On March 15th, we launched a petition to boycott the 2026 International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM) in Philadelphia in light of the Trump administration’s belligerent violence escalating around the world. Since then, we have garnered over 1800 signatures (and counting) from mathematicians around the world who share our discontent with the dismissive responses by decision-makers for the ICM. The IMU, as well as the Simons Foundation (as one of the primary sponsors), are ultimately forcing our community to be complicit in the violent and ever-worsening domestic and foreign policy of the United States. We, along with these 1800+ signatories, are refusing to attend the 2026 ICM unless it is moved out of the United States.
This conference, which is publicized as an event to create unity in the mathematics community, would only further systemic exclusion if held in the United States as many mathematicians are unable to get visas to travel here and/or are currently subjected to militaristic violence from the Trump administration’s assaults. We strongly believe that a healthy global mathematical community should stand up for each other as well as everyday people all around the world. It is impossible to realize such a community if our premier international conference is held in a country that is leading the assault on the pursuit of truth and knowledge in addition to directly endangering the lives of civilians around the globe. At the very minimum, fighting for a community in which our conferences are available to the largest cross sections of the world’s mathematicians should be a universal responsibility for each and every one of us.
Now, two weeks after launching the petition, we want to share background regarding our motivations for developing this petition, some initiatives and anecdotes that have been shared with us from the many signatories (spanning 70 countries), and most importantly, possible directions to continue building on this energy for future mobilizations.
Motivations and Background
Through conversations with colleagues over the last year or two, we have noticed a deep frustration with the IMU’s willingness to go ahead with the ICM as planned, despite mounting concerns about the safety of individual mathematicians traveling to and within the United States. In light of the IMU’s decision to move the 2022 ICM out of Russia due to the invasion of Ukraine, the decision to keep the 2026 ICM in the US feels like a tacit approval of the United States’ increasingly imperialist actions. In contrast to the IMU, we believe that this sort of behavior by a state can only be effectively resisted by a broad movement acting collectively across different sectors of society to reject American fascism in the ways each sector is particularly in a position to do so. As mathematicians, we believe it is our role to highlight the dangers of continuing along a trajectory where science is increasingly influenced by American state and military interests (and, as a result, completely at odds with the pursuit of freedom, knowledge, and truth). We started this boycott, inspired by recent petitions of mathematicians, as a call for mathematical scientists to come together and recognize our power in shaping the future of our field in relation to its effect on the entire world.
While we created the petition that formalized this boycott, the speed with which it grew demonstrates the widespread support for such a movement and the groundwork that has been built through an assortment of open letters that have similarly called for the IMU to move the Congress. Since February 2025, mathematicians have authored calls upon calls upon calls for the ICM to move out of the US. These asks have been answered by the outrageous response from the Local Organizing Committee of ICM 2026 that completely misses the point of global solidarity and doubles down on hosting the ICM in the United States. Our boycott is the culmination of the admirable stances so many mathematicians have taken in their own ways to make true a “commitment to internationalism” in the mathematics community. As the IMU did not respond appropriately to the many individual efforts, we decided that collective action must be taken.
This boycott in its current form has three main goals. First and most directly, we hope to move the ICM out of the US. Second, we want scientists, and mathematicians especially, to recognize the leverage that we hold and our capacity to impact decisions that shape not just our scientific fields but the lives of everyday people around the world. We have global networks and connections which we can use to influence the actions of our governments and it is important for mathematicians around the world to publicly recognize our shared interests and values. Third, we especially hope that this petition can inspire younger mathematicians to see a career in mathematics as one that is interlaced with taking anti-oppressive stances, as they witness well-respected and established scholars in their prospective field signing on. Overall, we believe that this boycott is one step towards building a mathematics community where open and accessible conferences are held all over the world and are available to as many mathematicians as possible.
