Category: sport

Is sport good for humanity?


Title of a talk organised by the Southampton Amnesty group

March 2026

“Sportswashing” has entered the vernacular and is broadly defined as the practice by governments, or other powerful organisations, of sponsoring or hosting a sports team or sporting event in order to promote a positive public image and distract attention from human rights issues or unethical or criminal activity. In a sense it has always been with us, witness the Roman circuses and the quote attributed to Juvenal about giving people ‘bread and circuses’ (panem et circenses) by emperors to win approval of the masses. The communist regimes were keen to use sport to promote their ideology.

This talk focused largely on today’s issues and in particular the role of football in society. It was delivered by Miguel Delaney who is the chief football correspondent for the Independent. It was the annual human rights lecture organised by the Southampton City Amnesty group in collaboration with Southampton University.

Football looms large he said because although many other sports are used by governments to enhance their reputations, football has massive worldwide coverage and often finds its way into the news matched only by the Olympic Games. Millions, even billions, follow it worldwide. It has become massively politicised. Delaney thinks that the issues today probably started with Berlusconi’s acquisition of Inter Milan. This was a naked attempt to use sport to promote a politician but also the principle of neo-liberalism. Perhaps it was no coincidence this took place in Italy. It was a ‘power there to be exploited’ he argued.

Money became more and more of an issue and with it, the ability of clubs to pay huge sums for key players. It has not always bought happiness on the terraces he claims with fans feeling priced out of the game. [If you have not attended a premier league club game in recent years you may find a ticket price of £519 to watch Manchester United play Bournemouth soon something of a surprise. There were some cheaper ones]. A few years ago there was a scandal about clubs changing their kit regularly to boost sales. This part of the talk was about football as a business and did not really touch on the human rights aspects of the game.

The take-over by Abramovich of Chelsea FC moved things up a gear, someone he described as having an ‘unprecedented level of wealth and mystery’. Aspects were not a mystery namely his past as a former KGB officer and the acquisition of his wealth as one of the post Yelstin Oligarchs. He mentioned Putin at this point who he claimed ‘wanted Abramovich to buy Chelsea [as a means] to gain acceptance into [British] society through sport’. He referenced the book Putin’s People: How the KGB took back Russia and then took on the West by Catherine Belton (pub: William Collins, 2020) which he recommended.

Much of his talk was about exploitation of the sport by, mostly, autocratic regimes. The purchase of clubs including British ones like Newcastle United and Manchester City. He touched on the reaction of supporters suggesting that they do not, on the whole, seem to care about the human rights of the autocratic owners. In the Gulf states for example, human rights abuses are legion: torture is widely practised, women have very few rights, there are massive executions, opposition does not exist neither does a free press. He also touched on the rampant corruption of the sports governing body, FIFA.

Conclusion

Football is hugely significant and is followed by millions around the world. It is not surprising it has come to the attention of corrupt regimes wanting to gain influence. Fans seem not to mind and there is little real concern expressed by ministers about their malign influence. Perhaps more could have been made of the kafala system where workers in the Gulf states are bound to their employers and subject to considerable exploitation. Many have died working on the glitzy projects including stadia. This system is a major infringement of rights.

It seems all too easy for these regimes to acquire clubs and to host tournaments with limited controls.

Few fans seem interested although it has to be questioned that despite the billions spent by the Gulf states on all its sportswashing activities, they still do not enjoy that good a reputation. Their influence comes from the oil they produce and the billions they spend on buying arms from the West. It is this which buys the complicity of our politicians, not the ownership of a football club or hosting a golf tournament.

Interesting talk and well done Southampton City Amnesty organising it.

Previous posts:

1

Talk in Southampton


“Is football a net good for humanity?”

February 2026

PAST EVENT: See later post.

The Southampton group is hosting this talk on Monday 2nd March at the University and booking is advised. The subtitle is the impact of sport on human rights. The lecture is by Miguel Delaney, the chief sports writer for the Independent. Starts at 6 pm.

We have posted a number of pieces on the subject of sportswashing and the effects on human rights. Sport as we have said – not just football but tennis, golf, cycling, motor sport, athletics, boxing and others – are being used by various unsavoury regimes to promote their image. Fans seem not to be concerned about the fearful human rights issues taking place in those countries, the routine use of torture, the absence of a free press and the imprisonment of opposition leaders, human rights defenders and lawyers. Vast sums of money are expended in the activity and several despots now own British football clubs. So the talk should be an interesting one.

