Why this matters
The IPC's decision to allow the participation of six Russian and four Belarusian athletes at the 2026 Paralympic Games in Milan–Cortina under their national flags affects more than sport. It is a question of trust in international institutions, the moral responsibility of organizers, and the signal sent to victims of aggression. That is why the reaction of official Kyiv deserves the attention of anyone who follows the security and reputation of our country.
What happened
The International Paralympic Committee adopted a decision under which six athletes from Russia were allocated quota places in Paralympic skiing, cross-country skiing and snowboarding, and four Belarusian athletes received places in cross-country skiing. The decision provides for the possibility of officially raising those countries’ national symbols during the competitions.
Ukraine's reaction
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Youth and Sports published a joint statement calling such admission unacceptable and undermining trust in international sport. The Ukrainian agencies emphasize that the raising of flags and the playing of anthems of countries waging an aggressive war against Ukraine effectively legitimizes the crimes committed by their regimes.
The flags and anthems of the aggressors personify regimes that wage an aggressive war. With those flags in their hands they destroy cities. Holding them — they kill civilians. Russia has turned sport into an instrument of war against the free world, not only against Ukraine. In the Paralympic movement the Russian Federation glorifies participants in the aggressive war. They are given awards for supporting the aggression. Ukraine has already applied sanctions against Russian sports propagandists, the Paralympic Committee of Russia and its head Pavel Rozhkov
— joint statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Youth and Sports of Ukraine
Separately, Andriy Sybiha instructed Ukrainian ambassadors to hold talks with the governments of the host countries and urge them not to take part in the opening ceremony as a form of diplomatic pressure. Minister of Youth and Sports Matvii Bidnyi said the IPC decision effectively contributes to the "legalization" of the war and the crimes of the Russian Federation.
What this means and next steps
The IPC decision places the international community before a choice between the principles of athlete inclusion and the responsibility of institutions to the victims of aggression. Analysts of sports diplomacy note that organizations often try to distance sport from politics, but in conditions of open war such distance becomes an illusion.
The next steps rest with the IPC and partner countries: whether they will tighten restrictions on symbols, apply diplomatic boycotts of ceremonies, or seek compromises in the form of neutral athlete status. At the same time, Ukraine has already begun work through diplomatic channels — a pragmatic and expected step that could influence further decisions by the organizers.
Conclusion
The decision to allow participation under national flags is not only a sporting precedent, but a signal about how international institutions will balance the apolitical nature of sport with responsibility under international law and to victims of aggression. Whether declarations will turn into concrete actions is a question for the IPC and its partners. Ukraine has already made its choice: to defend the memory and rights of the victims using diplomacy and sanctions.
