Football in the Middle East: What's the game plan?
Photo Courtesy: Mehdi Bolourian (via Wikimedia Commons)
On October 31st, Saudi Arabia presented their bid to host the 2034 FIFA World Cup. They were the only football association to do so, and are all but guaranteed to host the tournament in 11 years’ time.
For many, this will come as a surprise. The Saudi Professional Football League isn’t exactly prominent - the average viewership of 8,500 per game is lower than the average for Ryan Reynold’s Wrexham, who play in the fourth tier of British football. It also follows last year’s highly controversial World Cup in neighbouring Qatar. In reality, however, this has been a long time coming.
Increasing influence
It’s the 11th May 2008. Manchester City fans have just seen their club lose 8-1 to Middlesbrough on the final day of the season, placing ninth in the league table. The future seems bleak, but rumours of interest from the Middle East begin to circle, and fans begin to hope for change. Come September 2008, and Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan - a member of the royal family in Abu Dhabi - has completed his takeover of Manchester City Football Club.
Over the next fifteen years, Manchester City would go from strength to strength, winning all there is to win. But this would only be the first of several clubs to be taken over by high-profile figures from the Middle East. In June 2011, Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad Al Thani - heir to the Qatari throne - would buy a 70% stake in Paris Saint-Germain. In recent years, Newcastle United, Aston Villa, and Sheffield United have all been bought by groups or figures from the Middle East. And just last month, Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani made a (failed) bid to take over Manchester United, thought to be worth double the club’s $3.2bn stock market valuation.
Nowadays, football receives much of its financial investment from the Middle East. Six of the 15 largest football clubs in the world are sponsored by either Etihad Airways, Qatar Airways, or Emirates - in fact, the UAE airline is the third largest sponsor in all of European football, behind only Adidas and Nike. And, in turn, the Middle East has started investing more in its own football. The Saudi Pro League spent $957mn during this year’s summer transfer window, more than any league in the world besides England’s Premier League, and now includes players such as Cristiano Ronaldo and Karim Benzema, both of whom have a reported salary of around $200mn a year.
With this level of investment, it is no surprise that Saudi Arabia has become a prominent part of FIFA’s plans for the future. The question, however, is why the region decided to make this investment. Many have accused Saudi Arabia and its neighbours of sportswashing, involving themselves in football in order to better their global reputations and form strategic and political partnerships. The season after the Saudi Public Investment Fund took control over Newcastle United, for instance, the club introduced a kit sporting Saudi Arabia’s national green and white colours - this was a more conspicuous example. And this is not an accusation that has been limited to football: the very same Saudi PIF that owns Newcastle also owns the controversial LIV Golf brand, Formula 1 has recently introduced the Saudi Arabia Grand Prix, and so on.
According to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, this is all part of Vision 2030 - a set of economic objectives which he hopes will inspire the Middle East to undergo “the next global renaissance” and become “the new Europe” (a vision which has been put off course somewhat by the recent conflict in Gaza and consequently rising tensions in the Gulf States). Above all, investment in football is viewed as a safe bet for massive economic rewards. Take the example of Sheikh Mansour and his takeover of Manchester City: after paying $212mn and investing a further $1.8bn, the club is now worth more than $4bn. When confronted by the aforementioned accusations, Mohammed Bin Salman simply stated that “if sportswashing is going to increase my GDP by 1%, then we’ll continue doing sportswashing”. This is why regions from around the world are eager and will continue to invest in football.
Increasing scrutiny
Importantly, this increase in influence has also resulted in increased scrutiny. FIFA received immense criticism for its decision to host a World Cup in Qatar, and it is already receiving criticism regarding plans for the World Cup in Saudi Arabia. Many have argued that it is wrong to endorse and profit from such events when they are hosted in countries, like Saudi Arabia, that have numerous and prominent human rights issues; these include discrimination against women, criminalisation of homosexuality, restriction of free speech and human rights organisations, frequent use of the death penalty, next to no legal protection for domestic migrant workers, and more.
Yet others have also argued it is important not to fall into hypocrisy. It is easy to have too short-term a memory and imagine that countries like England are without fault, or indeed ignore that the 2018 FIFA World Cup was hosted in Russia, or that the 2022 Winter Olympics were hosted in China. It is also easy to ignore the complicated history of football in the Middle East, a region in which love for the game has been intertwined with struggles for independence from colonialism, or the formation of national identity, or the continued contestation between political powers and popular movements. It is easy to be Eurocentric and ignore football’s wonderful popularity and culture in the Middle East - for more on this, read James Montague’s When Friday Comes.
Photo Courtesy: حسین ظهروند (via Wikimedia Commons)
What is the future of Football?
The Middle East’s growing influence in football emphasises that politics and sport do mix - this is inevitable for any activity of football’s size and popularity. It also emphasises the hugely financial and commodified nature of the modern game. At its worst, this can lead to underhand motives and corruption. Concerns have been voiced, for example, about the suspicious nature of the bidding process for the 2034 World Cup. For not only did Fifa bring the process forward by three years, stating that the host country must come from Oceania or Asia and declare their bid in just 26 days, but the Saudis’ formal bid announcement came only minutes after FIFA’s. A World Cup in Saudi Arabia would be a natural part of the Middle East’s rising influence, in a sport that is becoming more and more global, but this bidding process greatly lacked transparency.
And such scrutiny extends to club ownership. According to Premier League regulations, football clubs cannot be owned by sovereign nations; this is why, before the team was bought by the Saudi’s PIF, the league required legally binding assurances that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would not control Newcastle United Football Club. This is also why co-owner Amanda Stavely can take concerns over Saudi Arabia’s human rights record “very seriously”, while reiterating that their partner “is not that Saudi state, it’s PIF”. A simple Google search, however, will tell you that the PIF is currently controlled by none other than Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman - the same person organising the Middle East’s Vision 2030, and Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler. A slightly deeper Google dive will then show that Boris Johnson’s government worked for months to facilitate this controversial takeover, despite the government, and Mr Johnson, repeatedly and publicly denying involvement. Such instances have not been uncommon.
At its best, however, football can still be a force for good. The sport’s popularity means that any issue relating to football will be talked about by millions, and that can be a highly effective way of spreading awareness. And more than inspire talk, football does have the potential to inspire change. Any country hoping to host a World Cup must lay out a plan, through which it will avoid any human rights risks that would break UN guidelines. Minky Worden, director of global initiatives at Human Rights Watch, has urged FIFA to be rigorous in its enforcement of these principles, ensuring their policy is more than “a paper exercise”. Whether or not this will happen remains to be seen, but the influence of hosting the world’s most watched sporting event is undeniable: “there are far-reaching human rights risks to consider…as well as opportunities for change that should not be missed”.
Football isn’t the sport it was decades ago - Middle Eastern influence, among many other factors, has changed the game forever. But it is important to recognise the complicated nature of this change, both in the Middle East, and in our own perceptions and attitudes. As long as the sport continues to inspire, to promote accessibility and inclusion rather than repression, it can and should still be the beautiful game, with influence around the world.