FIE expands the return of Russians and Belarusians: decision on neutral teams has grown into the return of national symbols
The decision of the International Fencing Federation, FIE, to once again allow Russian and Belarusian fencers to compete in team competitions has opened a new phase in the debate on the limits of neutrality in international sport. According to the FIE information letter of May 7, 2025, neutral teams composed of athletes to whom the Executive Committee had granted the status of individual neutral athletes were able to compete in senior team competitions starting with the 2025 European Championships. At the time, FIE stated that such teams would compete under the federation’s flag, without the national symbols of Russia and Belarus. But according to FIE’s latest announcement of June 2, 2026, that framework has been further expanded: from the 2026 Senior World Championships in Hong Kong, athletes and officials with Russian and Belarusian passports should once again compete under national acronyms, equipment, flags and anthems. As a result, the debate, which began as a question of neutral status, has grown into a much broader dispute over the return of the state symbols of countries linked to the war in Ukraine.
What FIE first decided about neutral teams
In a letter to national federations from May 2025, FIE announced that the Executive Committee had adopted the decision at an online meeting held on April 24 of the same year. The document states that neutral teams may be formed only from athletes to whom FIE had previously approved AIN status, that is, the status of an individual neutral athlete. The first competition to which that decision applied was the 2025 European Senior Championships in Genoa, held from June 14 to 19, 2025, which was also reported by Ukrainian media citing FIE’s announcement. This gave Russian and Belarusian athletes the opportunity to compete not only in individual disciplines but also in the team format, which has a different symbolic and sporting effect because the result is achieved collectively, although under the label of neutrality. It was precisely this shift that provoked the most criticism because opponents of the decision believe that a team performance, even without a flag, in practice more easily takes on the features of national representation.
According to FIE, neutral status was intended to enable the participation of athletes who do not compete under state symbols and who accept the conditions related to the federation’s rules, Olympic principles and anti-doping obligations. In a public statement from July 2025, the federation claimed that it was guided by the principles of the Olympic Charter, fair participation and the protection of athletes from the consequences of circumstances over which individuals have no influence. In that statement, FIE said that neutral athletes compete under the AIN designation, with the FIE flag and anthem, and that the Executive Committee decides on the status after reviewing applications. Critics, however, warn that neutrality in sport is not only a formal question of markings on a jersey, but also of checking public positions, institutional links and possible connections with structures that support the war. For that reason, the decision on team appearances was not perceived as a technical amendment to the regulations, but as a politically sensitive turning point.
From neutral status to the abolition of protective measures
Additional significance is given to the case by FIE’s decision announced on June 2, 2026, one day before the date to which this text refers. FIE then announced that, starting with the 2026 Senior World Championships in Hong Kong from July 22 to 30, all protective measures would be lifted and that athletes and officials with Russian and Belarusian passports would be able to participate in all individual and team competitions under their national acronyms, uniforms, flags and anthems. The federation explained that the decision was based on the principles of non-discrimination, equal treatment and the universality of sport, as well as on the provisions of its own statutes. In the same announcement, FIE also referred to the decisions of the Olympic Summit from December 2025, which initially related to younger athletes, and to the decision of the International Olympic Committee from May 2026 on Belarusian athletes. Nevertheless, FIE’s announcement is broader than the earlier neutral model because it no longer stops at participation under a neutral designation.
This new step is important because it changes the very basis of the previous debate. In 2025, the disputed issue was whether a team of Russian or Belarusian athletes could truly be neutral if it competed together and if it was composed of athletes from the same country. In 2026, FIE opened the question of the full return of national symbols in senior fencing, which critics see as an even stronger normalization of the return of Russia and Belarus to the international sports system. Unlike some international federations that have retained stricter bans or individual neutral status, FIE has now placed itself among the federations that are gradually abandoning the restrictions introduced after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. According to available information, the consequences of such a decision for individual national federations, potential boycotts and the organization of competitions are still not fully clear.
