Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry on Tuesday denounced ​the IOC’s decision ‌to lift the Russian Olympic Committee’s suspension as “troubling” and “urged ​both countries and international ​sports bodies to maintain ⁠restrictions on Russian participation ​and use of state symbols,” according to REUTERS. The ministry said in a statement, “The ​IOC’s decision to cancel the recommendations on limiting Russian athletes’ participation ​is a troubling ​signal for the entire international community.” It called on countries hosting competitions to uphold a ​ban ​on Russian ⁠state symbols as “under this flag an ​unprovoked war is continuing ​in ⁠Ukraine.” It also “urged international sports federations still ⁠restricting ​the participation of ​Russian athletes to keep those regulations ​in place” (REUTERS, 7/7).

SECOND CHANCES: THE ATHLETIC’s Barry Svrluga writes Russia invaded Ukraine four years ago and “is still there.” Svrluga: “What changed? Well, nominally, Russia is no longer trying to claim regional sports organizations on Ukrainian soil would be part of the ROC. Other than that?” IOC President Kirsty Coventry said at a news conference after the announcement, “We made it clear that we wanted to ensure all athletes have the possibility to compete at the Olympic Games and not be held responsible for their government’s actions.” Svrluga: “Wouldn’t that have made sense in 2024 in Paris and 2026 in Milan Cortina — where Russian athletes competed as neutral participants but Russian teams were banned?” Svrluga writes this is “a bit like trying to thread a needle with a bulldozer.” Coventry was not yet IOC president when Russia was initially banned, taking over for Thomas Bach a little more than a year ago. So “maybe this is showing new leadership, an enforcement of consistent standards.” Svrluga: “It still raises a question that constantly dogs the IOC and the Olympics: What should the Olympics be about? What values should they uphold?” (THE ATHLETIC, 7/8).

REGRETTABLE DECISION? In Toronto, Bruce Arthur wrote the IOC “will regret this.” Russia has been a “malign actor for a long time now, and not just in international sport.” The country’s state-sponsored doping system was the “most widespread in recorded history.” Arthur wrote Russia had “pumped money and people into international sports federations and hosting international events,” and the IOC “sought for years to find a middle ground between the appearance of justice and justice.” And every time the IOC “tried to loosen the reins, Russia would buck.” Arthur: “You can say this is realpolitik stuff, and in a way, it’s true. … If you sanction Russia for the war in Ukraine, how do you react if the United States — after Venezuela, Cuba, and that idiot war in Iran — annexes Greenland? Or, er, Canada? What if China takes Taiwan, and looks elsewhere?” Arthur wrote the IOC was “always a mirror of what it saw as the best of the international order, and as that falters, the IOC is retreating to a more amoral, financially beneficial crouch.” The IOC “will regret this, and likely are aware.” But “the world is changing, and the IOC seems determined to change with it” (TORONTO STAR, 7/7).