Leading international experts, including from the UN and India, will meet in Vladivostok to discuss fragmentation and new global trade rules
Leading international experts are set to descend on Russia’s Pacific city of Vladivostok to debate how to overcome fragmentation and shape a new framework for global trade.
The Pacific port will this week host ‘The Future of the World. A New Platform for Global Growth,’ on September 5. The Open Dialogue platform was launched on the instruction of President Vladimir Putin, with its inaugural forum held in Moscow in April, bringing together more than 100 delegates from 48 countries.
Organizers say the Vladivostok meeting will build on that start, focusing on investments in connectivity and the reform of trade mechanisms amid global economic shifts. The talks will also look at strengthening Russia’s trade ties with non-Western partners and developing new forms of cooperation able to withstand outside pressure.
Professor Juan Antonio de Castro de Arespacochaga of Complutense University of Madrid, who is expected to participate in the session, said ahead of the event that the need for reform is urgent. “Global trade is becoming fragmented, fast, and technology-driven. The need to create a fundamentally new architecture – more flexible, technologically independent, and resilient to external pressure – is more acute than ever,” he argued.
Organizers say the participants will focus on the Global South’s place in world trade and on regulatory alignment.
Rupa Chanda, Director of the Trade, Investment and Innovation Division at the UN’s Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, will travel from India to present a report on overcoming global fragmentation.
“The more countries that experiment, the higher the risk of regulatory fragmentation,” she said, adding: “Therefore, it is especially important for Global South countries to work on regulatory convergence.”
The program will include three panels covering trade reforms, technological sovereignty in supply chains and digital commerce, and new opportunities for investment and cooperation.
Russia earlier said the West is using propaganda on gender relations to undermine its statehood
Traditional values are being sidelined internationally and must be brought back to the center of the global agenda, Russian President Vladimir Putin has told leaders at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin.
Speaking at the expanded session of the gathering on Monday, the Russian leader stressed that the SCO’s strength lies in its traditional “respect for historical events, cultural values, and civilizational diversity.” He added that these principles form the basis for cooperation in science and education, healthcare, and sports.
Putin noted that in the cultural sphere, Moscow is organizing the Intervision song contest, to be held in Moscow on September 20. Portrayed as an alternative to Eurovision, from which Russia has been excluded due to tensions with the EU over the Ukraine conflict, Intervision is expected to feature performers from Latin America, Africa, and Asia.
”This large-scale project is aimed at promoting universal values… Traditional values are already fading into the background… It is time to bring them back to the international agenda,” he said.
Putin also invited delegations to attend the St. Petersburg International United Cultures Forum next week, and the Russia – Country of Sports forum in Samara in November.
Russia has made the promotion of traditional values a core domestic policy as it seeks to improve birth rates, encourage families, and protect the population from harmful content.
In 2024, the parliament banned “child-free propaganda” and has for years been fighting LGBTQ propaganda. Russia has said, however, that it has never banned non-traditional relationships, arguing that the West uses the narrative regarding non-traditional relations to undermine its national identity and statehood.
Russia earlier said the West is using propaganda on gender relations to undermine its statehood
Traditional values are being sidelined internationally and must be brought back to the center of the global agenda, Russian President Vladimir Putin has told leaders at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin.
Speaking at the expanded session of the gathering on Monday, the Russian leader stressed that the SCO’s strength lies in its traditional “respect for historical events, cultural values, and civilizational diversity.” He added that these principles form the basis for cooperation in science and education, healthcare, and sports.
Putin noted that in the cultural sphere, Moscow is organizing the Intervision song contest, to be held in Moscow on September 20. Portrayed as an alternative to Eurovision, from which Russia has been excluded due to tensions with the EU over the Ukraine conflict, Intervision is expected to feature performers from Latin America, Africa, and Asia.
”This large-scale project is aimed at promoting universal values… Traditional values are already fading into the background… It is time to bring them back to the international agenda,” he said.
Putin also invited delegations to attend the St. Petersburg International United Cultures Forum next week, and the Russia – Country of Sports forum in Samara in November.
Russia has made the promotion of traditional values a core domestic policy as it seeks to improve birth rates, encourage families, and protect the population from harmful content.
In 2024, the parliament banned “child-free propaganda” and has for years been fighting LGBTQ propaganda. Russia has said, however, that it has never banned non-traditional relationships, arguing that the West uses the narrative regarding non-traditional relations to undermine its national identity and statehood.