Neutrality checks have become one of the central disputed issues
The greatest dissatisfaction among opponents of FIE’s policy was caused by the change in the way neutrality is checked. In the information letter of July 7, 2025, FIE described the procedure used up to that point: an eligibility review group, composed of members of the Executive Committee, collected information about candidates, after which it was reviewed by a cybersecurity company and then by an independent lawyer who prepared a report. According to the same document, the Executive Committee concluded that such a procedure was complex, burdensome and expensive, so it decided to simplify the procedure. The new model envisaged that candidates submit a signed application and a sworn declaration that they support the peace mission of the Olympic movement, that they have not publicly supported the war, that they have not participated in pro-war events and that they will not display symbols of support for the war. FIE also stated that a false or misleading declaration may lead to the withdrawal of status and disciplinary measures.
For some athletes and sports organizations, such a model was insufficient because it relied on candidates’ declarations instead of comprehensive independent checks. In July 2025, Global Athlete published an open letter from more than 440 international fencers from 40 countries, of whom 338 were active athletes and 208 agreed to the public publication of their names. The signatories requested that FIE restore thorough checks of candidates for neutral status and asserted that a self-signed declaration does not provide enough guarantees that competitions will not be used against the values of neutrality and non-violence. The letter particularly emphasized that team appearances by Russian and Belarusian athletes further blur the line between neutrality and national affiliation. Such a reaction showed that the dispute is not taking place only between federations and states, but also within the sports community itself.
Usmanov’s role and the question of influence in FIE
The doubts of part of the public were further intensified by the position of Alisher Usmanov, the Russian-Uzbek billionaire and long-time head of international fencing. According to reports from Uzbekistan and sports media, Usmanov was re-elected president at the FIE congress in Tashkent on November 30, 2024, defeating Swedish candidate Otto Drakenberg by 120 votes to 26. Usmanov led FIE from 2008 to 2022, when he suspended the performance of his duties after sanctions were introduced in connection with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. After his re-election in 2024, he again withdrew from the operational exercise of presidential powers. According to FIE’s urgent letter of December 4, 2024, the Executive Committee accepted his decision on the voluntary suspension of powers and appointed Emmanuel Katsiadakis as interim president.
FIE documents show that Katsiadakis later resigned, and the information letter of May 1, 2025, states that the Executive Committee appointed Abdelmoneim ElHusseiny of Egypt as interim president. This formally transferred the operational management of the federation to interim officials, but Usmanov’s election still remains a politically sensitive fact. Opponents of FIE’s policy claim that this sequence shows a continuity of influence that goes beyond the formal holding of office. The federation, on the other hand, emphasizes in its documents the statutory procedure, the decisions of the Executive Committee and the need for the institution to function without disruption. Precisely for that reason, the issue of FIE governance has become almost as important as the issue of the sporting participation of Russian and Belarusian competitors.
Sanctions and the broader context of the war in Ukraine
Usmanov has remained subject to international sanctions, which further burdens the perception of FIE’s decisions. According to the official British sanctions list, the United Kingdom lists him as a person covered by the Russia sanctions regime, with the explanation that there are reasonable grounds to suspect a connection with persons involved in the destabilization of Ukraine and the undermining of its territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence. The Court of Justice of the European Union, in a case published on the EUR-Lex portal, considered Usmanov’s actions against the Council of the European Union in the context of asset-freezing measures and restrictive measures connected with the war. Usmanov disputed the allegations on which the sanctions are based, and the proceedings before European courts show how contested the legal framework surrounding Russian businesspeople still is. In sporting terms, the fact that a person under sanctions was re-elected to head an Olympic federation remains a source of criticism and questions about governance independence.
