Russia’s ambitions to regain a seat on the Council of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) were dashed on November 28, 2025, as the UN agency responsible for maritime safety announced its new executive members for the 2026–2027 term. The outcome, which left Russia off the list, has been heralded by Ukrainian officials as yet another sign of Russia’s deepening international isolation and a clear rebuke of its conduct at sea.
The IMO Assembly, convened in London, elected China, Greece, Italy, Japan, the United States, Norway, Panama, Liberia, South Korea, and the United Kingdom to its influential Council. These countries, recognized as having the greatest interest in providing international shipping services, are tasked with shaping the agency’s policies on maritime safety, security, and environmental stewardship. Notably absent from this roster was Russia, which had been vying to reclaim its position after recent failures in other international forums.
Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiga did not mince words in his reaction. Taking to social media, Sybiga declared, “This is yet another defeat for the Russian Federation in elections to the governing bodies of international organizations – after failures at UNESCO and OPCW – a clear continuation of its growing international isolation.” According to reporting by BBC and other outlets, Sybiga’s remarks reflect a broader sentiment among Ukrainian and Western officials who argue that Russia’s exclusion is a direct consequence of its actions since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Sybiga went further, describing Russia as a “terrorist state that systematically violates international law, attacks civilian vessels, destroys port infrastructure and operates a shadow fleet in blatant disregard of safety standards.” He argued that Russia’s ongoing aggression in the Black Sea, including attacks on civilian ships and the use of so-called ‘shadow fleets’ to evade international sanctions, makes its presence on the IMO Council “unacceptable.” In his words, “Given the circumstances, it is only natural that Moscow has no place on the International Maritime Organisation’s executive body.”
The International Maritime Organization, a specialized agency of the United Nations, plays a pivotal role in regulating shipping, ensuring maritime safety, and preventing pollution from ships. Its Council acts as the executive arm, setting the agenda and priorities for the global maritime community. Membership in the Council is both a mark of prestige and an opportunity to influence international maritime policy—a stage from which Russia is now conspicuously absent.
Russia’s exclusion from the IMO Council is not an isolated incident. In fact, this marks a pattern of setbacks for Moscow in international organizations. As reported by Reuters and corroborated by statements from the Ukrainian government, Russia was the only candidate country that failed to be elected to the IMO Council out of 11 contenders for Category ‘A’ membership in 2023. Category ‘A’ is reserved for states with the greatest interest in providing international shipping services, making the snub all the more significant.
Additionally, Russia has faced repeated defeats at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). In 2025, for the third consecutive time, Russia was not elected to the OPCW’s Executive Council, while Ukraine secured a seat. The OPCW, responsible for overseeing the global ban on chemical weapons, has become another arena where Russia’s international standing appears to be eroding. Ukrainian officials have pointed to these defeats as evidence that the international community is increasingly unwilling to tolerate what they describe as Russia’s unlawful behavior and disregard for international norms.
“Today’s vote demonstrates that the international community does not tolerate unlawful behaviour at sea. It reaffirms that international law prevails,” Sybiga asserted, as quoted by The Guardian. The message is clear: for many member states, Russia’s recent actions—ranging from attacks on Ukrainian port infrastructure to the operation of clandestine shipping fleets—are incompatible with the values and responsibilities of international maritime governance.
What exactly is meant by Russia’s “shadow fleet”? According to maritime analysts cited by The Financial Times, this term refers to a network of vessels that operate outside standard regulatory frameworks, often used to circumvent sanctions and transport oil or other goods in violation of international restrictions. These fleets, which frequently obscure their ownership and routes, pose significant risks to maritime safety and environmental protection. Critics argue that their proliferation undermines the IMO’s mission and jeopardizes the integrity of global shipping lanes.
The exclusion of Russia from the IMO Council is not without precedent, but the frequency and consistency of such rebukes in recent years are noteworthy. Since the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine, Russia has found itself increasingly sidelined in international institutions. Some observers, including diplomats from neutral states, caution that this trend could have long-term implications for the effectiveness of global governance. They argue that, while punitive measures may be justified, the absence of major maritime powers from decision-making bodies could complicate efforts to address issues like piracy, pollution, and shipping safety that require broad cooperation.
On the other hand, proponents of Russia’s exclusion contend that international organizations must uphold their own standards and cannot afford to grant legitimacy to states that persistently flout international law. As one European delegate told The New York Times, “Membership in these bodies is not just a formality. It’s a recognition of a country’s commitment to the rules that keep our seas safe and open. If Russia wants to return, it needs to change its behavior.”
For Ukraine, Russia’s defeat at the IMO is both symbolic and practical. Ukrainian ports and shipping have been among the primary targets of Russian attacks, with significant consequences for global grain markets and maritime security in the Black Sea. The country’s leaders have repeatedly called for stronger international action to hold Russia accountable and to protect civilian shipping from what they describe as state-sponsored aggression.
Looking ahead, the composition of the IMO Council will shape the agency’s agenda during a period of heightened tension in global shipping. Issues such as the security of maritime corridors, the enforcement of sanctions, and the transition to greener shipping practices are all on the table. The newly elected members—China, Greece, Italy, Japan, the United States, Norway, Panama, Liberia, South Korea, and the United Kingdom—will be tasked with navigating these challenges, now without Russian participation.
The vote at the IMO Assembly stands as a clear signal: the international maritime community, for now, is drawing a line against what it sees as Russia’s unacceptable conduct at sea. Whether this isolation prompts a change in Moscow’s behavior or leads to further entrenchment remains to be seen. For the moment, at least, Russia’s ships will be sailing without a seat at one of the world’s most important maritime tables.