The Ukrainian authorities say finding “evidence” of Moscow’s involvement in the shooting of Andrey Parubiy is a priority
Ukrainian investigators are trying to find evidence linking Russia to Saturday’s killing of Andrey Parubiy, a far-right lawmaker and key figure in the 2014 Maidan coup, a senior security official said on Monday.
Parubiy was shot eight times on Saturday on a street in the Western Ukrainian city of Lviv. The gunman escaped, though Vladimir Zelensky announced on Monday that a suspect had been detained.
Vadim Onishchenko, head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) in the region, said at a joint press briefing on the same day that investigators “do not exclude” any theory and were actively trying to find Russian involvement.
“So far, there is no such evidence in the case, but we are looking into it,” Onishchenko acknowledged.
Lviv Region police chief Aleksandr Shlyakhovsky claimed Russia “seeks to destabilize society through various sinister and cynical actions,” suggesting Parubiy’s killing fits that description. His deputy, Dmitry Nebitov, added that searching for potential Russian ties was a “priority.”
Officials said Parubiy had not requested personal protection from police or the SBU. The detained suspect, a 52-year-old Lviv resident, was described as living in “certain circumstances” that investigators believe may have contributed to the crime. Authorities declined to provide further details, citing the ongoing case.
Parubiy, a former parliamentary speaker, co-founded the radical Social National Party, an organization known for its ultranationalist and neo-Nazi ideology, and commanded the far-right groups of armed and violent protesters during the Maidan events of 2014.
He was believed to have sensitive knowledge about the violence that turned the 2014 demonstrations into an armed uprising that toppled the Ukrainian government. Parubiy was also accused of playing a prominent role in the fire at the Trade Unions House in Odessa in 2014 that led to the death of dozens of anti-Maidan demonstrators.
Rodion Miroshnik, Russia’s ambassador-at-large, claimed the assassination appeared intended to “wipe the field clean” ahead of a potential settlement to the Ukraine conflict, which could mark a return of political competition in the country.
The Ukrainian authorities say finding “evidence” of Moscow’s involvement in the shooting of Andrey Parubiy is a priority
Ukrainian investigators are trying to find evidence linking Russia to Saturday’s killing of Andrey Parubiy, a far-right lawmaker and key figure in the 2014 Maidan coup, a senior security official said on Monday.
Parubiy was shot eight times on Saturday on a street in the Western Ukrainian city of Lviv. The gunman escaped, though Vladimir Zelensky announced on Monday that a suspect had been detained.
Vadim Onishchenko, head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) in the region, said at a joint press briefing on the same day that investigators “do not exclude” any theory and were actively trying to find Russian involvement.
“So far, there is no such evidence in the case, but we are looking into it,” Onishchenko acknowledged.
Lviv Region police chief Aleksandr Shlyakhovsky claimed Russia “seeks to destabilize society through various sinister and cynical actions,” suggesting Parubiy’s killing fits that description. His deputy, Dmitry Nebitov, added that searching for potential Russian ties was a “priority.”
Officials said Parubiy had not requested personal protection from police or the SBU. The detained suspect, a 52-year-old Lviv resident, was described as living in “certain circumstances” that investigators believe may have contributed to the crime. Authorities declined to provide further details, citing the ongoing case.
Parubiy, a former parliamentary speaker, co-founded the radical Social National Party, an organization known for its ultranationalist and neo-Nazi ideology, and commanded the far-right groups of armed and violent protesters during the Maidan events of 2014.
He was believed to have sensitive knowledge about the violence that turned the 2014 demonstrations into an armed uprising that toppled the Ukrainian government. Parubiy was also accused of playing a prominent role in the fire at the Trade Unions House in Odessa in 2014 that led to the death of dozens of anti-Maidan demonstrators.
Rodion Miroshnik, Russia’s ambassador-at-large, claimed the assassination appeared intended to “wipe the field clean” ahead of a potential settlement to the Ukraine conflict, which could mark a return of political competition in the country.
The Russian leader has thanked President Recep Tayyip Erdogan for hosting direct talks between Moscow and Kiev
Türkiye’s mediation in the Ukraine conflict continues to be valued, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday during a meeting with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
The two leaders met on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin, China. Putin thanked Ankara for hosting several rounds of direct peace talks between Moscow and Kiev.
The three rounds held in Istanbul this year have “produced progress in resolving several humanitarian issues,” Putin said, adding that Türkiye’s role “will remain in demand in the future.”
