“Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive..” (from the 1808 poem “Marmion: A tale of Flodden Field” by Sir Walter Scott)
Scott’s epic historical poem spoke of romance, betrayal, and war. It climaxes during the 1513 Battle of Flodden, where English forces decisively defeat the Scottish army with catastrophic consequences for Scotland, plunging the nation into decades of instability and providing England with temporary security along its northern border in its age old struggle against the French and their erstwhile allies, the Scots. No one reads Scott any more - his ninteenth century style is exceedingly difficult - but that line above has timeless meaning and relevance. One deception leads to another, and one dishonest action could create an inextricable quagmire. Scott wrote of medieval war between England, Scotland and France but he may have well been writing about modern FIFA and its devious president Gianni Infantino, erstwhile ally of Donald Trump. Make no mistake - FIFA is a feudal fiefdom and its President is its overlord.
Fly Icarus, fly
We survived the most political, most commercialized, most lucrative, most corrupt World Cup in history. Despite all Infantino’s shenanigans, all the outrage and criticisms from fans, human rights groups and politicians, we enjoyed the football fest even as Don Gianni laughed all the way to the bank. Never mind the FIFA Peace Prize debacle, the ticket scam, the Balogun Affair, the immigration issues, the Argentina conspiracy theory, the rampant racism. Looking forward to FIFA’s 2027 Congress Infantino’s position looked impregnable. He laughingly advised the globe to “chill”. After all, more than 200 of FIFA’s 211 member associations formally supported his unopposed 2027 re-election bid. And then, like Icarus, arrogant, reckless, suicidal, he flew too close to the sun. Greed - the excessive desire for more than is needed or deserved; more money, power, influence, fame - is a mental illness. The logic of the greedy is “enough is good, more is better, too much is perfect”.
Unsatiated by the USD$14 billion generated by the 2026 World Cup and by his bromance with Trump, Infantino just HAD to look for too much. He HAD to seek another gear in his campaign to rule the global game, to generate even more revenue, to wed himself and FIFA even more tightly to the Trump family’s cabal of crony capitalists. So he launched his grotesque idea of selling the World Cup, confident that the ever hungry bellies of global football would follow his autocratic lead. But football rebelled. Part of it anyway. The problem is not necessarily that the rebels - Asia, Europe and CONCACAF - do not love more money. Not at all. Led by UEFA, which has an axe to grind as it fights Infantino to maintain the primacy of its UEFA Champions League and its other properties against the challenge of Infantino’s club World Cup, the insurgents objected on two levels - procedural and philosophical. The daggers came out and they declared “National associations around the world are now presented with an ultimatum: accept the irreversible capture of football’s greatest competitions or bear the consequences. This is not a “democratic decision”, but governance by intimidation – an act of coercion unworthy of an institution entrusted with the stewardship of the global game.” They wailed “The moment external investors acquire ownership interests in FIFA competitions, football changes forever. Commercial return becomes a permanent obligation. Investor expectations become a daily pressure.” I support these views but, forgive my cynicism, we have seen this movie before. The “principled” stand of FIFA’s “conscientious objectors” is at least equally opportunist and selfish. All I see is sharks maneuvering for position and the opportunity for a killer strike.
No democracy for the weak
We have our own local experience with these FIFA “democrats”, you see. In December 2019 new leaders (United TTFA) took charge of TTFA, replacing the administration of David John-Williams, who was enthusiastically supported by Infantino in a visit to the country mere days prior to the TTFA election. The William Wallace administration (of which I was a member) signaled to FIFA its intention to expose corruption within TTFA and its FIFA-financed “Home of Football”. In March Infantino imposed a “normalization committee” on TTFA and removed us. We wrote an open letter to all FIFA member associations and confederations seeking support. I penned that letter and I quote from its conclusion: “We view FIFA’s action as undemocratic, untimely and oppressive, given the fact that the newly elected administration had held office for less than four months. We insist, under the law of natural justice, on our right to be heard at the 18 September Congress. We hereby appeal to all fair-minded Member Associations of FIFA to investigate FIFA’s decision in an effort to protect football democracy and fair play, since just like you we are members under the FIFA umbrella.” We did not receive one acknowledgement. These anti-Infantino rebels do not fight for principle. They fight for advantage and advancement. The female president of the Norwegian Football Federation, Lise Klaveness, who has complained to the International Olympic Committee about Infantino, is the exception to that stern judgment. When others were silent she backed an ethics complaint lodged by human rights outfit FairSquare regarding Infantino’s breach of political neutrality. NFF expanded this to demand Infantino’s resignation, targeting his creation of a political “peace prize” for Donald Trump, external political interference in player suspensions, and questionable commercial governance.
