OLYMPIC TRUCE: ‘A call for states to exercise restraint and facilitate humanitarian access’
CIVICUS speaks with Hugh Dugan of the Truce Foundation, a civil society organisation inspired by the Olympic Truce that promotes Olympic values of excellence, fair play, respect and unity. The foundation has launched the Truce Compliance Index to transform the Olympic Truce into an accountability mechanism, tracking state behaviour during the Olympic Games.
The Olympic Truce is an ancient tradition that was first sworn in 776 BCE, launching the first Olympic Games, and revived by the International Olympic Committee in 1992. For the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly called for its observance from seven days before the competition began on 6 February until seven days after the Paralympics end on 15 March. Though non-binding, the truce carries symbolic weight: it ensures safe passage for athletes and officials while serving as a broader appeal for states to pursue peace and dialogue during this global gathering.
How was the Olympic Truce revived in modern times?
The modern Olympic Truce was revived in 1993 at the initiative of then International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Juan Antonio Samaranch. The immediate context was the war in the former Yugoslavia. Only a decade earlier, Sarajevo had hosted the Winter Olympics. By the time the 1994 Winter Olympics, held in Lillehammer, Norway, was approaching, the region was devastated by conflict. There was an urgent need to deliver humanitarian assistance, particularly to children.
Samaranch appealed for a temporary truce to allow humanitarian relief to reach those affected by the conflict. The UN Children’s Fund became involved, and for a brief period, access was granted. That experience demonstrated that even in war, a pause was possible. It showed that the symbolic power of the Olympic movement could translate into practical humanitarian outcomes.
From there, the idea evolved. The IOC requested that the UN General Assembly adopt a resolution reviving the ancient Olympic Truce. The USA brought the first resolution in 1993. Since then, every two years, ahead of each Olympic Games, the General Assembly adopts a resolution calling for observance of the truce. Over time, it has become by far the most widely supported resolution in UN history.
What does the UN resolution call on states to do?
The Olympic Truce resolution doesn’t mandate enforcement, impose sanctions or deploy troops. It costs the UN nothing. Instead, it calls on member states and others to respect a period beginning seven days before the Olympic Games, lasting through them and ending seven days after the Paralympics.
Its core purpose is to ensure safe passage and participation for athletes, officials and accredited people. But it also carries a broader appeal. It urges states to be mindful of the symbolic moment, a time when the world gathers peacefully, athletes from all nations live side by side in the Olympic Village and competition is governed by fairness rather than force. It is a message from states to themselves. It asks governments to exercise restraint, facilitate humanitarian access where needed and consider measured approaches to conflict. It doesn’t compel action, but invites reflection and responsibility.
Does the truce have any impact?
It does, but not in the dramatic way people expect. The impact is often subtle: it may not end wars, but it can lower temperatures. It can create small openings: dialogue, prisoner exchanges, humanitarian pauses, de-escalation. These are rarely attributed directly to the truce, but they occur within its timeframe.
We also live in an age saturated with negative headlines. News cycles amplify crisis. The bad makes the front page; the good rarely does. Yet history reminds us that the world has faced far graver threats before: nuclear standoffs, global wars, existential risks. We should be careful not to assume our moment is uniquely catastrophic.
To monitor these quieter developments, the Truce Foundation’s Truce Compliance Index tracks actions taken during the Olympic period that reflect restraint, dialogue or humanitarian progress. It seeks to identify what’s going right rather than merely exposing what’s going wrong. Sometimes positive outcomes may be coincidental. But even coincidences that favour peace are worth noting.
What role can civil society play in strengthening the truce?
Civil society is naturally aligned with the spirit of the truce, even if many are not fully aware of it. The special thing that makes the Olympics different from other sports contests is the Olympic ideal that lives thanks to the spirit of the Olympic Truce. Many feel this, even if it’s not put into words. And whenever it’s explained, people respond with enthusiasm. No one dismisses the idea outright. The challenge is visibility and articulation.
The Olympic movement itself was founded as an educational project and not just another sporting event. Its purpose hasn’t been merely sport, but educating young people through sport, to promote health, mutual respect and international understanding. That pedagogical foundation distinguishes it from purely professional sporting competitions.
Civil society organisations, community leaders, educators and former Olympians can amplify this message. Advocacy tools, educational resources and monitoring efforts such as the Truce Compliance Index are available for public use. The goal is simple: encourage leaders when they act responsibly, call attention to constructive behaviour and remind governments the world is watching. The truce asks us to see each other not as adversaries, but as potential partners in coexistence.