“Is football a net good for humanity? 
The impact of sport on human rights” Guest speaker: Miguel Delaney, chief football writer for The Independent Monday 2 March | 18:00 
Avenue Campus & Online
The School of Humanities at the University of Southampton, 
in partnership with Amnesty International (Southampton group), 
is excited to present Miguel Delaney to deliver the 11th Human Rights Lecture.
Book your place here
0

Surge in executions in Saudi


Almost one execution a day and a new record

January 2026

No less than 356 people were executed in 2025 exceeding the grizzly total of 338 in the previous year. Large numbers are foreign individuals. Many are executed for drugs crimes sometimes involving trivial amounts. Trials are notoriously unfair and the use of torture is routine. Most executions are thought to be by beheading.

Human Rights Watch refers to the ‘weaponising the penalty’ as a means to curb dissent. The de facto leader of Saudi is Mohammad bin Salman who was said to be keen to modernise the Kingdom. On this showing it would seem he has some way to go.

Sportswashing

A feature of the Kingdom is the vast amount being spent on sport in what has been termed ‘sportswashing’. Aided by leaders such as Boris Johnson and Donald Trump he has purchased the English football club Newcastle United and has secured the rights to the World Cup in 2034. This increase in largesse followed the murder of Khashoggi which sent huge shock waves around the world and was almost certainly ordered by MBS. We have noted before that there is no difficulty in recruiting sportsmen and women to compete in a wide variety of sports including golf, tennis, F1 motor racing, cycling and equestrianism.

He quoted as saying that “he does not care about sportswashing criticism” so long as the long-term diversification away from oil dependency is successful.

He need not worry. Western politicians are falling over themselves to visit and seek to secure trade deals. The British government’s desire for growth means human rights considerations are unlikely to intrude. The massive number of executions are unlikely to form more than a ripple on the UK government’s desire for exports, the sale of arms and investment in the UK itself.

There is a small hint of concern in an Early Day Motion 1411 in June last year:

“That this House remains concerned about human rights violations in Saudi Arabia; welcomes the recent release of dozens of political prisoners, including University of Leeds PhD student Salma al-Shehab, human rights defender Mohammed al-Qahtani, and doctor Lina Alsharif; notes, however, that released individuals face continued restrictions, including travel bans; further notes that others remain arbitrarily imprisoned for peaceful dissent, such as Manahel al-Otaibi; is alarmed by the record number of death penalty executions, with 345 in 2024 and over 140 in 2025 so far, with a number of persons who committed their alleged crimes as minors facing execution; is concerned about labour exploitation and potential deaths of workers in connection with the 2034 FIFA World Cup and other mega-projects in the absence of fundamental labour rights reform; calls on the UK Government to urge Saudi Arabia to release all those imprisoned for defending or exercising their rights and to establish a moratorium on use of the death penalty; and further calls on the Government to actively raise such rights issues and cases of concern, including in connection with on-going discussions with Gulf Cooperation Council states on a Free Trade Agreement”. [Source House of Commons accessed 2 January]

There were 15 signatures, none of which were Conservative.

One execution is noteworthy and that is of Turki al-Jasser in June. He was a journalist who worked for the Al Taqreer newspaper which the regime closed down. He wrote articles exposing the corruption within the Royal Family. He was arrested and his home searched. Much of what happened to him was surrounded in secrecy. His family did not know of his execution until after the event.

We seem to have moved to a situation where a high level of gross human rights violations are the norm and the desire for trade effectively trumps any meaningful political concern. Sport is being successfully being used to sanitise the regime’s reputation and millions are happy to spectate with little concern for what takes place behind the scenes.

Sources: HRW, MSN, Guardian, Council on Foreign Relations, Amnesty.

Previous posts:

0

Sport and rights


Major cycle races affected by protesters. Last stage of Vuelta abandoned

September 2025

La Vuelta a Espana is the tour of Spain cycle race and a major event in the cycling season. It follows the Tour de France and the tour of Italy, the Giro d’Italia. These are keenly watched by millions of fans and the teams are sponsored by commercial enterprises and countries. The last stage of the Vuelta had to be abandoned last week because of street violence. Cycling is fairly unique since races take place on ordinary streets and members of the public can see the cyclists close to.

