The conclusion of the World Cup in Qatar has ignited concerns among various organizations and activists who are apprehensive that the extensively documented human rights violations in the Persian Gulf nation might slip away from the public’s awareness. Guillermo Whpei, in his capacity as the President of the Foundation for International Democracy, firmly believes that the end of the tournament marks the initiation of a new advocacy campaign.
Whpei asserts, «The battle starts as soon as the World Cup concludes.» He has made a commitment that the Foundation will actively pursue three primary objectives: exerting pressure on FIFA to adopt a more ethical stance and openly acknowledge its actions, working to enhance the working conditions of migrant laborers, and securing financial compensation for the victims’ families.
At the outset of the World Cup, the Foundation released a study initiated in 2017 that assessed the conditions of these workers. Nevertheless, the precise methods to achieve their proposed objectives are not explicitly delineated.
While the International Labor Organization (ILO) collaborated with Qatar in 2014 to implement labor reforms aimed at improving the working and living conditions of migrant workers, Whpei disputes any significant progress. He argues, «I do not perceive any improvements in Qatar; they have essentially altered the terminology. The kafala system is fundamentally flawed. It was altered for cosmetic purposes, but the underlying issues persist. Now, instead of requiring their employer’s permission to leave the country, workers must seek approval from Qatar’s authorities.»
Instances where human rights violations intersect with football are not infrequent. In 1978, FIFA’s contentious decision led to Argentina being granted the hosting rights for the World Cup during the country’s dictatorship. This World Cup, described by Guillermo Whpei as the «bloodiest World Cup,» was marred by over 30,000 forced disappearances and incidents of torture. Curiously, the Foundation has refrained from releasing any reports on this matter.
Chaimaa Boukharsa, an activist and philologist specializing in Arab and Islamic studies, argues that if the World Cup in Qatar is to be boycotted, similar actions should be taken against other events. She highlights the double standard employed by the West when criticizing Qatar, often overlooking analogous issues within their own countries. While acknowledging Qatar’s deplorable human rights record, she stresses the importance of not ignoring cases of exploitation and slavery that have occurred in the West, including in southern Spain.
Guillermo Whpei, on the other hand, defends the criticism of the World Cup, emphasizing that just because history contains question marks doesn’t mean that present-day issues are justified. It is essential to recognize that the concerns raised by Boukharsa are contemporary and not rooted in the distant past.
Boukharsa raises concerns about the circumstances in which products like strawberries are manufactured and the harsh treatment of seasonal workers involved in their cultivation. These laborers often experience homelessness, are paid meager wages, and reside in makeshift settlements in rural areas. She also underscores the prevalence of sexual assault and the exploitation of women in such environments.
Boukharsa, in conjunction with other activists on social media, regards it as contradictory for individuals in the soccer industry to suddenly express support for the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, particularly within the context of football’s toxic and heteronormative environment.
She also highlights the absence of international action against Israel, despite the widespread criticism of its apartheid policies. Israel has been a member of UEFA in Europe since 1994, raising questions about why it continues to host events like Eurovision, a European cultural gathering, despite its controversial actions.
The Foundation for Democracy, with its post-World Cup objectives, does not attribute the responsibility for these issues to football itself. Instead, it assigns blame to the politics surrounding football, which it perceives as tarnished, driven by speculation, and self-serving. FIFA’s prioritization of profit over the genuine spirit of sports and international competition is seen as the underlying problem.
