By FELICIA CZOCHANSKI

The 2014 Winter Olympic Games in Sochi, Russia have brought Russia’s injustices, as well as its social and political problems, to the world’s attention, much more than its athletic prowess, even though Russia ended up winning the total medal count.

When a country is selected to host the Olympic Games, it is inevitable that more will be investigated than just the athletic ability of the country’s teams. Before the torch of the 2014 Winter Olympic Games had even been lit, Russia was facing criticism for the beliefs of its government, the infringement of its citizens rights and the severity of President Vladimir Putin’s rule.

More than 200 nations participate in the Olympic Games. It is not only a big deal to be selected as the host of this event, but also a great honor. The selection process is incredibly intensive and  takes up to two years in order to give the International Olympic Committee (I.O.C.) ample time to see which applicant city is best fit to be the host.

However, based on the amount of criticism that surrounded this year’s Winter Olympic Games in Russia, it seems that there are some holes in the host city selection process, as well as blurred boundaries that bar the I.O.C. from refuting changes that the host city may implement after being selected as an Olympic venue.

This past weekend, the Fordham Debate Society travelled to a tournament at the University of Albany, State University of N.Y. Members were presented with a case that questioned if the 2014 Winter Olympic Games in Sochi should have been boycotted due to unjust anti-gay and other right-breaching laws and issues of security.

This prompt brings up the questions of the importance of the correlation between a country’s state of affairs and said country’s ability to host the leading international sporting event.

Jacob Geyfman, FCRH’17, argued in favor of the boycott with these main points: “It goes against the ideal that the United States holds most dear: free speech. The Russian law prohibits distributing and showing any form of “gay propaganda,” which, in practice, essentially makes being openly gay illegal. This law also becomes an issue of inhibiting freedom of expression. ”

Because the Olympics are the most prestigious sporting event in the world, it is understandable that they take over a year to plan. A lot, however, can change in a country over this time, and thus a safety-net system should be implemented to ensure that the Olympics are fair and safe, just as the country they are held in should be.

Perhaps we have been too hard on Russia and should, instead, direct our criticism to the I.O.C. for selecting a superpower known for instability and political corruption to host the games. In this case, the I.O.C. seems to have selected the host based on economic resources.They have continued this pattern in their host city selection for the 2018 Winter Olympic Games as well.

The I.O.C. has chosen PyeongChang, a mountainous city, in the Republic of Korea, to host the 2018 Winter Olympics. According to European news source PlanetSKI, “likely factors of this selection were the city’s economic stability and state-of-the-art transportation.”

However, the I.O.C. has yet again weighed a potential host city’s wealth as being more important than other significant factors.

Unfortunately, we can expect another politically centered Winter Olympics in 2018. PyeongChang, South Korea is plagued with political instability. The city shares a border with dangerous, isolated and communist North Korea.

In addition,  The New York Times reported that four of the main leaders who promoted PyeongChang’s bid have been charged with financial or political corruption in the past. This has caused many to question how much the I.O.C. values a clean and non-corrupt government when choosing a host city.

Though President Putin was passionate about his Olympic ice hockey team, he was most fervent about hosting the Olympics as an opportunity to spur nationalism and acceptance of the government in his country. On the other hand, Korea has recognized that it, along with many other Asian countries, lacks zeal for winter sports.

One main point that the South Korean bid committee Chairman, Cho Yang-ho, made was that he would use the Olympics “to expand  winter sports to new regions of the world and give opportunities to new peoples to access the Winter Games.”

This vision is definitely a step up from Putin’s call for nationalism, as it is less selfish to give new parts of the world an appreciation of the Winter Olympics.

Many social and political cons still loom over the upcoming Winter Games in PyeongChang, South Korea. This will continue to be the case for other games as well, until the I.O.C. implements the changes necessary in their selection process to return the focus to friendly international competition celebrating the achievements of the most elite athletes in the world, and away from issues regarding issues of politics, morale and safety.

Felicia Czochanski, FCRH ’17, is an undeclared major from Metuchen, N.J.