London’s Royal Opera House has found itself at the center of a heated international controversy after inviting Russian soprano Anna Netrebko to headline its 2025-2026 season, drawing fierce criticism from politicians, cultural leaders, and Ukrainian organizations both in the United Kingdom and abroad. The uproar, which has been widely reported by The Guardian, centers on Netrebko’s perceived role as a symbol of Kremlin propaganda and her public support for Russian-backed separatists in Ukraine.
The spark that ignited this firestorm was an open letter published in August 2025 and signed by more than 50 prominent cultural and political figures. The signatories include multiple British Members of Parliament, Sergiy Kyslytsya (First Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine), celebrated author Andriy Kurkov (PEN Ukraine), Helen Clark (former Prime Minister of New Zealand), and representatives from the Association of Ukrainians in Great Britain—among them Chairman Petro Rewko, Executive Director Fedir Kurlak, and Board Member Iryna Terlecky.
In the letter, these voices call on the Royal Opera and Ballet to rescind its invitation to Netrebko, who was set to perform the title role in Tosca from September to October 2025, the lead in Turandot from December 2025 to February 2026, and a solo recital alongside pianist Pavel Nebolsin. The letter, as reported by The Guardian, makes no attempt to soften its stance: Netrebko is described as “a longtime symbol of cultural propaganda for a regime that is responsible for serious war crimes.”
The controversy is not solely about art and performance, but about the intersection of culture and geopolitics. Netrebko, a Russian citizen who also holds Austrian citizenship, has long been associated with public support for the Kremlin. In 2014, she was photographed waving the flag of “Novorossiya,” a symbol of Russian-backed separatism in Ukraine’s Donetsk region—an act that remains deeply controversial given the ongoing conflict and occupation of parts of Ukraine. She has also publicly expressed support for the militants in the self-proclaimed “L/DPR” (Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics), further cementing her reputation as a supporter of the Russian regime. In 2023, Ukraine responded by adding her to its official sanctions list.
The open letter questions the Royal Opera’s claim to neutrality and artistic integrity in light of these facts. “Can the Royal Opera credibly claim neutrality and integrity while offering its stage to someone who, in 2014, publicly waved the flag of ‘Novorossiya,’ the Kremlin’s separatist project in Ukraine’s Donetsk region, parts of which remain under Russian military occupation?” the letter pointedly asks. The authors argue that the opera house is now at a crossroads: “The Royal Opera now faces a defining choice: between status and responsibility, between profit and values, between silence and conscience. We urge you to remain, as you consistently have, on the ethical side of art – and of history.”
The context for this controversy is further complicated by recent events involving the Royal Ballet and Opera (RBO). In 2025, Director of Opera Oliver Mears was filmed trying to remove a Palestinian flag displayed by cast member Daniel Perry during a curtain call for a performance of Verdi’s Il trovatore. This incident, coupled with the RBO’s decision to withdraw from a planned 2026 production of Tosca at the Israeli Opera in Tel Aviv—after nearly 200 staff members signed an open letter criticizing the company’s stance on Gaza—has placed the institution’s political and ethical positions under intense scrutiny.
Alex Beard, CEO of the RBO, commented on the shifting landscape, stating, “Our support for Ukraine was aligned with the global consensus [in 2022]. As the world’s geopolitics have become more complex, our stance has changed to ensure that our actions reflect our purpose and values.” But for many, this explanation rings hollow. Labour MP Alex Sobel, chair of the parliamentary all-party group on Ukraine, was especially blunt in his criticism: “You can’t explain it as ‘complex geopolitics.’ It’s not complex. It’s simple. Don’t invite Russian supporters of the regime to perform. Ukraine is fighting for all our freedoms. This is adding insult to injury.”
The reaction from the Ukrainian community in the UK has been particularly strong. “For Ukrainians, the UK’s unwavering support […] has been a vital source of strength and hope amid Russia’s brutal war of aggression. It is, therefore, with great pain that we witness the Royal Opera House inviting Anna Netrebko,” the open letter reads. The sentiment is not confined to the UK; in May 2025, the German-based Ukrainian organization Vitsche Berlin organized protests against Netrebko’s concerts, signaling a broader international movement against her performances in Western venues.
The controversy has not been limited to words on paper. In August 2025, a protest against Netrebko’s scheduled performance took place outside the Royal Opera House, drawing several dozen demonstrators. The mood was one of frustration and disappointment, with protestors holding signs and voicing their opposition to what they see as a betrayal of moral responsibility by one of the world’s leading cultural institutions. Meanwhile, an online petition calling for the cancellation of Netrebko’s appearances quickly gained traction, reflecting widespread public engagement with the issue.
The situation has prompted a broader debate about the role of cultural institutions in times of conflict. Should opera houses and theaters serve as neutral spaces, insulated from the world’s political storms, or do they have an obligation to take a stand when their platforms are used by figures seen as representing oppressive regimes? The Royal Opera House, by extending its invitation to Netrebko, now finds itself at the heart of this debate.
As the new opera season approaches, the Royal Opera House is under mounting pressure to reconsider its decision. The letter’s signatories, the protestors, and the many voices online are united in their demand: that the institution “remain on the ethical side of art—and of history.” Whether the Royal Opera will heed this call remains to be seen, but the controversy has already left an indelible mark on the cultural landscape, raising challenging questions about where the boundaries between art, ethics, and politics truly lie.
In the end, the Royal Opera House’s decision will not just shape its own reputation, but will also serve as a bellwether for how the arts respond to the moral dilemmas of a world in turmoil.
