The trillion-dollar tournament: Understanding the economics of FIFA World Cup 2026

DAR ES SALAAM: THE FIFA World Cup is presented as a showcase of worldwide unity. Every four years, countries put aside their conflicts, athletes act as representatives and the tournament aims to remind us of our common humanity.

However, Iran’s first World Cup game against New Zealand in Los Angeles revealed a less pleasant truth: in today’s global landscape, certain countries are embraced more warmly than others.

Before a ball was kicked, supporters entered the stadium, or television cameras started broadcasting images of cheering fans, politics had already influenced Iran’s tournament. Unlike most teams, Iran reportedly couldn’t set up a standard training base in the United States.

Instead, players and staff stayed in Mexico until close to the match and were expected to leave right after. Iranian officials voiced complaints about visa issues, ticketing conflicts and restrictions impacting supporters. Coaches also raised concerns about unfair treatment. Regardless of the explanation accepted, the practical outcomes are hard to overlook. Elite athletes rely on preparation, routine and recovery.

Teams typically arrive days ahead of major matches to acclimate, train and adapt to local conditions. They also focus on recovery after matches before moving on. These routines are essential components of modern elite sport, not just luxuries. However, Iran faced different circumstances.

The question is not about supporting or opposing the Tehran government. People with good intentions can have strong disagreements about Iranian politics. The debate centres on whether international sporting events should be based on principles of equality or be shaped by geopolitical factors.

The symbolism is important because the World Cup goes beyond just football. It is one of the few times when countries come together outside diplomatic, military, or economic settings. When differences are visible, they send a message that extends far beyond sports.

In SoFi Stadium, the Iranian diaspora reflected those geopolitical tensions internally. The strong support for Team Melli was undeniable. Iranian flags dotted the stadium and each attack brought enthusiasm, with every goal greeted by loud applause. However, underlying that support were significant divisions.

A prominent flashpoint was the lion-and-sun flag linked to pre-revolutionary Iran. Despite FIFA’s ban, the flag was still visible across the venue. Security staff repeatedly asked spectators carrying it to put it away, but many refused. What was more concerning was the hostility shown towards spectators who carried Iran’s official national flag. Looking at several matches, it can be seen that opposition to a government is not the same as opposition to the people.

That distinction is becoming more blurred, not just in debates about Iran but across global politics. Attitudes toward Palestinians, Israelis, Russians, Chinese and others often reflect this phenomenon. Governments are seen as synonymous with their populations, with citizens viewed as extensions of state policies.

ALSO READ: Banking on beat bank, Bongo Flava bends to band music era

As a result, entire peoples are judged based on the actions of rulers they may not support or have influence over. Once this occurs, justifying collective punishment becomes simpler.

The reasoning is familiar: restrictions on movement become tolerated, unequal treatment seems reasonable and human rights appear conditional. This paragraph emphasises Iran’s significant role in the 2026 World Cup. During the 2022 Qatar event, Western media and governments largely concentrated on topics such as labour rights, freedom of expression and discrimination.

Much of this scrutiny was justified. However, consistency remains hard to achieve. Many individuals who passionately advocate for human rights in Qatar have become noticeably quieter when discussing immigration restrictions, political vetting, visa rejections and increasing restrictions on dissent in Western democracies.

No matter how one assesses the importance of international tournaments, the key issue isn’t whether, say, Qatar deserved criticism because it did. The real question is whether we apply the same standards to concerns closer to home. Human rights lose their moral authority when they are used selectively.

Sport cannot resolve geopolitical conflicts, nor should it attempt to. However, international sporting events should uphold principles of fairness, dignity and equal treatment. Iran’s experience in the World Cup highlights how much work remains to achieve these ideals.

A nation isn’t defined by its government, nor are its people identified solely by their rulers. Forgetting this distinction leads us to abandon the core values that international sport purports to uphold.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup, at any level, is considered a trillion-dollar global sports ecosystem when its direct and indirect economic impacts are included. It produces massive revenue from broadcasting rights, sponsorships, tourism, merchandising, infrastructure projects and international media coverage.

Beyond football, the sport has become a platform for discussions on geopolitics, national image, diplomacy and economics. The disagreement over Iran’s participation highlighted how international politics can impact sports, leading to challenges and difficulties for Iranian players and fans caused by geopolitical conflicts.

Although FIFA strives for neutrality, perceptions of bias, restrictions, or politically driven decisions can damage its reputation and weaken the belief that football brings people together, unites faith, connects regions and bridges cultures.

The key lesson for FIFA is the need to establish clear, consistent and fair governance practices to ensure that all teams are treated equally, regardless of political ties. FIFA should keep balancing security with inclusivity, safeguarding athletes from geopolitical conflicts and making sure the world’s biggest sporting event stands for excellence, respect and international unity instead of showcasing political divides.

The FIFA World Cup this year is being promoted as a celebration of international solidarity. It is well known that every four years, nations put aside their differences, athletes serve as ambassadors and football serves as a reminder of our common humanity.

As a football player and economic analyst, I observed that Iran’s opening World Cup match against New Zealand in Los Angeles, along with Somali FIFA referee Omar Artan, denied professional entry into the United States for the 2026 World Cup Omar Artan is now being honored by several nations for his contributions to international football, highlighting a less comfortable truth: some countries are received more warmly than others in today’s world.