The debate on Russian and Belarusian athletes cannot be separated from the war in Ukraine. According to reports by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine, civilian casualties continue to rise, and in April 2026 at least 238 civilians were killed and 1404 injured. The UN mission stated that from the beginning of 2026 to the end of April at least 815 civilians killed and 4174 injured had been confirmed, with a warning that the actual figures are probably higher. This context explains why Ukrainian athletes, part of the international competitors and some federations do not view decisions on the return of Russian and Belarusian representatives only through a sporting lens. For them, flags, anthems and team appearances are part of the broader question of international pressure on states linked to aggression.
FIE invokes the universality of sport, critics invoke institutional responsibility
In its announcements, FIE emphasizes that athletes should not bear the consequences of government decisions, especially if they meet the conditions set by the international federation. Such an approach rests on the broader argument of part of the Olympic movement that international sport should remain open to individuals who do not support the war and who accept the rules of neutrality. For the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympic Games, the International Olympic Committee has retained the model of individual neutral athletes for qualified Russian and Belarusian competitors, under conditions that exclude athletes who actively support the war or are connected with military and security structures. At the same time, the decisions of the Olympic system regarding younger athletes and Belarus showed that the regime of restrictions is gradually changing and that international federations have room for their own interpretations. FIE has used that room much more broadly than the initial model of neutral individuals.
Critics of the decision argue that institutional responsibility of sports federations must not be ignored under the concept of non-discrimination. According to the open letter from international fencers, strict criteria are not directed against individuals because of their passports, but against the risk that competitions will turn into a space for the symbolic rehabilitation of states that continue the war. They particularly warn of the possibility that athletes connected with military structures or the state propaganda system could compete under neutral or national designations, thereby calling into question the credibility of the entire procedure. That objection becomes even more important after FIE’s announcement of the return of flags and anthems at senior competitions. If the decision is implemented according to the announced schedule, the World Championships in Hong Kong in 2026 could become the first major fencing competition after the full abolition of these restrictions.
Possible consequences for competitions and relations among federations
The practical consequences of FIE’s policy will not be limited only to the list of participants. Decisions on visas, the organization of competitions, possible boycotts and encounters between athletes from Ukraine, Russia and Belarus may once again open problems that had already appeared after the first decisions on neutral appearances. The British Fencing Association warned back in 2023, after the implementation of the then IOC recommendations, that the changes could affect calendars, locations and athletes’ decisions on competing against neutral opponents. Similar questions may arise again in expanded form if Russian and Belarusian athletes compete under full national symbols. For national federations, organizers and athletes, this means that sports rules will increasingly encounter political, security and diplomatic restrictions.
FIE is one of the international federations that govern an Olympic sport with a long tradition; on its official website it states that it brings together 150 national federations and that the organization’s headquarters are in Lausanne. Precisely because of such a position, its decisions have an impact wider than fencing itself. If the model of the full return of Russian and Belarusian representatives becomes established, it could become a precedent that other sports actors will invoke, while opponents will warn that it weakens pressure on aggression and diminishes the gravity of the war. For now, it is clear that the decision on neutral teams was only an intermediate step toward a larger change in FIE policy. The dispute over it therefore remains open, and its central question is no longer only who may compete, but under which symbols and with what kind of accountability checks.
Sources:
- International Fencing Federation FIE – announcement on the abolition of protective measures from the World Championships in Hong Kong (link)
- International Fencing Federation FIE – letter N°8-25 on neutral teams (link)
- International Fencing Federation FIE – letter N°16-25 on the AIN procedure (link)
- International Fencing Federation FIE – letter N°6-24 on the suspension of Usmanov’s powers (link)
- International Fencing Federation FIE – letter N°29-25 on young athletes and symbols (link)
- Global Athlete – open letter by fencers on neutrality checks (link)
- UK Sanctions List / GOV.UK – official record on sanctions against Usmanov (link)
- EUR-Lex – judgment in the case Usmanov v Council of the EU (link)
- OHCHR / UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine – report on civilian casualties in Ukraine (link)
- FIE – information on the organization and headquarters (link)