SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
saudi arabia
Saudi Arabia Deserves a Red Card, Not the World Cup
Awarding Saudi Arabia the World Cup violates FIFA’s own human rights rules. The world of football should not look away.
Dec 22, 2024
No one can predict which team will win the Men’s World Cup soccer championship in 2034. But based on current conditions, we know the biggest losers will be the millions of migrant workers subject to egregious abuses while building stadiums, transit, infrastructure, and other facilities for host country Saudi Arabia over the next decade.
On December 11, the 211 national members of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) will hold a vote in an “Extraordinary Congress” to decide who will host the 2034 tournament. The conclusion is already known because Saudi Arabia is the only bidder and has received a glowing score from FIFA in the evaluation of its bid.
FIFA doesn’t disclose how much it profits from granting its flagship tournament to countries with dismal human rights records. Those most affected by this decision— Saudi Arabia’s 13.4 million migrant workers, Saudi citizens, players, fans and journalists—have no vote.
FIFA and its Saudi government partners boasted recently that Saudi Arabia’s evaluation score of 419.8 out of 500 is “the highest ever score in FIFA World Cup history.” The deeply flawed FIFA evaluation process further downplayed systemic human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia with a “medium risk” rating.
FIFA gave this “highest ever score” to a country with no labor unions, no press freedom, and a government that is deeply repressive and punishes any dissent.
“We cannot say that Saudi Arabia is a ‘medium risk’ country, given that it has become a pure police state,” said Lina al-Hathloul, Head of Monitoring and Advocacy at ALQST For Human Rights, whose sister Loujain was jailed and tortured for advocating for women’s right to drive.
This month FIFA leaders also rejected the organization’s own independent report that confirms FIFA “has a responsibility” to compensate families of thousands of migrant workers who died building FIFA’s last World Cup, in Qatar in 2022.
Like Qatar, Saudi Arabia operates under the abusive labor sponsorship system known as kafala, where migrant workers pay large recruitment fees, often have passports taken and wages stolen by employers, and cannot change jobs or leave the country freely. Labor unions, strikes and protests are banned. Saudi authorities do not adequately protect migrant workers from dangerous conditions such as extreme heat.
The unprecedented scale of Saudi World Cup plans makes the potential for labor rights catastrophes greater even than for the Qatar World Cup. The Saudi hosting documents promise to construct—in the deadly desert heat, as in Qatar—11 new and 4 refurbished stadiums,185,000 new hotel rooms, and to carry out airport, road and rail construction. This infrastructure deficit will rest entirely on the backs of migrant workers to build. Many of these World Cup projects will be accomplished with funding from the Saudi state-run $925 billion Public Investment Fund and from oil and gas behemoth Aramco, FIFA’s new major worldwide partner.
The hundreds of billions of dollars in construction come with a high human cost. A new Human Rights Watch report found that 884 migrant workers from Bangladesh died in Saudi Arabia between January and July 2024—a six month period. Eighty percent of these deaths were un-investigated, attributed to “natural causes,” and not eligible for compensation. Human Rights Watch wrote to FIFA President Gianni Infantino on November 4, 2024, documenting widespread labor abuses on giga-projects in Saudi Arabia that will be part of the World Cup infrastructure. FIFA has not responded.
Winning the right to host is an effort championed by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has made clear that the FIFA World Cup is a centerpiece of the Saudi national sportswashing strategy to project a reformist image of the country, while covering up its human rights abuses. “If sportswashing is going to increase my GDP by 1 percent, then we will continue doing sportswashing,” the de-facto Saudi leader said in an interview with Fox News last year. “I don’t care.”
But FIFA should care. Awarding Saudi Arabia the World Cup violates FIFA’s own human rights rules. In 2016, facing a corruption crisis, FIFA put in place specific human rights standards for itself and countries hosting the games—including protections against forced labor. These reforms were supposed to keep the tournament away from the worst human-rights violators. FIFA also pledged “an ongoing due diligence process to identify, address, evaluate and communicate the risks of involvement with adverse human rights impacts,” promising to “make every effort to uphold its international human rights responsibilities.”
