When Alexey Bychenok arrived at the 2022 Beijing Winter Paralympics under the RPC banner, his goal was clear. He dreamed of a gold medal after winning a silver medal at the 2014 Winter Paralympics. But even then, that dream already felt uncertain. In late February 2022, the IOC had urged international sports bodies to exclude Russian and Belarusian athletes from global competitions.

But on 2 March 2022, the International Paralympic Committee officially announced that, “The RPC and NPC Belarus will participate as neutrals at the Beijing 2022 Paralympic Winter Games. They will compete under the Paralympic flag and not be included in the medal table.” For Bychenok, that decision brought hope back.

He followed his routine without change. Inside the athletes’ village. Training sessions, recovery work, and final race preparations continued like any other Games. “We arrived in China, slept for four hours, and rushed to training at the stadium,” he said. But that sense of normal did not last long.

Less than 24 hours later, everything changed. On 3 March 2022, the IPC reversed its decision and announced it would “decline athlete entries” from Russia and Belarus. This move came after several countries and athletes threatened to withdraw, warning that their participation would make it impossible for the Games to go ahead.

For Bychenok, the moment felt like everything collapsed at once.”There was a feeling that we, like outcasts, were thrown out of the Olympic village. They brought buses and made a corridor so we would not go anywhere, although it was five in the morning. Where would you even go?” But he was not alone in that experience. Around 83 Paralympic athletes were affected by the decision.

Bychenok saw Irina Gromova, senior coach of Russia’s cross-country skiing and biathlon team, who was barely holding herself together. “I was frightened,” he said. “She had such an expression on her face, as if one of her relatives had died… She wanted to cry, but held herself back so it would not affect us.”

And just like that, Russian athletes had spent years in the wilderness of international sport. For a long time, there was no clear direction, only uncertainty, and competitions went on without their flag or anthem.

Then, in April 2026, World Aquatics became the first Olympic Sport to lift restrictions on Russian and Belarusian athletes. In its statement, it said: “Senior athletes with Belarusian or Russian sport nationality will be permitted to compete in World Aquatics events in the same way as their counterparts representing other sport nationalities, with their respective uniforms, flags and anthems.”

For many athletes, it felt like a long road was finally opening up again, even though most other sports are still holding their earlier rules in place.

But the decision was not accepted everywhere. Ukraine, along with several European sports officials, strongly opposed the move. Soon after, European Aquatics put forward its own position, asking World Aquatics to delay the change until 1 September 2026.

In its request, it stated that the new bylaw, “which permits the return of these athletes to full participation across all aquatic disciplines, not be enacted by European Aquatics until 1st September 2026. Until that date, athletes and teams from Russia and Belarus who have been approved under existing eligibility criteria will remain able to compete in European Aquatics competitions exclusively under the status of Individual Neutral Athletes (AIN).”

And with it, one question came:  Will this decision hold, or will it be reversed again, like it was in 2022?

Will World Aquatics reverse its decision?

In my view, that does not look very likely. Once a federation makes a formal decision, it usually does not change it quickly unless there is strong pressure over time.

If I look at past examples, sports decisions like this rarely flip back and forth without a big reason behind it.

In the case of South Africa, the country was banned from the Olympics in 1964 due to its apartheid policies, officially expelled from the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in 1970, and exiled from the Olympic movement for more than two decades. Even when political reforms began in the early 1990s, deep skepticism remained over whether institutional change was genuine; many international observers and anti-apartheid activists argued that the oppressive system had not been fundamentally dismantled.

Despite those intense internal debates, the IOC readmitted South Africa in 1991, clearing the way for its historic return to competition at the 1992 Summer Games in Barcelona. Ultimately, even amid a deeply fractured political landscape, the decision to reintegrate the country moved firmly in one direction without reversing course.

I feel a similar pattern could apply here, too. Interestingly, allowing Russian athletes to return under their national flag has already been tested in limited form in some events. For example, at the 2026 Winter Paralympics, Russian and Belarusian athletes were allowed entry through invitations in selected disciplines. Around six Russian and four Belarusian athletes competed in sports like para alpine skiing, cross-country skiing, and snowboarding.

Even at that time, Ukraine strongly condemned the decision and refused to attend official Paralympic events. “We will not be present at the opening ceremony. We will not take part in any other official Paralympic events,” Matvii Bidnyi, Ukraine’s Minister of Youth and Sports, said on social media.

Despite the criticism, the athletes still competed. In terms of results, they finished with a total of 12 medals (8 gold, 1 silver, and 3 bronze), placing them 3rd in the overall medal table.

So, yes, World Aquatics is unlikely to undo its decision quickly, but it is not completely fixed either. If conditions change, pressure could build again.

One clear factor would be if a large number of countries refuse to host events or threaten to withdraw.

Right now, we already see different groups taking different stances. Some Nordic countries, like Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland, have threatened or supported boycotts of hosting events.

In Central and Eastern Europe, countries such as Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Czech Republic, and Ukraine have strongly opposed Russian representation in sport. The UK government has also supported maintaining pressure in international sport discussions, and European officials have raised concerns about the timing and impact of such decisions.

Another possible reason could be pressure from the IOC.

The IOC oversees the Olympic Games (both Summer and Winter) and sets the overall rules for participation. Because of that structure, IOC decisions or guidance often influence how individual sports federations act, even if they make their own rules.

