10 hours Ago By Jerrad Peters
I recently returned from Europe, where, as it has in North America, both formal and informal discourse continues to revolve around the new American administration and its assaults on territorial sovereignty, international trade and basically the whole of the post-war status quo. Read this article for free: Already have an account? To continue reading, please subscribe: * I recently returned from Europe, where, as it has in North America, both formal and informal discourse continues to revolve around the new American administration and its assaults on territorial sovereignty, international trade and basically the whole of the post-war status quo. Read unlimited articles for free today: Already have an account? Opinion I recently returned from Europe, where, as it has in North America, both formal and informal discourse continues to revolve around the new American administration and its assaults on territorial sovereignty, international trade and basically the whole of the post-war status quo.
Initially caught completely off guard — which they shouldn’t have been — the Europeans seem finally to be orienting themselves to this new reality, moving from the shock of the affront to a sharper sense of the moment. At the same time I was reading, watching and listening to the commentary from back home, much of it rightfully questioning the lack of support from Canada’s trans-Atlantic friends, the general sense among the EU’s talking classes was this country’s government had won the first tariff stand-off with its southern neighbours — a victory that seemed to at once comfort and embolden our allies. PAMELA SMITH / THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FILES It is highly unlikely FIFA President Gianni Infantino would do anything to ruffle the feathers of U.
S. President Donald Trump. Another observation I made — and this is where sport, and world football specifically, becomes relevant — was the overseas media spaces (see the latest issue of for one example) have begun to critically weigh what a belligerent, inward-looking United States might mean for a range of global institutions.
Given the 2026 World Cup will take place on this continent, it might be worthwhile, even prudent, to consider how this White House may attempt to reshape the sporting landscape along its ideological lines. Or how it’s already doing it. Earlier this month the administration opened the sports-focused front of its scorched-earth campaign when an executive order targeted transgender and non-binary athletes.
Whatever one’s personal views on this issue, the fact remains the National Women’s Soccer League — which operates under the auspices of US Soccer — allows the participation of trans footballers. Is it conceivable the White House could meddle in NWSL policy? Without question. The president’s loathing of the U.
S. women’s national team is no secret (the feeling is mutual), and he’d hardly need a nudge to pressure the league’s decision-makers into conforming to his will. This, and any other intrusions in US Soccer matters, would likely constitute what FIFA categorizes as governmental trespassing in the independence of a member association, the sort of offence which obliges it to suspend the country in question.
Is it conceivable FIFA, should US Soccer be so compromised, suspend it? Absolutely not. There’s a better chance of the sport’s governing body proactively adjusting its own statutes to satisfy its friends in Washington, D.C.
It’s hardly a secret FIFA president Gianni Infantino is quite cozy with his Oval Office counterpart. He sat among billionaire donors at the inauguration, and his move to Miami has ensured he’s closer on a day-to-day basis with World Cup organizers and fellow grovellers at Mar-a-Lago. A recent article in declared sport could no longer “ignore” the American president, and a column in the same publication openly asked about the extent to which he’ll “interfere in the upcoming major events,” namely the World Cup and 2028 Olympic Games in Los Angeles.
Sports officials, mostly with FIFA, “have been doing so much antechambering for some time now that they can consider themselves pretty much the president’s best friends,” it added. Another German newspaper, , has raised the matter of entry permits and visas for World Cup teams, fans and journalists — documentation the White House could well withhold at random, or according to whatever set of circumstances its unpredictable attention span has looked to on a particular day. Iran, for example, is unbeaten in World Cup qualifying and pretty much a lock for participation in the competition proper.
A single, mindless remark from the Oval Office about their presence in the United States could be enough to inspire the spineless Infantino into having a “well, now that you mention it” moment. China could also qualify, and North Korea has yet to be eliminated. Should they beat Jordan next month, Palestine may also be on course for at least the next round of qualifying.
Then there’s the guaranteed presence of several Central American teams and the tens of thousands of supporters keen to accompany them. All told, an awful lot of people this administration detests will be clamouring to visit major American cities. Will they be allowed to? Can we expect daily diplomatic incidents? These are reasonable questions to ask, and we haven’t even broached the subject of Canada-U.
S. and Mexico-U.S.
relations. The three World Cup co-hosts would ideally co-operate to facilitate seamless movement between countries. Somehow, the spectre of soldiers patrolling the two borders seems more likely.
Two weeks ago the pointed out Infantino and FIFA are “now caught assembling a monthlong sporting extravaganza in 16 cities from Boston to Vancouver to Monterrey in the midst of a rolling diplomatic crisis whose outcome no one seems able to predict.” And what of Russia? Suspended by FIFA, UEFA, the IOC and most other sports organizations upon its invasion of Ukraine in 2022, it has since enjoyed the renewal of a peer-to-peer relationship with the U.S.
On Thursday, IOC presidential candidate Lord Coe revealed he’d be open to readmitting Russia, given the country’s sudden entente cordiale with the Americans. FIFA, meanwhile, has been quietly re-admitting Russian youth teams to its competitions. Once again, a single speculative remark from an Oval Office increasingly inclined to toss Ukraine under the bus could be enough to commence an expedited Russian return to global sport.
Already, IIHF president Luc Tardif has stated he’d like to see Russia’s international hockey ban lifted “as soon as possible.” Now, none of these scenarios are guaranteed, never mind their outcomes. The scramble to satisfy a volatile United States could slow, and key figures of courage and conscience could emerge within FIFA, UEFA, the IOC and other major governance bodies.
The White House could also lose interest in, well, just about anything. Thursdays Keep up to date on sports with Mike McIntyre's weekly newsletter. What is guaranteed is Canada will be co-hosting the world’s biggest sporting showpiece — ever — in fewer than 500 days.
As it stands, we’ll be co-hosting it with Mexico and an international pariah. World Cup matches in this country will take place the same day as others in places where rates of maternal mortality have regressed by a century, where athletes are ostracized because of their gender, where visiting fans have to duck the gaze of deportation forces. What we do with all that, and with everything that might happen before then, has a lot to do with the questions we start asking now.
[email protected] jerradpeters.bsky.
social Advertisement Advertisement.
