Many believe that Qatar’s hosting of the 2022 World Cup helped boost the country’s image internationally. The precision of the organization and sophistication of Qatar’s sports facilities and infrastructure have impressed the followers of the world’s most popular game, which number about 3.5 billion people, or about half the world’s population.
If one follows media reports, one could argue that all of the above is very similar to the truth, or at least quite applicable. Along with this reality, however, there is an underlying issue of great importance for Qatar’s relations with the West, at least for the foreseeable future, namely the uncertainty and circumstances surrounding Qatar’s request for this event from the beginning.
Everyone knows that in the twelve years leading up to the international tournament, that is, since Qatar won the bid to host it in 2010, a number of questions and investigations, some of which are still ongoing, have arisen regarding the legal suspicions surrounding the Qatari bid and the events leading up to the vote.
Most of these investigations and allegations, however, had little impact after the event actually took place. A few months ago, the Qataris were already considering abandoning the event and turning it over to another country.
Several factors played an important role in fending off the campaign of criticism that Qatar faced amid suspicions and accusations about the voting process. The most notable of these was the coronavirus outbreak in 2020 and the global concern about the consequences of this epidemic, whose negative effects are still being felt today in almost every economy in the world.
The changes in the international environment and the measures taken in the last two years contributed to the complete silencing of criticism of Qatar, especially since it seemed difficult to think of an alternative at the time. Qatar’s governance and extremely generous spending on infrastructure and other issues silenced all criticism, if only temporarily.
The admiration the country received for organizing the event outweighed any form of criticism. It actually went better than predicted, at least in terms of what the world and the region expected from the host country, and there were constant comparisons with previous editions of the World Cup.
The reality is that Qatar deservedly passed the test and earned extra points beyond its expectations, and was not overlooked as an spontaneous Arab alignment as Arab teams performed outstandingly in this edition of the tournament. The Moroccan team’s advance to the semifinals and the Saudi team’s victory over Argentina deserve special mention.
Indeed, it is not only about the results, but also about the performances of most of the Arab teams, which provided an exceptional result for the Qatari organization and made the holding of the tournament an important station in the annals of the World Cup. Amidst all this, a corruption scandal erupted in the European Parliament, in which Qatar’s name plays an important role.
There was a near unanimous vote to remove Vice President Eva Kiley from office due to an alleged affair. Deputies voted overwhelmingly 625 out of 628 in favor of Kiley’s removal. She is one of six people arrested as part of an investigation into suspected bribery.
They are suspected of receiving funds to represent Doha in the European establishment. Officially, Qatar categorically denies the allegations. But the firing of the Vice President of the European Parliament does not close the case.
The scandal seriously threatens the credibility of the entire European Parliament, which constantly criticizes Eastern and Western countries on issues such as corruption, human rights and others.
In this context, I was struck by the statement of French MEP Jordan Bardella, in which he said that “The EU spends its time moralizing all the regimes in the world: it is in fact allegedly corrupted, at the highest level, by [a coutry that] finances Islamism on our soil.” Linking the alleged corruption to “Islamism” is not surprising, given that the MEP belongs to the extreme right wing in Europe.
But the statement itself implies the fact that the European Parliament has suffered a terrible fall in this incident, where it could take many years to regain credibility, regardless of which country was involved.
The dilemma is also reflected in the fact that the consequences of the mistrust and corruption scandal may not be limited to the European Parliament: they may even go beyond its walls and affect other EU institutions that are already in crisis, whether because of disagreements over how to deal with the Ukrainian conflict and its aftermath, or because of the rise of extreme right-wing parties in several European countries and their demand to leave the Union the Brexit way.
The corruption case in the European Parliament is certainly a serious blow to the reputation of the parliamentary institution and, as already mentioned, affects the broader institutional framework – the Union itself.
But the impact may not stop there, since the investigation is still at an early stage, and the search for evidence and facts about Qatar’s alleged connection to the case could affect the latter’s European relations and the scope of Doha’s actions at the international level, especially in the West.
To some extent, this is limited by Qatar’s thirst for European gas markets, as the Russian gas supply crisis continues against the backdrop of the conflict in Ukraine. Qatar can also benefit from the leverage it has, especially after it has been “freed” from the fears and anxieties of a possible World Cup withdrawal and the support its global image has received from hosting the tournament.
