The 2026 World Cup and the Geopolitics of Football: Soft Power, Sovereignty, Migration, and the Transformation of FIFA into a Global Political Actor

Marco Alves

Introduction

The FIFA World Cup has always transcended the boundaries of sport. Since its inception, the tournament has constituted a privileged space for the projection of power, the construction of national legitimacy, and the symbolic affirmation of great powers. Football, frequently presented as a universal language capable of uniting peoples and cultures, became throughout the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century a strategic instrument of political, diplomatic, and ideological influence. In this context, the 2026 World Cup emerges as a possible historic turning point: not only because of the unprecedented scale of the tournament, but above all due to the geopolitical circumstances surrounding its organization.

The 2026 edition will take place simultaneously in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, marking the first World Cup organized by three countries. However, the most significant element lies in the fact that the event will occur during a period of sharp international polarization, marked by the return of nationalism, the intensification of disputes between major powers, and the growing political instrumentalization of mega sporting events.

More than a football tournament, the 2026 World Cup could transform into a mammoth global diplomatic arena. Migration issues, geopolitical rivalries, armed conflicts, narrative disputes, and soft power strategies will be present in every dimension of the competition. The event risks highlighting a central contradiction of the contemporary international system: while football claims to represent universality and global integration, it remains deeply conditioned by the power structures and political tensions of the contemporary world.

I) Football as an Instrument of Political Power

The relationship between football and politics is not a historical novelty. Throughout the 20th century, various regimes quickly understood the mobilizing potential of sport as a tool for political legitimation and national propaganda.

The 1934 FIFA World Cup, organized by Benito Mussolini’s fascist Italy, represented one of the first systematic uses of football as an ideological instrument. The tournament served to project an international image of the Italian fascist regime's strength and unity.

Decades later, the 1978 FIFA World Cup constituted another emblematic example of the political instrumentalization of sport. While thousands of opponents were imprisoned, tortured, and disappeared under the Argentine military dictatorship, the regime used the national team's sporting success as a mechanism to build domestic consensus and neutralize international criticism.

In the 21st century, the geopolitical dimension of football has become even more evident. The 2022 FIFA World Cup symbolized the rise of the Gulf States as central actors in global sports diplomacy. Qatar used the competition as a soft power tool, seeking to reposition its international image, expand its diplomatic influence, and consolidate its strategic relevance in the international system.

The underlying logic remains constant: organizing a World Cup means controlling global narratives. The host country becomes the center of international media attention for weeks, enabling it to project carefully constructed images of modernity, stability, prosperity, and political legitimacy. Football thus transforms into a mechanism for the symbolic fabrication of power.

II) The 2026 World Cup and the Reconfiguration of the World Order

The 2026 World Cup will take place in an international context deeply distinct from the one that characterized the final decades of liberal globalization. The contemporary international system is going through a transitional period marked by the erosion of Western hegemony, the rise of China, the strengthening of the BRICS, and the return of strategic competition among major powers.

In this scenario, the United States seeks to reaffirm its global leadership. Hosting the World Cup on American soil therefore assumes a clear geopolitical dimension. The event will allow the United States to project an image of a technological, organizational, and security superpower, while simultaneously attempting to demonstrate cultural and diplomatic leadership capacity.

However, the presidency of Donald Trump introduces an additional layer of complexity. His foreign policy—predicated on unilateralism, tougher stance on migration, and economic nationalism—directly contrasts with the universalist narrative traditionally associated with the World Cup. A central paradox then arises: how to reconcile a global mega-event based on the international circulation of people with restrictive migration policies and nationalist rhetoric?

This contradiction could become particularly visible regarding Iran. Tensions between Washington and Tehran have remained high for decades, involving nuclear disputes, regional rivalries, and economic sanctions. Although international sports law imposes an obligation on host countries to permit the entry of participating delegations, doubts persist regarding the treatment reserved for Iranian officials, journalists, and fans.

The problem transcends the sporting dimension. If migration restrictions are applied selectively, the World Cup risks transforming into an explicit manifestation of contemporary geopolitical hierarchies. Access to the sporting spectacle would no longer depend exclusively on athletic qualification, but would also reflect interstate power relations.