Yet not a single migrant worker, victim of human rights crimes, torture survivor, jailed women’s rights defender, or Saudi civil society member was consulted for FIFA’s supposedly independent human rights assessment. FIFA’s “Bid Evaluation Report” doesn’t even mention the historic forced labor complaint against the Saudi government filed by the trade union BWI at the International Labour Organization (ILO) in June of this year. A similar complaint about Qatar in 2014 spurred labor reforms in the country, although too late to help thousands of migrant workers who died.
In 2023, FIFA was forced to cancel the sponsorship it sold to the Saudi state-run tourism company “Visit Saudi,” after protests by women players. In October, more than 100 top women players published an open letter protesting FIFA’s lucrative sponsorship deal with the Saudi state oil giant Aramco. Already, two United States senators have called for FIFA to pick a different host for the 2034 World Cup.
FIFA needs to cancel the vote and back athletes and human rights over profiteering from Saudi sportswashing. Every sponsor, business, broadcaster, and national team associated with the Saudi World Cup will be tainted by widespread labor and other abuses unless wholesale, urgent human rights reforms are implemented. FIFA’s decision to award Saudi Arabia the 2034 World Cup is an unforgivable betrayal of basic human rights that risks migrant workers’ lives. It deserves a red card.
Keep ReadingShow Less
If Ronaldo Won't, Who Will Take a Stand Against Saudi Arabia's Human Rights Record?
Handing the World Cup to Saudi Arabia in 2034 cues up a torrent of terrible tidings that clash mightily with FIFA’s stated commitment to human rights.
Dec 13, 2024
When global soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo this week tweeted, “Congratulations to all my friends in Saudi, I know how proud you all are today and I am sure @Saudi2034 will be historic” it was hard not to wince.
The Portuguese icon’s celebration of the announcement that Saudi Arabia would host the 2034 men’s World Cup was hardly a surprise. In 2023 he signed a whopping $200 million-per-year deal with Saudi club Al Nassr FC. At the time, Amnesty International implored Ronaldo to take a stand on human rights, but to no avail. Instead, he soaked up Saudi cash and even enjoyed the opening of a “CR7 Signature Museum” at the garish Boulevard World tourist development in Riyadh.
Fast forward to Wednesday when FIFA, the world governing body for soccer, handed Saudi Arabia its crown-jewel tournament, the men’s World Cup. FIFA President Gianni Infantino declared, “The 2034 FIFA World Cup…will be a spectacular event. What Saudi Arabia has put forward in their bid is absolutely incredible.”
If by “incredible” Infantino meant lacking credibility, he was right. Ahead of the vote, FIFA changed its rules to make voting on the 2030 and 2034 men’s World Cups a package deal where vote-splitting was not allowed. There was no debate ahead of the vote, which was held over Zoom. Voting members made their preference known via a simple raising of their hands; their images could be seen on a panel of tiny Zoom boxes behind Infantino as he opened up an envelope with a card bearing Saudi Arabia’s name. It was a sham vote brazenly sprayed around the world.
Not only does sport create a space where [the Saudi crown prince] can plunge surplus capital derived from oil revenues, but it is a tremendous vehicle for pro-Saudi propaganda, even capable of drowning out the sound of a bone-saw.
Moreover, handing the tournament to Saudi Arabia cues up a torrent of terrible tidings that clash mightily with FIFA’s stated commitment to human rights. According to Minky Worden, the director of global initiatives at Human Rights Watch, “FIFA is willfully blind to the country’s human rights record, setting up a decade of potentially horrific human rights abuses preparing for the 2034 World Cup.” This view is co-signed by a slew of human-rights organizations. Steve Cockburn, Amnesty International’s head of labor rights and sport, noted, “FIFA’s evaluation of Saudi Arabia’s World Cup bid is an astonishing whitewash of the country’s atrocious human rights record.” He added, “Fundamental human rights reforms are urgently required in Saudi Arabia, or the 2034 World Cup will be inevitably tarnished by exploitation, discrimination and repression.”