Response to the Petition
While the lions’ share of responses we have received have been positive (which is likely indicative of just how thoroughly America’s aggression has alienated itself on the world stage), some have reacted to the letter with disapproval and dismissal. We feel it might be helpful to respond directly to some of the arguments that have circulated against the letter, which include the (mis-)conceptions that: (1) boycotting the ICM will do nothing because Trump doesn’t care about science in the first place; (2) there are already so few countries with the necessary budget (either provided by the state or through private donations) required to host the ICM and so we can’t afford to keep disqualifying them lest we run out of viable locations; and others.
With regards to the first argument, one of the main ways in which fascism gains momentum is by convincing civil and professional society of its powerlessness to resist. It is easy to convince oneself that making this sort of sacrifice (and indeed, it is a sacrifice for a mathematician to decide not to attend the ICM) is pointless because Trump doesn’t care about science anyway. On the other hand, what Trump cares about is quite irrelevant (both in this case, and in general). Thus, the goal here is not to single-handedly injure the Trump administration and, all on our own, save the day. It is instead to play our very small role as part of a larger whole. If the mathematicians and the lawyers and the dockworkers and the biologists and the bakers and the service workers and so forth each wield their respective powers as communities, we send the message that a government can not behave in this manner and expect things to go on as they normally would and the potential for impact increases exponentially.
The second argument is more sophisticated and therefore requires a more thorough rebuttal. It is indeed true that the ICM has only been hosted outside of the US and Europe four times in its over 100 year history, and never in Africa, West Asia, or Oceania. This is of course related to the broader impacts of colonialism; people living in these places–in spite of fostering rich mathematical traditions – encounter greater difficulties in fundraising for a potential ICM not through sheer happenstance. In any case, we are not asking mathematicians to take on the full legacy of imperialism and global capitalism; however, the ease with which some were willing to unquestioningly use something along the lines of “either a country has the money or it doesn’t” as a basis for opposing this boycott striving for solidarity struck us. In any case, we would counter that what we truly can’t afford to do as an international scientific community is lose any more legitimacy than we already have. If even one scholar is harassed by ICE on their way to the ICM (which seems increasingly likely), it will cause more damage to the future of international mathematical collaboration than whatever is to be gained by going forward with the conference as planned. By hosting the conference in the US, the IMU is playing fast and loose with the personal safety of many mathematicians.
Along these lines, we wish to highlight stories we have heard from several mathematicians about the specific barriers that would prevent them from attending an American-hosted ICM. Indeed,
- One Iranian mathematician informed us that they reached out to the ICM committee last October 2025 to see if there was a possibility of virtual accommodation as they are unable to attend due to the second US travel ban imposed on them, and the ICM had a disappointing response which provided no support or possibility for hybrid participation, essentially suggesting that this conference has no problem excluding people based on nationality.
- More broadly, we learned that Iranian IP addresses were blocked from registering for the conference at all, and the Iranian Mathematical Society wrote a formal protest of this exclusion of its members from the 2026 ICM in November 2025. It is not clear if the IMU ever responded to this issue by one of its members, including their call to uphold (rather than ignore) IMU Resolution 7.
- One mathematician wrote, “I have been selected to participate in the congress, but my country is on the list of countries whose citizens are not eligible for a visa. This puts me at a disadvantage.”
- A mathematician from the EU is unable to travel to the US on ESTA because of their collaborations with Cuban mathematics colleagues.
- Another mathematician brought our attention to an inhumane immigration incident that impacted the Korean community and is likely at the top of the minds of many Korean mathematicians: almost 500 tech workers were detained at a Hyundai facility in Georgia, their waists and ankles shackled in chains as if they were beasts. “Many Koreans will be excluded from the ICM due to their concerns about these Hyundai workers who were, frankly, pretty adjacent to many of us.”
