Since the United States secured the rights to co-host the 2026 World Cup, FIFA President Gianni Infantino has sought to align himself closely with Donald Trump. His efforts appear aimed at ensuring favorable treatment for FIFA from the U.S. government. However, this strategy has backfired, reflecting the broader consequences of engaging with a leader like Trump, ultimately damaging the reputation of the sport.
Soccer embodies inclusivity, democracy, and accessibility, values cherished by billions worldwide. This potential for unity was displayed at the onset of the World Cup, where, despite Trump’s stringent anti-immigrant stance, American hospitality shone through, showcasing the warmth of most Americans to visiting teams and fans.
However, Infantino has compromised these values by aligning FIFA with Trump, whose agenda promotes division and hostility. Given the detrimental impact of Infantino’s actions on soccer, particularly as they intrude on the domestic politics of my country, I feel compelled to voice my objections.
Historical Context of Political Co-optation
Throughout the history of the World Cup, the event has been exploited by politicians to advance their nationalist agendas, often at FIFA’s expense. Historical examples include Mussolini in 1934 and Argentina’s military junta in 1978. This time, however, it is Infantino himself who risks tarnishing the sport’s integrity. Recently, his relationship with Trump muddied the disciplinary process regarding U.S. Men’s National Team striker Folarin Balogun’s red card suspension, and last year, he controversially awarded a so-called ‘peace prize’ to Trump, a figure notorious for military aggression.
Within months of receiving the award, Trump initiated regime change in Venezuela, escalated threats against NATO allies, and embarked on a controversial military campaign in Iran. These actions brought uncertainty to the World Cup and forced the relocation of the Iranian team’s base camp to Mexico. By endorsing Trump, Infantino jeopardized FIFA’s already fragile reputation, tying it to Trump’s unpredictable and aggressive foreign policy. Despite the World Cup’s commercial success, the moral compromise of endorsing Trump’s wars under the banner of soccer will linger.
Professionalism or Groveling?
While FIFA must maintain a functional relationship with host nations, Infantino has repeatedly crossed the line into subservience. His frequent appearances at the White House and the overshadowing of Chelsea’s championship victory at the Club World Cup by his connection to Trump exemplify this. His actions have led to the politicization of FIFA, compromising its mission through implicit endorsements of Trump, as highlighted in an ethics complaint against him. Additionally, Infantino has diverted FIFA resources, intended to develop the sport globally, into Trump’s profit by leasing office space in Trump Tower, despite having a permanent FIFA office in Miami.
Critics of Infantino’s alignment with Trump must consider what he has gained in return. Trump has boasted of intervening in FIFA’s disciplinary processes and has made threats toward Canada and Mexico, co-hosts of the event. As the 2031 Women’s World Cup approaches, Trump’s reported conditioning of governmental guarantees for the U.S. hosting bid on FIFA adopting his desired policies raises further concerns.
Impact on Soccer’s Integrity
Trump’s interference in the Balogun case has severely compromised the integrity of soccer. While U.S. Soccer may have benefited from having a star player reinstated, the broader implications are troubling. The players found themselves ensnared in a political debacle ahead of a crucial match, tainting what should have been a showcase for American soccer with accusations of favoritism and corruption, thus undermining U.S. Soccer’s credibility globally. In an ironic twist, Infantino intends to honor Trump by having him present the World Cup trophy.
The lack of accountability for Infantino’s actions highlights a critical struggle for the soul of soccer—whether it will continue to be a force for good or succumb to autocracy and commercialization. I advocate for a rejection of Infantino’s self-serving and transactional approach to the beautiful game.
It is encouraging to see others beginning to voice their concerns, not just in reaction to FIFA’s disciplinary decisions. UEFA, FIFA’s European division, has criticized Infantino’s behavior as a pursuit of private political interests that harms the game. Additionally, a former chair of FIFA’s governance committee labeled it a clear violation of FIFA’s ethical standards. Resistance to Infantino’s pandering has emerged from within FIFA, with one vice president condemning Trump’s politically charged threats and the president of the Norwegian Football Federation calling for the dissolution of the ‘peace prize’ and supporting an ethics investigation into Infantino’s actions.
Despite the significant public support for Infantino’s reelection from FIFA members, many express their frustrations privately regarding his excessive vanity. UEFA may even be seeking a challenger for his position. All FIFA members are tasked with safeguarding the sport’s integrity and rescuing FIFA from self-destruction, even at the risk of retaliation. In the immediate future, I hope global federations will summon the courage to oppose Infantino’s vision; in the long run, they must advocate for structural reforms that diminish the president’s power and realign it with the FIFA Council, Congress, and Secretary General, preventing any single individual from acting against soccer’s interests again. Perhaps the most significant legacy of this World Cup will be the impetus to defend the values that make soccer a sport for the people.
- Nathán Goldberg Crenier serves as the elected vice-president of the US Soccer Federation. This editorial represents his personal opinions and does not necessarily reflect the positions or views of US Soccer.
