not there is obviously tremendous amounts of revenue, but the teams are particularly profitable and i think that'sbl what it was meant to address the next step would be introduced salary limits within the european super legal or you start moving franchises around may be at least part of the yearr so i think that's really the background there and then the intention with what roy mentioned, the one country one vote spirit of people competition or in this case more

precisely the promotion relegation system that gives every team at least a theoretical chance compete andnd sell you really have this tension between cartel is asian and profit maximization and the one hand versus maintaining the more i guess spirit that comes from sportsmanship where everyone has a chance to compete because i really don't think it's for example about-- it's not really about competitiveness no one complains about the german league even though iran wins every year end even no one complains about the italian league and obviously spain, so i don't think that's really the-- the issue where people are concerned, it's really more about the spirit of everyone having a beef about making it through. i think that's how i think of that and i think it's clever for

politicians to then jump through the rescue of that equal opportunity principal and i think that is what boris johnson did pretty smartly. i think in retrospect sanchez probably regrets not going in more aggressively but i think he was probably worried it would go through and he would look bad. i don't know if the other panelists have strong views on the european super league, but roy do you want to go? >> just some things. that italian ball point about shifting the level of analysis from the state to the club or the league and it reminds me of best points, conclusion that has me dumbfounded. he talks about the

indiscriminately representing of power because admired in some parts of the world particularly in my part of the world people get up at four in the morning to watch chelsea and others picked that particular point i think is relevant in the caribbean with the emergence of 1992, a lot of leagues remained premier league. it became a household term or language to represent a particular quality of football internationally, so that point about shifting the level of analysis i think has merit. i'm not an expert in diplomacy asas heather, but i know in this

policy the unit in the state and with the sports as diplomacy the unit of analysis shifted to the nonstate actors, so the point is to bring the club and the league into that equation by including them as nonstate actors as it relates to the dynamic of international sports and its function as a form of power between nations and countries. second part about a super league , i go to cricket briefly. we are the union which what they call a franchise league so it's just the same teams-- [inaudible] my suggestion is a franchise system. that will surely start issues

with fans identity to teams and the-- it comes to fandom and fan loyalty which has always been problematic. and a lot of fans-- i mean, there are stakeholders-- shareholders and shareholders too much-- >> ironically it's different in germany which has the most inequality within its league, probably, on the entire continent where fans are in control. >> if i can give a french point of view. what is at stake is americanization the world and the tradition to first publish the league in england at the end

of the 19th century-- [inaudible] the club in europe ishe to be linked to a committee, not to be considered as a brand, but the money to win what is at stake in the super league is to transform the club linked to a territory somewhere in a specific place which could play everywhere. i know very well, i live in torrance years w ago and he went to now the team, maybe but it was a brand and then a club. wanted to create this league--

competition between sports brand but no more. >> thank you. few more minutes and i went to ask one audience question and once-- one quickfo round up predictions and the audience question is from nick a lot-- nick a lot who asked what role did soccer player in the soccerr war cracks? who can answer this question? >> maybe i can. in fact it was more a game qualification for the world cup in 1970, but it was more a pretext relationship which was based on tension immigration, lack of field and someone,

social and economical problem-- [inaudible] >> heather, roy, do you agree with that assessment? >> yes. >> good. my final question is and i referenced it in the description, who is going to win europe 2020 which will obviously not take place in 2020, but a month from now cracks who wants to go first? >> i will say as a historian i like to look at the past, not to predict the future so i won't t necessarily predict a winner, but from having been in germany in 2006 and then a volunteer at the world cup that year i will vote for germany.

[inaudible] >> world champion. italians have a great chance this year. italy. >> interesting. italy has not done that well historically at the championship and have only one wants. >> 1968. >> roy, what do you think? >> [inaudible] i will go for england. >> england has never won the-- >> it would be the first time. >> that's right. oliver, what you think? >> france is a reasonable prediction. >> i think that is not crazy. i will obviously have to go with

my homeland of benevolence even though our captain will not be playing. we will see how that goes, but i have high hopes and ultimately it will lead to the disappointment on that note, we are out of time and i went to think our panelists for participating. i went to think our audience for tuning in and have a good rescue day.

regarding the constitution after it was ratified and later professor stephen brown recounts the presidential inauguration of george washington that took place in manhattan on april 30, 1789. find more information at good-- book tv.org or consult your program guide. now here is nina burleigh with her thoughts on the.s