Mexico’s 2-0 win over South Africa at the Azteca gave the 2026 FIFA World Cup the release it badly needed. For 90 minutes, the tournament could look like what FIFA sells so well: colour, noise, flags, spectacle and shared emotion. Yet the first whistle did not dissolve the question that shadowed the build-up. If this is the biggest and most inclusive World Cup in history, why has access to it already begun to look conditional?
That is the real issue. Not whether politics should enter sport. That argument belongs to a more innocent age, if such an age ever existed. The World Cup has always been political, carrying national prestige, commercial power, race, migration, television money, soft power and security anxieties on its back. The more serious question is whether football’s governing body can protect the integrity of its own competition when the host state’s immigration, security and foreign-policy machinery decides who may enter, officiate, report, support or participate.
The contradiction is glaring. FIFA expanded this edition to 48 teams and 104 matches across three host countries. However, no inclusion buzzwords protected Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan, selected for the tournament and reportedly holding a valid visa, against being denied entry into the US and removed from the roster. He had been set to become the first Somali to officiate at a men’s World Cup. Iraqi players and staff have reportedly faced questioning and entry problems. Iran’s campaign has unfolded under still greater strain, with visa delays, war-related tension and the team shifting its base from Arizona to Tijuana.
FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s answer has been revealing. On the eve of the tournament, he told critics to “chill, relax”, while conceding that FIFA could not overrule national immigration decisions.
This problem is, nevertheless, not new. FIFA has long presented itself as politically neutral while acting, or refusing to act, in deeply political ways. It has excluded some countries, tolerated others, and allowed the language of football unity to coexist with the realities of state power.
The ticket issue deepens the contradiction. A tournament marketed as global inclusion has also been criticised for pricing that risks narrowing the in-stadium audience.
None of this means the football is irrelevant. Once the ball moves, players will still produce joy, memory and escape. That is precisely why the World Cup matters. It can create contact where diplomacy fails, give smaller nations visibility, and briefly make identity feel celebratory rather than dangerous. But that is also why FIFA’s responsibilities cannot end at kick-off. *