Israel’s record Olympics: How systematic planning made seven medals normal - opinion

The Paris Olympic Games concluded with a record achievement for the Israeli delegation, bringing home seven medals. For several weeks, each report of another victory had filled Israelis with a sense of collective pride. Judoka Raz Hershko’s impressive ippon over her Turkish opponent in just 10 seconds felt like a fitting Zionist response to Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan. For a moment, it felt like just another normal country uniting behind its incredible athletes.

Israel’s amazing achievement was, however, not exceptional at all, even though it certainly felt that way. It was a normal achievement by all standards, and that’s what’s truly amazing.

In 1992, judo champion Yael Arad brought home the first-ever medal after a 40-year wait since Israel’s Olympic debut at the Helsinki Games of 1952. Twelve years ago, she joined the Olympic Committee of Israel, becoming part of the process of bringing Israel to the international level of Olympic sport. Arad brought her insights from the business world and helped implement effective metrics and financial planning. Israel understood that to improve its Olympic achievements it needed to consider its size and relative strength. To that end, five sports were chosen to receive excess funding: athletics, gymnastics, swimming, sailing, and, of course, judo.

The Olympic Committee of Israel understood that the state budget alone couldn’t provide for the professional development needed to compete with leading teams, so partnerships were developed with 11 businesses, including Bank Hapoalim, Arkia, and Shufersal. 

A scientific-medical support system – employing 110 people – was developed to provide athletes full support in nutrition, medicine, therapy, and data analysis. It was also decided to offer significant financial rewards to winning athletes: NIS500,000 for a bronze medal, NIS750,000 for a silver, and NIS 1 million for a gold – all tax-free. This has positioned Israel as a world leader in rewarding its athletes.

However, pouring money into the Olympic effort isn’t the only solution. Singapore, for example, tops the list of rewarding countries with a grant of NIS 2.7 million for gold medalists but had to settle for a single bronze medal in Paris. The real difference lies in a combination of professional leadership, long-term planning ability, early investment in talents, significant development budgets, and a population large enough to supply the best athletes.

So, where does Israel stand relative to the rest of the world? Is our achievement truly outstanding, or is it simply normal?

An analysis of the 88 countries that won 1,026 medals in Paris shows a positive correlation between GDP per capita and achieving Olympic success. After all, a country with more resources can allocate more funds to development.

Looking at the Middle East, it’s clear that Israel has performed impressively compared to Arab countries (that achieved 0.75 medals per million residents). In contrast, countries such as Egypt, Jordan, Iran, and Turkey ended up with results that don’t reflect their population, size, or economy. And there was great disappointment among countries the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, for example, whose athletes went home empty-handed this year. The exception was Bahrain, winning four medals – an impressive achievement given the kingdom’s small size.

But if we zoom out, it’s evident that Israel’s achievement in Paris was statistically normal and reflected a result that matches its population, size, and resources. When Israel won a silver and a bronze medal in 1992, it had only half its current population (5.1 million), and its GDP per capita was significantly lower. Those medals were a huge achievement. Seven medals for Israel 2024 were what is now expected.

However, looking at other countries with similar population sizes, it’s clear there’s still room for improvement. Hungary, for example, won 19 medals (1.9 medals per million), Sweden won 11 (1.04 medals per million), and Croatia, like Israel, garnered seven medals – but with about a third of our population. What’s the difference between us and them? One difference is that these countries have been hovering around 10 million residents for several decades and have established a sports tradition with impressive systems, while Israel, 30 years ago, was half its current size.

The core issue

And here’s exactly where our problem lies. Even though we are already a country with a significant and relatively wealthy population, we still look in the mirror and see a small and young country, David vs Goliath. But Israel is no longer there. Our impressive achievements in the Olympics didn’t happen just because of the Zionist spirit and our heroes and heroines but, mainly, because a well-oiled system was built behind them, understanding their relative strength and the necessary resources that should be at their disposal, with long-term planning and quality execution.

Small and weak countries rely on miracles and heroes. Strong and growing countries rely on experience and stable systems. 

While it was exciting to celebrate each medal, we must understand that our wins are not a unique spectacle but instead quite normal. And normal is wonderful.

The writer is an expert in Israel-US relations, the Middle East, and world Jewry, and is a research fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School Middle East Initiative.