FIFA’s move to choose Saudi Arabia to host the 2034 World Cup is an apex moment for sportswashing: when political leaders use sports to legitimize themselves on the global stage while stoking nationalism and diverting attention from human rights woes at home. This was a brash sportwash executed out in the open for all to see. But the announcement also helps advance authoritarianism at a moment of rising autocracy across the globe. In fact, FIFA itself is sliding deeper into an autocracy, regularly ignoring its own guiding principles and increasingly resembling the very authoritarian governments with whom it collaborates.
Let’s be clear: sportwashing is an equal opportunity exploiter. The United States is just as capable of carrying out sportswashing as Saudi Arabia. For instance, to secure the 2028 Summer Olympics, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti vowed to Seth Meyers on late-night television, “I’m confident by the time the Olympics come, we can end homelessness on the streets of L.A.” Meanwhile, homelessness continues to ravage human lives in LA, a humanitarian crisis in plain sight.
In fact, we can expect an onslaught of sportswashing in the US in the coming years. After all, FIFA President Gianni Infantino openly adores recently re-elected President Donald Trump. Infantino wasted no time congratulating Trump on his electoral victory, even before the Electoral College votes were in, posting on Instagram, “We will have a great FIFA World Cup and a great FIFA Club World Cup in the United States of America!” Infantino shared six photos of himself and Trump, a montage of sycophancy. More recently he cozied up to Trump and Elon Musk at the reopening of the Notre Dame cathedral in Paris.
Let’s be clear: sportwashing is an equal opportunity exploiter. The United States is just as capable of carrying out sportswashing as Saudi Arabia.
Infantino caused a media kerfuffle in 2022 when, at the opening match of the Qatar World Cup, he was nabbed on camera chuckling it up with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The Crown Prince has placed sport at the center of his global charm offensive. Not only does sport create a space where he can plunge surplus capital derived from oil revenues, but it is a tremendous vehicle for pro-Saudi propaganda, even capable of drowning out the sound of a bone-saw.
Research carried out by investigative journalist Karim Zidan and Stanis Elsborg of the Danish group Play the Game documented Saudi Arabia’s enormous—and ever-growing—sport footprint. Their exhaustive research report, “Saudi Arabia’s Grip on World Sports,” catalogs more than 900 sponsorships and 1,400 strategic positions that comprise the juggernaut of influence that Saudi Arabia has conjured to sportswash its global image. MBS is a man with a plan, and that plan involves sport.
And Mohammed bin Salman has made it clear that he has no qualms about sportswashing, stating directly on Fox News that he will “continue doing sport washing” regardless of public pushback. He “doesn’t care” about accusations of sportswashing. What other countries deign to deny, he openly welcomes. President Joe Biden’s notorious “bloody fist bump see around the world” only greased the path.
But not everyone is standing idly by. In October, a group of more than 100 prominent women’s soccer players wrote a letter to FIFA, denouncing the group for its sponsorship deal with Saudi Aramco, the Saudi Arabian oil firm. Describing the agreement as a “middle finger to women’s soccer,” the athletes raised concerns over gross human-rights violations, singling out anti-LGBTQ and anti-women practices in the country. CBC columnist Shireen Ahmed wrote, “There is no doubt that FIFA's connection deserves to be challenged and it is no surprise that women are leading the way.”
Now it’s time for the biggest stars of men’s soccer to follow their lead. Cristiano Ronaldo might be a lost cause, but it’s not too late to take a stand for what’s right. It’s not an exaggeration to say that lives are on the line.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Major Plastic Polluters Win as UN Treaty Talks Conclude Without Agreement
"Every day that governments allow polluters to continue flooding the world with plastic, we all pay the price," said one campaigner.