The problem is one of the teams is sponsored by Israel Premier Tech and its presence is causing major headaches. There are threats to next year’s Tour de France which starts in Barcelona (there is an increasing tendency for these tours to start outside the home country). Indeed, the Giro started in Israel in 2018.

There is hardly any need to explain the problems with the war in Gaza, set to intensify with the attacks on Gaza city, leading to the deaths of over 64,000 Palestinians. Although the sponsor is a commercial firm, the website makes clear the deep involvement of the Israeli government and Netanyahu himself. It is a national team.

The boss of IPT, Sylvan Adams, is hard line in his approach to Gaza and is quoted as saying ‘Israel should finish the job in Gaza’. He calls the protesters ‘terrorists’.

It is a major problem for race organisers since policing the roadside for three weeks is all but impossible. They are reluctant to ban or uninvite IPT because they are worried about being accused of being anti-Semitic. IPT is also extremely wealthy. Tour de France winner Chris Froome is on the team. The risk of disruption is high as we saw in Madrid. If the war in Gaza continues, protests are likely to grow and become more frequent.

It raises the question of sport and politics since countries like Israel are closely involved in teams as a means to promote themselves. Arab nations are spending billions engaged in the same thing. In the communist era, states like East Germany and Russia used sport to promote their ideology. The close involvement is a problem in times of war however. The involvement of IPT is only likely to intensify protests: there were two crashes in the Vuelta and two riders had to retire. The whole question of sport and politics is clearly an increasing issue especially as money is so important to success.

Latest posts:

1

England’s Cricket Controversy: Taliban and Women’s Rights


Minister supports England playing Afghanistan despite Taliban’s actions against women
January 2025

In a recent post, we criticised the International Cricket Council’s decision to carry on with games involving Afghanistan. This decision was made despite the multiple and atrocious actions by the Taliban against women. A large number of MPs have argued that games should be banned in view of the dire nature of women’s rights in that county.

Lisa Nandy MP, the culture and sports minister disagrees and thinks the games should go ahead. She said in an interview the following:

  • It will deny sports fans the opportunity that they love,
  • She was instinctively against boycotts in sports, partly because they are counterproductive,
  • ‘I think they deny sports fans the opportunity they love, and they penalise the athletes and sports people who work very, very hard to reach the top of their game’,
  • They will not be rolling out the ‘red carpet’ she said and instanced the Winter Olympics, where she was vocal saying ‘we did not give the Chinese the PR coup that they were looking for’,
  • Keir Starmer added that he welcomed the England and Wales Cricket Board making strong representations to the ICC on Afghanistan’s Women’s cricket team. Rather missing the point that the team no longer exists.

It is likely that women in Afghanistan will be unimpressed by these arguments. Sports people being denied the ‘opportunity they love’ has to be set against the fact that women in Afghanistan do not have thls or any other opportunity. Not education, going out unescorted, being seen at a window or work are ‘opportunities’ unavailable to them. They cannot walk the street without being clad head to toe with a grill across their eyes.

And who is the ‘we’ in the statement ‘we will not be rolling out the red carpet’? It has nothing to do with Ms Nandy how much publicity, attention and coverage these games get. As for the prime minister expecting the ICC to make ‘strong representations’ to the Taliban about a non-existant women’s cricket team who have had to flee the country, it is almost laughable if it wasn’t so serious.

The essential question is: will playing cricket with an Afghani men’s team make an iota of difference to the wretched lives being lived by women and girls in that country? It is unlikely. Will playing cricket with an Afghani men’s team make matters worse? Probably. It will send a message to the Taliban that women can be treated abominably yet a British minister – and a female British minister – seems to care more for ‘not denying sports fans the sport they love’ than for women in their country. She is anxious ‘not to penalise the sports people who work so hard to reach the top of their game’. Does not the word ‘people’ include women? They won’t be working hard or working at all to reach the top of their game. Because they are banned.

To pretend that the ICC or any of these sporting bodies will make strong – or indeed any kind of representation – to the Taliban is a fantasy. Sport at this level is about money. And the Taliban will correctly assume that the ICC is more concerned about money than it is about women being allowed to play cricket. Or women being allowed to marry whom they wish. Or girls not being forced into marriage with much older men. Or women being able to acquire an education. Or women being allowed to walk the streets without being totally covered over. Or women not being allowed to get a job. Or women not receiving help and support as a result of domestic violence.

