Trump wanted to be the star of the World Cup, but politics could ruin the party

But the historic political comeback that made him only the second American president to win two non-consecutive presidential elections gave him extra time on the political field and a prominent role in football’s enormous spectacle.

Trump has always had a talent for inserting himself into the zeitgeist. And he took advantage of the opportunity.

He proudly displayed a gleaming replica of the World Cup trophy, which matched the gold décor of the Oval Office; welcomed FIFA President Gianni Infantino into his global orbit of the MAGA movement; and, after presenting the trophy to Chelsea at a FIFA club tournament held in the United States last year, he celebrated with the team as if he had scored the winning goal.

But the 2026 World Cup, which starts on Thursday, may serve more to highlight the divisions associated with his politics than his enthusiasm for football. While Trump may be looking for another opportunity to promote his global ubiquity, many foreign critics tend to be turned off by attitudes that symbolize the turmoil and discord of his second term.

The competition comes at a time when Trump’s political star appears to be losing its shine due to rising domestic unpopularity and some international setbacks.

Infantino’s awarding Trump of the first FIFA Peace Prize — after his friend was left out of the Nobel Peace Prize — now seems embarrassing, after the president ordered military attacks against Iran, which is also qualified for the World Cup.

Trump’s restrictive immigration policies, which have left some foreign fans feeling unwelcome in the United States, are casting a shadow over the countdown to the start of the race. A respected Somali referee was refused entry at a time when the administration is accusing members of the Somali community in Minnesota of fraud — accusations rejected by the community itself. The Senegal team will have faced strict security checks upon arrival at the preparation stage for the World Cup, although the federation stated that it expected this procedure and considered it normal. Iran announced on Tuesday that its quota of tickets for the three group stage games in the United States has been cancelled.

Added to this are fears that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents could carry out control operations against undocumented immigrants at games involving South American teams with strong support in the United States, although the administration has tried to minimize these concerns.

Meanwhile, rising ticket prices have driven many fans away from stadiums, fueling accusations that FIFA sees the World Cup more as a source of revenue than a celebration for fans traditionally linked to the working classes. Prohibitive prices have become a metaphor for the cost-of-living crises affecting Western societies and the economic inequalities faced by countries in the Global South. Even Trump criticized the tickets costing around 870 euros for the North American team’s first game.

“I would certainly like to be there, but to be honest, I wouldn’t pay that amount either,” he told the New York Post.

More broadly, Trump’s intense second term, marked by the imposition of tariffs on competing economies and harsh criticism of the societies of allied countries, has created an environment of global tension that contrasts with the image of unity and joy that FIFA seeks to promote. For some time there was even talk of a European boycott after Trump demanded that Denmark cede Greenland.

It is not the first time that a major international sporting event has been affected by a political storm. The United States led the boycott of the Moscow Olympic Games due to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The last World Cup, in Qatar, was marked by accusations of human rights violations, including the death of migrant workers involved in the construction of the stadiums.

Before the start of any major competition, it is common for negative headlines related to politics, excessive commercialization or accessibility to appear. But the strong politicization of the 2026 World Cup, organized jointly by the United States, Canada and Mexico at a time of tension in the Western Hemisphere, has an additional ingredient almost guaranteed to generate divisions: Donald Trump.

Infantino’s closeness to Trump could prove to be a mistake

The American president’s ability to generate extreme reactions, both positive and negative, has placed Gianni Infantino’s decision to get so close to the White House under scrutiny.

The FIFA president became a frequent presence in Washington and Mar-a-Lago. He even attended a peace summit on Gaza held in Egypt last year. Following Trump’s second term inauguration ceremony, he wrote on Instagram:

“Together, we will make not only America great again, but the entire world.”

This apparent show of support appeared to conflict with FIFA’s statutes, which emphasize that the organization remains “neutral in political matters”. Still, Infantino defended his friendship with Trump during a meeting in Northern Ireland last year.

“I think it is absolutely crucial for the success of a World Cup to have a close relationship with the president,” he said, quoted by France-Presse.

Even so, the controversies leading up to the tournament raise doubts about the extent to which FIFA actually managed to influence Trump.

“Infantino can say, ‘What do I have to do as president of this organization to secure political support and make sure everything runs smoothly?'” said Alexander Cooley, a senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. But, according to the academic, FIFA may have fallen into a political trap.

“I think what we’re seeing is that the Trump administration just doesn’t care about global public opinion.”

Cooley also argues that the Trump team could be using its treatment of foreign fans, delegations and referees as a classic immigration strategy designed to please its voter base.

“If the rest of the world is outraged or disappointed by this, who cares?” he summed up, describing what the administration’s logic could be.

Usually, football ends up winning over politics

The World Cup is widely considered the biggest sporting event on the planet. According to FIFA, the Qatar 2022 final was watched by 1.5 billion people.

Trump often highlights the scale of the competition. Last year, he stated in the Oval Office:

“It’s like having three Super Bowls a day for a month.”

An avowed sports fan, Trump enjoys large audiences and intense media exposure. So it’s no surprise that you’d be drawn to a show of this size.

He is expected to intervene frequently throughout the tournament, whether on social media or commenting on controversies on or off the pitch, maintaining his tradition of using sport to transmit social, cultural and political messages. In his first term, for example, he repeatedly criticized Colin Kaepernick and other NFL players who kneeled during the national anthem to protest police violence.

But mixing sport and politics can have negative consequences. Trump was heavily whistled when he appeared at an NBA Finals game in New York on Monday. Furthermore, their tendency to associate themselves with the successes of others can end up eclipsing the protagonists themselves. The United States’ victory over Canada in this year’s Winter Olympics final turned into a politically divisive moment after Trump and FBI Director Kash Patel joined the team’s celebrations.

Throughout history, several world leaders have tried to take political advantage of the World Cups. Some, like British Prime Minister Harold Wilson after the English triumph in 1966, symbolically wrapped themselves in the national flag. The Argentine military junta used the 1978 victory as a propaganda tool. Vladimir Putin sought to regain international prestige by organizing the 2018 World Cup, after being diplomatically isolated due to the annexation of Crimea. And critics consider that both the World Cup in Qatar and the 2034 World Cup in Saudi Arabia are part of “sportswashing” strategies aimed at improving the image of authoritarian regimes.

These circumstances have led some critics to argue that Infantino sees himself as much a geopolitical figure as a football manager. His closeness to leaders like Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman reflects an era when Middle Eastern multimillionaires and sovereign wealth funds control many of the world’s biggest clubs.

Still, major sporting events often resist politicians’ attempts to instrumentalize them. The World Cups are remembered for moments of footballing genius, such as Johan Cruyff’s famous dribble in 1974 or Paolo Rossi’s goals that led Italy to the title in 1982.

The most remembered controversies tend to happen on the field, such as Diego Maradona’s famous “Hand of God” in the 1986 quarter-final against England, or Zinedine Zidane’s famous header in the 2006 final.

Sometime over the next month, a moment of genius or an impulsive gesture will once again remind us why the World Cups, even in their modern, highly commercialized and politicized version, can stop the world in its tracks.

Infantino, deeply involved in football politics, knows this better than anyone. At the World Economic Forum in Davos this year, he recalled that in Qatar all political controversy disappeared as soon as the ball started rolling.

“Once the ball started rolling and the magic started, we had virtually no incidents,” he said.