If Vladimir Putin is surprised by the breadth and depth of the economic sanctions imposed on Russia by the West, then that is nothing to his sense of shock at how world sport has functioned as one in swiftly banning Russia and removing events from the country.

"How could they?" Putin has probably muttered to some Kremlin apparatchik. "I thought they were my friends."

It is easy to understand why Putin would believe he occupied a special place in the hearts of world sport’s administrators. 

It was only a few years ago that he was clinking champagne glasses with International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Thomas Bach following what was then considered a highly-successful Winter Olympic Games in Sochi.

It was less than four years ago when Putin had enjoyed a kickabout in the Kremlin with FIFA President Gianni Infantino during the 2018 World Cup, a tournament such a hit that the BBC called Russia "perfect hosts" and claimed it proved that people had "misjudged" the country, despite the Kremlin earlier in the year having allegedly ordered the poisoning of former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, with nerve agent Novichok, in English city Salisbury.

The blizzard of press releases from world sports organisations and International Federations over the past few days stripping Putin of honorary positions or special awards demonstrated quite just how in thrall they were all to a man for who sport is just another branch of Russian foreign policy.

Few have been under Putin’s spell quite as much as Bach and Infantino. 

One of the abiding memories in the minutes after Bach's election as IOC President in Buenos Aires in 2013 was the sight of Dmitry Chernyshenko, then President and chief executive of Sochi 2014, rushing through the lobby in an agitated state trying to reach the German because he had Putin on the telephone, who wanted to be the first world leader to congratulate him. 

Such attention to detail by Putin probably goes a long way to explaining why Bach and Infantino have for several years always seemed to make allowances for Russia's misdemeanours. 

The watered-down sanctions imposed on Russia following discovery of its state-sponsored doping programme, and the subsequent attempted cover-up of the evidence, which allowed the country to compete at the 2018 and 2022 Winter Olympic in Pyeongchang and Beijing, respectively, along with the re-arranged Summer Games in Tokyo last year, were more a rebranding exercise than a proper attempt at punishing them.

As New York Times writer Tariq Panja tweeted earlier this week, "Russia must be the most 'banned but not really banned' country in sports history. Can’t think of anyone that’s been sanctioned as many times as they have and it not really being a ban when it matters."

It could be argued that this contributed to Putin’s misguided belief that he could more or less get away with what he wanted without properly being held to account, fuelling confidence that if he were to invade Ukraine then he would not suffer any severe action that would have meaningful repercussions.

It raises the interesting question of whether would Bach have adopted this tough new approach to Russia if he knew he did not have a two-year cushion before the IOC organise another event? 

Judging by past form, it seems inconceivable to think that he would have called for Russia to be banned from the Winter Olympics if this had happened five days before Beijing 2022 and not five days after, especially as China are among Moscow’s closest allies.

Even Bach realised he could no longer continue defending a country that have now broken the Olympic Truce three times in 14 years having been involved in a short war with Georgia on the eve of Beijing 2008 after entering the the Russian-backed self-proclaimed republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and then annexed Crimea shortly after the end of the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi.

Those who know Bach best, claim that now he is in his last term as IOC President, he is becoming increasingly aware of his legacy. 

He is not immune to what people broadcast, write and say about him. 

By acting hard now, at minimal cost or inconvenience to the IOC, Bach sees this as an opportunity to try to erase some of the stains on his reputation caused by his closeness in the past to Putin.

It is worth noting that the IOC has so far not suspended the Russian Olympic Committee or National Olympic Committee of the Republic of Belarus, surely the first thing they should have done before urging International Federations to prevent athletes from those countries from competing?

Russia has, predictably, hit back at the unprecedented response from the Olympic Movement, criticising the "politicisation" of sport. 

Chernyshenko, now Deputy Prime Minister of Russia, was particularly scatching about the decision to strip him and Putin of the Olympic Orders awarded to them by the IOC.

Chernyshenko claimed the "impulsive posturing behind their revocation simply aligns the Olympics to political ends, undermining the spirit of the Games" and that "the IOC has opened a Pandora’s box to be exploited by historical revisionists, and all sport should be concerned by its eager willingness to do so".

It may be an unpopular opinion, but I agree with Chernyshenko. 

The Olympic Order, first established in 1975 to mark particularly distinguished contributions to the Olympic Movement, has been awarded by the IOC to plenty of odious individuals who have been allowed to keep it even when history has found them guilty of less than Olympic ideals.

In 1985, for example, it was awarded to Nicolae Ceaușescu, the former dictator of Romania known as the "Butcher of Bucharest", who, shortly before he was overthrown in 1989, ordered the massacre of thousands of his citizens.

As was pointed out to me on Twitter, when Ceaușescu was awarded the Olympic Order "he still had a positive image" having the previous year defied the Soviet Union-led boycott of Los Angeles 1984. 

But then that is an argument that could be extended to Putin, awarded the Olympic Order in 2001 after Moscow had hosted a landmark IOC Session which saw Beijing awarded the 2008 Olympic and Paralympic Games and Jacques Rogge replace Juan Antonio Samaranch as President.

Other recipients allowed to keep their Olympic Order include Erich Honecker, the former leader of East Germany and accused of human rights abuses, and Robert Mugabe, the ex-President of Zimbabwe accused of killing 20,000 of his own people.

Todor Zhivkov, who led Bulgaria for 25 years until 1989 and was a devoted follower of the Soviet Union, and Islam Karimov, ruler of a repressive authoritarian regime in Uzbekistan where political opponents were assassinated, human rights were repressed, and dissent was prohibited, are other notable names on the list of those awarded the Olympic Order who have not had their honours stripped.

Away from brutal dictators, what about Brazil’s former IOC member Carlos Nuzman awarded the Olympic Order twice, once in 1992 and again after he oversaw Rio 2016, widely considered the worst Games in modern history?

Nuzman was subsequently sentenced to 30 years in prison after being found guilty of a number of crimes linked to Rio 2016, including corruption and money laundering, a decision he is currently appealing against. 

When Nuzman was arrested in Rio de Janeiro in 2017, among the items discovered in his house was a Russian passport he had allegedly secured from Putin in exchange for his vote for Sochi 2014. 

If he was hoping he could use it to flee from justice, then he is likely to be extremely disappointed in the current climate.