- An International Olympic Committee member told USA Today on Monday that the 2020 Tokyo Games will be postponed.
- Facing a surge of pressure amidst the worsening coronavirus pandemic, the IOC announced Sunday that it was considering this move.
- Shortly after the announcement, Canada said it’s pulling its athletes from the Games if they take place this summer.
- Australia made a similar move, saying it is not ready to assemble a team considering the current circumstances.
- The IOC as a whole has not officially announced the postponement or details but said it would finalize decisions in the next four weeks.
IOC Considers Postponement
Pressure has been mounting against Olympic officials to reconsider the July commencement of the 2020 Olympic Games in Tokyo as the deadly coronavirus continues to infect populations around the globe.
On Sunday, the International Olympic Committee said it is considering postponing the Games. This announcement came after Norway’s Olympic Committee, Brazil’s Olympic Committee, USA Track and Field, USA Swimming, and others pushed for the delay as the public health crisis grows.
“The IOC will, in full coordination and partnership with the Tokyo 2020 Organising Committee, the Japanese authorities and the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, start detailed discussions to complete its assessment of the rapid development of the worldwide health situation and its impact on the Olympic Games, including the scenario of postponement,” the committee said in a statement.
The committee said it would finalize these decisions within the next four weeks.
The IOC also noted that they are ruling out the option of canceling the Games altogether, saying that doing so “would not solve any of the problems or help anybody.”
In a letter to the athletes around the globe, IOC President Thomas Bach reiterated this sentiment, saying a total cancellation would destroy their Olympic dreams. Bach also outlined some of the hardships the Olympics community would face if the Games were delayed.
“A number of critical venues needed for the Games could potentially not be available anymore. The situations with millions of nights already booked in hotels is extremely difficult to handle, and the international sports calendar for at least 33 Olympic sports would have to be adapted,” he wrote. “These are just a few of many, many more challenges.”
Canada and Australia Pull Out
Following the IOC’s news of possible postponement, Canada made a big announcement of their own on Sunday, becoming the first nation to pull its athletes from the Olympic Games this summer.
The Canadian Olympic Committee (COC) and Canadian Paralympic Committee (CPC) announced their joint decision in a press release late Sunday night, urging for the Games to be postponed one year.
“While we recognize the inherent complexities around a postponement, nothing is more important than the health and safety of our athletes and the world community,” the Canadian committees said.
The COC and CPC added that they are grateful for the IOC’s decision to not cancel the event entirely.
The Australian Olympic Committee swiftly followed suit after their executive board members held a virtual conference on Monday and unanimously agreed that “an Australian Team could not be assembled in the changing circumstances at home and abroad.”
“We have athletes based overseas, training at central locations around Australia as teams and managing their own programs. With travel and other restrictions this becomes an untenable situation,” AOC CEO Matt Carroll said.
The committee said that Australian athletes should prepare for the Olympics Games in the summer of 2021.
Uncertainty Carries On
Though Canada and Australia are calling for the Games to be pushed back a year, it’s not yet clear if that will be the case if there is a postponement at all.
Tokyo 2020 Organizing Committee President Yoshiro Mori implied that he wasn’t considering a very long delay for the Games.
“Whether it’s delayed by one month, three months or five months, we need to run simulations of the impact,” Mori said at a press conference on Monday.
“We are 2020 so that is the direction for now,” he added. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe weighed in on the topic during a parliamentary session on Monday.
“If it is difficult to hold [the games] in a complete way, a decision of postponement would be unavoidable,” Abe said, adding that he hopes the IOC comes to a decision soon.
On Monday, USA Today reported that International Olympic Committee member Dick Pound confirmed that the Games would indeed be postponed.
“On the basis of the information the IOC has, postponement has been decided,” Pound said in an interview. “The parameters going forward have not been determined, but the Games are not going to start on July 24, that much I know.”
Pound said the announcement of the next steps will be rolled out.
“It will come in stages,” he said. “We will postpone this and begin to deal with all the ramifications of moving this, which are immense.”
When USA Today asked for an IOC response and referenced Pound’s remarks, a spokesperson said: “It is the right of every IOC member to interpret the decision of the IOC executive board which was announced yesterday.”
The IOC has not officially added to their news of considering postponement and hammering out details over the next month.
Some have expressed their unhappiness with the projected decision timeline of 4 weeks. Among these people was Hugh Robertson, chairman of the British Olympic Association.
