FIFA AT BORDERS: Power, Corruption, and Exclusion in WC2026

In July 2026, a player gets a red card. The rule is clear. He cannot play in the next match. FIFA itself says there is no way to appeal. Then the U.S. President calls the FIFA President and the suspension is lifted. Yes, this is for a review by FIFA. This is the first time since 1962 that a player could play the next World Cup match despite a red card. Seven months earlier, that same President was awarded FIFA's first Peace Prize. People say football is the world's last neutral space. But the 2026 World Cup wasn't played just on the pitch. It was played at border checkpoints, in design rooms, in VAR rooms, and on a phone call. Today we will see how the world's game became a playground for global politics. FIFA's rules include an article: Article 15. Every team and official must remain politically neutral. But FIFA has never clearly defined what neutral actually means. And that is the biggest question. Critics say by exploiting this gap, different standards are created for powerful nations. While rules are enforced more strictly on weaker nations. Actually, FIFA has taken political decisions before. From 1961 to 1992, for 31 years, South Africa was banned from FIFA due to apartheid. Meaning, the "no politics" rule was never really there. The real question is which politics matter, and FIFA decides that itself. FIFA President Gianni Infantino appeared at the Abraham Accords signing ceremony. In 2026, he also partnered with the Board of Peace. On the other hand, demands for action against the Israeli Football Association have been raised many times. But FIFA has not taken any action to this day. The response was that the matter is very complex according to international law. The same language often used by the governments of the U.S. and Israel. Whereas human rights organizations took this matter to the International Criminal Court. And in 2022, just days after Russia's attack on Ukraine, FIFA suspended Russian teams. One institution, two completely different reactions. Now, about the Peace Prize mentioned at the beginning. In December 2025, Infantino launched a new award. The FIFA Peace Prize; the first award was given to Donald Trump. FIFA, the football association, awards the 2026 FIFA Peace Prize to Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America. At the Kennedy Center event, Infantino said this honor is for what you have achieved. In recognition of his exceptional and extraordinary actions to promote peace and unity around the world. This decision raised many questions because at that same time, Trump's name was being linked to Israel's military campaign in Gaza, which many governments, UN experts, and human rights organizations have accused of serious genocide. Infantino has his own logic. A World Cup is impossible without good relations with that government. But is there any difference left between building good relations and bending the rules? Decide for yourself. In July 2026, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked in a podcast. Which team is he supporting? Before mentioning Messi or the Argentine football team, he named Argentine President Javier Milei. He described him as a supporter of the free market and a close friend of Israel. In other words, a national team was openly linked to political support. No reaction from FIFA. In the 2022 World Cup, many European teams wore protest armbands. Some covered their mouths in front of cameras. Western media called it bravery. But in 2026, the US, the biggest military supporter of the Gaza war and mired in border policy questions, saw those same teams now silent. Meanwhile, in Seattle, before the Iran-Egypt match, reporters kept asking both teams questions about LGBTQ+ rights. FIFA officials repeatedly tried to keep the conversation limited to football. This is how teams from poor or weak countries are often expected to criticize their own governments. But players from America, Britain, France, or Germany are rarely asked what their opinion is on their country's foreign policy, weapon sales, or border policies. Accountability is not demanded equally from everyone. Now let's move to the economics. Predictions are that FIFA will earn nearly 13 billion dollars in this cycle. Historical profits from the 48-team format are also considered part of that strategy. The US is now FIFA's biggest broadcast market. US broadcast rights value increased by about 94% in this cycle, and 14 of the 26 sponsors are American companies. Meanwhile, in 2024, Saudi Arabia's Aramco joined as a top sponsor, and that same year, Saudi Arabia was awarded the 2034 World Cup. Now, follow the money trail. It won't seem like a coincidence anymore. FIFA does not want to upset its biggest partners. Now let's come to the most controversial part of the tournament. Before it started, referee Omar Artan did not get a US visa. The reason was suspicion of terror links. The allegations were never proven. FIFA remained silent. The Argentina-Egypt match ended 3-2. But the talk wasn't about the win. There was talk of a disallowed goal, a controversial foul, and the inconsistent use of VAR. The Egypt coach gestured 'X' at the referee and even called the tournament fixed. A few days later, Switzerland's Breel Embolo received a red card due to mistaken identity. His coach described it as a disaster. And then, that phone call with which we started this video. The player, America's Folarin Balogun; the caller, Donald Trump; and Trump himself revealed this. The card remained on record, but FIFA suspended the punishment under Article 27 and placed Balogun on probation. The same rule was previously applied in the cases of Cristiano Ronaldo, Nicolás Otamendi, and Caicedo. The question was, a sitting president who had already received FIFA's first Peace Prize. Was calling the FIFA president directly. UEFA called it a dangerous precedent. Meanwhile, Belgium's appeal was dismissed on a technicality. The system is the same, but the results aren't the same for everyone. Now let's talk about the story off the pitch. The Haiti team had to change their kit just hours before the match. It bore the symbol of the 1804 revolution that made Haiti the world's first free Black republic. FIFA called it too political. While national and military flags kept flying in American stadiums without objection. Due to travel bans, most Iranian fans couldn't even make it. Players and coaches arrived under strict visa rules. Some had to return on the same day. One player's visa expired in the middle of the tournament. Months before the cross, Iran had already boycotted. The US had not granted visas to their federation officials. FIFA did not take a strict stance. Meanwhile, fans from Tunisia, Algeria, and Cape Verde were asked for visa bonds of up to $5,000. The DR Congo team was kept in quarantine for 21 days. South African fans remained stuck in visa backlogs for months. And many African journalists couldn't cover the entire tournament. Now the most important question: Gaza. It is reported that over 1,000 Palestinian athletes, coaches, and sports officials have been killed. This includes more than 34 registered football players. Former international player Mohammed Barakat, Olympic coach Hani Al-Masdar, and stadiums like Al-Yarmouk were either reduced to rubble or turned into detention sites. Human rights groups and the Palestinian Football Association call this "sporticide." Remember, action against Russia came within a few days. But complaints related to Gaza remained pending for months. Human rights organization FairSquare has filed a formal complaint against Infantino with the IOC Ethics Commission. This Pagong case has damaged the neutrality principle that every IOC member signs. The IOC is currently reviewing this complaint. This decision will determine if 2026 was an exception or the new normal of 2013. Finally, an interesting point: who uncovered the biggest corruption scandal in FIFA's history in 2015? The FBI, the US Justice Department, and the IRS. And in 2026, the punishment is halted by a single phone call from the president of that same government. Perhaps the football pitch was never truly neutral to begin with. It has always been a mirror to the world. And in 2026, that mirror left us with a question. Who is actually allowed to play politics and who has to pay the price for it?