The WADA-USADA conflict enters a political phase ahead of LA28, while China deepens cooperation with the ITA
The long-running dispute between the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has grown into an openly political issue as preparations for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Los Angeles accelerate. U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn has asked International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Kirsty Coventry to oppose changes that, in her assessment, could weaken the position of operationally independent national anti-doping organizations. WADA, on the other hand, says it wants to eliminate actual or perceived conflicts of interest at the largest sporting competitions by placing key decisions on testing and results management in the hands of an independent international body. USADA responds that such a model could reduce transparency, accountability, and oversight of sports organizations. The 2021 case involving 23 Chinese swimmers, which seriously damaged trust between U.S. institutions and WADA, remains in the background of the debate.
Blackburn asks the IOC to protect the role of national agencies
Blackburn, a Republican senator from the state of Tennessee, sent a letter to Coventry on July 28, 2026, ESPN reported, warning that the recommendations being considered by WADA could weaken the authority and effectiveness of independent national anti-doping organizations. She particularly emphasized the importance of USADA ahead of the Los Angeles Games, where the question of jurisdiction over testing will carry both practical and political weight. According to the contents of the letter published by ESPN, the senator believes that the Olympic movement should focus on systems that are not sufficiently separated from governments, national Olympic committees, or sports federations. Her message is that the greatest threats to the integrity of the anti-doping system are political influence and institutional conflicts of interest, rather than strong national agencies that operate independently of sport. At the time the report was published, the IOC had not provided a comment to ESPN.
What WADA's recommendation for major events provides for
At the center of the dispute is recommendation number 19 from the final report of WADA's Working Group on the Operational Independence of National Anti-Doping Organizations. The Working Group submitted the report on March 31, 2026, and WADA's Executive Committee discussed it on June 16. The document contains a total of 19 recommendations concerning cooperation, compliance with rules, the development of national agencies, education, transparency, athletes' perceptions, and testing. WADA concluded that recommendation 19 could be incorporated into the mandatory International Standard for Testing that would apply from 2027, while the remaining 18 recommendations require further analysis. On July 15, the Agency launched a stakeholder consultation on proposed amendments to the relevant international standards.
According to WADA's explanation, the national anti-doping organization of the host country or territory at a major international competition would not decide on the test distribution plan, the selection of athletes for testing, or results management. The restrictions would also apply to certain parts of sample collection, especially when athletes from the host country or countries with which there is a geopolitical or other potential conflict are being tested. These most sensitive functions would be assumed by an independent and impartial body, while WADA emphasizes that the local agency does not have to be completely excluded from operational cooperation. Event organizers and international federations would have to provide sufficient resources for a robust testing program. WADA argues that the aim is to eliminate both actual bias and the mere suspicion that a host agency might give preferential treatment to its own athletes.
The World Agency states that independent management is already the preferred model at the Olympic Games, but the recommendation seeks to define it more strictly and extend it to world championships, continental competitions, and other major events. WADA President Witold Bańka said after the June meeting that such a system would protect the integrity of competitions from allegations of bias, regardless of whether those allegations were well founded. Under this logic, it is not enough for a national agency actually to be independent; athletes and the public must believe that the host has no control over who is tested and how positive findings are handled. WADA therefore presents the proposal as an additional layer of protection, rather than as a punishment for a particular country or agency. The final text, however, has not yet been adopted, so the extent of the role of domestic organizations remains a subject of consultation and political competition.
USADA warns of control returning to sports organizations
USADA interprets the proposal almost in the opposite way. Chief Executive Officer Travis Tygart stated on June 16 that sidelining genuinely independent national agencies and handing control to sports bodies or their service providers would be a dangerous step backward. In his view, national agencies such as USADA provide a check on the work of international federations, event organizers, and WADA, so removing them from key stages would reduce external oversight. USADA particularly disputes the idea that private contractors or bodies hired by sport are necessarily more independent than a national organization that is legally and operationally separate from sports federations. It therefore views the debate not merely as a question of testing efficiency, but as a question of who controls the institutions that organize competitions and manage their commercial interests.
Similar arguments were presented in mid-June by Sara Carter, Director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. In an open letter to WADA stakeholders, she stated that certain recommendations could weaken national agencies, increase costs for governments, and reduce confidence in testing before and during the Games. Carter argued that operationally independent national organizations have for years exposed shortcomings in the global system and called for reforms, which is why she considers it wrong to restrict their role. She also called for an independent operational audit of WADA as a more effective way to restore trust. The White House letter showed that the U.S. administration does not regard the proposal as a narrow technical amendment, but as a matter of an international organization's accountability to the governments that fund it and the athletes to whom its rules apply.
The Chinese swimmers' case remains a source of mistrust
Today's conflict is difficult to separate from the case of 23 Chinese swimmers who, during a national competition in Shijiazhuang, China, between January 1 and 3, 2021, provided a total of 28 samples that tested positive for trimetazidine. This is a prohibited substance used to treat certain heart conditions, and it is banned in sport because of its potential effect on performance. Following an investigation, CHINADA accepted the explanation that the athletes had been exposed to very low quantities of the substance because of environmental contamination at the hotel and did not initiate proceedings for anti-doping rule violations. WADA reviewed the case and did not appeal the Chinese decision, stating that it did not have sufficiently strong scientific and legal grounds to successfully challenge the contamination scenario. The case became publicly known only in April 2024, shortly before the Olympic Games in Paris, following media reports that raised questions about timeliness, secrecy, and equal treatment.
