A Comparative Look at Goals and Security Systems

Mega-events are not only reporting on sports, but they are providing the world with coverage of the host country. In the 2008 Beijing Olympics, the government saw it as an opportunity to legitimatize the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and depict itself as a modernized society. In the 2010 South Africa World Cup, the government would saw it as an opportunity to legitimize itself by showing that Africa can manage large and complicated projects and is ready to be a player in the global economy. Brazil, however, has already been legitimized as an economic and political power. As one of the few countries in the world to have a female president, the events offer Brazil the opportunity to solidify its role as a major global political and economic influence. Security will be the biggest barrier to this.

The post 9/11 panic mentality in the international community has generated high international security concerns for any mega-event. Western security systems and US corporations play a large role in these issues. The mega-events have created global security market for new monitoring technologies, a market that the US is actively involved in. Some fear that the ‘Olympic spirit’ has been replaced by greedy private businesses, and that these events have become testing-grounds for new security systems where the main corporate players benefit.

The Athens games in 2004 accepted direct US and international assistance. The American Science Application International Corporation (SAIC) helped to implement the C41 security system, and linked to a central command center that integrates all security forces and information. The command center crashed and became a technical nightmare. The flawed system remained useless. SAIC, which has close relationships with the Pentagon, had promoted the use of the C14 system for the Athens Olympics. Although the system crashed, Athens was still able to convey a perceived sense of security during the events. Visible airborne surveillance, although a controversial spectacle, offered comfort for all of the Olympic participants. It also kept any potential security threats ignorant of the system malfunctions.

More and more, cities are looking to the citizens for assistance. A special 100,000 person anti-terrorist force was organized for the China’s games in 2008. The force was backed by 400,000 city volunteers. The volunteer group was made up of taxi drivers, receptionists, and other members of the public. Because of this system, the Chinese forces had people reporting on every level. Security was linked with patriotism, and citizens took any potential threats to Chinese security personally. Vancouver and London have also promoted public awareness, and encouraged citizens on all levels to report suspicious behavior.

Electronic surveillance systems help track, target and profile suspects, control population, watch traffic and monitor electronic communication. Brazil will have the decision which system to implement and which countries to involve in the decision. Brazil security officials need to seek help and volunteers on every level, and make security concerns relevant to all people in Brazil. Make the public active participants in the security issues. The public might be able to identify security gaps that officials missed.

“Surveillance in Athens 2004 and Beijing 2008: A Comparison of the Olympic Surveillance Modalities and Legacies in Two Different Olympic Host Regimes.” Samatas, Minas. Oct. 24, 2011.

“Before and After the Vuvuzela: Identity, Image and Mega-Events in South Africa, China and Brazil.” Tomlinson, Richard. South African Geographical Journal. May 16, 2011.