Dec 01, 2024
Environmental groups on Sunday decried the conclusion of a United Nations summit designed to secure an international treaty to combat plastic pollution after powerful oil- and gas-producing nations refused to agree to production limits and other more aggressive measures to curb pollution.
Failure to reach an agreement means the talks—known as the INC-5 round that took place in Busan, South Korea—will be extended to another round, but campaigners said the sabotage of a far-reaching treaty by fossil fuel interests is wasting precious time that the world's ecosystems, wildlife, and people can no longer afford.
"Every day that governments allow polluters to continue flooding the world with plastic, we all pay the price. This delay comes with dire consequences for people and the planet, ruthlessly sacrificing those on the frontlines of this crisis," said Graham Forbes, Greenpeace's Head of Delegation to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations.
Reutersreports that the "most divisive issues included capping plastic production, managing plastic products and chemicals of concern, and financing to help developing countries implement the treaty."
"It is unjust that those who bear the greatest burden of plastic pollution are being denied the opportunity to forge a solution among themselves by those profiteering off the unregulated production and consumption of plastic."
Powerful oil producers, both private companies and governments of oil-producing nations, were seen as the key impediment to a deal. As the New York Timesreported:
Saudi Arabia, Russia and other producers of petroleum, which is used to make most of the world’s plastic, have pushed back against measures that would address plastic pollution by placing curbs on excessive plastic production. The Saudis and their allies have also said they oppose any treaty that would start to list and phase out chemicals present in plastic that are thought to be harmful to health.
In closed-door negotiations late Saturday, Saudi Arabia, along with other nations, was pushing to delete entire paragraphs from the treaty text on who should finance the costs of implementing the agreement, according to a delegate with direct knowledge of the proceedings.
"Civil society, Indigenous people, waste pickers and affected peoples were locked out of the negotiations for days," said Sam Cossar-Gilbert of Friends of the Earth International.
At the same time, Cossar-Gilbert added, "220 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists registered to attend INC-5, the highest at any of the Plastics Treaty negotiations. The process is under attack by corporate power and a small minority of countries intent on nothing but blocking, weakening and delaying."
Eirik Lindebjerg, global plastics policy lead for the World Wildlife fund, said a "week of hard-fought and frustrating negotiations" in Busan ended "with governments no closer to agreeing on a solution to the worsening plastic crisis. It has now been over 1,000 days and five negotiation meetings since governments agreed to establish a legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution. Over this time, more than 800 million tonnes of plastic has been produced, over 30 million tonnes of which have leaked into our ocean, harming wildlife, poisoning ecosystems and destroying lives, to say nothing of the plastic that has been sent to landfill or burnt."
As did others, Lindebjerg pointed the finger at powerful nations that benefit from the plastics industry as the chief culprits to progress.
"For too long, a small minority of states have held the negotiation process hostage. It is abundantly clear that these countries have no intention of finding a meaningful solution to this crisis and yet they continue to prevent the large majority of states who do," he said. "It is unjust that those who bear the greatest burden of plastic pollution are being denied the opportunity to forge a solution among themselves by those profiteering off the unregulated production and consumption of plastic."
Campaigners say the following round of talks, which will conclude the treaty effort, must not follow the same path as what occurred in South Korea.
"As we move forward with the Chairs non-paper which was approved by member states at INC-5 as a basis for future negotiations," said Cossar-Gilbert, "we demand a democratic, transparent and inclusive process for an ambitious Plastics Treaty."
And Lindebjerg added that it is now "increasingly clear that the majority of states that are committed to securing a meaningful agreement with the necessary binding measures to end plastic pollution must be ready to vote or adopt a treaty-of-the-willing. If INC-5 has shown us anything it's that we are not going to find the solution we desperately need through more of the same. The crisis demands more. People and wildlife demand more. And it is our governments' job to deliver."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular