WI: 1916 Olympics not cancelled?

The 1916 Summer Olympics were due to be held in Berlin, Germany but were ultimately cancelled because of the ongoing world war. But what if the IOC had made the decision to carry on with the games despite the war, perhaps even as a statement or protest against the conflict?

It seems unlikely that Germany would have been able or interested in still hosting the games, so it's possible one of the candidate cities that lost out to Berlin in the 1912 selection could have served as an alternate host. These were Alexandria, Amsterdam, Brussels, Budapest, and Cleveland.

Brussels was under German occupation, and very near to active combat zones, so would have been out of the question. Likewise, Budapest, as with Berlin, would likely not have been able to host, since the government would likely not have wanted to divert resources to the games, and travel to Budapest for athletes from outside of the Central Powers would have likely been impossible. Amsterdam was in neutral territory, but the Netherlands was experiencing food shortages and a refugee crisis from Belgium, so also an unlikely host city.

Alexandria was a marginally better proposition; the British authorities in Egypt could have gone with staging a propaganda-games, contrasting the "liberally"-minded British Empire playing gracious host to the world against the image of the German occupiers in Belgium putting people to forced labor, or something of the sort. However, Alexandria was still in close proximity to theaters of military operation.

That leaves the most likely choice, Cleveland. Woodrow Wilson was still in his first term, and the US was neutral. It would have been difficult for athletes from Europe to attend the games, as civilian passage across the Atlantic was unsafe, but a sort of reduced Olympics could have been held that was attended by mostly North American, Latin American, Asian, and Oceanian athletes.

Finally, it's possible that a different host city could have been chosen as a stopgap. St. Louis would have been a prime choice, located in a safe region and already having infrastructure from hosting the 1904 games. San Francisco had hosted the Panama-Pacific International Exposition in 1915, and so also may have had a good amount of infrastructure with which to accommodate attendees for an Olympics.

Regardless of venue, how likely is it that the Olympics could have gone ahead in 1916? How many athletes could have attended, and from which countries/regions? And what would have been the political and cultural interaction between the Olympics and the war?
 
How about in Switzerland?

That's a possibility. It would be feasible for athletes from both the Allied and Central powers to travel there, and Switzerland would be a host nation respected by both sides in the conflict. Do you know what sort of resources the Swiss government had to devote to hosting at the time?
 
That's a possibility. It would be feasible for athletes from both the Allied and Central powers to travel there, and Switzerland would be a host nation respected by both sides in the conflict. Do you know what sort of resources the Swiss government had to devote to hosting at the time?

There would be a great operation field for spies during during the Olympics .

Switzerland was on high alert during WW1, because they felt threatened by the German Empire. They had plans of Mountain Guerilla warfare and formed a militia. This was not just WW2 but also WW1. The German history magazin "Damals" had an article about this topic earier this year.
 
It's entirely feasible for athletes to go there as it's an easily accessible neutral for all European participants to the war (except for Russia). What All the others require hazardous sea travel (i.e. Cleveland, Amsterdam) or are in belligerent nations.
 
There would be a great operation field for spies during during the Olympics .

Switzerland was on high alert during WW1, because they felt threatened by the German Empire. They had plans of Mountain Guerilla warfare and formed a militia. This was not just WW2 but also WW1. The German history magazin "Damals" had an article about this topic earier this year.

It's entirely feasible for athletes to go there as it's an easily accessible neutral for all European participants to the war (except for Russia). What All the others require hazardous sea travel (i.e. Cleveland, Amsterdam) or are in belligerent nations.

How much advance notice would the IOC have to give Switzerland for the Swiss to have a venue ready by Summer 1916? I can see why the games were cancelled IOTL, none of the belligerents in 1914 thought the war would go on as long as it did, and by the time they realized they'd still be fighting in mid-1916, it was probably too late to find a new venue.
 
This has the potential for some butterflies.

Most obviously, the Olympics are different. Ancient Greeks suspended wars for the Olympics. Modern Olympics are suspended for wars. Holding the Olympics anyway despite the war actually moves them closer to their ideals. There is a reduced chance of exploitation in the future by dictatorships and conglomerates. And now there is precedent for no more interruptions of the games.