The irony is that cricket was an important element of the British Empire. The game was introduced into more or less all the colonies. But with it came a culture, the idea of gentlemanly conduct, and fair play. It was more than just a game for the colonialists. It was seen as a civilising force. It was a key showpiece for civility. We no longer have an empire but the concepts of the game live on. Yet here we have a situation where cricket is being used by a monstrous regime to promote itself on the world stage supported by a British minister.

Sources include: Portico Magazine, Kent Messenger; The Guardian

1

Scandal of Saudi World Cup


Saudi has won bid for 2034 World Cup despite massive human rights failings

December 2024

The football World Cup is the most watched sporting event on earth. Millions will will watch and many thousands will travel to see matches. The sports pages of magazines and newspapers will be full of excited articles, photos and interviews with star players. The progress of the home teams will be a matter of much debate. Pubs will be full to the brim with cheering supporters watching massive TV screens. What’s not to like?

The award FIFA made this Wednesday (11 December) has attracted considerable controversy. Human rights are clearly a major issue in the Kingdom. Amnesty has identified a range of serious issues of concern:

  • Labour exploitation. The people employed to work on construction sites in Saudi die in large numbers. A combination of unsafe working conditions and high heat levels has resulted in the deaths of 21,000 Indian, Bangladeshi and Nepalese workers since 2016. The massive level of construction needed for the competition is likely to see many more die. Trade unions are prohibited and there is forced labour.
  • Women’s rights. Women have few rights. They can be imprisoned for wearing the wrong clothing. The guardianship restricts their freedom of movement and what they can study. Same-sex relations are banned. They are not free to play sports.
  • Repression. There is no freedom of speech. The media is highly restricted. Human rights organisations, trade unions and opposition parties are banned. Journalists face censorship and imprisonment.
  • Death penalty. The Kingdom is one of the world’s biggest users of the death penalty usually by beheading and often in public. Confessions are often gained by the use of torture.
  • Evictions. Mass evictions have taken place to enable the facilities to be built. Protesters have been imprisoned for up to 50 years. Over half a million people are affected by these evictions.

To satisfy the requirements – such as they are – for decent human rights, a report was commissioned from Clifford Chance, an apparently respected London law firm with an office in Riyadh. The report was a whitewash and the response in the London HQ was reported to be a ‘shitstorm’. FIFA’s assessment of the human rights situation in Saudi as ‘medium’. It has to be wondered quite what they would have to do to be regarded as ‘high’.

FIFA’s Charter

So what has FIFA’s Charter go to say? Two elements are relevant:

  • To improve the game of football constantly and promote it globally in the light of its unifying, educational, cultural and humanitarian values, particularly through youth and development programmes. (para 2a)
  • Discrimination of any kind against a Country, private person or group of people on account of race, skin colour, ethnic, national or social origin, gender, language, religion, political opinion or any other opinion, wealth, birth or any other status, sexual orientation or any other reason is strictly prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion (para 4). (our italics)

How then does a country that discriminates against women, does not have religious tolerance, does not allow any political opposition, bans homosexual activity and does little in the way of promoting humanitarian programmes, get to host the World Cup? Amnesty describes the situation in Saudi as ‘dire’. ‘Mohammed bin Salman has presided over a soaring number of mass executions, torture, enforced disappearance, severe restrictions on free expression, repression of women’s rights under the male guardian system LGBTI+ discrimination and the killing of hundreds of migrants at the Saudi Arabia – Yemen border’.

Sport can be used to alleviate misery and wretchedness. “Sport can unite the world” Jules Rimet

It is of course impossible to marry the two. Any notion or suggestion that sport, and in particular football, can be used to unite the world is nonsense on stilts.

Sportswashing

This is pure and simple an example of Saudi Arabia using its immense wealth to acquire the rights to another sporting event as a means to enhance its reputation through sport. It will be interesting to see as we draw near to the event itself, whether the media and the sporting press pays any attention to the human rights situation – the dire human rights situation – in the country. Or will they focus almost entirely on the competition itself with endless vacuous interviews with managers and players? Will the thousands who will pour into pubs to watch the event be concerned or even know? Are we all complicit in this monstrous example of corruption both of sport and any sense of human values?

In view of the thousands who will die building the stadia and infrastructure, will FIFA be open to corporate manslaughter charges?

