When the United States co-hosts the FIFA World Cup in 2026 alongside Canada and Mexico, it will mark the first time the tournament is staged across three countries. For fans, it’s a celebration of football on a scale never seen before, with 48 teams competing in cities from Toronto to Mexico City to Los Angeles. But beneath the spectacle of sport, the U.S. risks turning the world’s most-watched event into a stage for political friction.
Football and Politics: A Long Tradition
From its early days, the World Cup has never been just about the game.
- Uruguay 1930: The inaugural tournament was used to showcase national pride amid economic turmoil.
- Argentina 1978: The ruling junta exploited the event to project legitimacy, even as human rights abuses mounted.
- Qatar 2022: Despite dazzling stadiums, the tournament was shadowed by criticism over migrant labor practices and geopolitics.
The lesson is clear: hosting the World Cup often carries political weight. For the U.S., which shares hosting duties with its neighbors, the politics may be even more complicated.
Tensions with Co-Hosts
While FIFA promotes the 2026 tournament as a model of international cooperation, U.S. relations with Canada and Mexico could inject a note of discord.
- Border Politics: Immigration policy remains a flashpoint between Washington and Mexico. A crackdown in the U.S. could cast a shadow over matches hosted south of the border.
- Trade and Security: Disagreements over trade agreements, cross-border infrastructure, and security cooperation risk resurfacing in the glare of global media attention.
- Diplomatic Perceptions: Canada and Mexico, eager to highlight inclusivity and cooperation, may contrast sharply with a U.S. political climate that sometimes veers toward protectionism and unilateralism.
The Global Stage
For the U.S., the stakes are high. The World Cup offers a rare chance to shape global perceptions. A successful, cooperative tournament could highlight American openness and hospitality. A misstep could reinforce narratives of arrogance or disregard for partners.
The international audience will not just be watching the goals scored on the pitch but also how the three host nations interact. Every gesture of partnership—or lack thereof—will be magnified.
Domestic Divides
The U.S. also faces a domestic challenge. While soccer is growing in popularity, the sport still lags behind American football, basketball, and baseball in cultural dominance. Hosting the World Cup presents a chance to accelerate the sport’s acceptance. But political polarization could overshadow the moment, particularly if debates about costs, immigration, or nationalism seep into tournament discourse.
A Diplomatic Opportunity—or Own Goal?
Handled carefully, the World Cup could bolster U.S. soft power, much like the 1994 tournament, which left a lasting legacy in American soccer. But if the U.S. allows political disputes to overshadow the spirit of cooperation, it risks turning the event into a “diplomatic own goal” that alienates allies and undercuts its leadership image.
For now, the spotlight is on Washington. In 2026, the world will not just be keeping score on the field—it will be keeping score on diplomacy.
