Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ)
A little over a week since the 2026 men’s World Cup final, world soccer appears on the brink of war.
The main battleground is a proposal from FIFA president Gianni Infantino to sell off a key function of the not-for-profit association.
It has even led to a threat from some European nations to boycott upcoming World Cups.
So, why is Infantino’s proposal so controversial and why are so many nations against the plan?
The FIFA Forward Enterprise
Infantino’s idea is to create a $US20 billion (A$29 billion) commercial subsidiary, named the FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), to run major competitions such as the men’s and women’s World Cups and club World Cups.
The plan would need to be approved by FIFA’s 211 national member associations, which would then be able to access this capital to support their development programs.
While Infantino describes this as the “democratisation of football [soccer] worldwide”, his proposed partial privatisation of FIFA has provoked strong opposition.
Critics include new UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham and FIFA’s most powerful confederation, UEFA (the Union of European Football Associations).
The European governing body complains Infantino’s plan “crosses a line” by trading the “soul and governance of football”.
UEFA has called an emergency meeting to discuss a response, including a potential World Cup boycott.
Yesterday, Infantino heaped more pressure on FIFA’s associations to accept the plan by September 19. He said each association would receive US$40 million in funding if they agreed to the proposal. But if they reject it, their funding would drop by almost 75%.
Infantino’s initiative is further evidence of his close ties to US President Donald Trump and family.
Thrive Eternal, a key potential private investor, is a venture capital company founded and run by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Trump’s son-in-law, Jared.
Infantino’s playbook
Although Infantino was once Secretary General of UEFA, he has increasingly seen his own and FIFA’s future as lying beyond Europe.
He has cultivated political and commercial relationships in the United States, the world’s largest sport market, and the Middle East, global sport’s most eager, cashed-up investor.
Adopting tactics pioneered by former FIFA President João Havelange, Infantino has secured loyalty by allocating more funds to more countries. He has also expanded participation in the men’s and women’s World Cups.
Infantino is counting on the majority to elect him in 2027 for a final four-year term and to vote for FFE.
Since replacing the disgraced Sepp Blatter in 2016 after a FIFA corruption crisis, Infantino has controversially presided over men’s World Cups hosted by illiberal nations – Russia (2018) and Qatar (2022) – and co-hosted by the declining democracy of Trump’s US (2026).
When UEFA again gets its turn to host in Spain and Portugal 2030, Infantino orchestrated the sharing of the tournament with Africa (Morocco) and South America (Uruguay, Paraguay and Argentina). This means the men’s World Cup rotates next to Asia – and to Infantino ally Saudi Arabia in 2034.
Just as Infantino has worked closely with Trump to marginalise UEFA, he has collaborated with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The relationship has included a failed 2018 attempt to introduce a new global Nations League that threatened to undermine UEFA’s most prized assets: the Champions League and the European Championship.
Infantino dismisses European critics who accuse him of cosying up to authoritarians as “moral-lesson giving, one-sided … hypocrisy”.
Journalists have received similar treatment.
Earlier this week, UEFA would have been in Infantino’s sights in an Instagram message scolding “those spending their time and energy hating us” when “our world needs love, not hate; tolerance, not division; celebration, not mourning”.
World game at war
There was certainly not a lot of love, tolerance and celebration in UEFA when Trump lobbied Infantino to reduce American player Folarin Balogun’s suspension in the 2026 World Cup so he could play against Belgium.
Read more:
Why reports Trump pressed FIFA to overturn a decision are so alarming
While FIFA claimed it was a decision of its independent Disciplinary Committee, there was still strong suspicion the concession was made under pressure from its president.
UEFA has its own history of questionable governance. It has also been criticised for its domination by the revenue-obsessed largest clubs and countries.
An unprecedented boycott of World Cups, and refusing the multimillion-dollar allocation, would be painful.
Given the rapacious practices of UEFA’s main actors, such principled self-sacrifice is unlikely.
But the association is working hard to kill off or at least modify FFE to protect its interests.
FIFA’s other confederations, including Asia (of which Australia is a member), Africa and Oceania, would likely be happy to see UEFA’s historical dominance eroded.
Yet there is widespread unease about changes to the world game that will hyper-commercialise it. The Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF), which just hosted a World Cup, has joined the chorus of complaint about the FFE gambit.
Some believe Infantino is organising his next career move in 2031 to a lavishly remunerated role in the FIFA commercial arm that he has designed.
If that happens, he will be a thorn in UEFA’s side long after vacating FIFA’s Zurich headquarters.
David Rowe does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/07/30/world-game-at-war-why-some-european-nations-have-threatened-a-world-cup-boycott/