Cross-Party MPs Urge FIFA to Expel the US from World Cup Over Foreign Policy Concerns
A coalition of cross-party MPs is urging FIFA to consider expelling the United States from the World Cup until the country demonstrates "clear compliance with international law and respect for the sovereignty of other nations." This call comes in the wake of a US military operation that resulted in the seizure of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in Caracas, alongside recent aggressive rhetoric from President Donald Trump directed at various nations.
With the US set to host both the World Cup and the Olympics in the next two and a half years, questions arise regarding how America's foreign policy may impact international sports organizations and whether any will take a stand.
Concerns Over US Actions
In December, FIFA awarded President Trump its inaugural "Peace Prize" during the 2026 World Cup draw, citing his role in promoting a ceasefire between Israel and Palestine and his efforts to resolve other conflicts. However, since then, the US has engaged in military actions in Venezuela and Nigeria and has hinted at potential operations in Greenland, Mexico, Colombia, and Iran, all of which are connected to the upcoming World Cup.
A group of 23 politicians from Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party, and Plaid Cymru has signed a parliamentary motion calling for international sports bodies to consider expelling the US from major competitions, including the World Cup. They argue that such events "should not be used to legitimize or normalize violations of international law by powerful states." The MPs expressed deep concern over the "escalation of US actions against Venezuela," particularly regarding what they describe as the "kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro," which they view as a direct intervention in a sovereign nation's internal affairs.
The motion also highlights "repeated veiled and overt threats" made by senior US officials toward Denmark, Colombia, and Cuba, asserting that these actions undermine the rules-based international order.
US Government's Stance
While the White House has not yet responded to inquiries regarding the MPs' motion, it previously characterized the capture of Maduro as a law enforcement operation against an illegitimate leader involved in drug trafficking and terrorism. President Trump has claimed that the US will now control Venezuela and its oil industry. Maduro, for his part, insists he is a prisoner of war and has faced significant criticism during an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council. UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed deep concerns regarding the lack of respect for international law during the US operation.
Furthermore, Trump has urged Cuba to negotiate over Venezuelan oil exports "before it is too late" and has suggested that a military operation targeting Colombia "sounds good." He has also accused Colombia of insufficient efforts to combat drug trafficking, prompting Colombian President Gustavo Petro to express that there is now a "real threat" of US military action against his country. Additionally, Trump has claimed that drugs are "pouring" through Mexico into the US and indicated that military action may be necessary, despite Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum's rejection of any US military presence on Mexican soil. Trump has also expressed interest in acquiring Greenland for national security reasons and has not ruled out military force to achieve this objective.
FIFA's Potential Response
FIFA has declined to comment on the MPs' motion or whether it will reconsider its annual peace prize in light of Trump's recent foreign policy. However, few expect the organization to take action against a country hosting the majority of its World Cup matches, especially given the close relationship between FIFA President Gianni Infantino and Trump. This relationship has led to accusations that FIFA has become politicized, although the organization maintains that it has a statutory duty to remain neutral.
This is not the first time FIFA has faced pressure over the political actions of a World Cup host. The 2018 tournament proceeded in Russia despite the country's annexation of Crimea four years earlier, as well as accusations of cyberattacks and meddling in Western elections. Comparisons have also been drawn to FIFA's subsequent ban on Russia following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, a sanction that remains in effect.
Brian Leishman, one of the MPs who signed the motion, called for consistency in FIFA's approach, stating, "It's an invasion of a sovereign nation and the kidnapping of a president in Venezuela. I'm very critical of Maduro, but what we've seen is a breach of international law. When you see how Russia has been treated, which is absolutely correct, I just want there to be consistency." Some within FIFA note that the Russian Football Union remains a member association, and the ban on international matches was largely due to teams refusing to play against Russia, rather than a moral stance from the governing body.
In October, Infantino remarked that FIFA "cannot solve geopolitical problems" amid pressures to sanction Israel following a UN commission report alleging genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Israel's foreign ministry has categorically rejected the report, labeling it as "distorted and false."
Implications for the Olympics
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has also maintained a ban on Russian teams, allowing individual athletes to compete as neutrals, provided they are accepted by the relevant sporting federations. However, the IOC has ruled out the exclusion of American athletes from the upcoming Winter Olympics in Milan and Cortina, Italy. In a statement, the IOC emphasized its role as a global organization navigating a complex reality, asserting that its ability to unite athletes from around the world is fundamental to the future of values-based, truly global sport.