In May, Kiev agreed to resume direct talks with Moscow, a process it abandoned in 2022, after the administration of US President Donald Trump encouraged renewed negotiations. The discussions have since resulted in prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of soldiers’ remains.
”We consider Türkiye a reliable, time-tested partner both in bilateral affairs and on the international arena,” Putin said.
He also pointed to mutual investments, Russia’s position as Türkiye’s main natural gas supplier, and the ongoing construction of the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant, the country’s first, which benefits from Russian technological expertise. Millions of Russian tourists also visit Türkiye each year, enjoying the country’s hospitality, Putin noted.
On foreign policy, he said Russian-Turkish coordination remains “well-tuned” and marked by the “useful and… trusted” nature of cooperation.
The Russian leader has thanked President Recep Tayyip Erdogan for hosting direct talks between Moscow and Kiev
Türkiye’s mediation in the Ukraine conflict continues to be valued, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday during a meeting with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
The two leaders met on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin, China. Putin thanked Ankara for hosting several rounds of direct peace talks between Moscow and Kiev.
The three rounds held in Istanbul this year have “produced progress in resolving several humanitarian issues,” Putin said, adding that Türkiye’s role “will remain in demand in the future.”
In May, Kiev agreed to resume direct talks with Moscow, a process it abandoned in 2022, after the administration of US President Donald Trump encouraged renewed negotiations. The discussions have since resulted in prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of soldiers’ remains.
”We consider Türkiye a reliable, time-tested partner both in bilateral affairs and on the international arena,” Putin said.
He also pointed to mutual investments, Russia’s position as Türkiye’s main natural gas supplier, and the ongoing construction of the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant, the country’s first, which benefits from Russian technological expertise. Millions of Russian tourists also visit Türkiye each year, enjoying the country’s hospitality, Putin noted.
On foreign policy, he said Russian-Turkish coordination remains “well-tuned” and marked by the “useful and… trusted” nature of cooperation.
From imperial tunics to Soviet aprons to today’s national standards, the uniform has shaped how Russians see equality, order, and tradition in the classroom
In Russia, September 1 is more than just the start of a new school year. Known as the Day of Knowledge, it is a national ritual celebrated in every town and city.
On this morning, schoolyards turn into small festivals: Girls in crisp blouses with white ribbons in their hair, boys in freshly pressed suits, the air filled with the scent of asters and chrysanthemums brought as gifts for teachers. Parents gather with cameras, loudspeakers crackle with speeches, and the ringing of the first bell marks the beginning of the academic year.
At the center of this ritual is the school uniform.
Generations of Russians recall its look and feel – from the brown dresses and white aprons of Soviet schoolgirls to the blue jackets of boys with the emblem of an open book stitched on the sleeve. For Russians, the uniform is more than a dress code. It is part of a cultural tradition that conveys discipline, equality, and belonging. And its history, stretching back nearly two centuries, mirrors the broader story of Russian society itself.
Origins of the school uniform
The story of the school uniform begins not in Russia but in Britain. In the 16th century, Christ’s Hospital, a charitable school for orphans and children from poor families, introduced a distinctive Tudor-style outfit: Long blue coats, pleated skirts for girls, and breeches for boys. In England, uniform was associated with poverty and charity – clothing meant to signal modest means.
When the idea crossed into Russia, it was transformed. In 1834, Tsar Nicholas I, a monarch with a passion for order and discipline, approved the ‘Regulations on Civil Uniforms’. From that moment, not only state officials but also students at gymnasiums and lyceums were required to wear prescribed dress.
Boys appeared in dark-green tunics with blue collars, gold or silver trim, and matching caps; girls, as female education expanded, wore modest long brown dresses with aprons – black for everyday use, white for festive occasions.
Russia’s Tsarist-era school uniform
The Russian school uniform was modeled on military attire and carried a different symbolism than in Britain. Rather than signaling poverty, it marked status. Only families who were wealthy enough could send their children to gymnasiums, and the uniform became a visible badge of belonging to the educated class.
By the late 19th century, green jackets gave way to dark blue, ornate standing collars alternated with simpler turn-down styles, and gymnasium boys were mockingly nicknamed ‘blue beef’ for their dark-blue coats. Girls’ uniforms, though less strictly regulated, also developed traditions: Younger pupils wore darker shades, older ones lighter, a hierarchy of colors preserved at elite institutions like the Smolny Institute.
