Yes, Take Trump’s Threats To Move World Cup Games Seriously

It was late September when President Donald Trump first suggested his administration could relocate World Cup matches for safety reasons, primarily citying games being held in municipalities run by Democrat mayors that have been the target of his ire.

Since then, FIFA has waffled in its public response. First, early this month, FIFA council vice president Victor Montagliani downplayed the possibility. Then on Thursday, a federation spokesperson appeared to contradict Montagliani’s remarks and asserted the final say on venue safety belonged to the U.S. government.

Meanwhile, Trump’s position hasn’t changed.

While local officials and organizers are quick to cite existing contracts and ticket sales as practical obstacles to any relocation, at this point in the trajectory of Trump’s political career, his threats should be considered serious until proven otherwise. Because, in his second term in office in particular, the 47th president has already bent other live entertainment institutions to his will on a smaller scale. He’s forged an apparently strong relationship with FIFA president Gianni Infantino. And unlike recent previous hosts, his administration doesn’t appear nearly as concerned with outside opinions.

Nothing New, Really

Yes, relocating World Cup matches would be a far more complicated endeavor than previous Trump presidency forrays into sports and entertainment. But it would repeat a pattern we’ve already seen of melding sports and the performing arts in the administration’s image.

There was this spring’s takeover of the Kennedy Centerg, which coincidentally paved the way for the announcement that the venue will host December’s World Cup draw.

There was the agreement with the UFC to stage live bouts on the White House South Lawn as part of the nation’s 250th birthday celebration on July 4, 2026.

Also, Trump has not only succeeded at attending numerous high-profile sporting events this year, but also at getting TV broadcast partners to minimize the visibility of any booing of the president to viewers watching at home.

As for the idea of contracts preventing the administration from taking action, there is a long list of complaintants, including scores of laid off federal government employees, who have claimed Trump’s administration and previous business endeavors have left not fulfilled their end of contracts.

Donny and Gianni

Further Trump appears to have a strong relationship with FIFA president Gianni Infantino, with the two making numerous appearances together, including at his second inauguration and at ceremonies recognizing a recent ceasefire agreement in Gaza.

The nature of the bond isn’t completely known. But the central point is that even if the larger FIFA community is resistant to Trump’s desires, its president may not be.

That’s a very influential friend to have, considering how Infantino has proven capable of leading his own crusades in the footballing world.

The expanded FIFA Club World Cup was largely an endeavor in his own vision despite significant pushback from wealthy European nations. And critics have alleged Infantino’s push to expand the World Cup field to 48 teams and the process he crafted to award 2030 and 2034 hosting rights has gone against the organization’s own democratic norms.

No Need To Appease

But maybe the most important thing to understand is that it’s clear the Trump administration does not feel the same need to appease outside foreign in the way that previous hosts Russia and Qatar strove to.

For example, during the 2018 tournament, Russia famously relaxed its notoriously strict restrictions on international travelers travel for anyone who possessed match tickets. Then in 2022 Qatari government relaxed restrictions on public alcohol consumption and also took steps to lessen the severity its anti-homosexuality laws and policies.

By contrast, there have been no such promises from Trump brass to lessen immigration enforcement activities during the tournament, or to roll back visa restrictions for foreign travelers. In fact, in August, the U.S. Congress added an additional $250 fee for travel visa applicants, though that doesn’t apply to citizens of the 42 nations who need only a passport to visit the United States.

If the administration doesn’t feel pressure in those areas, it’s unlikely global or local pressure would make a significant dent on a desire to relocate World Cup host sites.