Last year, Saudi Arabia secured the unofficial rights to host the 2034 World Cup because it was the only bidder.

Of course, that wasn’t the only reason. Anybody who has been paying attention can see that Saudi Arabia’s unprecedented investment in sports, particularly football, over recent years could lead to a World Cup for the ages.

The bigger issue is that Saudi Arabia will be very much in the shoes of Qatar whose hosting of the 2022 World Cup drew much criticism because of its allegedly poor human rights record.

Just as Qatar was severely criticized for its reported abuses so, too, the Kingdom will be bashed right and left for its perceived human rights failures.

The knives, in fact, will be out a few weeks from now.

World Cup hosting contracts will be prepared sometime in December and put to more than 200-member federations from FIFA, world football’s governing body, formally proclaiming Saudi Arabia as the official host of the 2034 football extravaganza.

There is no trace of a hint that any FIFA member will rebel against voting for Saudi Arabia’s hosting bid. Not only is it impossible for any country outside of Asia to host 2034 because of FIFA’s rotation policy, and not only because Saudi Arabia stands alone as the only bidder after Australia bowed out last year (when an Oceania country was eligible).

But, also because whenever the subject is broached, FIFA President Gianni Infantino, who has well-known public ties with the Saudi leadership, speaks as if the signing ceremony is a done deal.

But the pro-Saudi stance by FIFA has not prevented early anti-Saudi sparks from dissenters flying. The fireworks started earlier this month when FIFA was urged – demanded would be more like it - to scrutinize human rights in Saudi Arabia before the siging on the dotted line.

A group of law and human rights experts plus Saudi activists abroad want FIFA to strenuously review the Kingdom’s record before a hosting agreement is reached.

According to AP, these would-be FIFA advisers cite Saudi Arabia’s record on freedom of speech and assembly, and laws on labor and male guardianship that they say limit women’s freedoms. They also want to add a potential termination clause if the Saudi answers are not to their liking.

What is irking the people who basically do not want a Saudi World Cup? Their accusation is that Saudi Arabia is sportswashing: using sports to detract from long-standing issues of human rights.

While Saudi Arabia has made significant social reforms in recent years - in 2018 allowing women to drive and later going to stadiums to watch football games - critics say its investment in sports is to deflect attention from controversy over its human rights record.

That was the exact charge Qatar faced. Now it’s Saudi Arabia’s turn.

The problem with that accusation is that practically no country in the world is innocent of human rights violations. For instance, it is estimated that there are 136,000 modern slaves in Britain, with 41 per cent of them being children. Isn’t that a human rights violation?

America’s 2003 invasion of Iraq and aftermath which killed reportedly one million people was launched under a false pretext. Wasn’t this a human rights violation?

Human rights organisations have tried to put pressure on international sporting bodies that have allowed their competitions to take place in countries that reportedly violate human rights. They haven’t been successful, and the reason is usually double standards.

For decades, embarrassing flip-flops have been all over the place. Nazi Germany held an Olympics. China has been accused of possible genocide against the Uyghur population. It held an Olympics. Russia is accused of brutally silencing its critics. It held a World Cup. Qatar was accused of mistreating its immigrant workers. It held the last World Cup.

How did they get away with it? Because when placing a moral halo on the heads of Western democracies, it can be asked why they are not called out as sportswashers for their own human rights breaches.

Who decides who is a sportswasher? On what basis? The decision-making is not always principled and shows inconsistency and hypocrisy. Many countries hold their noses over human rights records, when the price is right.

It is presumptuous to selectively apply sportswashing to some countries while ignoring it in others. Critics should not abrogate themselves of blame for something their own countries might also be doing.

One person who is not perturbed at all by so-called sportswashing is Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman, the mastermind behind the stunning Saudi rise in the sports world.

In September last year, the crown prince told Fox News he didn’t care about the country’s investment in sport being described as sportswashing. “Well if sportswashing is going to increase my GDP by one per cent, then I will continue doing sportswashing. I am aiming for another one and a half per cent. Call it whatever you want, we’re going to get that one and a half per cent.”

Obviously, the crown prince doesn’t give a hoot about sportswashing, and it shows. Over the past few years, Saudi Arabia has splashed the cash on prestigious international sports events. From chess championships to massive investments in esports and gaming, Saudi Arabia has invested billions across the sporting world.