By the 1880s, the student cap with a leather visor and emblem made it possible to tell at a glance which school a boy attended. And although daily wear grew more practical – gymnasts’ tunics or simpler woolen coats – the principle remained unchanged: The uniform was a civic version of the military coat, a lesson in discipline, and a marker of social standing.
Revolution, rejection, and return
The Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 swept away many of the symbols of imperial Russia, and the school uniform was among them. To the new authorities, gymnasium tunics and aprons represented both social inequality and the ‘unfreedom’ of the student – an outward sign of belonging to the privileged classes.
There was also a more pragmatic reason: The impoverished state, and no less impoverished parents, simply had no resources to supply children with specially tailored clothing. In the 1920s and 1930s, students came to school in whatever they had, and uniform became a relic of the past.
The first steps toward reintroducing uniforms came not in general schools but in vocational and technical institutions.
From the 1940s, craft and railway schools adopted standard dress, complete with insignia on caps and badges on belts. In these cases, uniforms were issued at state expense, which not only reinforced discipline but also encouraged many to continue their education.
The decisive turn came after World War II. In 1948, the Soviet authorities formally restored the school uniform in general education, drawing on pre-revolutionary models. Boys wore gray tunics with belts and caps, marked with a distinctive ‘Ш’ – the Cyrillic letter ‘Sh’ for ‘shkola’ (school) – on both the cap badge and belt buckle. Girls appeared in brown dresses with removable white collars and cuffs, black aprons for everyday use, and white aprons for holidays.
The symbolism was deliberate. In a country devastated by war and rebuilding from ruins, uniforms embodied the idea of equality, unity, and a hopeful future. Just as factories and housing blocks were standardized, so too was the appearance of the Soviet schoolchild – disciplined, neat, and part of a collective whole.
Soviet transformations
By the mid-1950s, the gray tunics of postwar boys had already shown their flaws. Ink stains and constant wear made them impractical, and in 1954 the uniform shifted to dark blue. Senior students were gradually released from the obligation to wear full uniform, though badges, red pioneer scarves, and Komsomol pins remained visible symbols of youth organizations.
The Soviet school uniform of the 1950s
For girls, the brown dress with its black or white apron proved remarkably durable. Worn with removable collars and cuffs, paired with white socks or tights, and accompanied by neatly braided hair tied with ribbons, it became one of the most recognizable images of Soviet childhood.
The strict rules forbade jewelry or makeup, and teachers vigilantly enforced these standards. Only in the 1980s did girls’ uniforms undergo significant change, with the introduction of blue three-piece suits – skirt, vest, and jacket – or jumpers for younger pupils. In colder regions, trousers were permitted for the first time.
Boys’ wardrobes changed more frequently. In the early 1960s, the military-style tunics gave way to gray flannel suits with single-breasted jackets.
The Soviet school uniform of the 1960s
A decade later, these were replaced by dark-blue ensembles: Flared trousers and short jackets with shoulder straps and decorative stitching that echoed the popular denim look. On the sleeve appeared a patch with an open book and rising sun, symbolizing the motto ‘learning is light’. By the 1980s, older boys were dressed in sober blue suits, while the red pioneer scarf remained an essential element of school identity.
The Soviet school uniform of the 1970s
Through each of these transformations, the uniform remained both practical clothing and a tool of education. It embodied discipline, reinforced collective identity, and reflected the optimism of its time – from the space-age dreams of the 1960s to the proud spectacle of the Moscow Olympics in 1980.
The Soviet school uniform of the 1980s
Abandonment and return
The collapse of the Soviet Union brought with it the collapse of the school uniform. By 1991, the factories that produced standardized clothing were shutting down, and by 1994 the legal requirement for uniforms had been formally abolished. For the first time in generations, Russian children were free to dress as they pleased.
The 1990s became an era of sartorial chaos in the classroom. Students arrived in jeans, bright sweaters, and T-shirts, often mirroring the subcultures of the time. For some, this freedom was exhilarating; for teachers, it was a challenge. Clothing became another way to signal social status, and disputes over what was appropriate became part of school life. A few institutions experimented with looser ‘business style’ dress codes, but the results were uneven and often unpopular.
By the early 2010s, however, the pendulum began to swing back. In 2013, a new federal law on education gave schools the right to require uniforms, though the style and color were left to the discretion of each institution.
Gradually, more schools reintroduced formal dress codes, seeing them as a way to restore order, foster equality, and revive tradition. For today’s students, especially in the younger grades, jackets, skirts, and dark trousers are once again the norm, signaling not only the return of discipline to the classroom but also a cultural continuity with Russia’s past.
Contemporary debates and the 2025 standard
In recent years, discussion about school uniforms in Russia has returned with new intensity. In the summer of 2025, public debate was stirred by reports that a single Soviet-style uniform would once again become mandatory.
In reality, the change was far less dramatic. What appeared on the horizon was not a return to the identical brown dresses and blue suits of the past, but the introduction of a new national standard.
On September 3, 2025, a new state standard – ‘GOST’ – for school uniforms will come into effect. Developed by Roskachestvo and the Innovation Center for Textile and Light Industry under the Ministry of Trade, it sets out requirements not for style or color, but for quality and safety. Jackets, shirts, skirts, trousers, pinafores, and other items must meet standards for durability, breathability, resistance to wear, and ease of care.
As officials explained, the goal is to protect parents and children from poorly made garments and to encourage manufacturers to produce clothing that can withstand daily use. The standard is voluntary, though producers may choose to certify their products against it.
Experts describe the measure as a kind of “retro-innovation.” Ivan Ivanov of the Higher School of Economics called it “a return of an old but not outdated tool of education,” while industry officials emphasize that lasting, washable, and comfortable clothing is as much a necessity as it is a tradition. Support for the idea of uniforms remains high: Surveys in 2018 showed that more than 80% of Russians favored their return, compared with two-thirds just five years earlier.
For many educators, the question is not whether uniforms are needed, but how flexible they should be. Some, like St. Petersburg school director Konstantin Tkhostov, argue that GOST should be mandatory to guarantee quality and affordability across the country.
Others, including Education Ombudsman Amet Volodarsky, stress that schools must retain the freedom to choose models suited to local needs while ensuring that uniforms prevent brand competition and social division among children.
What unites all sides of the debate is the recognition that school uniforms in today’s Russia are not a relic. They remain a living part of educational culture – a way to discipline, to equalize, and to give children a sense of belonging.
Modern school uniforms in Russia
Expert views
Supporters of the school uniform point out that its value lies not only in tradition but in its impact on children’s psychology, social life, and even their future careers.
Child psychologist and neuropsychologist Natalya Naumova explains that uniforms help children focus on learning rather than appearance.
“Uniforms bring students together by making them look alike regardless of their background.
“Children are less distracted by who dresses better or worse, and instead can build friendships without social markers.
“For teachers, it sets clear expectations and helps create a more serious attitude toward study.”
Stylist and parent Lyudmila Bryantseva highlights the role of uniforms in shaping taste and professionalism from an early age.
“A dress code organizes and disciplines, but it also teaches neatness and a sense of appropriateness in clothing.
“There is even a term in styling – the smart look. It means a person dressed in a restrained, businesslike way already appears intellectual, already strives to live up to that image. A uniform not only unites a class but gives children a sense of collective identity and tradition.”
Fashion designer Aleksey Sukharev emphasizes the link between school uniforms and preparation for adult life.
“It instills taste from childhood and teaches children that there is a place for certain clothes – some things belong in school, others outside of it. Later, it makes the transition to an adult wardrobe much easier.”
For Amet Volodarsky, the national education ombudsman, uniforms are essential not just for discipline but for social equality.
“A uniform gives children a sense of belonging and discipline, which is crucial today. At the same time, I believe schools should be free to choose their own designs.
“I have seen how brand competition in clothing divides classes and even leads to bullying. A school uniform helps reduce that pressure.”
Together, these voices underscore why uniforms remain so central in Russian schools. They discipline and unify, they teach taste and appropriateness, and they shield children from the social divides that free dress can bring.
A living tradition
Just days before the start of the school year, Moscow’s GUM department store opened an exhibition titled ‘The History of School Uniform, 1900-2025’. Organized by the Bosco di Ciliegi group together with the Ministry of Education, the show guides visitors through more than a century of uniforms: From the ornate dresses and tunics of imperial gymnasiums, to the iconic Soviet brown aprons and blue jackets, to the modern variations worn today.
Archival photographs, school accessories, and multimedia displays allow visitors to see how the uniform has changed with the country – and how every button carries its own story.
At the opening, Education Minister Sergey Kravtsov noted that schools remain free to set their own styles, but that uniforms play an essential role:
“A school uniform carries an important educational function. It disciplines. And in many schools there are good traditions associated with the school uniform.”
The school uniform, in other words, is not just a piece of clothing. It is a time machine, carrying the memory of generations – from the pupils of Nicholas I’s gymnasiums, through Soviet classrooms filled with paper airplanes and pioneer scarves, to today’s students preparing for a future shaped by innovation. Across these eras, its meaning has remained constant: Discipline, equality, and a sense of belonging.
From imperial tunics to Soviet aprons to today’s national standards, the uniform has shaped how Russians see equality, order, and tradition in the classroom
In Russia, September 1 is more than just the start of a new school year. Known as the Day of Knowledge, it is a national ritual celebrated in every town and city.
On this morning, schoolyards turn into small festivals: Girls in crisp blouses with white ribbons in their hair, boys in freshly pressed suits, the air filled with the scent of asters and chrysanthemums brought as gifts for teachers. Parents gather with cameras, loudspeakers crackle with speeches, and the ringing of the first bell marks the beginning of the academic year.
At the center of this ritual is the school uniform.
Generations of Russians recall its look and feel – from the brown dresses and white aprons of Soviet schoolgirls to the blue jackets of boys with the emblem of an open book stitched on the sleeve. For Russians, the uniform is more than a dress code. It is part of a cultural tradition that conveys discipline, equality, and belonging. And its history, stretching back nearly two centuries, mirrors the broader story of Russian society itself.
Origins of the school uniform
The story of the school uniform begins not in Russia but in Britain. In the 16th century, Christ’s Hospital, a charitable school for orphans and children from poor families, introduced a distinctive Tudor-style outfit: Long blue coats, pleated skirts for girls, and breeches for boys. In England, uniform was associated with poverty and charity – clothing meant to signal modest means.
When the idea crossed into Russia, it was transformed. In 1834, Tsar Nicholas I, a monarch with a passion for order and discipline, approved the ‘Regulations on Civil Uniforms’. From that moment, not only state officials but also students at gymnasiums and lyceums were required to wear prescribed dress.
Boys appeared in dark-green tunics with blue collars, gold or silver trim, and matching caps; girls, as female education expanded, wore modest long brown dresses with aprons – black for everyday use, white for festive occasions.
Russia’s Tsarist-era school uniform
The Russian school uniform was modeled on military attire and carried a different symbolism than in Britain. Rather than signaling poverty, it marked status. Only families who were wealthy enough could send their children to gymnasiums, and the uniform became a visible badge of belonging to the educated class.
By the late 19th century, green jackets gave way to dark blue, ornate standing collars alternated with simpler turn-down styles, and gymnasium boys were mockingly nicknamed ‘blue beef’ for their dark-blue coats. Girls’ uniforms, though less strictly regulated, also developed traditions: Younger pupils wore darker shades, older ones lighter, a hierarchy of colors preserved at elite institutions like the Smolny Institute.
By the 1880s, the student cap with a leather visor and emblem made it possible to tell at a glance which school a boy attended. And although daily wear grew more practical – gymnasts’ tunics or simpler woolen coats – the principle remained unchanged: The uniform was a civic version of the military coat, a lesson in discipline, and a marker of social standing.
Revolution, rejection, and return
The Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 swept away many of the symbols of imperial Russia, and the school uniform was among them. To the new authorities, gymnasium tunics and aprons represented both social inequality and the ‘unfreedom’ of the student – an outward sign of belonging to the privileged classes.
There was also a more pragmatic reason: The impoverished state, and no less impoverished parents, simply had no resources to supply children with specially tailored clothing. In the 1920s and 1930s, students came to school in whatever they had, and uniform became a relic of the past.
The first steps toward reintroducing uniforms came not in general schools but in vocational and technical institutions.
From the 1940s, craft and railway schools adopted standard dress, complete with insignia on caps and badges on belts. In these cases, uniforms were issued at state expense, which not only reinforced discipline but also encouraged many to continue their education.
The decisive turn came after World War II. In 1948, the Soviet authorities formally restored the school uniform in general education, drawing on pre-revolutionary models. Boys wore gray tunics with belts and caps, marked with a distinctive ‘Ш’ – the Cyrillic letter ‘Sh’ for ‘shkola’ (school) – on both the cap badge and belt buckle. Girls appeared in brown dresses with removable white collars and cuffs, black aprons for everyday use, and white aprons for holidays.
