Can sporting events ever be truly apolitical? Rob Heppell argues that host countries receive a perceived ‘global seal of approval’ , while corruption, human trafficking and homophobia continue… a minimum standard of human rights must be required...

On 2 December 2010, FIFA awarded the 2018 and 2022 World Cup competitions to hosts Russia and Qatar respectively. Following the media maelstroms surrounding the 2008 Chinese Olympics and the South African Football World Cup last year, the intrinsically political nature of the awarding of the two most prominent international sport festivals has perhaps never been so evident. This is despite the International Olympic Committee’s pledge that they are opposed to “any political or commercial abuse of sport” .

Beijing - Olympics 2008

The spectacular opening ceremony of the 2008 Beijing Olympics was the most televised live event in history, with 1 billion people ( ) tuning in. The games bring with them a great deal of profit for any host country, by way of tourist revenue and as a way of presenting a staged utopian image of their nation to the rest of the world.  This utopian image was only made possible by the expulsion of migrant workers from Beijing , tenant eviction and demolition of housing.

Russia - World Cup host 2018

Nine days after the announcement that Russia would play host to the World Cup, thousands of football fans took part in racist riots in Moscow with violence committed against migrants from the Northern Caucasus.  Xenophobia and nationalism are considered widespread in Russia and the country has long standing issues with the Chechen population. Since 2009, reports have been emerging that the level of Russia’s population living below the poverty line is growing rapidly, with approximately 19% of the country’s population living on less than $110 per month , a rate that had grown by 30% on the previous year.

One of the main benefits to the local population of hosting events is the provision of labour prior to the event. However, corruption is a strong bias on the distribution of financial assets, preventing the initial expenditure reaching the construction workers fairly . Businesses owned or victimised by organised crime often reap the rewards of tourism.

"Qatar effectively operates as a two-caste society, with extremely rich nationals and western expatriates occupying the upper caste, and extremely poor migrant workers."

Qatar - World Cup host 2022

Qatar is officially the richest nation in the world by capita , with an outstanding welfare system and an extremely high level of education where residents pay very low levels of tax (with no income tax) . As a Rentier state , a vast bulk of Qatar’s GDP is obtained purely from the selling of Petroleum . It only has 175,000 citizens, the other 800,000 residents being migrant workers brought in from India, Egypt, Palestine and South Asia  to act as servants and in any position that the Qataris have set aside. Nationals of the country are widely uninterested in working in any position that is not managerial or administrative. 

Qatar effectively operates as a two-caste society, with extremely rich nationals and western expatriates occupying the upper caste, and extremely poor migrant workers, typically on two-year sponsorship deals which block employment from anyone other than the employer who brings them to Qatar.

It is common practice for employers to remove passports from migrants , there are frequent complaints that food and housing is of a very low standard and pay is frequently withheld. Migrants are lured by the promise of high wages and enter Qatar by paying large fees to obtain a sponsor and travel from their home country. This locks them into debt and they are effectively forced to stay in whatever position they reach, despite such positions frequently being underpaid.

Such practices are near tantamount to slavery, although in recent years the Qatari government have made some effort to introduce and enforce more stringent employment laws.

The problem that faces the major sporting events is complex. It is important that as many countries as possible are given the chance to host competitions and one could argue that the major cash injection that accompanies competitions will invariably do some good to the poor of a nation. However, if the IOC and FIFA must fully recognize that their events are of immense global importance and a minimum standard of human rights should be required by host nations. Countries awarded the games are effectively given what could be viewed as a major global seal of approval.

Following the multiple controversies surrounding Beijing in 2008, and with Russia’s issues with corruption, racism and violence, Qatar’s homophobia and human trafficking, as well as the issue of extrajudicial execution  in Rio de Janeiro (host of the 2016 Olympics), would it not be fair to suggest that some sort of human rights code is absolutely necessary to prevent the games from being used as a political tool?

Surely, what is necessary is not to uphold the misguided belief that the major sporting events can be apolitical, but to accept that the games are potentially an extremely powerful tool to scrutinize host nations, and effectively act as an international prize? It is imperative that the IOC and FIFA put in place some kind of human rights criteria for host nations. 

Words: Rob Heppell
Photo: Courtesy of Wikipedia Creative Commons, Marcello Casal Jr//ABr, Flickr user babasteve