However, in this case, there was no immediate response from the International Olympic Committee when asked for comment on World Aquatics’ decision.

At the same time, the IOC itself has been clear in its general guidelines, saying: “It is a fundamental principle that sport is neutral and must be separate from political, religious or any other type of interference. Specifically, the focus for the field of play and related ceremonies must be on celebrating athletes’ performance, and showcasing sport and its values.”

World Aquatics also has the same philosophy. Its president, Husain Al-Musallam, has openly said that the aim is to keep sport as a space where athletes can still compete together despite global tensions. “We are determined to ensure that pools and open water remain places where athletes from all nations can come together in peaceful competition,” he added.

From that point of view, the IOC sees sport as closer to its ideal when politics does not directly visibly shape participation rules.

Even if things change again, I do not think it automatically leads to a full removal of Russian athletes from competition. In many recent cases, athletes still compete, but not under their national flag. Instead, they participate under a neutral status, which has become a middle path in a lot of international sports decisions.

The chain of events that led to Russia’s sporting exclusion

Russia’s exclusion from international sport happened in stages, starting with doping allegations and later expanding due to the war in Ukraine and governance issues in sport.

1. Doping scandal

It all started in December 2014, when a German ARD documentary exposed what it described as widespread doping in Russian athletics. It claimed that 99%  Russian athletes were involved in performance-enhancing drug use. The programme also alleged that officials were helping athletes cover up failed drug tests in exchange for payments.

Soon after, a major whistleblower stepped forward. Grigory Rodchenkov, former head of Russia’s national anti-doping laboratory, revealed details to international investigators. He described a coordinated system involving protected athletes, state support, and the manipulation of urine samples inside the laboratory to avoid detection.

In 2015, the World Anti-Doping Agency launched an independent investigation led by Professor Richard McLaren. His team examined laboratory records from Moscow, athlete testing data, and whistleblower testimonies. This marked the beginning of a formal global probe into Russian sport. The McLaren Report confirmed the findings in July 2016. It concluded that a state-linked doping system had operated over several years.

According to the report, a hidden process secretly swapped samples, government bodies took part, and it implicated more than 1,000 athletes across different sports, including Paralympic athletes.

Following this, the IPC took action and banned Russia from the 2016 Rio Paralympic Games. Then, in 2019, the WADA issued another major decision, banning Russia from major international competitions for four years due to continued issues with data manipulation and non-compliance.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport later reduced this to two years. Even after the reduction, restrictions stayed in place, including no flag, no anthem, and only neutral participation for cleared athletes.

2. Second wave of restrictions

In February 2022, the IOC urged international sports federations to remove Russian and Belarusian athletes and officials from global competitions.

The IOC pointed to the Olympic Truce, a long-standing principle that expects countries to avoid conflict during the Olympic period. It said the invasion went against this idea and the values set out in the Olympic Charter.

Another concern was safety and event security. Several federations warned about possible security risks if Russian teams returned. They also said it could raise tension among athletes and create a more strained environment.

3. Suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee

In October 2023, the IOC suspended the Russian Olympic Committee after it incorporated sports organisations from occupied Ukrainian territories.

Those regions included:

• Donetsk
• Luhansk
• Kherson
• Zaporizhzhia

The IOC said this violated the Olympic Charter because it effectively extended recognition to regions not internationally recognised as part of Russia.

IOC spokesperson Mark Adams stated that the ROC: “The Russian Olympic Committee is no longer entitled to operate as a National Olympic Committee, as defined in the Olympic Charter, and cannot receive any funding from the Olympic movement.”

Impact of the 2022 ban on Russian athletes and competition

Before 2022, Russian athletes were among the most consistent performers across several Olympic sports.

• Figure skating: Russia dominated the sport, especially in women’s events, with athletes like Kamila Valieva, Anna Shcherbakova, and Alexandra Trusova at major events.
• Cross-country skiing: Alexander Bolshunov led Russia to 9 Olympic medals
• Biathlon: Russia regularly stayed competitive in World Cup circuits and Olympic relay events.
• Swimming: Russia produced Olympic-level swimmers like Evgeny Rylov, who won gold in the backstroke events at Tokyo 2020.

Even at the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing, Russia competed under the ROC banner. Despite ongoing restrictions, they still finished 9th in the medal table with 32 medals. But after 2022, everything shifted.

Russian athletes faced broad restrictions that limited their participation in international sport. In figure skating, the ISU excluded them from major events, cutting off ranking opportunities and top-level competition. Then, in athletics, many were absent from Diamond League meetings, which are key for world rankings. In gymnastics and swimming, younger athletes lost out on international experience during key development years.

Beyond competition, the effects went further:

• Sponsorship and funding became harder without global visibility
• Some athletes reported lower motivation due to a lack of an international stage
• Training cycles changed, since there was no clear pathway to major global events
• Domestic competitions became the main focus, but they did not fully replace international exposure

Overall, the change didn’t just affect results; it also changed the career paths and development cycles of many athletes.

For now, WA has fully lifted its ban, but most other international federations have not followed the same approach. World Athletics still keeps its restrictions in place. In several Olympic sports, federations allow athletes to compete only under neutral status, while some events still exclude them completely. Even so, the move by World Aquatics has raised questions about whether other federations could slowly reconsider their stance in the coming period.