Global mathematicians challenge US hosting of ICM amid geopolitical tensions
Original framing: “Will China’s mathematicians join a global effort to boycott the United States?” — South China Morning Post
Scientific collaboration in mathematics is increasingly globalized, yet the ICM remains a centralized, Western-governed institution. The boycott highlights the need for more inclusive governance models that reflect the diversity of the global mathematical community.
The proposed boycott of the 2026 ICM in the US is not merely a political or academic dispute but a systemic reflection of how global knowledge institutions are shaped by power imbalances.
The ICM’s governance, rooted in Western academic norms, fails to represent the diversity of the global mathematical community, including Indigenous and non-Western traditions. By decentralizing decision-making, integrating diverse epistemologies, and promoting inclusive collaboration platforms, the ICM can evolve into a more representative and equitable institution. This transformation would not only address current tensions but also set a precedent for how global academic bodies can navigate geopolitical and cultural divides. The trickster energy of the boycott reveals the need for a reimagined academic space—one that is both politically aware and culturally expansive.