Main sources: FIFA; Observer; Guardian; Amnesty; European Sport Management Quarterly;

Updated 11 December with actual FIFA decision

0

The World Cup and sportswashing


Major law firm heavily criticised for a whitewash report on Saudi Arabia

November 2024

The 2034 World Cup is to take place in Saudi Arabia a country with a huge range of human rights issues. Women have restricted rights both in law and in practice. They are prevented from participation in sporting activities. Human Rights defenders are routinely intimidated or arrested on spurious charges. There is no religious freedom. There is a heavy toll of death sentences usually by beheading in public. By September 2024, 198 had been executed. Torture is common and suspects are kept for long periods often in solitary confinement without legal representation. Altogether a Kingdom where few freedoms or human rights exist.

FIFA, the world governing body, has been racked by years of controversy and corruption allegations. It would hardly be surprising therefore if the decision to host the 2034 competition in Saudi – following the massive scandal of the Qatar competition – was not accompanied by some corruption or other shady activities.

Enter Clifford Chance, a major London law firm with apparently a good reputation. They have produced a 39 page report in support of the Kingdom which somehow misses the key issues and the multiple human rights infringements. Clifford Chance, along with many other organisations, has a range of fine words praising their high principles. ‘[We] are committed to the highest ethical and professional standards’ they claim. ‘[We act] with integrity, professionalism and fairness.‘ As a firm ‘we have agreed to support and respect internationally recognised human rights both as part of our own commitment to the UN Global Compact and consistent with the UN Guiding Principles.’

So how, it might be asked, does a law firm with such principles and policy statements come to write a report which seems to overlook the massive infringements taking place in the Kingdom? It helps if you do not ask those in a position to know such as the many human rights organisations who have produced report after report detailing the dreadful state of human rights. Instead, you ask the Saudi sports authority itself, SAFF, who helpfully identified the five human rights ‘focal points’ for the (allegedly) ‘independent’ assessment. Reading the 39 pages there is no mention of the multiple human rights infringements which regularly take place in the Kingdom.

The report has produced a ‘shitstorm’ in the Clifford Chance headquarters

The report is nothing short of a disgrace. It is reported that it has produced an ‘internal shitstorm’ in the London headquarters. Eleven human rights organisations have condemned it. A common response to criticisms such as these is that sport enable a better understanding of human rights through sport. Global Citizen is a champion of this view. The difficulty with this idea, noble though it is, is that sport is being used by the likes of Saudi to promote – not human rights and brotherhood – but its own interests.

Another issue is the kafala system which immigrant labour works in desperate conditions for 16 hours a day sometimes in searing heat. The death toll is enormous and it is reported that 21,000 Nepali, Bangladeshi and Indian workers who have died in Saudi since the Vision 30 plan was launched in 2016. The Clifford Chance report dances around this issue with a host of weasel words.

And we must not forget the murder and dismemberment of Jamal Khashoggi almost certainly on MBS’s orders.

But should we be surprised? The Kingdom has enormous wealth and company after company is happy to do business there and hold their noses whilst doing so. Why should Clifford Chance be any different? It is alleged that the firm facilitated the removal of fortunes from 400 citizens who were locked in a hotel by Mohammed bin Salman. It is claimed £100bn was removed from them. The enormous wealth of the Gulf states has profited many European and American corporations eager to benefit from the largesse. Any moral scruples seem all too easily to be set aside. That a major law firms should join this jamboree is deeply disappointing. Thousands will die during the course of construction. Hundreds more will be detained without trial. Hundreds will continue to be beheaded. Whatever happened to those ‘highest ethical and professional standards?’

All this in aid of football. The ‘beautiful game’ has become mired in sleaze, corruption and graft. It has now dragged down a respected law firm in its quest to earn big fees.

[UPDATE: 15 November. Inside World Football reports that FIFA deliberately agreed with Saudi to limit the scope of the report into human rights.]

Sources: Amnesty, FIFA, Clifford Chance, The Guardian, New York Times, The Observer, Inside World Football.

0

F1 and sportswashing


Formula 1 claims about change questioned

There is increasing interest in the question of sportswashing – that is the increasing use by despotic regimes to sanitise their reputations through funding sports events. The World Cup was a recent example where the Qatar regime spent billions to host this event a major part of which was to give the country a good image. There were many concerns surrounding the event and the treatment of the workforce used to build the stadia and other projects. According to Amnesty and other human rights observers:

On sites both connected and unconnected to the World Cup, migrant workers have encountered:

  • recruitment fees, wage theft, debilitating debt and broken dreams, including for impoverished
    families back home;
  • abuse by employers emboldened by excessive powers and impunity for their actions, sometimes
    trapping workers in conditions that amount to forced labour; and
  • unbearable and dangerous working and living conditions, with thousands of workers’ deaths
    remaining unexplained, and at least hundreds likely to have been linked to exposure to the country’s
    extreme heat.

Qatar was an example of a regime with a poor human rights record, hosting an international sporting event. Regimes and oligarchs have used their massive wealth to acquire sporting assets in the UK and elsewhere. Recent examples have included the purchase of Newcastle Football Club by Saudi interests. It is true that sport has always had some kind of ‘display’ function and during the cold war years, the Soviet government and its satellite countries devoted enormous energies to win Olympic medals. It has now seemed to have grown with a large range of sports visiting countries with poor or very poor human rights records to compete in well-funded events.

There does not seem to have been much of a reaction to this. Tens of thousands went to the World Cup and although there were some limited attempts to wear arm bands in support of LGBQ rights, generally protests were extremely limited.

Sporting interests like to claim that sport has a role in stimulating change. There seems little sign of this. There is encouraging news however that people are questioning the F1 event in Bahrain. It is reported that a group of 20 cross party MPs have written to the governing body, FIA, to call for an independent inquiry into the sport’s activities in countries like Bahrain with questionable human rights records. The FIA claims apparently that they are committed to improving conditions and the best way is through dialogue and its continued presence in the grand prix. Unfortunately, the human rights situation shows no sign of improvement with torture, forced disappearances and extrajudicial killings still taking place there according to the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy.

It is difficult for individual sportsmen and women to take action especially if they are professional. They go where the competitions are and where the contracts require them to.

Sportswashing is essentially about laundering regime’s reputations using PR firms and masses of money. It is used to hide atrocious human rights records and corruption. At its heart is money but also, a willingness of those involved in sport – including fans and spectators – to look the other way. Sport sits at the back of most newspapers and in reporting events, the money and what lies behind the sport seldom gets discussed. It seems detached from other political reporting making it ideal for the process of sanitising reputations. The funding of arts institutions by fossil fuel firms for example has come under scrutiny and has attracted a lot of criticism and the ending of some relationships. The Sackler family, of Oxycontin fame, have seen their name removed from many galleries and arts venues. So the spotlight can work.

Lewis Hamilton has queried the claims by Formula One that it is bringing positive change so perhaps a greater awareness of the role of sport in sanitising these regime’s reputations might happen.

0

Qatar, world cup and human rights


Things have not gone all Qatar’s way in the World Cup

November 2022

Qatar has spent huge sums of money on building stadia and in attempts to promote its image around the world. It was perhaps the most expensive example of sports washing there has been. How successful is it?

Not going to plan

What is obvious is that it has not gone according to plan. Previous nation’s attempts to sanitise their image using sport have, from their point of view, been reasonably successful, one thinks of China. This has been because the sporting community: the sports people themselves, the managers and promoters, the media and many of the supporters – have cared little for the human rights of the countries where competition has taken place. So tennis, golf, boxing, cycling, horse racing, motor sport and other competitions have happily taken place in countries where torture is still practised, opposition is repressed, women have few rights and the death penalty is still a fact of life. Why let a stoning or public amputation spoil a game of tennis? No matter, the money is good and the sports pages of our media do not sully their pages with the sordid goings on outside the field of play. Sport has existed in a kind of bubble making it supremely suitable to be used by autocratic regimes to launder their image.

Qatar has been different. People have noticed and suddenly, some of the sports pages have moved away from sports reporting and are talking about arm bands, protests and footballers not singing the national anthem. The wearing of arm bands has become politically charged. There are pictures of people holding up posters particularly about women’s rights (or should we say, the absence of them). Yesterday, it was the German team covering their mouths. David Beckham who, up till now, has been able to promote himself as the honest Essex boy done good, is now seen in as a somewhat dubious light having accepted a reported £120m fee to be an ambassador for the Qataris. It is said he will not now get his knighthood. When reporters approach him for interview, he is silent. Not yet hero to zero but certainly a damaged brand.

