Football Cannot Stay Out of Politics, Belgian Media Argues—Here’s Why

For decades, football’s governing bodies have insisted the game must stay “apolitical,” a stance that has allowed tournaments like the FIFA World Cup to proceed despite controversies over human rights, labor abuses, and corruption. But as Belgian media outlet Knack argues in a recent editorial, that position is increasingly untenable.

The magazine’s stance comes as football fans, players, and even some governing bodies grapple with whether the sport can—or should—remain detached from the world’s political battles. The debate was reignited by the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar, where allegations of worker exploitation, LGBTQ+ rights restrictions, and environmental concerns clashed with FIFA’s insistence on focusing solely on the game.

“Football cannot remain outside politics. The idea that it can is nonsense. The World Cup in Qatar proved that once and for all.”

— Knack editorial, March 2024

Knack‘s argument aligns with growing criticism from activists, journalists, and even some football officials who believe the sport’s global platform demands accountability. The magazine points to several key moments where football’s political entanglements have become impossible to ignore:

• Qatar 2022: The tournament was marred by reports of migrant worker deaths, labor rights abuses, and environmental damage, despite FIFA’s insistence that the focus should remain on the sport.
• Russia 2018: Sanctions and boycott calls over human rights violations in Russia led to a divided fan movement, with some teams and players refusing to participate in political statements.
• FIFA Governance Reforms: The recent overhaul of FIFA’s leadership, including the election of a new president, was framed as a move toward transparency—but critics argue it was also a response to long-standing corruption scandals tied to political influence.

Why the ‘Apolitical’ Stance Is a Myth

The idea that football can separate itself from politics ignores the sport’s history. From the 1936 Berlin Olympics, where Nazi propaganda was woven into the games, to the 1978 World Cup in Argentina, which coincided with a brutal military dictatorship, football has always been a tool of political messaging—whether by design or default.

Modern football’s global reach means it cannot escape scrutiny. The Knack editorial highlights how:

• Fan Activism: Groups like FIFA Watch and Football Supporters Europe have pushed for greater accountability, arguing that football’s governing bodies cannot ignore human rights abuses tied to tournaments.
• Player Voices: High-profile athletes, including Belgian stars like Eden Hazard and Kevin De Bruyne, have spoken out on social issues, forcing clubs and federations to address political and social questions.
• Corporate Sponsorship: Brands like Adidas, Coca-Cola, and Visa—all tied to FIFA—face pressure to align with human rights standards, making it difficult for football to claim neutrality.

Even FIFA’s own rules reflect this tension. While the organization’s statutes prohibit political interference, the same documents allow for “social responsibility” initiatives—effectively acknowledging that football cannot ignore the world around it.

What Qatar 2022 Revealed About Football’s Political Role

The 2022 World Cup in Qatar served as a turning point. While FIFA insisted the tournament was about “unity in football,” the reality was far more complex. Reports from human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, detailed systemic abuses tied to stadium construction, migrant worker conditions, and environmental harm.

Despite these controversies, FIFA maintained its apolitical stance, arguing that discussing human rights would “politicize” the tournament. But the backlash was immediate:

• Over 100,000 fans signed petitions calling for boycotts or reforms.
• Several national teams, including Belgium and Wales, wore rainbow armbands in solidarity with LGBTQ+ rights, defying FIFA’s ban on political gestures.
• Corporate sponsors faced protests, with some, like Coca-Cola, distancing themselves from the tournament’s controversies.

FIFA’s response? A $440 million settlement with the Qatari government for labor reforms—hardly a neutral stance, critics argue. The settlement was framed as a “social responsibility” measure, but it also served to quiet international criticism.

How Football’s Governance Is Changing

The recent election of Sunil Gulati as FIFA’s new president in March 2024 marked a shift in the organization’s approach. Gulati, a former U.S. Soccer executive, campaigned on transparency and reform, explicitly acknowledging that football’s global platform comes with responsibilities.

Key changes under Gulati’s leadership include:

• Human Rights Policies: FIFA has introduced stricter labor standards for host nations, though critics argue enforcement remains weak.
• Fan Engagement: The organization has pledged to give supporters more input in World Cup decisions, including potential boycotts or protests.
• Corporate Accountability: Sponsors are now required to align with FIFA’s human rights policies, though loopholes remain.

Yet, even these reforms are not enough for activists. Knack argues that true change requires football to embrace its political role rather than pretend it doesn’t exist.

“FIFA can no longer claim neutrality. The question is no longer whether football should be political, but how it will engage with the world’s challenges—responsibly or not.”

— Knack editorial analysis

What This Means for the Future of Football

The debate over football’s political role is unlikely to fade. As Knack points out, the sport’s global influence means it will continue to be a target for activism, corporate pressure, and governance scrutiny. The key questions moving forward are:

1. Can FIFA balance commercial interests with human rights demands? The organization’s reliance on corporate sponsors and host nations creates conflicts that will only intensify.
2. Will fan activism lead to real change? Movements like FIFA Watch have grown in influence, but their impact on policy remains limited.
3. How will players and clubs respond? With stars like Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo using their platforms for social causes, the pressure on football to engage politically will only grow.

One thing is clear: the days of football pretending to be apolitical are over. Whether that leads to meaningful reform or continued controversy remains to be seen.

Key Takeaways

• Football’s ‘apolitical’ stance is a myth. The sport has always been tied to politics, from propaganda to human rights debates.
• Qatar 2022 exposed the limits of FIFA’s neutrality. Controversies over labor rights, LGBTQ+ issues, and environmental harm forced the organization to confront its role in global politics.
• Fan and player activism is reshaping football’s governance. Movements like FIFA Watch and high-profile athlete statements are pushing for greater accountability.
• Corporate sponsors are no longer silent. Brands tied to FIFA face backlash over human rights abuses linked to tournaments.
• The future of football hinges on how it engages with politics. Whether reform comes from within FIFA or external pressure remains uncertain.

Next Up: Follow Archysport for updates on FIFA’s governance reforms, the 2026 World Cup host selection, and how fan movements are shaping the future of football.