International sporting events intensify nationalism and prolong territorial disputes

What's this about?

People disagree about whether big sports events make pride in a country stronger and keep land fights going.

These events include world games, with flags, songs, teams, and huge crowds.

What supporters say

• Big sports events can make people feel more tied to their country.
• Flags, songs, and team shirts can make national pride feel very strong.
• In places with old land fights, leaders or news groups may link sports pride to land claims.
• Some leaders use major events to build support and show who they say belongs in the nation.

What critics say

• Strong national pride may exist before a sports event starts.
• The facts do not prove that sports events cause people to support land fights for years.
• A game may make an old conflict louder without creating that conflict.
• We cannot tell if the event changes views, or only shows views people already had.

The bottom line

Big sports events can make existing national pride and harsh stories stronger.

But we do not have proof that they usually cause long-term support for land disputes.

International sporting events can put national identity in the spotlight and, in some settings, feed hostile narratives around borders and territory. But the evidence does not show that such events generally cause lasting public support for territorial disputes.

The case for

Sport is one of the world’s most visible stages for national identity. International tournaments bring together flags, anthems, uniforms and mass audiences, creating powerful shared rituals that can strengthen a sense of national belonging. Research describes major events, particularly the World Cup and Olympics, as places where national identity is displayed and reinforced through sport, media coverage and public conversation. 1

That heightened identity can become politically charged when an existing conflict has already made another group seem like an opponent. Studies of national-team support link sporting identification with stronger in-group and out-group attitudes, while research on the Olympic torch relay shows that sporting rituals can carry symbolic nationalist claims beyond a country’s borders. 2 In a tense territorial dispute, these messages could make it easier for politicians or media outlets to connect sporting patriotism with a claim over disputed land.

Governments may also use major tournaments deliberately. Case research on Russian mega-events, for example, finds that authorities can use sporting spectacles to bolster national identity and political legitimacy. Media narratives around the 2014 World Cup similarly show how sporting performance can be turned into stories about who belongs to the nation. 3

Taken together, this evidence makes a limited case: international sport can amplify nationalism already present in the political environment. In conflict settings, it may reinforce hostile narratives and provide governments with a highly public platform for them.

The case against

The biggest problem with the broader claim is causation. Nationalism often exists long before a match, tournament or Olympic ceremony begins. Political history, conflict and government messaging may shape how fans respond to an event, rather than the event itself creating those views. The research portrays nationalism as historically and politically dependent, not as an automatic product of sport. 4

There is also an important difference between feeling more national pride and supporting a particular territorial claim. Much of the available evidence measures national identification, patriotism, fan attitudes or media narratives. Those measures do not show whether people become more supportive of holding disputed territory, let alone whether they remain so after the tournament ends. 5

The evidence on duration is especially weak. The studies discussed are largely theoretical, historical or based on individual cases. They generally do not track public opinion before, during and long after an event to determine whether support for a specific territorial dispute rose and persisted. Without those long-term, dispute-specific measurements, researchers cannot separate an event’s effects from nationalism that was already there.

Sporting nationalism is not always hostile, either. It can be framed as domestic unity, dialogue or coexistence. Reviews of the field note that sport can foster national unity as well as sharpen identity, and the International Olympic Committee’s Olympic Truce promotes sport as a route toward dialogue and peaceful coexistence. 6 That initiative is not independent evidence that sport produces lasting peace, since the IOC itself promotes it. Still, it underlines that the meaning of sporting nationalism depends heavily on context.

The bottom line

The evidence strongly supports the view that international sporting events can heighten national identity and can reinforce hostile territorial narratives in politically charged conflict settings. Governments, media outlets and supporters may all use the symbols and emotions of sport to express nationalism.

But the broader assertion—that sporting events prolong public support for territorial disputes—has not been established. There is no strong body of long-term evidence showing that an event itself changes and sustains opinion on a particular dispute. The best-supported conclusion is that sport can magnify nationalism that already exists, rather than independently and reliably creating lasting territorial nationalism.