“We urge rapid decision-making for the sake of athletes who still face significant uncertainty,” Robertson told The New York Times. “Restrictions now in place have removed the ability of athletes to compete on a level playing field, and it simply does not seem appropriate to continue on the present course toward the Olympic Games in the current environment.”
The IOC’s decision affects many parties who have shared concern about how they can adequately prepare for the Games if the dates are up in the air. This includes sponsors who are spending millions of dollars on advertising, broadcasting networks who plan to air the events, and players in the travel and hospitality industries who are organizing people’s trips and stay in Tokyo.
And as Robertson emphasized, as the heart of the Games, athletes want a decision as soon as possible. Some Olympic training facilities have closed as the coronavirus worsens and major qualifying events have been canceled. Athletes are facing the conflicting decision of continuing their rigorous training or heeding orders to stay home.
“So many people feel that if there was an answer then we would know what to do,” Kathleen Baker, a gold and silver medalist in swimming at the 2016 Olympics, told The New York Times.
Baker is not the only Olympian demanding answers. Lolo Johnson, a U.S. Olympic hurdler, is among those urging the IOC to make a decision.
“It’s tearing athletes apart,” Jones told the Associated Press. “We want to be like everyone else. We want to be healthy, responsible citizens. But we’re also afraid the IOC is going to say, in a month, that the games are on, and, what, hopefully you’re going to still be in shape?”
See what others are saying: (New York Times) (CNN) (The Hill)
Israel Relaxes Abortion Restrictions in Response to U.S. Supreme Court Ruling
The reforms follow similar moves by France and Germany as leaders across the political spectrum denounce the court’s decision.
Health Minister Makes Announcement
Israel is easing access to abortion in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s repeal of Roe v. Wade, Nitzan Horowitz, the country’s health minister and head of the small left-wing Meretz party, announced Monday.
“The U.S. Supreme Court’s move to deny a woman the right to abortion is a dark move,” he said in the announcement, “oppressing women and returning the leader of the free and liberal world a hundred years backward.”
The new rules, approved by a majority in the parliamentary committee, grant women access to abortion pills through the universal health system. Women will be able to obtain the pills at local health centers rather than only hospitals and surgical clinics.
The new policy also removes the decades-old requirement for women to physically appear before a special committee that must grant approval to terminate a pregnancy.
While women will still need to get approval, the process will become digitized, the application form will be simplified, and the requirement to meet a social worker will become optional.
The committee will only conduct hearings in the rare case it initially denies the abortion procedure.
Israel’s 1977 abortion law stipulates four criteria for termination of pregnancy: If the woman is under 18 or over 40, if the fetus is in danger, if the pregnancy is the result of rape, incest, or an “illicit union,” including extramarital affairs, and if the woman’s mental or physical health is at risk.
All of the changes will take effect over the next three months.
The World Reacts
Politicians across the political spectrum from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson have denounced the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision since it was announced Friday.
On Saturday, French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne expressed support for a bill proposed by parliament that would enshrine the right to an abortion in the country’s constitution.
“For all women, for human rights, we must set this gain in stone,” she wrote on Twitter. “Parliament must be able to unite overwhelmingly over this text.”
Germany scrapped a Nazi-era law prohibiting the promotion of abortion Friday, just hours before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
In Israel, abortion is a far less controversial issue than it is for Americans. Around 98% of people who apply for an abortion get one, according to the country’s Central Bureau of Statistics.
Part of the reason for Israel’s relatively easy access to abortion is that many residents interpret Jewish law to condone, or at least not prohibit, the procedure.
In the United States, several Jewish organizations including the American Jewish Committee, Hillel International, and the Women’s Rabbinic Network have expressed opposition to the court ruling, and some Jews have protested it as a violation of their religious freedom.
See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (ABC News) (The Guardian)
Flight Deporting Refugees From U.K. to Rwanda Canceled at Last Hour
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said the U.K.’s asylum policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.
Saved By The Bell
The inaugural flight in the U.K. government’s plan to deport some asylum seekers to Rwanda was canceled about an hour and a half before it was supposed to take off Tuesday evening.
A last-minute legal intervention by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) halted the flight. Tuesday’s flight originally included 37 people, but after a string of legal challenges that number dwindled to just seven.
In its ruling for one of the seven passengers, a 54-year-old Iraqi man, the court said he cannot be deported until three weeks after the delivery of the final domestic decision in his ongoing judicial review proceedings.
Another asylum seeker, a 26-year-old Albanian man, told The Guardian he was in a “very bad mental state” and did not want to go to Rwanda, a country he knows nothing about.
