Not just a game: Why sports and politics cannot be separated

There was a sudden ceasefire when Santos landed in Lagos, Nigeria, on 26 January 1969. For a country embroiled in a civil war, the silence - not heard for almost two years - was almost deafening. But soon the streets and stadiums in Lagos would be bursting with a different kind of sound instead. 

Pele had landed. 

And as Santos faced the Super Eagles, a ceasefire of two days was agreed upon behind the scenes. After all, they couldn't possibly be wasting time killing each other when Pele was playing. And while this exact account of the Nigerian-Biafran War ceasefire has been disputed, there have been many more similar miraculous events. 

The Christmas Truce for example was a widespread ceasefire that occurred during the First World War. Football matches were played between men that their states deemed were mortal enemies. 

No matter how hard we try to separate politics from sport, we only seem to entangle ourselves further. There's no better stage to see this in action than the current FIFA World Cup. Qatar had outdone even Russia in creating a politically charged atmosphere going into the competition. 

Yet even with FIFA doing Qatar's bidding and suppressing any talk of LGBTQ rights, Iran protests or migrant deaths, FIFA, who is notoriously strict about political symbols on the pitch, allowed one to fly free almost unobstructed – the Palestine flag. 

It's a significant moment for pro-Palestine activism. For one, the World Cup is a massive stage, with an estimated 3.57 billion tuning in to the 2018 FIFA World Cup. How this will play out and if it will have any impact on Palestine remains to be seen.  

In recent years fans have bemoaned the political slogans, armbands and players who take the knee. We commonly hear fans saying 'politics do not belong in sports,' but if history has taught us anything, it is that not only can sports play a vital role in politics, it has always done so. Even if it can't always take a cause along to the finish line, the stadium has always been a fighting ground. And right now, for the first time, Palestine has joined in.

The resurgence of this heated debate can be attributed to Colin Kaepernick, the American Football player who knelt during the American national anthem in 2016 to protest police brutality and racial inequality in the United States. But Kaepernick is just one athlete out of many who have used sports to fight for civil rights.

It was Mohammad Ali in 1967 who had refused the draft to fight in the Vietnam War. He was famously quoted as saying, "Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go ten thousand miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on brown people in Vietnam while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated like dogs and denied simple human rights?"

It was a massive moment for not only the civil rights movement in America but also for the Vietnam War in general. It came at a great cost to the boxer. While he did not serve jail time, he was stripped of his boxing license and much of the next three years he spent fighting in court. His new conversion to Islam too made the situation volatile. 

When he wasn't in court, Ali was speaking at college campuses. Discontent at the war grew and the civil rights movement gained momentum.

It wasn't just Ali who used sport to fight for equal rights against racism and segregation. Nelson Mandela used rugby to bring together a nation fractured by apartheid. At the final of the Rugby World Cup in 1995 in South Africa, it was the South African team, who had previously been barred from playing due to the country's apartheid policies, who beat New Zealand to lift the trophy. And for the first time, the nation came together to celebrate itself. 

For many fans, not only do football clubs become a second home in itself, but also a safe haven or a battling ground for their political values.

Barcelona FC is closely tied to Catalan values and culture. The club's motto "Més que un Club" (More than a club) is a direct reflection of that. Throughout history, Camp Nou has been more than just a stadium, it was one of the few places Catalans could speak their language after Franco banned it and suppressed Catalan culture.

There's a strong chance you've heard the booing of the English national anthem or seen banners that say 'Scouse not English' on certain football fixtures featuring Liverpool. It's down to a complicated history between Liverpudlians and the English. 

The feeling of alienation felt by Liverpudlians goes back decades. It's not only rooted in the city's Irish and other immigrant links, but also certain policies undertaken by Margaret Thatcher and the Conservative party in the 1980s. As the city fell into industrial decline, Thatcher pulled public services and aid further, increasing unemployment and poverty.  

As the divide deepened, Liverpool and its stadium Anfield transformed into a hub and a place of pride for the city's often ostracised culture. 

The 'Old firm,' the name for Scotland clubs - Celtic and Rangers - is more than a simple rivalry. Often referred to as the most heated clash in the world, the derby has roots in religion, identity and politics. Celtic fans are usually Irish-Scots, Catholics and Republicans, while Rangers are usually Protestants, native Scots, pro-British Loyalists.

The clash is not just significant in Glasgow but greater Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland too. 

The violence of the old firm, however, can't hold a candle to the rivalry between Argentina's Boca Juniors and River Plate, nicknamed the Superclásico. The rivalry here is borne more out of a social divide – Boca Juniors represent the working class while River Plate have more upper-class fans. 

Fans hold their local clubs as an extension of their identity and politics and as a result, it can become difficult to navigate to more fruitful political middle grounds. Nations have used their national sports teams as a means for diplomacy.

In cricket, India's historic tour of Pakistan in 2004 was the first tour between the two nations after the Kargil War of 1999. Even amidst all the security during the tour, it was a landmark moment for the countries relations, which was only just starting to recover. 

North and South Korea's decision to march under one flag in the 2018 Olympics was symbolic at a time of heightened tensions. It had been the most significant show of unity between the two countries in more than a decade. South Korea has often fallen back on sports to foster better relations with North Korea, even though it has not always been successful. 

And while reunification seems a very distant hope, moments like sending a unified women's ice hockey team has done much to thaw out frosty relations, or at the very least provided a brief reprieve and hope for future diplomacy.

The latest on the list of political victories brought about by sports is unique, but one that really should have happened sooner, when you think about it. Bangladesh's fanatic support for Argentina has culminated in Argentina considering reopening its embassy. It was closed more than 40 years ago, in 1978.  

Whether the screentime Palestine or LGBTQ rights (or the many others) received on the TV and news will bring the issues any benefit is still up in the air, but there is no question of the topic at hand. Sports not only plays a massive part, it absolutely has a home in politics.