In banning Russia, Canada flexes its supreme power in hockey

Canada is a middle power from every national perspective save one – hockey. In that one area, we are a hyperpower. Other nations may imagine they rival us in influence over the game, but that’s all it is – imagining.

On Tuesday, for the first time, the Canadian state chose to fully exercise that power. Now that Russia has been reinstated into the international hockey community, a few rivals have announced they will refuse to play against them. Canada is the only one banning them.

No Russians at the world juniors in Alberta, says Prime Minister Mark Carney. No money for other hockey events staged in this country that propose to admit Russians (or Belarusians) under their own flag.

Russian teams won’t compete in Canadian-hosted events, including world juniors, Carney says

You so seldom see moral leadership in sports that it’s jarring when you do. Canada becomes the first member of the shaky Western alliance to take a unilateral stand on this issue.

We’re not waiting for the International Olympic Committee or the Court of Arbitration for Sport to tell us what we can do. We’re the captain now.

It’s surprising on two levels. First, that anyone had the steel to move beyond statements of concern. This was the challenge of the CAS’s ruling in favour of Russia – if you want to exclude this country, there aren’t any sporting rules that say you can do that, so you’re going to have to do it yourself. They mustn’t have believed anyone would chest up with them. Canada just did. Your move, Swiss judges.

The second level is the more surprising – Canada on the attack. We’re the nice guys of international relations, which often means passive onlookers.

Others threaten boycotts. We offer binding arbitration. Others break the rules. We are publicly disappointed in those people. Are you sure you wouldn’t prefer a social worker to sort this out?

Maybe it’s U.S. President Donald Trump, especially now that he’s begun to fade. He’s awful, but you have to give him one thing – the man has the temperament of a bull. He does what he wants, and more often than not, he gets away with it. Maybe Canada has taken a few lessons.

Because I’m having a hard time believing that the previous Canadian government – or any of the half-dozen before it – would have looked at the judgment of an accredited international court and said, “Yeah, no, we’re not going to be doing that.”

Using our control of hockey as a lever, Carney is setting Canada against the international sporting establishment. Ignoring the CAS is the first step. Forcing the International Ice Hockey Federation to fall in line goes along with it. Because what are they going to do? Find a new place to hold the world juniors? It’s in less than two months.

It’s either a cozy arena in Red Deer or a flooded parking lot in Bratislava. Sometimes, it’s easier to let others make your choices.

Next up – the world championships in Germany. The Europeans have already done the work there. Canada can show up and do as they propose to do – refuse to play Russia. Or they can not go at all. Either way, it’ll cost us a shot at a gold medal. If that bothers you, I defy you to name the last three world champions. Repeat for the women’s iteration.

But then there’s the big one – the IOC.

Let us say that the conflict in Ukraine has not been resolved in four years’ time. Knock wood that it has, but say it hasn’t.

Canada can’t ban Russia from the Olympics. Are they really going to cede two gold medals? There’s no suggestion that the U.S. will go along with the Russians-have-cooties approach. Which means that the likeliest way the Canadians win is if the U.S. takes Russia out for them.

At a guess, it wouldn’t get that far. The IOC is not going to allow its flagship winter event to become a circus. It’ll make moves to forestall that and, eventually, prevent it. They could disqualify anyone who refuses to play Russia in the opening rounds. They’ve done it to judokas who refused to fight Israeli opponents. They could issue years-long bans.

Cathal Kelly: Russia’s return from the cold will force sporting rivals to make a choice

How far is Canada willing to go, while still keeping the Olympics sweet? Traditionally, that would be the question.

After Tuesday, maybe the better question is, “What does the IOC have to do to keep Canada happy?”

Because what if Canada bails out of the hockey tournament? Where’s your Olympics then? Because I could see a realistic world in which it would start to fall apart.

Morality is a potent force, but it works best when coupled with actual power. In this instance, Canada has the benefit of both. It’s not just a matter of star power. It’s a question of mythology.

You can’t have a World Cup without Brazil. In the same way – maybe more so – you cannot hold an international hockey tournament of consequence without Canada.

Unlike others I could think of, we’ve earned our influence. Nobody does more to caretake the game, and I’m not talking about building rinks. I’m talking about setting the terms for what the game means, how its stories are told and who gets to be part of that.

Cathal Kelly: Don’t confuse Nikita Kucherov’s temper tantrum trade request for player empowerment

For more than a century, we’ve exercised that power inclusively. Anybody who wants to join can. Come on up here. We’ll take care of you. We’ll even pay for everything. Just for the enjoyment of seeing the world sharing in this thing that we value so much.

But at a certain point, when people take advantage, Canada can also say enough. International sport wasn’t willing to do that. So Canada has. Good for us.

If the powerbrokers of international sport would like to try pushing back on that, they may find us a little less co-operative than they’ve become used to.

We don’t want to fight anyone, but as Canada has started to demonstrate over the last while on a variety of fronts, that doesn’t mean we don’t know how.