International Tennis Community Reacts to Wimbledon’s Ban of Russian and Belarusian Players
On the 20th of April, Wimbledon announced its decision to ban Russian and Belarusian players from competing in this year’s tournament in late June, barring top players such as reigning US Open champion Daniil Medvedev, men’s number eight Andrey Rublev, as well as women’s world number four Aryna Sabelenka, and two-time Australian Open champion Victoria Azarenka. This marks the first time that Wimbledon has banned players from specific nations since the immediate aftermath of World War II. In contrast, the French Open and the US Open tournament organisers have not indicated that similar sanctions are being considered.
Wimbledon’s move is met with heavy disapproval from other major tennis organisations such as the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) and the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP), as well as prominent tennis players such as Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. Prior to this announcement, all major tennis associations and professional tournament organisers had agreed to allow individual players to compete without national identification, while banning Russian and Belarusian teams from participating in team events.
It is clear from Wimbledon’s statement that its decision to ban athletes is influenced by pressure from the British government, citing “it is our responsibility to play our part in the widespread efforts of government, industry, sporting and creative institutions to limit Russia's global influence through the strongest means possible.”
Guidance was given by the government to the tournament organisers, indicating that Russians and Belarusians may be able to compete if they agree to sign a declaration condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. While some Russian and Belarusian athletes such as Rublev have made their opposition to the war very clear, Wimbledon has favoured a blanket ban rather than placing athletes in potentially compromising situations.
On the one hand, it has been argued that individual athletes should not be discriminated against and penalised for the decisions made by their governments, noting that tennis players often compete for themselves and not for their countries at major events such as Wimbledon. On the other hand, former Ukrainian tennis player Olga Savchuk contends that sanctions and penalties should be applied uniformly to all people of Russia, regardless of profession or international status.
It can be argued that the banning of individual tennis players does little to put an end to the atrocities of war, and that tournament organisers have merely acted upon a moral impulse to do something when not much is able to be done at all. However, the ban is nevertheless contributing to the overall isolation of the Russian state in the hopes of limiting the state’s global influence. What has been clearly demonstrated is that international sport operates within the global socio-political context, and sports ostracism will undoubtedly continue to play its part as a sanctioning mechanism in international law.
If you are interested in learning more about Wimbledon’s decision to decline entries from Russian and Belurasian players, please see here.