III) Migration, Surveillance, and Control

Another central aspect of the 2026 World Cup lies in the issue of migration. The tournament will take place at a time of intensifying tensions related to borders, migratory flows, and the securitization of Western societies. In recent years, the United States has significantly expanded mechanisms for surveillance, biometric control, and digital monitoring in the name of national security.

Historically, mega sporting events function as laboratories for security experimentation. The Olympics and World Cups frequently justify the implementation of advanced surveillance technologies, facial recognition, and population control. In many cases, such devices remain active long after the events conclude.

The 2026 World Cup could deepen this trend. Millions of fans will move between the United States, Canada, and Mexico, requiring unprecedented security operations. In this context, there is a risk that the tournament will be used to legitimize new forms of mass monitoring, particularly targeted at migrant populations and Latin American communities present in the United States.

Furthermore, the political discourse surrounding immigration could directly influence the international perception of the event. The World Cup, which ought to symbolize global integration, could end up associated with images of militarized borders, immigration detentions, and geopolitical selectivity in the international movement of people.

This even impacts national teams hailing from countries affected by the new American migration restrictions. The case of Haiti has become emblematic: despite their historic qualification for the 2026 World Cup, many fans, journalists, and even personnel linked to Haitian football face uncertainty regarding obtaining visas to enter the United States. The restrictions equally affect other countries under heightened immigration scrutiny, such as Iran, as well as African nations like Senegal and Ivory Coast. Although athletes and official delegations should theoretically benefit from diplomatic exceptions, doubts persist regarding companions, technical staff, volunteers, and fans. Some analysts even fear that visa denials or administrative delays will end up creating a "two-speed" World Cup, where the universality proclaimed by FIFA clashes directly with the geopolitical and migratory hierarchies of the contemporary world.[1]

IV) FIFA and the Crisis of Neutrality

The growing politicization of the 2026 World Cup also highlights the transformation of FIFA as a global political actor. Traditionally, the organization insists on the idea of sporting neutrality, arguing that football must remain separate from political disputes. However, this position has become progressively untenable.

The corruption scandals revealed in 2015 deeply weakened FIFA's institutional legitimacy. Accusations involving vote-buying, opaque contracts, and international corruption networks revealed the highly politicized inner workings of the organization. Since then, the entity has attempted to rebuild its image but continues to face recurring criticism related to transparency and governance.

The relationship between FIFA President Gianni Infantino and various international political leaders reinforces this perception. Infantino has cultivated proximity with heads of state from different ideological backgrounds, including authoritarian or controversial leaders.

The closeness between Gianni Infantino and Donald Trump, for instance, has become one of the most controversial symbols of FIFA's increasing politicization. Since Trump's first term, Infantino has cultivated a particularly cordial relationship with the American president, viewing the United States as an essential strategic partner for the commercial and media expansion of football. This rapprochement drew criticism both within and outside the sports world, especially after Infantino presented Trump with a distinction billed as a "global peace prize" (perhaps to soothe the American president's heart for not having received the Nobel Peace Prize?), a gesture interpreted by many analysts as an attempt to bolster political alliances surrounding the 2026 World Cup. For numerous observers, this episode symbols FIFA's transformation into a global diplomatic actor, which today operates as a sort of parallel (global) diplomacy, willing to align itself with influential political leaders—regardless of the controversies associated with their domestic or international policies—in order to preserve its economic, strategic, and institutional interests on a transnational scale.

The 2026 World Cup could further deepen this crisis of legitimacy. Should migratory or diplomatic issues interfere directly with the competition, FIFA will be pressured to take a political stance. Neutrality will no longer be a viable option.

V) Soft Power and the War of Narratives

In the contemporary context, football has become one of the primary soft power instruments available to states. The concept, developed by Joseph Nye, refers to the ability to influence other actors through cultural, symbolic, and ideological attraction, rather than military or economic coercion.

The World Cup represents perhaps the most powerful form of sports soft power in existence. The event mobilizes billions of spectators and generates an enormous global emotional impact. Controlling the narrative of the competition means influencing international perceptions of national legitimacy, modernity, and prestige.

