Fifa’s confirmation of Saudi Arabia’s hosting of the men’s 2034 World Cup – despite the country facing years of scrutiny over its human rights and environmental record – will be one of the most controversial steps that football’s governing body has ever taken.
Yet while many critics will be dismayed at the prospect, few should be surprised given the influence that the kingdom’s unprecedented investment in sport has secured.
So is the tournament being used to help transform Saudi Arabia’s reputation, or can it be a catalyst for social reform? And what does this tell us about Fifa and football more widely?
Why is this a coronation, not a contest?
Official confirmation of a Saudi World Cup will come at a ‘virtual’ meeting of Fifa’s Congress on Wednesday afternoon.
But this has seemed like a formality for more than a year. In October 2023, it emerged the Saudi bid would be unopposed after Australia – the only other potential candidate – decided not to enter the running, hinting that it was futile to do so after being given less than a month by Fifa to mount a challenge.
Fifa has defended a fast-tracked process that many argue was lacking in transparency and accountability. But critics believe it effectively paved the way for the Saudis, by decreeing that the 2030 World Cup would be staged across three continents (Spain, Portugal and Morocco are co-hosts, with the first three matches in South America). That meant that under its rotation policy, only bids from Asia and Oceania were considered for 2034.
It is worth noting that Saudi Arabia and Fifa, under president Gianni Infantino, have developed a close relationship. The country hosted Fifa’s 2023 Club World Cup, and the governing body has a lucrative sponsorship deal with Saudi state-owned oil giant Aramco.
There has also been widespread speculation that Saudi’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) could make a major investment in streaming giant DAZN which has agreed to broadcast the inaugural edition of Infantino’s pet project – an expanded Club World Cup next summer.
The sense of inevitability surrounding Saudi’s bid was only reinforced last month with the late-night publication of Fifa’s evaluation report, authored by Infantino’s deputy, Secretary General Mattias Grafstrom. It awarded the bid an average score of 4.2 out of 5, the highest ever.
No media conference was held in order to explain such a glowing assessment, nor the fact that the bid was deemed ‘medium risk’ for human rights and ‘low-risk’ for environmental protection, sparking outrage from campaigners.
Furthermore, with ratification expected to be confirmed by acclamation at the Congress, rather than a traditional vote, the only way any dissenting national associations can express their opposition is to abstain from the round of applause.
While the precise protocol remains unclear, there are suggestions that associations are to be asked to simultaneously show their support for both the unopposed Spain, Portugal and Morocco 2030 bid and the Saudi 2034 bid (rather than having two separate acclamations).
Fifa meanwhile can argue that anointing hosts via uncontested bids is preferable to the past, when long races between various countries could be vulnerable to vote-swapping and attempted corruption, and that as a global body they have a duty to take their flagship event to new territories.
What have other countries said?
Norway’s football federation has said it will abstain from the acclamation, arguing the bidding process “undermines Fifa’s own reforms for good governance” and “challenges trust in Fifa”. It added that Fifa’s guidelines for due diligence had not been followed, “increasing the risk of human rights violations”.
Most federations outside of western Europe will endorse the Saudi bid. Germany’s DFB said it “took the criticism of the applicant country seriously…[but] our goal is to work together with Fifa to improve the situation in the coming years”.
The FA is yet to declare what position it will take, although BBC Sport has been told some senior officials, while aware of human rights concerns, are wary of accusations of hypocrisy if it fails to support Saudi Arabia but then wants England to participate.
Most scrutiny has come from outside the sport. In March, the Guardian said it had found evidence of high numbers of unexplained deaths of Bangladeshi migrant workers in Saudi Arabia. The country defended its regulations and standards, but Fifa came under pressure to secure binding commitments for reforms, external before awarding the World Cup.
In October, an independent report conducted by the Saudi arm of a major law firm – which was submitted to Fifa as part of its bid inspection – was condemned by human rights groups for ignoring the alleged abuse of migrant workers. Last month Amnesty urged Fifa to halt the bidding process, external “to avoid worsening an already dire situation”, warning that “fans will face discrimination, residents will be forcibly evicted, migrant workers will face exploitation, and many will die” if a Saudi tournament went ahead.
There has been some opposition to Saudi’s growing influence within football. In October for instance, more than 100 professional women’s footballers signed an open letter urging Fifa to drop Aramco as a sponsor, calling it a “punch in the stomach”.
