10 July 2026 - 10:00am
The supposedly apolitical and neutral arena of sport has never truly been either. From the infamous 1956 Soviet–Hungarian water polo match — a bloody microcosm of the conflict that had been raging beyond the pool — to Cold War rivalries, elite sport has long served as a stage for competition between nations as much as individuals.
Now the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has decided to lift its suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee, paving the way for Russian and Belarusian athletes to compete at the 2028 Los Angeles Games. It was, the organisation stressed, a technical decision since the “ROC no longer includes as its members any regional sports organisations in territories falling under the jurisdiction of the National Olympic Committee of Ukraine”.
But why, really, did the IOC make the decision? The verdict appears less a reflection of Russia’s conduct in Ukraine than a consequence of debates surrounding Israel. Russian Sport Minister Mikhail Degtyarev bragged of his country’s “extensive diplomatic work to reinstate our athletes”, a campaign which relied on the argument that it was hypocritical to exclude Russia while allowing Israel to compete at a time of conflict. The IOC itself noted that “an athlete’s participation in international competition should not be limited by the involvement of their government in a war.”
Expect other sports to shift position now. In April, World Aquatics permitted Russian and Belarusian athletes to compete under national flags, followed by World Boxing allowing them as neutrals. The IOC is letting international federations integrate Russia into global tournaments and world championships at their own discretion, with Degtyarev vowing that Moscow will “take advantage of this” and ensure “all sports reinstate Russian national teams”. Fifa is already reviewing Russia’s exclusion from the World Cup. While Uefa and World Athletics are upholding their bans, such a hardline position may be difficult to maintain now that the momentum has swung behind permitting Moscow.
This is a win for the Kremlin. For all he has personally done to degrade it, Vladimir Putin cares deeply about his country’s prestige on the global stage. Russia’s readmittance into elite sport offers him the spectacle of international legitimacy, reinforces the message that Moscow remains an indispensable power and sparks nationalistic feeling that he can appropriate. The IOC’s decision removes an incentive for him to end the war to secure Russia’s return to diplomatic normality.
Any triumph for Russia in this regard constitutes a loss for Ukraine. Kyiv will interpret this as further evidence of waning international concern, especially after one of its athletes was disqualified for a helmet commemorating slain sportsmen. The chorus of Western disapproval at Russia and Belarus being at this year’s Paralympics amounted to a symbolic boycott of the opening and closing ceremonies, while the competition continued as usual.
While the IOC may be congratulating itself on not inviting Russian state officials, that gesture is cosmetic. The Kremlin does not need to dispatch ministers when its most loyal envoys will simply arrive in tracksuits. With vetting of athletes’ views on the war now abandoned, Moscow is free to send full-throated supporters of the conflict and potentially even its veterans to the Olympics. Russia can thereby needle Kyiv, no doubt sparking some especially bitter heats, while selling a propaganda narrative of Russians conquering on both Ukrainian and American soil.
Putin will rejoice that parts of the international community have apparently yielded to a Kremlin lobbying campaign. The President — and state media — will draw parallels with the wider war, noting that Moscow’s persistence and refusal to concede ultimately brought success. Los Angeles 2028 may be a while off, but Russia has scored the first victory.
