“Please, let’s now focus on the football“. FIFA has officially asked the 32 teams taking part in the Qatar World Cup, set to start on 20th November, not to initiate protests or criticism of the emirate for its questionable human rights record, both in direct relation to the planning of the tournament and in more general terms. However, several European football associations stated their rejection of this request: “We will continue to fight for human rights”. And, given that World Cup ambassador Khalid Salman has since stated that homosexuality is considered “damage in the mind” in Qatar, protests are undoubtedly warranted.
Months of protests all over the world
For months, even years now, the Qatar World Cup has been in the crosshairs of human and environmental rights organisations, with national teams also recently voicing their opposition to the host nation’s human rights practices. Denmark, for example, will wear “toned down” jerseys at the tournament designed by kit manufacturer Hummel as a form of protest, with a completely black third kit as a symbol of mourning for the over 6.500 migrant workers who died building infrastructure for the World Cup.
This shirt carries with it a message.
We don't wish to be visible during a tournament that has cost thousands of people their lives.
We support the Danish national team all the way, but that isn't the same as supporting Qatar as a host nation. pic.twitter.com/7bgMgK7WzS
Khaled al-Suwaidi, an older member of the organising committee for the Qatar World Cup, responded to Denmark’s announcement by saying that the country has used the football World Cup “as a catalyst to drive change” and reformed its migrant worker laws.
Members of Australia’s national team published a video criticising Qatar for its human rights legislation and demanding the decriminalisation of homosexual relationships, which are strictly forbidden in the country. The organisers’ response sounded like something along the lines of “nobody’s perfect”.
Conversely, Iranian footballers have asked FIFA to exclude their country’s team from the Qatar World Cup as a way of condemning the government’s repressive actions against protests sparked by the death of Masha Amini, a young woman killed by the morality police. Calls to ban Iran from the tournament also came from Ukraine, due to the fact that the government in Teheran has given support to Russia in the ongoing conflict. Unsurprisingly, however, FIFA confirmed Iran’s team will be taking part.
Gianni Infantino and Fatma Samoura, respectively the president and general secretary of FIFA, signed a letter to all 32 participating teams, stating that “as one of the 32 participating teams, you carry the hopes and dreams of your home nation and all of its people on your shoulders. […] So, please let’s now focus on the football!”.
Essentially: let’s not ruin the fun for billions of fans for the sake of the rights of a few million others. Of course, the letter continues, “We know football does not live in a vacuum and we are equally aware that there are many challenges and difficulties of a political nature all around the world. But please do not allow football to be dragged into every ideological or political battle that exists”.
At FIFA, Infantino and Samour continue, “we try to respect all opinions and beliefs, without handing out moral lessons to the rest of the world. One of the great strengths of the world is indeed its very diversity, and if inclusion means anything, it means having respect for that diversity. No one people or culture or nation is “better” than any other. This principle is the very foundation stone of mutual respect and non-discrimination. And this is also one of the core values of football. So, please let’s all remember that and let football take centre stage”.
According to FIFA, the football World Cup, far from legitimising the emirate’s human rights policies, are thus a means to promote inclusivity: “We have the unique occasion and opportunity to welcome and embrace everyone, regardless of origin, background, religion, gender, sexual orientation or nationality. Let’s take that opportunity and unite the world through the universal language of football”.
The response from European teams
FIFA’s letter did not go unanswered. According to the Swiss newspaper Le Temps (Switzerland is home to the headquarters of FIFA and UEFA, and Gianno Infantino himself is Swiss), ten football associations, all European, responded rather negatively to Infantino and Samoura’s message, drafting a joint response reiterating their commitment to defending human rights, supporting migrant workers, and continuing to put pressure on FIFA to respect the promises made within the framework of the Qatar World Cup.
Dans une lettre commune, dix associations nationales réaffirment leur volonté de défendre les #droitshumains et des travailleurs migrants et d’obliger la @FIFAcom à tenir les engagements pris dans le cadre de la Coupe du monde. #Qatar#FIFAWorldCuphttps://t.co/cZxrftcmWF
The countries that responded to FIFA’s letter are Germany, England, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, The Netherlands, Wales, Portugal, Sweden, and Switzerland. They are all part of a UEFA working group on human and workers’ rights, and eight of them (Norway and Sweden didn’t qualify) will compete in Qatar. “We acknowledge, and welcome, as we have done in the past, that significant progress has been made by Qatar, particularly with regards to the rights of migrant workers,” the signatories immediately clarify, adding that “we welcome the assurances given by the Qatari Government and by Fifa regarding the safety, security and inclusion of all fans who travel to the World Cup, including LGBTQ+ fans”.
However, the statement goes on to say that “embracing diversity and tolerance also means supporting human rights. Human rights are universal and they apply everywhere. We will continue to support the momentum for positive, progressive change and continue to advocate for a conclusive outcome and update on the two key outstanding issues we have been discussing with Fifa for a long time”. The captains of the eight teams that qualified for the World Cup will wear a special armband, with a multicoloured heart and the phrase “One Love”, symbolising diversity and the fight against discrimination.
For the World Cup ambassador, homosexuality is ‘haram’
Qatar FIFA World Cup ambassador and former footballer Khalid Salman has said homosexuality is “damage in the mind,” in an interview with German broadcaster ZDF.https://t.co/xakhPOwqmp
If any further proof were needed that, despite the limited concessions on workers’ rights made to improve its image for the World Cup, Qatar’s position on human rights is far from acceptable, look no further than the words of Khalid Salman, World Cup ambassador and former Qatari footballer. In an interview with German broadcaster ZDF, Salman stated that “homosexuality for us is haram” (forbidden by Islamic law, ed.) and that those travelling to the tournament “will have to accept our rules”. The ambassador even said that being gay is “damage in the mind” and expressed concern that children may learn “something that is not good”.
Controversial African land deals by Blue Carbon face skepticism regarding their environmental impact and doubts about the company’s track record, raising concerns about potential divergence from authentic environmental initiatives.
Alle Olimpiadi di Rio ci sarà, per la prima volta, una squadra composta da dieci rifugiati. Così i giochi olimpici brasiliani sono già entrati nella storia.
Food imported into the EU aren’t subject to the same production standards as European food. The introduction of mirror clauses would ensure reciprocity while also encouraging the agroecological transition.
Sikkim, one of the smallest states in India has made it mandatory for new mothers to plant saplings and protect them like their children to save environment
Chilekwa Mumba is a Zambian is an environmental activist and community organizer. He is known for having organized a successful lawsuit against UK-based mining companies.
What led to the Fukushima water release, and what are the impacts of one of the most controversial decisions of the post-nuclear disaster clean-up effort?