FIFA’s confirmation of Saudi Arabia as the host country for the 2034 World Cup has ignited global controversy, with many viewing the decision as a stark prioritization of wealth and power over human rights and ethical governance. Twenty-one human rights organizations have issued a joint statement condemning the move, calling it a “moment of great danger” for human rights. Their warning underscores the risks of holding such a high-profile event in a country with a deeply troubling human rights record.
Saudi Arabia’s selection reflects its strategic push for international influence under its Vision 2030 initiative, an ambitious plan to diversify the economy and improve its global image. Central to this effort is the kingdom’s investment in sports, including hosting global events and acquiring major football players. While Saudi Arabia boasts modern infrastructure and an unparalleled willingness to spend billions on its World Cup bid, these superficial advancements mask systemic human rights abuses that remain unaddressed.
Critics argue that Saudi Arabia’s reliance on the exploitation of migrant workers is among the most pressing concerns. The kingdom’s labour system, characterized by poor working conditions, withheld wages, and limited worker protections, has already faced international criticism for its handling of large-scale construction projects. Human rights organizations fear a repeat of the violations seen during Qatar’s 2022 World Cup, where migrant labourers suffered under abusive practices and unsafe environments.
The concerns extend beyond labour rights. Saudi Arabia’s deeply entrenched gender inequality remains a significant issue despite recent reforms. While women can now drive and attend public sporting events, they remain bound by restrictive guardianship laws and pervasive societal segregation. These limitations starkly contradict FIFA’s commitment to gender equity and inclusivity, raising questions about the organization’s values.
The suppression of freedom of expression also casts a long shadow over the decision. Saudi Arabia has a long history of silencing dissent through imprisonment, harassment, and even execution of journalists and activists. This raises concerns about the ability of fans, media, and human rights organizations to speak openly and freely during the tournament without fear of retribution.
The joint statement from 21 organizations highlights the broader implications of FIFA’s decision, emphasizing that hosting the World Cup in Saudi Arabia could serve to “whitewash” ongoing abuses rather than address them. Amnesty International has stressed that, without enforceable commitments to human rights improvements, the tournament risks exacerbating existing inequalities and abuses rather than creating meaningful change.
Proponents of Saudi Arabia’s bid argue that the spotlight of the World Cup could pressure the kingdom to improve its human rights record. However, past experiences suggest otherwise. Qatar’s labour reforms, for example, were limited in scope and poorly enforced despite international scrutiny. High-profile events often result in surface-level changes designed for optics rather than substantive, long-lasting improvements.
FIFA’s track record of prioritizing financial incentives over ethical concerns is well-documented, and its decision to award Saudi Arabia the 2034 World Cup is no exception. The organization’s willingness to overlook systemic abuses undermines its stated commitment to human rights and inclusivity. To salvage its credibility, FIFA must implement strict, enforceable human rights standards for host nations and ensure rigorous monitoring and transparency throughout the tournament preparation process.
The 2034 World Cup risks becoming a symbol of complicity in oppression rather than a celebration of global unity. The world’s attention will not only be on the matches but also the treatment of migrant workers, women, and dissenting voices. FIFA’s decision has placed Saudi Arabia under intense scrutiny, and the responsibility lies squarely with the kingdom and FIFA to ensure that the tournament’s legacy does not come at the expense of human dignity. However, without concrete action and accountability, this event may ultimately highlight the cost of ignoring human rights in the pursuit of a global spectacle.