“I was exploited by traffickers in Albania for six months,” he said. “They trafficked me to France. I did not know which country I was being taken to.”
A final domestic effort to block the flight in the Court of Appeals failed on Monday. The High Court will make a ruling on the asylum policy next month.
Britains Divided by Controversial Policy
U.K. Home Secretary Priti Patel spoke to lawmakers after the flight was canceled, defending the asylum policy and saying preparations for the next flight will begin immediately.
“We cannot keep on spending nearly £5 million a day on accommodation including that of hotels,” she said. “We cannot accept this intolerable pressure on public services and local communities.”
“It makes us less safe as a nation because those who come here illegally do not have the regularized checks or even the regularized status, and because evil people-smuggling gangs use the proceeds of their ill-gotten gains to fund other appalling crimes that undermine the security of our country,” she continued.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Filippo Grandi, told CBC the policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.
“We believe that this is all wrong,” he said. “This is all wrong. I mean, saving people from dangerous journeys is great, is absolutely great. But is that the right way to do it? Is that the right, is that the real motivation for this deal to happen? I don’t think so. I think it’s… I don’t know what it is.”
An Iranian asylum seeker in a British detention center who was told to prepare for deportation before being granted a late reprieve was asked by ABC whether he ever thought the U.K. would send him to Africa.
“I thought in the U.K. there were human rights,” he said. “But so far I haven’t seen any evidence.”
The Conservative government’s plan was announced in April, when it said it would resettle some asylum seekers 4,000 miles away in Rwanda, where they can seek permanent refugee status, apply to settle there on other grounds, or seek asylum in a safe third country.
The scheme was meant to deter migrants from illegally smuggling themselves into the country by boat or truck.
Migrants have long made the dangerous journey from Northern France across the English Channel, with over 28,000 entering the U.K. in boats last year, up from around 8,500 the year prior. Dozens of people have died making the trek, including 27 who drowned last November when a single boat capsized.
See what others are saying: (BBC) (The Guardian) (CNN)
Ryanair Draws Outrage, Accusations of Racism After Making South Africans Take Test in Afrikaans
Afrikaans, which is only spoken as a first language by around 13% of South Africa, has not been the country’s national language since apartheid came to an end in 1994.
Airline Won’t Explain Discrimination
Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline, has received widespread criticism and accusations of racism after it began requiring South African nationals to complete a test in Afrikaans to prove their passport isn’t fraudulent.
The airline told BBC the new policy was implemented because of “substantially increased cases of fraudulent South African passports being used to enter the U.K.”
Among other questions, the test asks passengers to name South Africa’s president, its capital city, and one national public holiday.
Ryanair has not said why it chose Afrikaans, the Dutch colonial language that many associate with white minority rule, for the test.
There are 11 official languages in South Africa, and Afrikaans ranks third for usage below Zulu and IsiXhosa. Only around 13% of South Africans speak Afrikaans as their first language.
“They’re using this in a manner that is utterly absurd,” Conrad Steenkamp, CEO of the Afrikaans Language Council, told reporters. “Afrikaans, you have roughly 20% of the population of South Africa understand Afrikaans. But the rest don’t, so you’re sitting with roughly 50 million people who do not understand Afrikaans.”
“Ryanair should be careful,” he continued. “Language is a sensitive issue. They may well end up in front of the Human Rights Commission with this.”
Ryanair’s policy only applies to South African passengers flying to the United Kingdom from within Europe, since it does not fly out of South Africa.
The British government has said in a statement that it does not require the test.
Anyone who cannot complete the test will be blocked from traveling and given a refund.
Memories of Apartheid Resurface
“The question requiring a person to name a public holiday is particularly on the nose given that SA has a whole public holiday NEXT WEEK commemorating an historic protest that started in response to language-based discrimination,” one person tweeted.
South African citizen Dinesh Joseph told the BBC that he was “seething” with anger when asked to take the test.
“It was the language of apartheid,” he said, adding that it was a trigger for him.
Officials in the country were also surprised by Ryanair’s decision.
“We are taken aback by the decision of this airline because the Department regularly communicates with all airlines to update them on how to validate South African passports, including the look and feel,” South Africa’s Department of Home Affairs said in a statement.
Any airline found to have flown a passenger with a fake passport to the U.K. faces a fine of £2,000 from authorities there. Ryanair has also not said whether it requires similar tests for any other nationalities.
Many people expressed outrage at Ryanair’s policy and some told stories of being declined service because they did not pass the test.