Svetlana Romashina, renowned as the world’s most celebrated synchronized swimmer, weighed in on a topical question: should athletes who change their citizenship be allowed to compete in the Olympic Games? He expressed his view plainly in the discussion with the publication Championship, offering a measured perspective on a contentious issue.
Romashina stated that his stance toward athletes who switch national allegiance remains calm. He rejected labeling such competitors as traitors. People make their own choices, he noted, and the public can either accept those decisions or persist in criticizing them. He emphasized that opting to acquire a different citizenship does not justify harboring hostility toward the country that launched an athlete’s sporting journey. In his view, to denounce the country of birth after receiving opportunities there would be unacceptable and, in that sense, counterproductive to the spirit of sport.
During an executive committee meeting of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) held on March 28, a proposal emerged to permit Russian athletes to retain neutral status provided they refrain from actively supporting the ongoing conflict. The policy at stake also included restrictions: those affiliated with law enforcement agencies and armed forces would be barred from competition. This stance highlighted the IOC’s attempt to balance political realities with the integrity of international competition, a tension that has repeatedly shaped decisions in Olympic governance. [Source: IOC]
Further developments unfolded on October 12 when the IOC announced the suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) until further notice. This action followed the decision to include the Olympic Councils of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, along with the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, within the Russian organizational framework. The IOC also reserved the right to determine, at an appropriate time, whether Russian athletes would be admitted to the 2024 Olympic Games in Paris. The move underscored the evolving relationship between sport federations and geopolitical events, and the uncertainty surrounding participation in future Games. [Source: IOC]
A notable voice in the discourse, a former Olympic champion, characterized the IOC as grappling with a broader problem—what was described as a virus of lawlessness. This stark assessment reflected frustration with what some critics view as inconsistent or politically charged decisions that influence athletes’ careers and national representation on the world stage. The comment illustrated how the rhetoric surrounding Olympic governance can provoke strong reactions even among those who have experienced the highest levels of athletic achievement. [Source: various contemporary reports]