










































121SIUJ.ORG SIUJ  •  Volume 3, Number 3  •  May 2022

This is an open access article under the terms of a license that permits non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.  
© 2022 The Authors. Société Internationale d'Urologie Journal, published by the Société Internationale d'Urologie, Canada.

EDITORIAL

International Conflict in Urology
Peter C. Black, Editor-in-Chief

Soc Int Urol J.2021;3(3):121–122

DOI: 10.48083/EQQM2273

Urologic societies and associations with global reach are unavoidably drawn into conflict between different countries 
and regions, and even between different factions within one country. The stakeholders in these conf licts are 
represented in the membership of the corresponding societies, and the societies are therefore forced to address the 
potential political strife in their own committees, meetings, educational events, and research initiatives. The ongoing 
war in Ukraine is a particularly stark example of this phenomenon. 

The European Association of Urology (EAU) and the Société Internationale d’Urologie (SIU) are two prominent 
organizations that are obviously affected by this war. I have no particular insight into how either organization is 
handling this conflict. Instead, I look upon it as an outside observer, much like the vast majority of readers of the SIUJ. 
My comments are my own and do not reflect the position of the SIU leadership. 

The EAU and the SIU both made early statements, communicating to their members their dismay over the unfolding 
situation in Ukraine and their solidarity with the Ukrainian people. Many bodies have focused on assistance for the 
victims of the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine. The American College of Surgeons, for example, circulated a list of 
opportunities for its members to provide support. The European Cancer Organisation (ECO) and the American Society 
of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) have launched initiatives to support cancer patients affected by the war in Ukraine. The 
Canadian Institutes of Health Research have launched a “Special Response Fund for Trainees” to support graduate and 
post-graduate students from Ukraine who cannot continue their research because of the crisis in their home country. 
Some individuals have shown remarkable initiative, courage, and sacrifice, and have traveled to the border regions 
around Ukraine to care directly for the millions of Ukrainian refugees fleeing the war.

The unprovoked Russian invasion in Ukraine deserves the highest level of condemnation, but should that 
condemnation extend beyond the Russian leadership and the military and their supporters? Governments around the 
world have instituted harsh sanctions against the Russian state and individual oligarchs, but should we in organized 
urology be sanctioning our Russian urologic colleagues? 

One of the first messages I received related to the potential impact of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on February 24 
was a plea from a reputable journal to exercise fairness in the peer review of articles submitted by Russian authors. 
Reviewers were asked to avoid prejudice related to the ongoing conflict. To some degree we all would like protest 
against Russia by whatever means available to us, and it may seem tempting to use peer review as an opportunity 
to send a message of dissent. I do not believe that many in academic medicine would consider this type of academic 
sanction, but it is an example of how international conflict can play out in our professional spheres. 

I also received a message from a subspecialty society in Ukraine asking one of the urologic societies to expel 
Russian and Belorussian members from its ranks and to block them from the society’s activities and conferences. The 
implication of such a call for academic sanctions against urologists is that they are complicit in their government’s 
actions simply by being Russian. While we would all like to see the Russian people speak out against their leadership, 
we should not conclude that the Russian population is complicit with the government simply because they are 
not protesting en masse in the streets of Russia. We have read of the misinformation disseminated by the Russian 
propaganda apparatus, and we have little concept of what the Russian people know about the conflict in Ukraine. 
Furthermore, we cannot expect widespread protests in an authoritarian state like Russia. It would therefore be 
extraordinarily unfair to punish Russian urologists and researchers because of the conflict in Ukraine.

http://SIUJ.org
mailto:editorinchief%40siuj.org?subject=SIUJ


122 SIUJ  •  Volume 3, Number 3  •  May 2022 SIUJ.ORG

EDITORIAL

Some organizations have taken action to limit scientific collaboration with Russia. The German Research 
Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) stopped all funding to projects with Russian participation. This 
was intended to send a clear signal to the Russian leadership and was accompanied by a call to preserve the dialogue 
with Russians on a personal level and also an acknowledgement that many Russian scientists are distressed by their 
government’s actions. In this vein, we may consider official Russian medical organizations as likely representing the 
state’s interests, but we do not know the political leanings of any individual urologist and we should therefore refrain 
from condemning individuals. The EAU has suspended all joint activities with the national urological societies of 
Russia and Belarus.

We should denounce the actions of the Russian leadership and military and declare our solidarity with the people 
of Ukraine, but our condemnation should not extend to the Russian people, and especially not to our Russian 
colleagues. Let the governments do the politicking, and let us support the Ukrainian people in general, and our 
colleagues and urologic trainees in particular. As stated by the President of the SIU: 

As a global society, the SIU embraces peace and freedom for all, and opposes violence. We remain committed to our 
members and our mission: to elevate patient care through international co-operation in education and research — a 
peaceful environment is fundamental in achieving this. Our thoughts are with the victims, and it is our hope that peace 
will prevail quickly.

http://SIUJ.org