The symbolism was deliberate. In a country devastated by war and rebuilding from ruins, uniforms embodied the idea of equality, unity, and a hopeful future. Just as factories and housing blocks were standardized, so too was the appearance of the Soviet schoolchild – disciplined, neat, and part of a collective whole.
Soviet transformations
By the mid-1950s, the gray tunics of postwar boys had already shown their flaws. Ink stains and constant wear made them impractical, and in 1954 the uniform shifted to dark blue. Senior students were gradually released from the obligation to wear full uniform, though badges, red pioneer scarves, and Komsomol pins remained visible symbols of youth organizations.
The Soviet school uniform of the 1950s
For girls, the brown dress with its black or white apron proved remarkably durable. Worn with removable collars and cuffs, paired with white socks or tights, and accompanied by neatly braided hair tied with ribbons, it became one of the most recognizable images of Soviet childhood.
The strict rules forbade jewelry or makeup, and teachers vigilantly enforced these standards. Only in the 1980s did girls’ uniforms undergo significant change, with the introduction of blue three-piece suits – skirt, vest, and jacket – or jumpers for younger pupils. In colder regions, trousers were permitted for the first time.
Boys’ wardrobes changed more frequently. In the early 1960s, the military-style tunics gave way to gray flannel suits with single-breasted jackets.
The Soviet school uniform of the 1960s
A decade later, these were replaced by dark-blue ensembles: Flared trousers and short jackets with shoulder straps and decorative stitching that echoed the popular denim look. On the sleeve appeared a patch with an open book and rising sun, symbolizing the motto ‘learning is light’. By the 1980s, older boys were dressed in sober blue suits, while the red pioneer scarf remained an essential element of school identity.
The Soviet school uniform of the 1970s
Through each of these transformations, the uniform remained both practical clothing and a tool of education. It embodied discipline, reinforced collective identity, and reflected the optimism of its time – from the space-age dreams of the 1960s to the proud spectacle of the Moscow Olympics in 1980.
The Soviet school uniform of the 1980s
Abandonment and return
The collapse of the Soviet Union brought with it the collapse of the school uniform. By 1991, the factories that produced standardized clothing were shutting down, and by 1994 the legal requirement for uniforms had been formally abolished. For the first time in generations, Russian children were free to dress as they pleased.
The 1990s became an era of sartorial chaos in the classroom. Students arrived in jeans, bright sweaters, and T-shirts, often mirroring the subcultures of the time. For some, this freedom was exhilarating; for teachers, it was a challenge. Clothing became another way to signal social status, and disputes over what was appropriate became part of school life. A few institutions experimented with looser ‘business style’ dress codes, but the results were uneven and often unpopular.
By the early 2010s, however, the pendulum began to swing back. In 2013, a new federal law on education gave schools the right to require uniforms, though the style and color were left to the discretion of each institution.
Gradually, more schools reintroduced formal dress codes, seeing them as a way to restore order, foster equality, and revive tradition. For today’s students, especially in the younger grades, jackets, skirts, and dark trousers are once again the norm, signaling not only the return of discipline to the classroom but also a cultural continuity with Russia’s past.
Contemporary debates and the 2025 standard
In recent years, discussion about school uniforms in Russia has returned with new intensity. In the summer of 2025, public debate was stirred by reports that a single Soviet-style uniform would once again become mandatory.
In reality, the change was far less dramatic. What appeared on the horizon was not a return to the identical brown dresses and blue suits of the past, but the introduction of a new national standard.
On September 3, 2025, a new state standard – ‘GOST’ – for school uniforms will come into effect. Developed by Roskachestvo and the Innovation Center for Textile and Light Industry under the Ministry of Trade, it sets out requirements not for style or color, but for quality and safety. Jackets, shirts, skirts, trousers, pinafores, and other items must meet standards for durability, breathability, resistance to wear, and ease of care.
As officials explained, the goal is to protect parents and children from poorly made garments and to encourage manufacturers to produce clothing that can withstand daily use. The standard is voluntary, though producers may choose to certify their products against it.
Experts describe the measure as a kind of “retro-innovation.” Ivan Ivanov of the Higher School of Economics called it “a return of an old but not outdated tool of education,” while industry officials emphasize that lasting, washable, and comfortable clothing is as much a necessity as it is a tradition. Support for the idea of uniforms remains high: Surveys in 2018 showed that more than 80% of Russians favored their return, compared with two-thirds just five years earlier.
