If the spirit of the Olympic Games were recognized, Athens would be an open city rather than a fortress. Realistically, however, we cannot bury the memories of the bloodbath of the 1972 Summer Games of Munich. But if terrorists have assaulted the Games' reputation of peace, our political leaders and even the IOC and its satellite organizations have at times mismanaged the image of the Olympics.

The political statement and other boycotts that became prevalent during the fascism era and the Cold War, or unsportsmanlike precedents exemplified by figure skater Tonya Harding and her lawyers, point a finger toward leaders of the Olympic Movement and participating countries. Moreover, the Olympiads are increasingly exploited to increase TV ratings, promote commercial sponsorships, and display the host country's organizational skill and hospitality. It’s hard to feel inspirational about the brand where so much cynicism is involved.

In truth, we close our eyes to the extreme pressure that many Olympians endure if they aspire to climb the podium. Aren't we all responsible for this un-Olympic environment? It is a notable drift from the wishful Olympic aspiration: "The Games have always brought people together in peace to respect universal moral principles," (stated on Olympic.org, the official website of the Olympic Movement). Who better than the IOC to restore our respect and awe?

The collective consciousness remembers that the Olympic Games stand for something more than sports. Most of the athletes do benefit from the spirit of the Games, but to television audiences, the message is implicitly nationalistic rather than “peace and friendship.” Nowadays, in this era of prevalent individualism, the ideal may even seem naïve and hollow.

Regardless of what idealists may think, Olympians and sports fans in general deserve that the Olympic Games remain more than another World Championship (and defined by more than the amount of drugs involved). The Olympics need to stay above the fray, and to be perceived as such by the general public.

Both the press and book writers have criticized officials' past handling of the control of performance enhancing drugs as well as their tolerance for excessive executive compensations and recurring corruption charges. All of which add to the image issue of which the IOC is the ultimate steward.

Like the United Nations, the IOC is an easy target for unconstructive criticism. As an international committee, the accusations of bureaucracy and sclerosis bear some credibility in people's mind. Nevertheless, the IOC's results demonstrate that perhaps we should not throw the baby out with the bath water. Not only the International Olympic Committee has more successes than blunders to brag about, but as a multinational organization, it has managed rather well in its mission to gather the youth of the world in outstanding sports competitions every four years.

The IOC is not a centralized business as Nike or Coca-Cola is, and nonetheless they have managed the Olympics' brand rather successfully. Perhaps the very reason this committee has stewarded its brand effectively is in staying away from political controversies. In a world where democracies are not yet the norm, the enlightened attributes of founding IOC member Pierre de Coubertin's mission are still young and growing. Sport, however, is the lowest common denominator on which the 124 IOC members do seem to agree.

When cyclist Jan Ullrich offers his hand to rival Lance Armstrong while crossing the finish line together in the Tour de France, the gesture benefits more than cycling and sports. Sportsmanship then becomes synonymous with moral values and humanity. It takes thirty such encouraging gestures to erase every petty mishap, unfortunately. Stewarding a grand brand has never been this challenging.