Suspilne refuses to broadcast the Paralympics opening ceremony in protest at the admission of Russian and Belarusian athletes
The broadcaster supported the position of the national Paralympic team and refused to broadcast the opening ceremony of the XIV Winter Games. This is not only an emotional gesture — it is a signal against normalizing the aggressor on the international stage.
By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik
February 20, 2026 · 1 min read
What happened
Suspilne officially announced that it will not broadcast the opening ceremony of the XIV Winter Paralympic Games (Italy, 6–15 March). The broadcaster's statement says this decision was taken in support of the Ukrainian national Paralympic team, which is boycotting the opening in protest of the admission of Russian and Belarusian athletes.
"We consider it unacceptable to invite to the Paralympic Games representatives of the aggressor state and its satellite, which are waging a full-scale war in Europe, destroying Ukrainian cities, killing Ukrainians, among them hundreds of athletes"
— Suspilne (official statement)
Why it matters
The broadcaster's decision is more than a symbol. It highlights the conflict between Ukraine's principled position and the approach of part of the international sporting leadership. The International Paralympic Committee (IPC) confirmed the admission of Russian and Belarusian athletes under their own flags, while in the context of the Olympics the International Olympic Committee (IOC) disqualified skeleton racer Vladyslav Heraskevych for attempting to use commemorative symbolism — a fact cited by Suspilne in its statement.
Consequences for Ukrainians and the international arena
- For viewers: Suspilne will provide broadcasts of Ukrainian Paralympians' performances, but the opening ceremony will not be shown on the broadcaster's platforms.
- For the state: The Minister of Sports said that Ukrainian officials will not attend the Games in response to the IPC's decision.
- For the reputation of sport: The question of Russia's and Belarus's return to international competitions is no longer only a sporting issue — it is a debate about legitimizing states that are waging war.
Evaluative summary
This move by Suspilne is part of a strategy to defend national values and memory. It poses a question to international organizations: can sporting institutions balance the apolitical ideal of sport with the reality of political aggression? Experts and the public expect consistency — now the ball is in the court of international partners and organizers.