You name it, the Kingdom has it: A Formula One Grand Prix, several heavyweight boxing showdowns (just this month a female world title fight) and unheard-of amounts poured into golf, tennis and horse-racing.

Without any doubt, Saudi Arabia’s biggest coup was in football, the world’s most popular sport, in which it snagged Cristiano Ronaldo, one of the most celebrated football players ever to grace the game.

The pulling in by the Kingdom of Ronaldo in January last year captivated the sporting world with a mix of curiosity, bemusement and skepticism. It looked like a bad joke, but after Ronaldo signed for Al-Nassr, what followed was an extraordinary Saudi summer spending spree. The scope and speed of this blitz to corral some of soccer’s biggest stars was positively breath-taking. There has never been anything quite like it.

Once CR7 started the proverbial ball rolling, the Saudi Pro League never looked back and never looked the same since. It turned out Ronaldo was just the start; his was a harbinger of things to come. Five months after the blockbuster Ronaldo deal, reportedly worth $200 million a year, former Ballon d’Or holder Karim Benzema jumped to Al-Ittihad, as did Brazilian wunderkind Neymar. All told, over 80 players made the switch to Saudi Arabia.  

What started out as Ronaldo becoming a one-off signing quickly became Ronaldo the pied piper of soccer superstars, leading them to a country starting a spectacular shift in football power.

The Kingdom does not need to apologise that it has money to spend. Saudi Arabian clubs have as much right to purchase players as any other league. Saudi investment in sports is audacious, ambitious – and absolutely within bounds. Athletes performing there or in Saudi-hosted tournaments should not be made to feel embarrassed or feel they must say sorry about having gone there.

Because woe to some athletes who are dragged over the coals, first because of going for the money, then raked over the coals back the other way for going to play in a country that is perceived in some quarters to violate human rights.

In Saudi Arabia, which has one-fifth of the world’s total oil reserves, the second largest in the world, money screams. And if you have it, flaunt it.

Clearly, Saudi Arabia is opening up. Women do not need to cover themselves up on the streets. It reopened cinemas and allowed concerts and international entertainment events to be held after being banned for 30 years. Restaurants, cafes and workplaces are now mixed. Businesses now have the freedom to close during the prayer time or remain open.

In Western eyes Saudi Arabia could move a lot faster. But it has moved remarkably fast in the context of its history.

There is also the cultural lens which must be looked into. A country that bars same-sex relationships might be viewed as a violator of human rights when elsewhere this lifestyle is religiously prohibited.

And let’s face it, as the Kingdom tries to find the right balance between respecting culture and being open to progress, some Western capitals are still debating who’s a man and who’s a woman, an issue that was long settled by Adam and Eve.

Up until two years ago, the World Cup had never been held in an Arab country. Now it could be two Arab countries, both from the Gulf, just 12 years apart.

But it seems there is this thing about Arab Gulf wealth that some people can’t stand. Call it xenophobia or Islamophobia, Arabian money is their kryptonite. At the very least, there must be that ubiquitous paragraph about sportswashing at the end of any story about how countries like Saudi Arabia try to change the subject whenever human rights are mentioned.

Because the morality police and social media warriors are never satisfied, let’s get the big, fat elephant out of the room: Saudi Arabia has Jamal Khashoggi, the war in Yemen, freedom of speech, gay rights, women’s rights, minority rights, human rights.

This article has no intention of defending Saudi Arabia or glossing over its record. Riyadh can take care of itself and is in no need of anybody speaking on its behalf, and certainly not in a story which is devoted basically to sports.

Throughout its drive to host a World Cup and thereafter, Qatar faced allegations of sportswashing, and for the next 10 years, should Saudi Arabia win the 2034 World Cup rights, the Kingdom will be stigmatised the exact same way. A World Cup, world football’s marquee event, would be the culmination of the Kingdom’s ambitious drive to become a major player in global sports. But Saudi Arabia won’t be allowed to savor the achievement. It will continue to be dogged by the sportswashing label.

Qatar is in the rearview mirror but Saudi Arabia is up ahead.

* A version of this article appears in print in the 24 October, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly