15 August 2025
Leading mathematicians, with Ahmed Abbes of CNRS (pictured) leading, have returned the medals they earned at the International Mathematical Olympiad in protest at the failure of the Olympiad organisation to suspend Israel for its genocide in Gaza. Thanks to our French colleagues in AURDIP for this report.
We return our IMO medals in an ethical protest
Posted on AURDIP | Melih Ucer
The International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO) suspended Russia in 2022 but readmitted it in 2025 instead of suspending Israel in addition. In this article, I explain how this moral decline of the IMO proceeded from 2022 to 2025, and I emphasize its severe negative consequences for the mathematical olympiad community. By Melih Ucer.
Solidarity with underprivileged fellow competitors is undoubtedly from the Olympic spirit. However, incidents from modern Olympic history show negative examples as often as positive ones. When an oppressive regime prevents athletes belonging to a minority from thriving, what is the correct ethical stance of the Olympic community vis-a-vis the oppressors? For example, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) rightly excluded South Africa between 1964-1988 during the apartheid. However, the same IOC had allowed the 1936 Games to be held in Berlin during the Nazi era. What if an aggressive country destroys a neighbor, with its infrastructure and institutions, preventing its sportspeople from equal opportunity? For example, the IOC rightly excluded Russia in 2022 upon its invasion of Ukraine, but it had held the 1980 Games in Moscow during the invasion of Afghanistan and it continues to keep Israel despite the ongoing genocide in Gaza, the occupation of the West Bank, and the unprovoked attacks on other neighbors. The International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO) also suspended Russia in 2022 but readmitted it in 2025 instead of suspending Israel in addition. In this article, I explain how this moral decline of the IMO proceeded from 2022 to 2025, and I emphasize its severe negative consequences for the mathematical olympiad community.
The IMO is a prestigious annual event that has served as the career starter for many world-class mathematicians and fostered a cross-cultural “olympiad community” bound by the appreciation of mathematics as a unifying language. Yet, as is the case with the athletic world, some young minds are denied this incredible opportunity by evil actors. Would the olympiad community feel sympathy for the plight of its deprived members? It turns out that the answer was “yes” in 2022, then it became “depends on the country” in 2024, and finally it became “no” in 2025. This shameful transformation of the IMO led some former medalists including me to return their medals in protest.
To recount how the story unfolded step by step from 2022 to 2025, I am quoting Ahmed Abbes who was the first to return his two IMO medals on July 22, 2025. In part of his letter to the IMO Board and the IMO Ethics Committee, Abbes wrote:
In 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine, the IMO Board reacted within weeks. It invoked the Force Majeure clause, proposed a resolution, and organized an electronic vote. The Jury voted to suspend Russia’s membership as a state, while allowing its students to compete as individuals.
In 2024, when similar demands were made regarding Israel, the same Board refused to act. Instead, it changed the regulations to prohibit any “political use” of the IMO. This change had a chilling effect. Delegation leaders reported an atmosphere of fear. Any mention of Gaza was discouraged.
In April 2025, over 700 mathematicians — including Fields medalists, IMO team leaders, and contestants — signed a petition calling for Israel’s suspension as a state, following the precedent of Russia. The petition also denounced the IMO Board’s efforts to prevent discussion.
In June 2025, a draft resolution was submitted to the Jury, supported by over 500 members of the mathematical community. It proposed to apply the same measure used in 2022: suspend Israel’s state membership while maintaining the participation rights of its students as individuals.
Faced with overwhelming support for the resolution, particularly from the global south, and no longer able to sustain its double standard, the IMO Board introduced a last-minute counter-resolution during the July 2025 Olympiad in Australia. It declared that “measures against IMO participating countries will only be taken for violations of IMO regulations,” and that “all current suspensions expire at the end of IMO 2025.” By doing so, the Board effectively asserted that internal IMO rules outweigh international law, including the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The counter-resolution was adopted.
In an effort to shield Israel from accountability for its crimes, the Board has thus resorted to lifting sanctions on Russia and effectively whitewashing Putin’s crimes in Ukraine.
As is seen in Abbes’ explanation, the IMO showed a clear stance in 2022 when indiscriminate Russian attacks on civilian targets in Ukraine left some members of the olympiad community in danger. But the IMO did not show the same stance in 2024, even after Israel destroyed the entire education system in Gaza, killed more than 10,000 children, and prevented the Palestinian team from participating in the IMO. Meanwhile, Russia remained suspended because of its crimes in Ukraine which had by then been surpassed by the Israeli crimes in Palestine. Finally in 2025, the IMO decided to readmit Russia, taking a U-turn from its earlier humanitarian stance. What does this mean? I explained this in my letter to the IMO Board and the IMO Ethics Committee on July 23, 2025 when I returned my four medals following Ahmed Abbes who had done it the day before. In that letter, I wrote:
In July 2024, I emailed the IMO Board in protest of their tricky efforts to shield Israel from accountability and –in particular– their double standard treatment compared to the case of Russia, which they had previously suspended in a timely manner upon its invasion of Ukraine. In my email, I gave many examples of this double standard and I repeatedly asked “is Ukraine more equal than Palestine?” in a rhetorical way. The IMO Board easily ignored my small, individual effort.
But in May and June 2025, hundreds of mathematicians and IMO community members signed two letters addressing the IMO Board and the Jury, in which they demanded that Israel be held accountable on the same terms as Russia. The IMO could not ignore this massive call and no longer maintain its different treatment of the human rights violations in Ukraine and Palestine. Consequently, the IMO found the most cynical solution to equate the life of a Ukrainian to that of a Palestinian: namely, to diminish the value of Ukrainian life instead of increasing the value of the Palestinian life. I do not see any other explanation for their decision to readmit Russia instead of suspending Israel.
The moral failure of the IMO is thus obvious, but what makes it even worse is the supposed justifications. Quoting Abbes’ letter: IMO Board president Gregor Dolinar later confirmed that financial considerations played a role: “Sponsors do not want to deal with politically motivated organizations,” he told The Guardian. Dolinar claims to be apolitical, but there is no more political act than choosing to shield a state from accountability in the face of a genocide. By silencing debate, manipulating rules to block any response, and ensuring that Israel would be treated differently from Russia, he has engaged in the worst kind of politics — the politics of denial and complicity. In doing so, he has profoundly betrayed the principles the IMO claims to stand for.
I addressed this supposed justification in my letter as follows: Worse yet, this is disguised as a “non-political” stance which is good for “business”. I see these words as euphemisms for selling our values to criminals.
It is this shameful transformation from 2022 to 2025 that led Ahmed Abbes, me, Valerio Melani and Redi Haderi to return our IMO medals in an ethical protest. Abbes wrote that he does not wish to be associated with an institution that remains silent about the ordeal of the olympiad students in Gaza, simply because they are Palestinians. Then I wrote that I do not want to be associated with the IMO until it restores the core value of peaceful collaboration between nations in mastering mathematics. Then, Melani wrote that he does not want to be associated with the clear and strong political acts of the IMO under the disguise of “staying out of politics”. Finally, Haderi wrote that the sense of disgust from the recent shameful decision has overwhelmed the pride that his medal has given him all along, to the point that he no longer wants to be associated with the IMO.
I am sure that many more colleagues will follow our strong act of ethical protest. The administration has put the IMO in trouble: either they will fix the situation, or the community will build up sufficient pressure so that it is fixed.
Melih Ucer.