In addition, some signatories shared personal decisions and principles of solidarity for supporting the boycott. We share only a few:
- An American mathematician wrote: “The comments of the IMU in 2022, announcing the move of the ICM from St. Petersburg to online, should be deeply considered. What are the differences between the decision then, and the high-minded comments about internationalism and transcending political divisions now? I do not wish to participate in the hypocrisy.”
- Another mathematician wrote: “Mathematics suffers when voices are excluded. Let us meet where all are welcome. Let us not implicitly endorse the marginalization of our international colleagues.”
- A mathematician from Senegal wrote (originally in French): Moving the ICM out of the USA “is a wonderful prospect, especially if it helps make science more accessible and inclusive. Restoring equity in research can truly make a significant difference—not only for researchers but also for the communities that benefit from scientific discoveries. If initiatives like these foster better international and interdisciplinary collaboration, they can genuinely lead to significant progress.”
While our initial statement regarding the boycott did not talk about the travel concerns of trans people in the US, we have learned from many trans mathematicians who have signed onto the boycott about their particular challenges in attempting to participate in an ICM taking place in the US. Due to the widespread state violence against trans people in the US, many trans mathematicians are unable to travel here (even from within the US); globally, this is the cause of many of the travel advisories countries are issuing regarding travel to the US. As one signatory wrote, “If the IMU feels that transgender people should be doing mathematics, and, possibly, attending the Congress – they should really move ICM out of this dangerous country.”
These are only a handful of the specific stories from mathematicians around the world that have further cemented our position that the ICM must be moved out of the US.
What’s Next
We hope that this boycott can form the beginnings of a global network of mathematicians who show solidarity with each other and the rest of the world as we take a stand against rising authoritarianism. We hope to continue building on the amazing solidarity illustrated by the 1800+ signatories by getting mathematical societies to sign on and/or issue their own statements in support of moving the conference for the safety of their own members. Societies can:
- sign on to our statement,
- issue their own, and/or
- publicize existing travel advisories to their memberships.
La Société Mathématique de France (SMF), la Société de Mathématiques Appliquées et Industrielles (SMAI), la Fondation Sciences Mathématiques de Paris (FSMP), and a Sociedade Brasileira de Matemática (SBM) all offer instructive examples. Recently, la Sociedad Cubana de Matemática y Computación (SCMC) is the first to endorse our boycott, and is publicizing the following statement:
“The Cuban Society of Mathematics and Computing as a professional society of mathematical scientists, cannot in good conscience recommend participation in the upcoming ICM for Cuban mathematicians, if it is to be held in the United States as planned. Indeed, safe passage to and from the United States is not at all a guarantee. Cubans run the risk of not obtaining a visa if the ICM is held in the USA. Recently, the VI World Baseball Classic was held there, and 8 members of the Cuban sports delegation were denied visas to participate in that event. In the future we hope to engage as broadly as possible with the international mathematics community. To this end, we must prioritize the safety and well-being of our members."
The presidents and leaders of professional mathematical societies can follow these actions in addition to signing and promoting the boycott as the President of the African Mathematical Union and the former president of the Swedish Mathematical Society have done. Whatever you feel inclined to do (no matter what your positioning in the mathematics community is), please feel free to CC us or keep us up to date on any initiatives you or a group of mathematicians are taking on to help out with this growing effort to move the ICM out of the US.
Additionally, it is our view that we should set longer-term goals to make these large prestigious conferences more accessible for the majority of mathematicians all over the world. This could be achieved in any number of ways. For example, we could pursue an international structure in which professional societies from well-resourced countries provide more substantial sponsorship towards the conference, regardless of where it ends up being held. In the short term, we want to reinforce the idea that the upcoming ICM could be held almost anywhere else, including online. We appreciate that great efforts have already gone into planning the conference in Philadelphia and that moving it at this point would most likely result in financial loss for some of the sponsors. But it is worth spending money on a commitment to an inclusive and welcoming international mathematics community. As one signatory wrote, the “ICM cannot promote the deliberate destruction of academic integrity among mathematicians.”