FIFA want us to focus just on the football. Never mind the 6,500 worker deaths, the near absence of women’s rights, the silencing of opposition people and the anti LGBQI+ actions and laws. Where once football was to be the means by which nations came together and mutual understanding increased, now we are enjoined not to look outside the stadium itself. FIFA’s Infantino tells us that he understands prejudice because he has freckles and red hair which was a problem for him at school.

Sports washing may not be the same again

One positive thing may emerge from this World Cup and that is the days of sports washing may not be numbered but it will make countries and despots think twice in future. Instead of hundreds of thousands of supporters and spectators arriving to marvel at the spectacle no questions asked, some of them are asking questions. Some might even be a little uncomfortable at being there at all. The sports pages now mention the uncomfortable truths about the regime where the event is held and do not simply report on the sport as though wearing blinkers. Sport has been a willing captive, happy to take the millions and all too ready to claim ignorance of what happens outside the stadium or arena. The media has also followed the money. Perhaps those days are over and future events will bring a greater readiness to question and take account of the human rights situation in the host country.

0

FIFA and the World Cup


FIFA writes to all contestants urging them to ‘focus on the football’

November 2022

The decision to hold the World Cup in Qatar was always controversial and as the competition approaches, temperatures have risen concerning the state’s human rights record and treatment of the migrant workers who built the stadiums and facilities, around 6,500 of whom have reportedly died. The FIFA president Gianni Infantino has written to the 32 competing nations asking them to ‘focus on the football’. He suggests further that they need ‘to respect all opinions and beliefs without handing out moral lessons.’ The FIFA General Secretary Fatma Samoura goes further and tells us that the food is great and ‘the tea is beautiful!’ She suggests, absurdly, that Qatar can be used as a ‘role model for other countries in the Gulf’.

The essential dispute is whether sport is a useful pressure point to improve the human rights of the host nations where events take place, or whether sport is simply being used to sanitise the reputations of dire regimes, in other words, sports washing. There is an argument for sporting events going to a country where the combination of visibility, media attention and the need to ‘put on a good face’ can have a positive effect on how individuals are treated. While this may be true in principle, it was hard to find such positive examples on a search through a range of sport-based campaign organisations who promote this idea such as the Centre for Sports and Human Rights. The IOC claimed to insert requirements into their contracts but the extent to which they outlast the actual competition has to be questioned.

Qatar has a range of problems on the human rights front. They include the kafala system which ties workers to their employers. We have mentioned the claim that around 6,500 have died building the facilities. The workers are barred from forming a trade union. FIFA has claimed that reforms have been introduced but there seems little sign of them in practice and enforcement seems minimal. Wage theft is common.

Women are treated poorly. The suffer under the guardianship system which means the permission of a male member of the family is needed to marry, travel or study abroad and divorced women are not permitted to be their children’s guardian.

Same sex relations are banned and are a crime. There is no freedom of expression.

FIFA’s statements seem to be at variance to the idea of sport having some kind of ambassadorial role. If the footballers are being asked not to wear armbands, nor to ‘hand out moral lessons’ as they put it and generally keep a low profile, where then is the pressure on the Qataris going to come from? They were joined by the UK’s foreign secretary James Cleverly MP who was quoted at saying, in connection with LGBT football fans heading for the competition, that they should be ‘respectful of the host nation’. Downing Street distanced themselves from this crass comment.

Another factor is how the competition will be reported. Sports reporting lives largely in a world of its own. The narrative is around how the home country is progressing, who is the favourite to win and facile interviews with the various participants about their performances on the field past and future. Life outside the stadium and hotel rooms are unlikely to get a mention. Will any of the sports reporters visit the squalid accommodation that the men who built the stadiums live in? Will the subservient status of women be mentioned? Since freedom of expression is substantially curtailed, none of this is likely to see the light of day. The reporters might reasonably argue we are here to comment on football not on social or human rights conditions.

There seems no escape from the fact that sport is being used by repressive or abusive regimes to enhance their reputations and the sports people are only too willing to play along. It’s not just football of course: tennis; boxing; golf; motorsport; cycling and athletics have all quite happily taken the money. The notion that sporting events are a force for good and the publicity they generate helps those abused by the regimes is fanciful at best. There seems little evidence of sustained benefit deriving from these major international sporting events. Claims are made but the power of money seems to trump any moral considerations and those with the power to make a difference are only too content to look the other way.

Sources: ITV News; HRW; Amnesty; Mirror; Daily Mail; UNSW Sidney

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