But others fear that many players are reluctant to speak out in case it jeopardises a lucrative move to the Saudi Pro League, and also that it is difficult for footballers to take a stand when governments are prepared to do business with Saudi Arabia. This week for instance, the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, visited the kingdom in a bid to strengthen economic ties.
What will a Saudi World Cup look like?
“Extraordinary”, according to the Saudi Football Federation. Its bid proposes 15 stadiums, (including three that are under construction, and eight where work is yet to start), across five host cities, including one (the futuristic development of Neon) that is yet to be built.
Fifa’s evaluation report hails “a range of impressive stadiums which, when built or refurbished, could offer state-of-the-art infrastructure”.
It is also almost certain to be held in winter. But there could be one major difference with neighbouring Qatar’s tournament, which took place in November-December, 2022.
Noting that summer temperatures “can exceed 40C”, Fifa has said there is an “elevated risk in terms of event timing” for Saudi 2034, and referenced having to navigate “climatic conditions” and “religious events”, leading to speculation the event may be held from the start of January to avoid a clash with Ramadan.
Premier League and other top European leagues would oppose a winter World Cup according to the PA news agency.
What does this say about Saudi sporting influence?
For many, ratification of a Saudi World Cup would be the ultimate expression of the power the country now wields across sports, and the opportunity, disruption and controversy that have accompanied it.
The kingdom has invested billions of pounds staging events since 2021, when the country’s de-facto ruler the Crown Prince made it a key part of his ‘Vision 2030’ strategy to modernise and diversify the economy. The kingdom has since hosted Formula 1, football’s Spanish and Italian cup finals, the Club World Cup, and top-level boxing, golf, horse-racing and tennis.
The country’s Public Investment Fund has also launched the breakaway LIV golf series, taken control of four Saudi Pro League clubs and purchased Newcastle United.
Meanwhile a recent report by Danish organisation Play the Game has revealed that Saudi Arabia has signed more than 900 sponsorship deals, external and made dozens of formalised agreements with football federations as it extends its influence across the sports landscape.
But staging a World Cup will take Saudi’s sporting revolution to an entirely different level, and perhaps even pave the way for an Olympic bid in the future.
Is this just sportswashing?
Many critics see this as the biggest act of sportswashing in Fifa’s history with the World Cup being used to help improve the image of a country that has faced years of criticism over subjects such as:
- human rights violations
- the repression of women
- the criminalisation of homosexuality
- the restriction of free speech
- the continued use of the death penalty
- the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi
- the imprisonment of activists for online dissent
- the country’s involvement in the bloody conflict in Yemen
While campaigners acknowledge that there have been important reforms in recent years, for example over women’s rights, they also point out there has been continued repression.
Saudi Arabia executed the third highest number of prisoners in the world in 2023, and three hundred people have already been put to death this year, a record tally based on official figures. This year Manahel al-Otaibi was sentenced to 11 years in prison after she used social media to call for an end to rules stating that women needed the permission of a male relative to marry or travel.
Campaign group Reprieve said: “This is one of the world’s most brutal authoritarian regimes spending vast sums of money to create a false image, to distract from worsening repression and state violence.
“Some of those executed or currently facing a death sentence are protesters or have done nothing more serious than be caught with small amounts of cannabis.
“Fans planning to travel to Saudi Arabia in 2034 should be aware that this is a country where exercising freedoms we take for granted in democratic societies can get you killed.”
The Saudi authorities insist their bid is designed to diversify the economy and boost tourism, act as a catalyst for modernisation and reform, and inspire a youthful population to be more active.
Last year, the country’s sports minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Turki Al Faisal, defended the country’s right to host the tournament, told me claims of sportswashing were “shallow.”
He added: “We’ve hosted more than 85 global events and we’ve delivered on the highest level. We want to attract the world through sports… any country has room for improvement, no-one’s perfect. We acknowledge that and these events help us reform to a better future for everyone.”
Women in Saudi Arabia were only allowed to enter sports stadia to watch matches in 2018, but since then a professional women’s football league and national women’s team has been created, with more than 70,000 girls now playing regularly.
However, last year, Jake Daniels, the UK’s only openly gay active male professional footballer, told the BBC he “wouldn’t feel safe” at a Saudi World Cup.
When I asked what he would say to female and gay fans worrying whether they would be safe to attend, Prince Abdulaziz said that “everyone is welcome”.