For the United States, the 2026 World Cup constitutes a crucial strategic opportunity. At a time when American influence is contested by multiple international actors, the tournament could function as a mechanism for the symbolic reaffirmation of American centrality in the global system. However, this attempt at repositioning occurs within a context of growing informational fragmentation. Social media, political polarization, and narrative disputes will transform every episode of the competition into an object of international symbolic battle. Issues related to racism, immigration, human rights, or police repression could quickly take on a planetary dimension.

Moreover, athletes and national teams have progressively become political actors. In recent years, players have taken stances on issues such as racial discrimination, social inequality, and international conflicts. In 2026, FIFA will likely attempt to limit explicit political expressions to avoid diplomatic crises. However, this strategy may prove unfeasible in the face of the highly polarized environment of contemporary international politics.

Conclusion

The 2026 World Cup could go down in history not just as a mega sporting event, but as a snapshot of the structural tensions of the 21st century. The tournament will take place during a period of profound geopolitical transition, marked by the crisis of liberal globalization, the intensification of strategic rivalries, and the growing political instrumentalization of sport.

More than a simple football competition, the World Cup will constitute a global diplomatic arena where different worldviews, power strategies, and narrative disputes will confront one another. Migration issues, interstate rivalries, technological surveillance, soft power, and international legitimacy will be present in every dimension of the event.

In this context, FIFA is progressively ceasing to be just a sports organization to become a transnational political actor embedded in the power dynamics of contemporary globalization. Its claim to neutrality proves increasingly difficult to sustain.

The 2026 World Cup will show, perhaps definitively, that contemporary football can no longer be understood merely as a sport or entertainment. It has become a core territory of global geopolitical competition, where states, corporations, international organizations, and private actors vie for influence, legitimacy, and symbolic power.

Ultimately, the true political significance of the World Cup may lie precisely in this transformation: football has converted into a mirror of the contemporary international order—with all its contradictions, conflicts, and battles for the control of the global imagination.

Marco Alves

Holds a Master’s degree in Political Science from the University of Paris West Nanterre, in International and European Law from Grenoble Alpes University, and in International Relations and Business from the Institute of International Relations of Paris (ILERI).

Has operated in 30 countries, including Brazil, where he worked for 10 years, notably for the State Government of Pernambuco as a development specialist.

Worked for NGOs on the African continent as a specialist in economic recovery in post-conflict zones.

Currently serves as director of an international consultancy firm specialized in social sciences and social engineering, with interventions in Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Mali, and Niger.

Correspondent for France and Europe for the radio station CBN Recife.

Chairman of the Assembly of the IFSRA (Institute for Social Research in Africa).

Social entrepreneur, speaker, and mentor for the international organization MakeSense.

Consultant in strategic intelligence and risk management for the corporate sector.

Bibliography

-          Allison, Lincoln. The Global Politics of Sport: The Role of Global Institutions in Sport. Routledge, 2005.

-          Black, David, e Janis Van Der Westhuizen. “The Allure of Global Games for ‘Semi-Peripheral’ Polities and Spaces: A Research Agenda.” Third World Quarterly, vol. 25, no. 7, 2004.

-          Boykoff, Jules. Power Games: A Political History of the Olympics. Verso, 2016.

-          Brannagan, Paul Michael, e Richard Giulianotti. “Soft Power and Soft Disempowerment: Qatar, Global Sport and Football’s 2022 World Cup Finals.” Leisure Studies, vol. 34, no. 6, 2015.

-          Foer, Franklin. How Soccer Explains the World. Harper Perennial, 2010.

-          Gaffney, Christopher. Temples of the Earthbound Gods: Stadiums in the Cultural Landscapes of Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires. University of Texas Press, 2008.

-          Giulianotti, Richard. Sport: A Critical Sociology. Polity Press, 2005.

-          Hobsbawm, Eric. Nations and Nationalism since 1780. Cambridge University Press, 1990.

-          Nye, Joseph. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. PublicAffairs, 2004.

-          Sugden, John, e Alan Tomlinson. FIFA and the Contest for World Football. Polity Press, 1998.

-          Tomlinson, Alan. FIFA: The Men, the Myths and the Money. Routledge, 2014.

-          Zimbalist, Andrew. Circus Maximus: The Economic Gamble Behind Hosting the Olympics and the World Cup. Brookings Institution Press, 2015.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cp37kpqpdq2o?utm_source=chatgpt.com "World Cup 2026: Which countries are banned? - BBC Sport"