The Race for 2004 Olympics at Hand

The real race for the 2004 Summer Olympics is set to begin.

After more than a year of jockeying by a record field of 11 candidate cities, the International Olympic Committee meets in Lausanne, Switzerland, this week to sort out the contenders from the pretenders in this ultimate global beauty pageant.

On Friday, an IOC panel will select four or five finalists to contest the final months of a high-stakes bidding contest for the right to host the world’s greatest sports festival.

Rome and Athens seem certain to make the cut, with Stockholm, Cape Town and Buenos Aires also in strong position. But with at least six cities destined to be eliminated, the IOC is faced with political pressures that could affect the final lineup.

The other candidates are Istanbul, Turkey; Lille, France; Rio de Janeiro; San Juan, Puerto Rico; Seville, Spain; and St. Petersburg, Russia.

*

Europe dominates the list of bidders with seven cities. The bottom-line choice for the IOC will be whether it is time for the games to return to Europe in 2004 or to go to Africa or South America for the first time.

Once the finalists are named, the race will move into high gear, with the cities spending millions of dollars to wine, dine and lobby the 100-plus IOC members who will select the winner on Sept. 5 in Lausanne.

Friday’s decision will be made by a 14-member “electoral college” that includes 10 members of the IOC executive board. The panel will try to reach its choice by consensus, but if no agreement is possible, a secret ballot can be called.

The selectors will rely partly on the findings of the IOC evaluation commission, which visited all 11 cities, studied the technical merits of each bid and compiled a 350-page report that was released last week.

The report focused on infrastructure, transportation, financing, sports venues, accommodation and security. Rome seemed to get the best overall report card, although the Eternal City and other front-runners were also noted for their weaknesses.

Rome was cited for its traffic problems, Athens for its air pollution, Cape Town for its high crime rate, and Stockholm for its opposition groups.

But while technical issues will play a part in the decision, the IOC is also likely to take geopolitical factors into account.

“If you want to have a sort of added value to host cities, other considerations like rotation between continents, or going to continents which have never had the games, play an important role,” said Jacques Rogge, a Belgian IOC member who heads the association of European Olympic committees.

Much could depend on whether the panel decides to choose four finalists or five. The rules state that four is the desired number. To raise it to five, there must be unanimous agreement by the committee.

There is widespread speculation the panel will select five candidates and strike a geographical balance by taking three European cities and one each from Africa and South America. Under that scenario, likely choices would be Rome, Athens, Stockholm, Cape Town and Buenos Aires.

But if the panel sticks to four finalists, the equation becomes trickier. Would there be just two European cities? Would Cape Town or South America lose out?

Rome, which hosted the games in 1960, and Athens, venue for the first modern games in 1896, look like the front-runners--even though both cities face considerable challenges to upgrade their infrastructure.

The Italian capital has an extremely strong political lobby and is sure to curry IOC favor by offering to turn the Via Veneto area--symbol of the “Dolce Vita” of the 1960s--into a private playground of hotels and restaurants for Olympic officials and their families during the games.

Many IOC members feel they owe a debt to Athens, which was bypassed in favor of Atlanta for the 1996 Centennial Games. The Greeks have steered clear this time of saying they deserve the games by right.

Then there is Stockholm, which is clean, safe and efficient and benefits from the feel-good factor of the 1994 Winter Games in Lillehammer, Norway. But the Swedish capital could be undermined by a poll cited in the IOC report that showed 52% of the population opposed to the bid.

Europe last staged the Summer Games in 1992 in Barcelona.

“I think there is a call to go back to Europe,” Rogge said. “In the traditional rotation between continents, then it’s time to go back to Europe. But I think there will also be a very strong argument to open up to new continents.”

In that case, sentiment rides with Cape Town. In the wake of South Africa’s transition from apartheid to all-race democracy, the IOC could be tempted to align itself with President Nelson Mandela and take the games to Africa.

But the IOC could also be scared off by the continuing social problems in South Africa, the uncertainty of the post-Mandela era and particularly the country’s crime rate.

“The safety and security factor is a most important issue for the IOC,” Rogge said.

Of all the bids, none has more riding on it politically than St. Petersburg, Russia’s second-largest city. President Boris Yeltsin and Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin have lobbied for the bid, saying the games would reinforce Russia’s transformation to democracy.

Despite the country’s continuing economic struggles and the organizational troubles that tarnished the 1994 Goodwill Games in St. Petersburg, IOC president Juan Antonio Samaranch could be under pressure to ensure the Russians at least make the final cut.

“St. Petersburg is the city of the No. 1 national Olympic committee in Europe, the No. 1 medal winner, the second power in the world,” Rogge said. “That means something. They have their pride, their feelings. The whole political system is behind the bid.”

While IOC officials introduced the pre-selection system in order to reduce the costs of the bidding process, they acknowledge the procedure makes it even more painful for those cities that don’t make the cut.

“For some cities and governments, it might be considered a humiliation,” Rogge said. “We should improve the system in the future to avoid this kind of sending off.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

2004 at a Glance

A brief look at the 11 cities bidding to host the 2004 Summer Olympics (financial figures based on IOC evaluation report):

ATHENS (Greece)

Population: 5 million

Previous games: 1896

Proposed dates of games: Aug. 13-29

Projected cost of games: $1.57 billion

Projected surplus: $25.3 million

Capital investments: $1.5 billion

Strengths: government and public support; good facilities; historic sites and ambience; projects to build new airport and improve metro and roads.

Weaknesses: worries over air pollution, high temperatures and possible transportation problems.

Variables: chance for IOC to make amends to Athens after choosing Atlanta for Centennial Games in 1996?

Chances of making final cut: excellent

BUENOS AIRES (Argentina)

Population: 11 million

Previous games: none

Proposed dates of games: Sept. 24-Oct. 10

Projected cost of games: $1.26 billion

Projected surplus: $36.7 million

Capital investments: $7.4 billion

Strengths: government and public support; compact layout, with most sites and facilities in “Olympic Corridor” area, including avenue reserved for Olympic traffic; athletes’ village located in quiet neighborhood, good environmental program.

Weaknesses: problems with some sports venues; hotel capacity needs major expansion; airport needs major improvements.

Variables: token South American candidate?

Chances of making final cut: good

CAPE TOWN (South Africa)

Population: 2.7 million

Previous games: none

Proposed dates of games: Sept. 17-Oct. 3

Projected cost of games: $1.29 billion

Projected surplus $22 million

Capital investments: $2.1 billion

Strengths: sentimental pull of helping South African’s post-apartheid transition; backing of President Nelson Mandela.

Weaknesses: crime rate; uncertain public support; environmental challenges; major transportation improvements needed.

Variables: first games for Africa?

Chances of making final cut: good

ISTANBUL (Turkey)

Population: 8 million

Previous games: none

Proposed dates of games: July 17-Aug. 1

Projected costs of games: $1.53 billion

Projected surplus: $23.3 million

Capital investments: $1.7 billion

Strengths: 96 percent public support; historic crossroads between Europe and Asia; tender for 80,000-seat Olympic stadium under way; bidding for second consecutive time.

Weaknesses: only general plans provided so far for most new venues; transportation/traffic worries; airport needs upgrading; clarifications sought by IOC over Turkish Olympic Law.

Variables: first Muslim country to host games?

Chances of making final cut: fair to poor.

LILLE (France)

Population: 1.1 million

Previous games: none

Proposed dates of games: July 27-Aug. 8

Projected cost of games: $1.38 billion

Projected surplus: $2.3 million

Capital investments: $2.6 billion

Strengths: local support, good environmental program.

Weaknesses: spread-out venues reminiscent of 1992 Winter Games in Albertville; lukewarm support from French government, national Olympic officials and media; IOC concern over plans for Olympic village in densely populated area; shortage of hotel rooms; transportation problems.

Variables: dry run for a future Paris bid?

Chances of making final cut: poor

RIO DE JANEIRO (Brazil)

Population: 5.5 million

Previous games: none

Proposed dates of games: July 16-Aug. 1

Projected cost of games: $1.68 billion

Projected surplus: $14 million

Capital investments: $2.4 billion

Strengths: enthusiastic local support; bid’s agenda of improving city’s social problems; compact concept, with all sports venues within city limits; Olympic stadium within walking distance of athlete’s village.

Weaknesses: worries over crime, water supply, sanitation, transportation; IOC concern over high revenue projections.

Variables: Can soccer legend, Pele, Brazil’s sports minister, pull enough strings?

Chances of making final cut: fair to poor.

ROME (Italy)

Population: 3 million

Previous games: 1960

Proposed dates of games: July 16-Aug. 1

Projected cost of games: $1.51 billion

Projected surplus: $2.1 million

Capital investments: $2 billion

Strengths: government support; Italy’s rich experience in organizing major sports events; solid sports venue plan; good range of hotels; strong political influence of Italian Olympic and sports officials; history and beauty of city.

Weaknesses: traffic; need for major infrastructure improvements; uncertainty over planned government projects to renovate city.

Variables: Plan to turn Via Veneto into private “Dolce Vita” zone for Olympic officials could be too hard to pass up.

Chances of making final cut: excellent.

SAN JUAN (Puerto Rico)

Population: 1.6 million

Previous games: none

Proposed dates of games: July 16-Aug. 1

Projected cost of games: $1.29 billion

Projected surplus: break even

Capital investments: $3.2 billion

Strengths: high public support

Weaknesses: As U.S. Commonwealth, needs guarantees from U.S. authorities; Puerto Rico’s future political status depends on referendum in 1998; spread-out sports venues; possibility of high temperatures and humidity.

Variables: first Caribbean Olympic host?

Chances of making final cut: poor.

SEVILLE (Spain)

Population: 716,000

Previous games: none

Proposed dates of games: Aug. 27-Sept. 12

Projected cost of games: $1.61 billion

Projected surplus: break even

Capital investments: $895,000

Strengths: government and public support; city successfully hosted 1992 World Expo; compact sports venues.

Weaknesses: proximity to 1992 Barcelona Games; possibility of high temperatures; transportation challenges; IOC concerns over budget figures.

Variables: can IOC president Juan Antonia Samaranch bring the games to his native Spain again so soon?

Chances of making final cut: poor.

STOCKHOLM (Sweden)

Population: 1.7 billion

Previous games: 1912

Proposed dates of games: July 9-25

Projected cost of games: $1.61 billion

Projected surplus: $15 million

Capital investments: $1.1 billion

Strengths: most venues within 20 minutes of Olympic village; good sports facilities; vast network of good accommodations; reliable and extensive public transport; high-technology standards; high-quality financial guarantees; Sweden’s reputation as clean and safe.

Weaknesses: anti-bid sentiment on economic and ecological grounds, including opinion poll showing 52 percent of population opposed.

Variables: will Stockhold benefit from the success of the 1994 Lillehammer Games?

Chances of making final cut: good

ST. PETERSBURG (Russia)

Population: 4.8 million

Previous games: none

Proposed dates of games: July 16-Aug. 1

Projected cost of games: $2.16 billion

Projected surplus: $54.7 million

Capital investments: $8.4 billion

Strengths: strong government backing; Russian sports tradition and expertise; beauty, culture and history of former czarist capital.

Weaknesses: Russia’s continuing economic struggles; bid’s reliance on construction of a highway whose funding is still subject to approval; water-quality concerns for rowing, canoeing and triathlon; new hotels dependent on investors; IOC concerns over financing, including total budget of $9.6 billion.

Variables: Will IOC spare Russians from political humiliation?

Chances of making final cut: fair.