signals

South Korea signals cuts to military exemptions for gold medallists after backlash over athletes’ Asian Games comments.

South Korea’s sports minister says the government will review the military service exemption for gold-medal-winning athletes after public backlash to some controversial comments from winners at the Asian Games.

Three players from the men’s football team came under fire for comments following South Korea’s 1-0 win over Japan in the Asian Games final last weekend in Japan.

All three apologised, but a broader debate had already reignited over whether athletes should receive special treatment for sporting achievements, particularly as common citizens, as even members of BTS – the globally famous K-pop group – had to complete their mandatory service.

Al Jazeera Sport takes a closer look at the furore surrounding the comments at the Asian Games.

Culture, Sports and Tourism Minister Choi Hwi-young on Wednesday said the alternative military service exemption system for artists and athletes “will inevitably have to be scaled back”.

“It is true that the system has contributed to helping outstanding artists and athletes maintain and develop their abilities,” Choi told the National Assembly’s Culture, Sports and Tourism Committee.

“However, the values attached to fairness and public perceptions of military service have changed. I agree that the system should be comprehensively reviewed once again.”

What does military service look like in South Korea?

Most South Korean men must complete 18 to 21 months of military service by the age of 28.

Since 1973, however, Olympic medallists and Asian Games gold medallists have been able to replace the full term with a supplementary service, which consists of three weeks of basic training.

Three of the footballers, including Yang Min-hyuk, who assisted the winning goal against Japan, made comments that were viewed as insensitive.

“The medal and winning the championship weren’t important. I played the game with only one thing in mind – the reward of a military service exemption,” Yang, who joined Tottenham Hotspur in 2025 and is currently on loan at Belgian club Westerlo, said.

Newcastle United midfielder Park Seung-soo posted a photo on social media showing him wearing a cap associated with soldiers who have completed their service. In a post-match interview, captain Lee Gi-hyuk held up his gold medal and said, “I’m not going to the military.”

What has been said elsewhere in South Korea about the controversy?

A number of politicians, including Ahn Cheol-soo of the People Power Party, said it was time to change the system.

“Some players’ remarks after the match were outrageous,” Ahn posted on social media. “Even the captain bragged about not having to serve in the military. Are all the young people who enlist every year fools?”

Former lawmaker Yoo Seong-min said the flippant comments had provoked resentment and asked: “Is it really fair that BTS has to serve in the military while Asian Games gold medallists are exempt?”

In a Korea Herald editorial on Tuesday, the newspaper declared that the practice was outdated.

“South Korea now stands shoulder to shoulder with the world’s leading nations,” the newspaper said. “The days when finishing first in Asia could meaningfully enhance the country’s national prestige are long gone. It is time to reconsider.”

That was the message from Defence Ministry spokesperson Chung Binna during a press briefing in Seoul.

“Ultimately, we have plans to cut back or scrap the supplementary service, including one designed for artists and athletes,” Chung said.

What other athletes gained military-service exemptions?

The footballers were among many winners from the Asian Games who qualified for the military exemption.

Golfer Tom Kim won the men’s singles on Saturday after flying across the Pacific when the Presidents Cup competition ended so he could compete in Japan. Asked about the military exemption, he took the gold-medal approach.

“I’m more proud that I’m able to bring a medal for my country,” he said.

Sixteen South Korean baseball players are also exempt after defeating Japan 3-1 in the Asian Games final. So are three South Koreans who won gold in esports, an event at the Asian Games.

The Kremlin has signalled that Russia’s position on potential peace talks with Ukraine remains unchanged, despite a planned meeting between US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in New York.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said there were still no conditions for formal Ukraine peace talks to begin, while insisting that Moscow remained open to negotiations.

His comments came ahead of the Rubio Lavrov meeting, which is expected to provide an opportunity for Washington and Moscow to discuss the prospects for ending the war.

However, Peskov said there were no concrete plans for further high level meetings involving either the United States or Ukraine to discuss a potential peace agreement.

Moscow Maintains Its Position

The Kremlin also said there had been no change in its position regarding a possible direct meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

Peskov reiterated that Zelenskiy could travel to Moscow for such a meeting and said Russia would provide the necessary security guarantees.

He also said the Ukrainian president was aware of the decisions that Moscow believes would be necessary before meaningful progress could be made.

The comments underline the continuing gap between the two sides over the conditions for direct negotiations.

Ukraine has repeatedly rejected the possibility of holding talks in Moscow and has instead proposed a neutral location for any direct meeting between the two presidents.

US Diplomacy Faces a Difficult Path

The Rubio Lavrov meeting comes as Washington continues to engage both Moscow and Kyiv over the possibility of a diplomatic settlement.

The meeting itself does not necessarily indicate that formal peace negotiations are imminent. Russia continues to say that the conditions for talks have not been established, while Ukraine has maintained its own requirements for any negotiations with Moscow.

That leaves the United States attempting to maintain communication with both sides while the basic framework for potential negotiations remains unresolved.

The disagreement over the location of a Putin Zelenskiy meeting is also significant because it reflects broader differences over the political conditions surrounding any future negotiations.

For Moscow, the latest statements reinforce its existing position that Ukraine must address Russian demands before a presidential meeting can produce meaningful progress. Kyiv, meanwhile, has rejected Moscow’s proposed setting and continues to favour a neutral venue.

What Comes Next

The Rubio Lavrov meeting could provide an indication of whether Washington and Moscow can narrow some of their differences, but the Kremlin’s latest statements suggest that Russia is not currently changing its stated position on the conditions for peace talks.

The immediate diplomatic focus will therefore be on whether the US Russian dialogue can establish enough common ground for further discussions involving Ukraine.

Until the disagreement over the conditions and format of negotiations is addressed, the prospect of a direct Putin Zelenskiy meeting remains uncertain. The New York meeting may keep diplomatic channels open, but it does not by itself resolve the fundamental differences separating Moscow and Kyiv.

With information from Reuters.