WADA subsequently engaged Swiss prosecutor Eric Cottier to conduct an independent review of its handling of the case. His final report from August 2024 found no evidence that WADA had favored China or been subjected to improper influence, and it considered the decision not to appeal reasonable in light of the available information. At the same time, it identified areas in which procedures, communication, and rules could be strengthened, which later led to further discussions about the independence of national agencies and oversight of major competitions. USADA has never accepted that this brought the dispute to an end; Tygart accused WADA and CHINADA of a cover-up and unequal application of the rules. WADA rejected those accusations and referred to Cottier's findings and the limitations it faced in legally challenging the Chinese investigation.
Funding and auditing place additional strain on relations
The tensions have also spread to WADA's funding. According to ESPN, the United States began withholding its annual contribution of approximately 3.6 million U.S. dollars in 2025, demanding greater transparency and an independent audit of the Agency's work. The U.S. Congress linked the continuation of funding to audit requirements, and President Donald Trump signed a broader budget law on February 3, 2026, that contained the relevant provision. In its June letter, the White House also objected to the fact that the United States representative had not participated in the extraordinary meeting of WADA's Executive Committee. WADA and U.S. institutions are therefore no longer debating only one case or one technical recommendation, but also the distribution of authority, financial accountability, and the right of funding countries to exercise oversight.
CHINADA and the ITA renew cooperation on testing and investigations
At a time when the United States is distancing itself from WADA, the ITA and CHINADA announced the renewal of their multi-year cooperation. According to the ITA's statement, the new agreement establishes a framework for coordinating testing, exchanging anti-doping information and intelligence, jointly working on sample collection and other services, and carrying out projects in education and workforce training. The cooperation also includes intelligence and investigation activities, which is particularly important because the modern anti-doping system depends not only on laboratory findings but also on data analysis, tips, and targeted testing. ITA Director General Benjamin Cohen emphasized that independent international management can be effective only through close coordination with reliable national and regional partners. CHINADA Director Li Zhiquan stated that major competitions require high standards, coordination, and mutual trust.
The two organizations had already cooperated on programs during the Beijing 2022 Olympic Winter Games, the Hangzhou 2022 Asian Games, held in 2023, and the Harbin 2025 Asian Winter Games. The ITA states that they also worked together during the 2025 World Games in Chengdu, where the international agency implemented an independent anti-doping and education program in cooperation with local organizers and CHINADA. Their next major joint assignment is expected to be connected to the World Aquatics Championships in Beijing in December 2026. This continuity shows that international institutions continue to include the Chinese agency in operational programs despite the political consequences of the 2021 swimmers' case. The renewed agreement does not in itself resolve the questions raised by USADA and U.S. politicians, but it confirms that the ITA considers cooperation with national organizations essential for the implementation of independent programs.
The model described by the ITA in its agreement with CHINADA also shows that the debate is not a simple choice between national and international control. An international body can retain authority over planning and decision-making, while a national agency provides local knowledge, personnel, logistics, and a connection to the domestic sports system. WADA sees precisely this division of roles as a way to reduce conflicts of interest at major competitions. USADA, however, warns that the quality of the model depends on the genuine independence of the international operator, transparent rules, and the possibility of external oversight. The agreement between the ITA and CHINADA will therefore be viewed not only as a technical partnership but also as an indicator of how capable the global system is of building trust after one of the greatest anti-doping controversies of recent years.
The decision on the rules will shape the system before Los Angeles
WADA's Executive Committee is scheduled to meet in Belgrade on September 10 and 11, 2026, where it will consider strategic issues concerning the international anti-doping system. According to the schedule published so far and reports on the consultation, the proposal connected with recommendation 19 could be among the subjects decided upon after stakeholder comments have been collected. If the amendments are adopted, their implementation through the International Standard for Testing from 2027 would leave LA28 organizers a relatively short period in which to adapt protocols, contracts, and funding. It will be necessary to define precisely who prepares the testing plan, who selects athletes, who may participate in sample collection, and who conducts the proceedings following an adverse laboratory finding. It will be equally important to determine how the domestic agency can contribute to the program without influencing sensitive decisions.
The outcome will not eliminate the deeper problem of trust between WADA and U.S. institutions. Even the most detailed technical standard can hardly be effective if key participants challenge one another's independence or withhold funding and political support. At the same time, the agreement between the ITA and CHINADA shows that the international anti-doping system continues to expand through a network of formal partnerships, including countries whose practices have been subject to serious criticism. Ahead of LA28, the key question is therefore not only who will collect samples, but who will have the right to make the most important decisions and how they will prove that they make them without political, national, or sporting interests. The answer that WADA, the IOC, USADA, and the ITA find over the next two years could set the standard for major competitions long after the Los Angeles Games have ended.
Sources:
- World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) – Executive Committee decisions and explanation of recommendation 19 on independent testing at major competitions (link)
- World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) – consultation on amendments to international standards and the status of the Working Group's recommendations (link)
- United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) – statement by Travis Tygart on the role of national agencies at major competitions (link)
- White House, Office of National Drug Control Policy – Sara Carter's open letter on the independence of national anti-doping organizations (link)
- ESPN – report on Senator Marsha Blackburn's letter to IOC President Kirsty Coventry and U.S. demands ahead of LA28 (link)
- International Testing Agency (ITA) – announcement concerning the renewed agreement with CHINADA and the areas of joint work (link)
- World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) – final Cottier report on the handling of the case involving 23 Chinese swimmers (link)
- White House – official confirmation that the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026, was signed on February 3, 2026 (link)
- World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) – official information on the Executive Committee meeting in Belgrade on September 10 and 11, 2026 (link)