Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

IOC: Russia will not return to the 2026 Olympics as a team, even if the war ends — what this means for Ukraine

Kirsty Coventry told Corriere della Sera that for Italy 2026 Russians may compete only under a neutral status and on an individual basis. We explain why this decision matters for security, the reputation of sport, and international pressure on the Kremlin.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

January 2, 2026 · 2 min read

IOC: Russia will not return to the 2026 Olympics as a team, even if the war ends — what this means for Ukraine

In high-level diplomacy, clear boundaries matter more than loud statements

The President of the International Olympic Committee, Kirsty Coventry, said in an interview with Corriere della Sera that Russia will not take part in the 2026 Winter Olympic Games as a national team, even if the conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine ends before the Games begin. This decision fixes the IOC's current policy and sets clear conditions for individual athletes.

"At this stage, nothing will change the decision already taken: neutral athletes on an individual basis"

— Kirsty Coventry, President of the IOC (Corriere della Sera)

What exactly has been decided and what the rules are

The IOC retains a format for participation by Russian and Belarusian athletes in a neutral status: no flag, anthem or national symbols; only individual entries are allowed, national teams remain banned. Participation depends on several criteria:

  • meeting the competition's qualification requirements;
  • absence of public support for the war against Ukraine;
  • no ties to military or security forces.

Contexts: diplomacy, sport and security

In November the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution on a truce during the 2026 Olympics — but the IOC emphasizes that policy on athlete status and admission is based not only on declarations but also on internal control and verification criteria. Coventry also noted that "the channel is open" with the Olympic Committees of Russia and Israel, indicating a desire to maintain communication even in times of crisis.

"The channel is open with the Olympic Committees of Russia and Israel"

— Kirsty Coventry, President of the IOC (Corriere della Sera)

Italy, as the host country, publicly called for an "Olympic truce," and Ukraine's Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed support for this initiative. But it is important to understand: for Ukraine this issue is not only about symbolism — it concerns security, the truth about war crimes, and pressure on the aggressor country through international institutions.

Why this matters to the reader

The IOC decision produces a dual effect: it preserves the possibility of an individual sporting fate for athletes who do not support the war, while at the same time serving as an instrument of international pressure on the Kremlin. For Ukraine, this means that questions of Russia's reputation and accountability remain in the focus of the global community — not only as an emotional response, but as part of a systematic policy of containment.

What next?

The Winter Games will take place 6–22 February 2026 in Italy. The next steps will depend on the verification mechanisms the IOC applies, and on the ability of international institutions to uphold standards of transparency and independence of adjudication. Analysts point out: without effective verification the requirement of no ties to military structures will remain a declaration rather than a barrier.

Summary: the IOC decision sets clear boundaries for the return of Russian athletes to international sport — and these boundaries hold not only sporting logic, but also diplomatic and security context. Will this be enough to change the Kremlin's behavior and protect international institutions from political pressure? The answer will depend on the subsequent actions of the international community and on the real readiness to verify compliance with the conditions.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026