No clean hands
Democracy is not a convenience. It is not useful only when it advances one’s personal agenda. Authoritarian rule in FIFA did not begin with Infantino’s attempted 2030 World Cup money grab. The consistent lack of action in defence of democracy by today’s anti-Infantino rebels has brought FIFA to where it is today. They have encouraged, aided, abetted, and benefited from Infantino’s authoritarian rule. FIFA’s governance model is one of institutionalized patronage, characterized by the concentration of power in the President (supported by a cabal called the Bureau of the FIFA Council, a small group consisting of the FIFA President and the presidents of the six continental confederations) at the very top of the politico-administrative hierarchy. The lubricant of governance, annual subsidies to member associations, ensures loyalty. FIFA leaders fear popular democracy. This is why controversial issues such as the sale of the World Cup to private equity, or Palestine’s longstanding complaint against Israel, would never arrive on the Congress floor for a democratic decision. The leadership would lack control and could not necessarily engineer its desired outcome. So Member Associations meet once annually in a rubber stamp Congress with little effect on the direction of FIFA policy. This arrangement is mirrored in the statutes of member associations. Indeed, in 2024 FIFA forced TTFA members to adopt a new Constitution at the end of its “Normalisation Committee” occupation. Gone are the days of popular democracy from the floor, by which TTFA members exercised supreme constitutional power. TTFA membership meetings are now a thing of the past, with only the Annual General Meeting bringing members together as a formality. Today real power resides in the Executive, which is controlled by the President, who exercises regal power backed by the power of patronage.
And now the denouement
So now Don Gianni is fighting for his life. AFC, CONCACAF and UEFA have called for his resignation while they threaten to boycott FIFA’s competitions and plot alternatives. They are said to be working on a policy document that outlines a new structure and governance model for the global organization. As I said, we saw this movie before (in 2016 after the fall of Sepp Blatter). Oceania is on the fence but Africa and South America officially support Infantino, while his soul mate Donald Trump has come out swinging, saying “He is fantastic, having just presided over the most successful World Cup by four times, ever presented. If he is gone, it will never be as successful or profitable again!” Hopefully, Trump will not back his words with bombs but one does wonder how global and FIFA geopolitics will affect Infantino’s hold on power. Will he survive to FIFA’s 2027 Congress? And if he does, will he be challenged then? Notably, Mexico has broken ranks with CONCACAF to remain in his corner (allegedly in return for permission to move to CONMEBOL) and pressure is surely being exerted on other CONCACAF members to rally to his banner. Meantime, of forty-six AFC member associations at least eight have publicly supported him - Bhutan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mongolia, Phillipines, Qatar, Sri Lanka and United Arab Emirates. No heavyweights, but he will be counting on the lovely despots in Saudi Arabia (to whom he gave the 2034 tournament) to break their silence and publicly embrace him.
Europe, a mostly intact Asia and a fully united CONCACAF would be a decisive bloc that renders Africa, South America, and Oceania politically impotent. But FIFA presidential elections employ a secret ballot. Even if a confederation leadership publicly pledges its entire bloc to a candidate, individual country delegates could secretly “cross the floor” to project their preferred overlord. Oh, the intrigue. Ultimately, FIFA Presidents come and go without affecting the venal governance culture of the organization. Infantino is a mere symptom of its chronic sickness. Unless internal reform is forced upon FIFA by external actors, the next Don may bring a different style, but he will also surely sustain the FIFA modus operandi. Infantino’s fate hangs in the balance, with powerful forces aligned against him. Will he outmanoeuvre the insurrectionists? Autocrats live by knowing how to survive. Until, inevitably, they do not.
Editor’s note: The views expressed in the preceding article are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of any organisation in which he is a stakeholder.
