The conclusion of the World Cup in Qatar has raised concerns among various organizations and activists who are worried that the well-documented human rights violations in the Persian Gulf country might slip out of the public’s focus. Guillermo Whpei, who serves as the President of the Foundation for International Democracy, is convinced that the end of the championship marks the commencement of a new struggle.
Whpei expresses, «The battle starts once the World Cup is over.» He has pledged that the Foundation will pursue three primary objectives: encouraging FIFA to adopt a more ethical stance and publicly acknowledge its actions, striving to enhance the working conditions of migrant workers, and seeking financial compensation for the families of the victims.
At the outset of the World Cup, the Foundation unveiled a study initiated in 2017, evaluating the situation of these workers. However, the specific strategies to achieve their proposed goals are not explicitly detailed.
While the International Labor Organization (ILO) partnered with Qatar in 2014 to implement labor reforms aimed at improving the working and living conditions of migrant workers, Whpei disputes any notable progress. He asserts, «I do not perceive any improvements from Qatar; they have essentially altered the terminology. The kafala system is intrinsically flawed. It was modified for cosmetic reasons, but the fundamental issues persist. Now, instead of seeking permission from their employers to leave the country, workers must obtain approval from Qatar’s authorities.»
Instances where human rights violations intersect with football are not rare. In 1978, FIFA selected Argentina as the host for the World Cup during the country’s dictatorship. This period witnessed what Guillermo Whpei described as «the bloodiest World Cup,» marked by over 30,000 forced disappearances and instances of torture. Remarkably, the Foundation has not issued any reports on this matter.
Chaimaa Boukharsa, an activist and philologist specializing in Arab and Islamic studies, contends that if the World Cup in Qatar is boycotted, similar actions should be taken for other events. She highlights a double standard in the West’s criticism of Qatar, as it often fails to acknowledge analogous issues within their own countries. While recognizing Qatar’s deplorable human rights record, she emphasizes the importance of not overlooking cases of exploitation and slavery that have occurred in the West, including southern Spain.
Guillermo Whpei, however, defends the criticism of the World Cup, underlining that historical question marks should not be used to justify present-day issues. Boukharsa’s concerns are contemporary rather than rooted in the distant past.
Boukharsa raises questions about the conditions under which products like strawberries are produced and the harsh treatment of seasonal workers involved in their cultivation. These workers frequently endure homelessness, low wages, and live in makeshift settlements in rural areas. She also highlights the prevalence of rape and the exploitation of women in these circumstances.
Boukharsa, along with other activists on social networks, deems it hypocritical that individuals in the soccer industry abruptly express concerns for the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, considering the sport’s toxic and heteronormative environment.
She also criticizes the lack of action against Israel and points out that Israel has been a member of UEFA in Europe since 1994, despite facing widespread criticism for its apartheid policies. She questions why Israel is allowed to host events like Eurovision, which is a European cultural event, despite its controversial actions.
The Foundation for Democracy, with its post-World Cup objectives, does not attribute these issues to football itself. Instead, it places responsibility on the politics surrounding football, which it views as tainted, speculative, and self-serving. FIFA’s prioritization of profit over the ideals of sport and international competition is seen as the fundamental problem.
