Earlier this month, UEFA sparked controversy with its chaotic back-and-forth over Russia’s return to European football.
Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, their national squad was banned from all European competition, but this September, UEFA announced their decision to allow the under-17 team to play without their national anthem, flag, or kit.
This decision was controversial, dividing football governing bodies across the globe. According to the BBC, UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin claimed the decision was made so as not to “directly discriminate against” children and instead provide a “brighter and more capable future generation.” The Ukrainian Association of Football rejected the reinstation as an action that “tolerates Russia’s aggressive policy” and refused to compete against them — a decision mirrored by England’s Football Association.
In early October, UEFA then backtracked on the reinstatement, citing failure to work out a ‘technical solution’ to the squad’s re-entry. However, the controversy surrounding Russia’s potential participation highlights the wider question that exists over the country’s return to athletic competition.
This debate affects almost all sports and competitions globally. After the invasion of
Ukraine, total bans for Russian athletes were widespread, but now policies are starting to diverge.
Some governing bodies are maintaining the total exclusion of Russian and Belarusian athletes, like the International Skating Union (ISU), which extended its ban in conjunction with “its condemnation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the strongest possible terms.” This hard-line stance reflects the attitude of some Ukrainian athletes, such as as Arsenal’s Oleksandr Zinchenko, who claims Russian athletes “shouldn’t be allowed to compete … I’m not political, I don’t understand anything about it … But this is not political, this is war.” In contrast, Wimbledon allowed tennis players to compete in the 2023 competition so long as they signed a neutrality agreement in which they stated they were not representing, receiving funding from, or expressing support for the Russian or Belarusian state.
The issue is complex. While individual athletes may not support their home government’s actions or be involved in decisions of warfare, sports bodies recognise the need to punish Russia as a state. Moreover, alleged Russian state involvement in the 2014 Olympic doping scandal suggests that sport cannot be separated from politics. Navigating this fine line is the International Olympic Committee (IOC), which released guidance that Russian athletes can compete in future Olympics, but only as individual neutral athletes, and that those who support the war cannot compete. While the IOC affirms its “full solidarity with the Ukrainian athletes and the Olympic Community of Ukraine”, they address the “complex reality” of their decision, in which “extremely complex political problems do not have easy solutions”.
It is a sensitive debate, and one in which there appears to be no clear consensus. The bottom line across most sports and competitions appears to be a total condemnation of the Russian invasion and support of Ukraine. But when it comes to the inclusion or exclusion of athletes, the nuances in the debate become more apparent. For now, Russia is largely excluded from global competition, but only time will tell how the world of sport will move forward.
“File:Welcome ceremony for the Russian Olympic Committee delegation (2014-02-05) 03.jpeg” by The Presidential Press and Information Office is licensed under CC BY 4.0.