For many educators, the question is not whether uniforms are needed, but how flexible they should be. Some, like St. Petersburg school director Konstantin Tkhostov, argue that GOST should be mandatory to guarantee quality and affordability across the country.
Others, including Education Ombudsman Amet Volodarsky, stress that schools must retain the freedom to choose models suited to local needs while ensuring that uniforms prevent brand competition and social division among children.
What unites all sides of the debate is the recognition that school uniforms in today’s Russia are not a relic. They remain a living part of educational culture – a way to discipline, to equalize, and to give children a sense of belonging.
Modern school uniforms in Russia
Expert views
Supporters of the school uniform point out that its value lies not only in tradition but in its impact on children’s psychology, social life, and even their future careers.
Child psychologist and neuropsychologist Natalya Naumova explains that uniforms help children focus on learning rather than appearance.
“Uniforms bring students together by making them look alike regardless of their background.
“Children are less distracted by who dresses better or worse, and instead can build friendships without social markers.
“For teachers, it sets clear expectations and helps create a more serious attitude toward study.”
Stylist and parent Lyudmila Bryantseva highlights the role of uniforms in shaping taste and professionalism from an early age.
“A dress code organizes and disciplines, but it also teaches neatness and a sense of appropriateness in clothing.
“There is even a term in styling – the smart look. It means a person dressed in a restrained, businesslike way already appears intellectual, already strives to live up to that image. A uniform not only unites a class but gives children a sense of collective identity and tradition.”
Fashion designer Aleksey Sukharev emphasizes the link between school uniforms and preparation for adult life.
“It instills taste from childhood and teaches children that there is a place for certain clothes – some things belong in school, others outside of it. Later, it makes the transition to an adult wardrobe much easier.”
For Amet Volodarsky, the national education ombudsman, uniforms are essential not just for discipline but for social equality.
“A uniform gives children a sense of belonging and discipline, which is crucial today. At the same time, I believe schools should be free to choose their own designs.
“I have seen how brand competition in clothing divides classes and even leads to bullying. A school uniform helps reduce that pressure.”
Together, these voices underscore why uniforms remain so central in Russian schools. They discipline and unify, they teach taste and appropriateness, and they shield children from the social divides that free dress can bring.
A living tradition
Just days before the start of the school year, Moscow’s GUM department store opened an exhibition titled ‘The History of School Uniform, 1900-2025’. Organized by the Bosco di Ciliegi group together with the Ministry of Education, the show guides visitors through more than a century of uniforms: From the ornate dresses and tunics of imperial gymnasiums, to the iconic Soviet brown aprons and blue jackets, to the modern variations worn today.
Archival photographs, school accessories, and multimedia displays allow visitors to see how the uniform has changed with the country – and how every button carries its own story.
At the opening, Education Minister Sergey Kravtsov noted that schools remain free to set their own styles, but that uniforms play an essential role:
“A school uniform carries an important educational function. It disciplines. And in many schools there are good traditions associated with the school uniform.”
The school uniform, in other words, is not just a piece of clothing. It is a time machine, carrying the memory of generations – from the pupils of Nicholas I’s gymnasiums, through Soviet classrooms filled with paper airplanes and pioneer scarves, to today’s students preparing for a future shaped by innovation. Across these eras, its meaning has remained constant: Discipline, equality, and a sense of belonging.
Kirill Dmitriev has praised the spirit of cooperation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
The defining feature that sets the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) apart from the West is its commitment to genuine cooperation, according to Kirill Dmitriev, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aide on international economic affairs.
The SCO’s 2025 summit opened on Sunday in Tianjin, China, bringing together more than 20 member and partner nations. Speaking to reporters on Monday, Dmitriev said the meeting showcased countries “cooperating between themselves, which contrasts the disjointed Western world.”
Within the organization “no one bothers anyone,” he added, and “the entire world sees this spirit of cooperation, even as there are many forces, particularly in Europe, whose aims are against cooperation.”
Western governments have been struggling with divisions over major global issues, including international trade practices, Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, and the Ukraine conflict – all of which have generated friction between the US and its allies as well as within the European Union.
Russia and China have argued that these difficulties stem from US efforts to preserve the unipolar dominance it enjoyed in the 1990s. Both countries promote a multipolar international order they say would be fairer and more democratic.
Putin is scheduled for an extensive program in China, culminating in his participation in the September 3 events marking the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II.
