With the US set to host 78 of 104 matches played at this year’s World Cup, the others being hosted in Canada and Mexico, there have been calls to boycott the summer games. These calls come as a result of Trump’s aggressiveness towards Greenland, and in pushback of the horrific treatment of migrants by ICE in US cities, especially in Minnesota.
The heads of twenty European football federations have discussed the possibility of a boycott. Gottlich, the vice president of the German Football Association, the DFB, has called for the serious consideration of a boycott. He has said that the need to boycott the US games now is greater than ever; greater than it was in 1980 when the US led a boycott of the Olympic games in the USSR over the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The strong calls to boycott the 2022 games in Qatar vs the comparative silence on the prospect of a US boycott is something that really “bothers“. Ex-FIFA President, Blatter, has joined the DFB in their calls for a boycott of the US games. However, voices like these, when it comes to football bodies and the presidents of key nations, are in the minority. This article will explain why a unilateral boycott of the US World Cup is unlikely at this stage, especially by the UK, and why in the grand scheme of things, it is an ineffective stand against Trump’s policies.
.jpg)
Firstly, nations allied to the US, like the UK, would unlikely have their leaders take a stand against Trump. Sporting boycotts, like the boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics, have historically been coordinated by political leaders, not sporting federations. President Carter led the 1980 boycott by rallying sixty nations to boycott the games, and today, it is unlikely that the FA would diverge from Starmer’s line on the US which is very much to not upset the Trump administration.
Aside from the opinion of its leaders, it is unlikely that the UK population at large would support a boycott. Yes, there has been much criticism of US policy on this side of the Atlantic, however, the 2026 games marks the first time that Scotland has qualified since 1998. This means that two of the UK’s four nations: Scotland and England would be playing. With the UK’s massive interest and stakes in the World Cup, it is hard to confidently say that the general public would support a political boycott.
Also, countries who do boycott the World Cup stand to lose a lot. FIFA runs the World Cup and sanctions virtually all major global football competitions, including the UEFA Championships and most significant age-group tournaments. With its president, Infantino, cosying up to Trump, and FIFA being able to ban federations and national teams, countries who boycott the games could in theory be banned from all these competitions, which would be a major hit on their revenues.
Lastly, whilst the idea of boycotting the World Cup has been floated, it has not received serious consideration. Even if it did, there was lots of fuss kicked up about a potential boycott of the 2022 World Cup hosted in Qatar over the countries’ human rights violations, and this did not amount to a boycott. All thirty-two of the federations that qualified participated. Similarly, demands to ban Israel have been made since 2023 over its occupation of Gaza, and these have not been actualised. It is therefore very unlikely that the US – a major global player and leader – would, under present circumstances, see a successful boycotting of their games.
Whilst unlikely, a boycott would also be relatively insignificant for Trump. Granted, Trump would be embarrassed if the US’ historical allies took a stand against him of this nature. The administration has poured a lot of money and made great ceremony over the cup already, but most of the profits will go to FIFA itself. A boycott would probably not cause Trump to reverse any of the major policy decisions that are the source of the calls for a boycott.
At this time, a boycott of the World Cup held in the US is very unlikely. However, there is a significant amount of time between now and June, when it is taking place. Who knows what decisions Trump stands to make between now and then and if any of these could constitute as red lines, prompting nations to seriously consider a boycott.
Images:
