World Cup 2026: What does the Middle East conflict mean for the tournament?
In December, FIFA awarded Trump the inaugural ‘Peace Award’ at the 2026 World Cup draw ceremony, saying he “played a very important role” in brokering a ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinians and working to end other conflicts.
In the few weeks since then, the United States has taken military action in Venezuela, Nigeria and Iran, and has hinted at possible operations in Greenland, the other World Cup host country, and Colombia, another participant in the tournament. In January, Trump also told Cuba to “make a deal” or face consequences.
Trump has fiercely defended his foreign policy, insisting that he was acting in the interests of the United States.
Last month, Infantino defended the awarding of the ‘Peace Prize’, and even appeared at the first meeting of the US President’s Peace Board wearing a ‘USA’ hat with the Trump-themed ’45-47′ stamp, referencing his tenure.
Trump’s decision to attack Iran has received both support and condemnation, but what is certain is that it will lead to greater scrutiny of FIFA’s decision to side with him, with critics arguing it risks politicizing the governing body.
In January, 27 politicians from Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and Plaid Cymru signed a motion in parliament calling on international sports bodies to consider excluding the United States from major international competitions, including the World Cup. The resolution stated that such incidents “should not be used to legitimize or normalize violations of international law by powerful states.”
That same month, an official from the German Football Association said it was time to boycott the 2026 World Cup following Trump’s actions.
Such demands may now be repeated, with Gulf states calling for Iran to be punished for retaliatory attacks on their territory.
FIFA insists that as a body regulating football events it has a legal duty to remain impartial. In fact, last year, Infantino said he “could not solve geopolitical problems” in the face of pressure to impose sanctions on Israel after the United Nations commission of inquiry concluded that Israel had committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.
Israel’s foreign ministry said it categorically rejected the report, calling it “distorted and inaccurate.”
Some critics believe that FIFA’s rules need to be strengthened so that it can properly respond to serious geopolitical events, and this is not the first time FIFA has been put under pressure due to the actions of a World Cup hosting country.
In 2018, the tournament went ahead despite Russia’s annexation of Crimea four years earlier. Russia was also accused of cyber attacks, interfering in western elections and carrying out the Novichok nerve agent attack in Salisbury.
Russia was banned by FIFA for invading Ukraine in 2022 after some European countries refused to compete against Russia.
However, Infantino recently said that the punishment was not working and that he wanted it to be lifted. There is no sign of any desire to impose sanctions on the United States, no matter how controversial its foreign policy may be.
What is clear is that the already complex political landscape for the World Cup has become even more challenging in the last 48 hours.
