Since 1930, the FIFA World Cup has always been one of the most-watched events in the world. It was no different this past year, with the World Cup in Qatar gaining over 1.5 billion viewers on television. However, when FIFA awarded the small kingdom of Qatar the honor of hosting the World Cup in 2010, the country faced various international scrutiny on subjects including bribery, migrant worker exploitation, and the prohibition of homosexuality. 

Qatar expressed interest in hosting the momentous sport event years earlier. Qatari Ambassador Dr. Al-Muftah to the United Nations stated that in 2008, the country launched the 2030 national vision board to "host major sporting events” to “strengthen our capabilities and build our reputation as a reliable international player and partner.” However, after receiving their bid in 2010 to host the event, they were met with bribery allegations from the U.S. Department of Justice. U.S. prosecutors revealed details about how Qatari and Russian media executives paid “five members of FIFA’s top board ahead of the 2010 vote to choose Russia and Qatar as hosts” for the games. Additionally, there is evidence of money laundering and wire fraud correlating with the bribes to secure television rights for the international soccer tournament. Although the 2022 World Cup organizers adamantly denied these allegations, a global response claimed the allegations were influenced by Qatar being the first nation from the Middle East to want to host such an event. Even Qatari World Cup Ambassador Nasser al Khater argued that Qatar and the Middle East, in general, have been “unfairly treated and scrutinized” for several years as a defense to the nature of the allegations from the United States and other international actors. 

These bribery allegations from 2010 are not the only element considered controversial about Qatar hosting the World Cup. In 2022, Qatar faced much criticism from human rights groups and the media over its treatment of migrant workers from Nepal and other South Asian countries. However, foreigners “comprise the bulk of the country's population.” The Qatari government withheld salaries and failed to uphold humane working conditions when building the new stadiums, resulting in the death of at least 6,500 people due to prolonged heat exposure. This is not surprising, considering FIFA granted Qatar the games without set protections for these migrant workers that would build the infrastructure. 

Amnesty International is now calling on FIFA to compensate for the human rights abuses towards migrant workers by reserving over $440 million, equivalent to the World Cup prize money. Also, a large organization such as FIFA should be held accountable for allowing the World Cup to be held in a place lacking labor laws, considering the amount of infrastructure that had to be built to host such an event with an estimated cost of $220 billion. 

Before and during the World Cup event, the international public also criticized the criminalization of homosexuality in Qatar. Players and fans entering Qatar were subject to these prejudicial belief systems, even though the World Cup is meant to symbolize cross-cultural unity. It began as captains of several European nations, including England’s Harry Kane and Germany’s Manuel Neuer, raised concerns for their fans from the LGBTQ+ community, asking if they would face discrimination when they traveled to Qatar for the event. 

Less than two weeks before the finals, Qatar World Cup ambassador Khalid Salman claimed that homosexuality was "damage in mind.” The WC players also faced repression for expressing their political beliefs. For instance, team captains of England, Wales, Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany, and Denmark had planned to wear "OneLove" armbands but were met with “extreme blackmail” by the Qatari government, which forced them to drop the band. The one love armbands refer to the One Love organization that focuses on empowering young individuals to see the signs of unhealthy relationships and the importance of providing educational resources about love regardless of sexual orientation.

These conflicts show that the World Cup is not just a sports event but is seen as a symbol for particular moral or political values preferred by the Qatari regime. This has not always been the case since traditionally, the World Cup, as seen when it was held in Brazil, Spain, and other places, has always brought people from different cultural backgrounds through the passion of soccer. The World Cup itself is not the issue; the real problem began with how Qatar acquired its hosting rights through bribery and now used it to impose its moral beliefs on the sport's players and fans. A large institution like FIFA endorses this event but has done little to respond to the allegations—even the prohibition of signs of expression, such as the OneLove armbands. 

By utilizing the idea of soccer, Qatar had the opportunity to unite numerous nations, but it ultimately failed to unite the attending nations. Hosting the game enabled Qatari officials to mingle with essential politicians, celebrities, and business people worldwide. World leaders, including President Emmanuel Macron from France, U.S. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken, and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, attended the World Cup matches. These leaders and others engaged in various policy negotiations regarding human rights and economic investments between their respective nations and Qatar. To illustrate, the majority of the attendees of this event came from the U.S. sectors of “entertainment, development, humanitarian assistance, technology, and energy.” These fields have been of significant interest in Qatari foreign relations and can be seen in specific policy frameworks. 

The 2022 World Cup in Qatar highlighted that the rights of workers, women, or LGBT+ individuals are of secondary importance to the Qatari government regarding state-to-state relations and international events. Qatar’s efforts to impose cultural values on the cup may contradict its efforts to build ties elsewhere. Doha used this sporting event to enhance its international profile and put them in a position to negotiate its economic and political relations with leaders who were fans of the sport.

More From Our Writers