What prompted World Athletics president Sebastian Coe to personally pledge to defend the organization's ban on Russian and Belarusian athletes before the Court of Arbitration for Sport, how does World Athletics' stance compare to the International Olympic Committee's recent decis

2. How World Athletics' stance compares to the IOC's recent decision

The two bodies have sharply diverged:

• IOC (July 7, 2026): Provisionally lifted the suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee and advised international sports federations that they no longer need to vet Russian athletes — effectively opening the door for a return to Olympic competition, including the 2028 Los Angeles Games .
• World Athletics (July 3, 2026): Reaffirmed its total ban on Russian and Belarusian athletes from all international track and field competitions, a stance it first imposed in March 2022 and has maintained through reviews in 2023, 2025, and 2026 .

World Athletics explicitly dismissed the IOC's suggestion to lift restrictions, making it one of the few major global sports bodies openly maintaining a hardline ban that contradicts the Olympic movement's direction .

3. Legal challenges filed by the Russian Athletics Federation

RUSAF has filed two separate appeals at CAS in response:

• First appeal (filed July 9, 2026): Lodged after World Athletics' July 3 Council meeting reaffirmed the exclusion. RUSAF stated the decision "affects the fundamental interests of athletics in Russia" and argued it violates the principle of equality in sport .
• Second appeal (filed August 10, 2026): A fresh claim challenging the same sanctions, which RUSAF described as "politicized" and contrary to the principle of equality in sports . This is the filing that prompted Coe's pledge to appear in person.

Both cases center on RUSAF's argument that the ban is political rather than sport-related, while World Athletics maintains it is a necessary measure to protect competition integrity in light of the Ukraine invasion .