The Germans in 1916 were still in the mode of appeasing the US with the U-boats in the Atlantic. Restricted warfare was on that year. Hold the games in Cleveland, and they almost certainly suspend the campaign entirely and make a big deal about it. The u-boats are needed for the High Seas Fleet sortie that led to Jutland (the plan actually was for the fleet to sortie and the u-boats to sink the British warships when they responded). Athletes from Entente countries can travel across the Atlantic with no problem. Will they let German and Hungarian athletes through the blockade?

The complete suspension of the campaign, and the holding of the Olympics in Cleveland, because the US is neutral, has butterfly effects on the Great War. It strengthens anti-war sentiment in the US. There may be an effect on the decision by the German government to undertake unrestricted submarine warfare. Also there were several high profile peace initiatives in 1916-17 that IOTL came to nothing.
 
Will they let German and Hungarian athletes through the blockade?

What would be the effect on world opinion if they didn't? If only Allied and Neutral athletes are allowed to participate?

The complete suspension of the campaign, and the holding of the Olympics in Cleveland, because the US is neutral, has butterfly effects on the Great War. It strengthens anti-war sentiment in the US. There may be an effect on the decision by the German government to undertake unrestricted submarine warfare. Also there were several high profile peace initiatives in 1916-17 that IOTL came to nothing.

If the games have the effect of leading the German government to decide to not engage in unrestricted submarine warfare, and especially if the games include German athletes, then anti-German sentiment in the US would be significantly reduced, I would think. It would be a lot harder for Washington to later drum up support for a declaration of war against Germany if they weren't bothering us and we got to hear about German athletes as individuals at the games.

Could the games also act as a clandestine meeting point for Allied and CP diplomats looking to send out peace feelers?

Also, what would the interactions between Allied and CP athletes at the games be like? I can imagine the French and German delegations awkwardly avoiding each other, let alone teams like Austria-Hungary and Serbia.
 
It would probably be more likely if a city in a neutral location had been already chosen (e.g. Cleveland). The time it takes to prepare a venue probably militates against a change in site, given the short notice.

It would be more dramatic if the site were moved, and have a bigger impact - but it would be less likely, IMO.
 
It would probably be more likely if a city in a neutral location had been already chosen (e.g. Cleveland). The time it takes to prepare a venue probably militates against a change in site, given the short notice.

It would be more dramatic if the site were moved, and have a bigger impact - but it would be less likely, IMO.
Depends on the timing; the 1940 Olympics were awarded to Tokyo in 1936, then the Japanese forfeited the right to host the games (under some international pressure as well as domestic factors) in 1938 after the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese war, saying "When peace reigns again in the Far East, we can then invite the Games to Tokyo and take that opportunity to prove to the people of the world the true Japanese spirit." The games were then moved to Helsinki - St Moritz, then Garmisch, for the winter games - and only finally cancelled in 1939. If the German government recognises that the war will be a long one some time in 1914 and surrenders the games, I could see the IOC reawarding them to a neutral city.
 
Depends on the timing; the 1940 Olympics were awarded to Tokyo in 1936, then the Japanese forfeited the right to host the games (under some international pressure as well as domestic factors) in 1938 after the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese war, saying "When peace reigns again in the Far East, we can then invite the Games to Tokyo and take that opportunity to prove to the people of the world the true Japanese spirit." The games were then moved to Helsinki - St Moritz, then Garmisch, for the winter games - and only finally cancelled in 1939. If the German government recognises that the war will be a long one some time in 1914 and surrenders the games, I could see the IOC reawarding them to a neutral city.

Maybe Stockholm ?
 

oberdada

Gone Fishin'
Cease Fire on all fronts for the duration of the Games! That would be something, but probably very ASB....
 
Cease Fire on all fronts for the duration of the Games! That would be something, but probably very ASB....
That would probably not happen the first war Games, but free movement of athletes, even enemy nationals might be a possibility. But if an alt-WWII that was more 'Germany addressing old grievances' and less 'wacko genocidal dictator trying to take over the world', you might get that as an improvement on the first one. Maybe.
 
Top