The events at the current World Cup in Qatar hold many remarkable signs, the most important and noteworthy of which is the intersection of politics and sports.
This overlap sometimes happens in positive and helpful ways, such as the important “political” handshake between Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan at the opening ceremony of the tournament, a handshake that reflects the positive face of sport with all its values that bring societies and countries closer together.
On the other hand, there is also a negative overlay, such as arguments over sensitive issues like LGBT, the admission of alcohol. Soccer sometimes becomes verbal conflicts about “identity,” “religions,” etc., even though sports have nothing to do with religion and there is no Muslim or Christian or Jewish soccer, and we see players of different religions playing in the same team and there is nothing to it.
But sometimes, like on the sidelines of the current tournament, it becomes the subject of controversy in social media and even in articles and headlines in traditional media. In addition to Qatar’s stance on LGBT, compliance with the laws of the countries where the tournaments are held is also a topic worth discussing.
In this and other similar cases, the issue is the national sovereignty of states, which includes domestic laws and even respect for the feelings, tastes and general morals of society. It is a very delicate question, the discussion of which is tantamount to a walk over thorns.
Between the supporters and the opponents, the issue becomes a subject of negotiation, doubts and sometimes insults, and stereotypical accusations are made, whether by “Islamists” or by human rights activists. Between two groups deciding for or against something in a sharp zero-sum game, there is no room for rational thought. I am not here to side with any group in this absurd dialectic.
But I will make a point that is missing in this kind of intergovernmental debate. We all know that there are so-called globalized values, and we also know that there are subtle threads that divide between integrating into those values and preserving national cultural identities, as many believe. The problem may have nothing to do with religion.
Rejection of certain behaviors should not be equated with religious militancy or even the presence of a religious conservative current. It cannot be denied.
At the same time, however, it should be understood that the rejection of certain behaviors and ideas, whether in the West or in the East, is to a large extent related to the cultural values of society, some of which are derived from or identified with religion, while others are related to the culture, customs, traditions, and social values that prevail and are passed down from generation to generation, whether or not they are related to religion.
Against the background of these dynamics, we researchers note that there is a new problem related to the issue of national sovereignty. Some ambiguities are highlighted, such as the distinction between state sovereignty and the laws of international organizations or organizations such as FIFA in the organization of tournaments.
It is true that agreeing to organize or host a tournament or even an international conference means, in principle, agreeing to abide by all laws and rules approved by the governing organization. But every now and then serious disagreements arise over certain details that may seem insignificant to some.
But for others, this becomes the “mother of problems” on the ground, such as the use of alcohol, the “geographical” limits of alcohol consumption, such as whether the ban is for religious reasons or to maintain security and ensure that chaos does not break out and turn a sporting event into an arena for brawls.
In general, it is difficult to guarantee that identity politics will not erupt at a global event that takes place in a region where identity disputes are raging. This explains why some speak of the “Islamization” of the World Cup, touting all that is “Islamic” and trying to turn a global sporting event into an opportunity for “dawah.” There are many lessons we can learn from this tournament.
Our region, the Middle East, has joined the global race in recent years. Overall, the results look very satisfactory. The identity tensions that occur are normal, correspond to reality and can be managed.
But we must not forget the biggest gain – the wide human communication in such cases. Finally, we must not forget that the current World Cup has undergone an important change. The old world order of sports seems to be crumbling, just as the current world order of politics is crumbling politically and strategically.
The Saudi soccer team trumps a traditional soccer power like Argentina, automatically considered a contender to win the tournament, regardless of its current level and results. Japan has also outplayed Germany. These two cases, regardless of the other results of the tournament, are important signs of a resurgent soccer world order.
In the future, we should expect political rise to be linked to the rise of sport/soccer, as Saudi Arabia, whose star is rising strategically regionally and internationally, is not ignoring the promotion of its political/economic rise with cultural/sporting rise, which deserves to be studied and reflected upon.
