BACH’S PRESIDENCY ENDS, HIS LEGACY OF COMPLICITY REMAINS

Thomas Bach’s time as president of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) will officially end this June. It will close a 12-year chapter defined not by Olympic ideals, but by political deals, compromises, and a troubling tolerance toward Russia and its allies.

Bach for­mal­ly announced his res­ig­na­tion from the IOC itself, effec­tive June 23, after the elec­tion of his suc­ces­sor at the IOC ses­sion in Greece this March. Although Bach could have remained an IOC mem­ber until age 80, he will walk away entire­ly after his pres­i­den­cy con­cludes.

On paper, Bach’s cre­den­tials are exten­sive. He won Olympic gold in fenc­ing in 1976, served as the found­ing pres­i­dent of the Ger­man Olympic Sports Con­fed­er­a­tion, and held mul­ti­ple high-lev­el posi­tions with­in the IOC. But the real­i­ty of his lead­er­ship paints a very dif­fer­ent pic­ture. The most glar­ing stain on his record is his per­sis­tent refusal to hold Rus­sia account­able for decades of vio­la­tions, from state-spon­sored dop­ing to the ongo­ing war against Ukraine.

Through­out his pres­i­den­cy, Bach con­sis­tent­ly down­played Russia’s mis­con­duct, allow­ing Russ­ian ath­letes to com­pete under so-called neu­tral ban­ners even after the inva­sion of Ukraine. This pol­i­cy, framed as a ges­ture of inclu­sion, dis­re­gard­ed the bru­tal real­i­ty faced by Ukrain­ian ath­letes whose train­ing cen­ters were bombed, whose fam­i­lies were dis­placed, and whose futures were destroyed by Russ­ian aggres­sion.

The dam­age to the Olympic Movement’s cred­i­bil­i­ty did not stop there. In ear­ly 2025, the IOC qui­et­ly rein­stat­ed the Belaru­sian Nation­al Olympic Com­mit­tee (NOC), led by Vik­tor Lukashenko, son of author­i­tar­i­an dic­ta­tor Alexan­der Lukashenko. This deci­sion came despite the Belaru­sian regime’s deep involve­ment in Russia’s war effort and its relent­less per­se­cu­tion of ath­letes who oppose the regime.

Accord­ing to mul­ti­ple reports, this shock­ing rein­state­ment appears to have been part of a polit­i­cal trade. In exchange for rein­state­ment, Belarus report­ed­ly agreed to back Juan Anto­nio Sama­ranch Jr., son of the for­mer IOC pres­i­dent, in the upcom­ing elec­tion to suc­ceed Bach.

Tak­en togeth­er, these actions show a pat­tern that defined Bach’s pres­i­den­cy: pri­or­i­tiz­ing polit­i­cal maneu­ver­ing and per­son­al alliances over the rights and safe­ty of ath­letes. By bend­ing the rules to accom­mo­date author­i­tar­i­an regimes, Bach turned the Olympic Move­ment into a stage for polit­i­cal horse-trad­ing, rather than a sym­bol of fair play and eth­i­cal sport.

As Bach pre­pares to exit, ath­letes and human rights advo­cates must demand a clean break from this cul­ture of com­plic­i­ty. The next IOC pres­i­dent must do more than uphold tra­di­tion. They must rebuild trust by enforc­ing eth­i­cal stan­dards, hold­ing aggres­sor states account­able, and ensur­ing that the Olympic Move­ment tru­ly serves the ath­letes it claims to rep­re­sent.

Bach may be step­ping down, but the con­se­quences of his deci­sions will cast a long shad­ow over the future of the Olympic Move­ment.