Football, Qatar, and Performative Activism

England’s one-nil loss to Italy on 23rd September means that, for the first time in 150 years of international football, the national team has been booted out of the Nations League and faces the ignominious prospect of being unseeded in the qualifying draw for Euro 2024. Their run of five games without a victory is the team’s worst performance since the Graham Taylor era some thirty years ago. 

I’m no expert, but surely the point of competitive sport is to win? I would never be so bold or cynical as to assume a bunch of overpaid, pampered babies kicking a ball around have little to no pride in representing their country. Oh no, they are all heroes and role models whose impeccable off-field behaviour is an inspiration for the next generation of ball kickers. But it begs the question: how can our beloved national team improve? Perhaps the team just needs a dose of the old Alex Ferguson ‘hairdryer’ treatment. Yet, besides scoring more goals than the other team, or verbal intimidation from the straight-talking ex-Manchester United manager, I can offer little advice. However, I can provide a bit of common sense. 

Stop virtue-signalling! 

For the upcoming World Cup in Qatar, England captain Harry Kane has decided to emboss himself and his team with a ‘OneLove’ armband. Kane has said the LGBTQ-esque rainbow-coloured heart styling the band is part of a campaign to fight discrimination. (Of course, the flavour of discrimination Kane would like to fight—namely against the LGBTQ community—is rampant throughout the Islamic state of Qatar, though he would less than like to admit it.)

It’s all too easy to fall into this meaningless performative activism, which is why I was not shocked when I stumbled across David Beckham’s latest offering. The former England star has of course got himself a job as Qatar’s global brand ambassador for the World Cup, a role for which Goldenballs, as he was once known, will be allegedly paid £150 million. In what has to be some of the most shameless and hypocritical footage ever committed to film, Beckham has decided to present a corporate video where he extols the virtues of Qatar. 

The thirty-minute vlog has all the hallmarks of a well-funded production company. The opening scene showcases the crystal clear waters of Doha Bay before an aerial shot focuses on a revving motorbike. As our leather-clad protagonist races through empty streets, a voiceover tells us about the wide range of experiences you can have in Qatar in just 48 hours. Besides seemingly spending most of his time sunbathing on boats, one of Beckham’s most memorable visits was to a local spice market. In his trademark falsetto, he tells us: “It's one of the best spice markets that I have ever been to.” Yet I fear the only nutmeg Beckham’s heard of is on the football field. 

Whether he knows it or not, Beckham has become the socially acceptable face of sports washing. This is the term for the way dictatorial regimes attempt to sanitise their global reputations by gaining an endorsement from a sporting legend. It is done in an attempt to divert attention away from their own, often dreadful human rights records: in this case, using a world-famous sports star to promote a major international sporting event held in a tyrannical sand-swept satrapy in the Middle East.

Take Saudi Arabia. The Islamic kingdom has spent at least $1.5 billion on hosting major sporting events to help boost its reputation. Just a few days after Anthony Joshua and Oleksandr Usyk’s Jeddah bout in August, The Guardian reported on the case of Nourah bint Saeed al-Qahtani, a Saudi woman sentenced to 45 years in prison for “using the internet to tear [Saudi Arabia's] social fabric.” (Basically, for criticising the country’s absolute monarchy.)

Outside of the Middle East, criticism against the Gulf regimes is rare for a simple reason: politics. Qatar holds roughly 12 per cent of the world's energy reserves and is now an essential source of supplies for Europe to replace Russian gas due to the ongoing war in Ukraine. Having to cosy up to despots for material gain is a bold, and some would say despicable geopolitical strategy. Henry Kissinger called it realpolitik; others call it hypocrisy.

Qatar won the right to hold the World Cup back in 2010. The decision was rocked by controversy given that the whole FIFA voting system is corrupt, a sign of too much money-buying influence. The country is also thoroughly unsuitable for playing football, with temperatures in the Gulf state regularly rising above 50° C in the summer. For that reason, FIFA moved the tournament to November, causing chaos in our domestic league and the numerous football competitions around the world that traditionally play during that period.

Thankfully, the players won't have to play in conditions that more resemble working in a steel plant. No such luck for the Asian migrant workers Qatar imported in to build the stadiums. It has been reported that work in such a hostile environment has left thousands of construction workers dead. Qatari authorities insist the toll is fewer than 50, while The Guardian reports the figure as 6,500. Perhaps we will never know.

In highlighting Kane’s decision to wear the gaudy accoutrement, the Football Association said the campaign is  “acknowledging that progress has been made in Qatar since the awarding of the tournament.” That's reassuring. Does this mean they will pick up the scorched remains of the dead labourers and bury them? Perhaps they will be so kind as to pay for their funerals. 

Those who stay alive long enough to build these shrines to Islamic tyranny are no better off. Any complaints regarding working conditions are met with the threat of deportation. In August, Qatar deported scores of migrant workers after protesting about not being paid. Perhaps Beckham could take some time out from being the face of the medieval Islamic country's tourist board and become their union rep? 

Or perhaps Harry Kane could wear another band. Maybe a badge? Yeah, that'll sort it all out.

Noel began life at university under the guidance of Professor Stuart Hall—spending four years reading sociology and political science. He is a regular contributor to City Journal and has written extensively for The Critic. In addition, he has written for Quillette, Spiked, and Areo magazine, and regularly writes for Reaction magazine. He lives with his girlfriend and his rather annoying cat.