Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

Foreign Ministry urges boycott of the Mendeleev Prize — a diplomatic challenge for UNESCO

Kyiv is calling for the cancellation of a competition funded by the Russian government. This is not only a question of morality — it concerns the legitimacy of international institutions and the security of science.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

February 15, 2026 · 2 min read

Foreign Ministry urges boycott of the Mendeleev Prize — a diplomatic challenge for UNESCO
Премія Менделєєва (Фото: ЮНЕСКО)

What happened

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine has called on UNESCO member states, the scientific community and the organization's secretariat to boycott the D. I. Mendeleev Prize in Fundamental Sciences, which is funded by the Russian government. The ministry demands that the competition be cancelled and has asked the current jury to resign; it also urged the new Director‑General of UNESCO not to appoint a new jury.

Official rationale

The MFA's statement emphasizes that UNESCO announced the competition for this prize on February 13, and that the involvement of the aggressor state in funding the award creates a risk of instrumentalizing science for political PR. Ukrainian diplomats stress: science should serve peace and humanism, not the justification of atrocities.

"The MFA calls on the international scientific community, UNESCO member states and all stakeholders to boycott the mentioned prize, which is funded by the aggressor state... We believe it should be cancelled, and the competition jury should resign."

— Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine

Context and facts

The MFA's argument is based not only on symbolism. Since the start of the full‑scale invasion, thousands of educational and scientific institutions in Ukraine have suffered: according to official counts, at least 4,456 educational institutions and 1,443 research institutes have been damaged or destroyed. The ministry emphasizes that the Kremlin systematically violates UN norms and UNESCO procedures, and that funding the award could serve as an element of "whitewashing" the aggressor's image.

This appeal fits into a broader context: on January 30 in Belgium a screening of the film "Carnets de Russie" was cancelled as part of a reaction to propaganda initiatives associated with the Russian Federation.

What this means for UNESCO and the international community

The demand to cancel the competition is a test for international institutions. If UNESCO and member states ignore the signal, the risk increases of further delegitimizing the organization's procedures in the eyes of part of the scientific world and countries suffering from aggression. Conversely, acceding to Ukraine's demand would strengthen the organization's position as a neutral platform for science and culture.

"True science must serve peace, development and humanism, and not be used as an instrument of propaganda by an aggressor state."

— Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine

Brief conclusion

This is not only a moral appeal: it is a strategic move aimed at protecting the reputation of international institutions and preserving the autonomy of the scientific community. The key question now is whether Ukraine's partners will strengthen their statements and whether these declarations will be turned into practical decisions at UNESCO.

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