

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The Argentine national football team does not belong to Javier Milei. Nor does it belong to Benjamin Netanyahu. Argentina does not speak with one voice.
One day before the FIFA Men’s World Cup final between Argentina and Spain, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed his support for Argentina. In a video released before the match, he said: “I don’t hide that I’m a fan of Argentina. I think most Israeli citizens do. That is because President Milei has revolutionized Israel’s relationship with Argentina, and we have no greater nor better friends. Which is why we support them.”
Both media outlets known for supporting Palestinian solidarity and media outlets affiliated with or supportive of the Israeli state immediately framed the World Cup final as a proxy for the relationship between Palestine and Israel. The final turned into a symbolic contest due to the official state policies of Argentina and Spain toward Palestine and Israel. Acts of individual actors, for example, Lionel Messi’s commercial connection with Israeli companies or his visit to Israel and the occupied West Bank as part of a 2013 “Peace Tour” organized by Barcelona or Lamin Yamal’s waving of a Palestinian flag after the La Liga championship, were turned into symbols of the collective stance of a nation and became reasons enough to support or oppose a specific team in the World Cup final.
As a Bangladeshi-American who grew up in Bangladesh—a country known for its passion for Latin American football powerhouses and its split loyalties between Argentina and Brazil—I have been a fan of the Argentine men’s football team since the age of 10. I have also been in solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for freedom since I was old enough to read newspapers. I found it appalling to see the head of a genocidal state publicly endorse my favorite men’s football team and to watch Palestinian solidarity become over simplistically reduced to supporting or opposing a football team. Can we end settler-colonial violence by winning a football match?
While people have argued that symbols matter, I would urge them to consider how such symbolism ignores two important points: First, it overlooks the problem of transforming one of the world’s most celebrated sporting spectacles into a stage upon which Benjamin Netanyahu’s ethnonationalist genocidal project can be publicly performed and normalized. Second, people are not their governments. Argentina’s self-proclaimed “most Zionist president in the world” Javier Milei’s unconditional alignment with Netanyahu’s government does not reflect the fact that Argentina is also the home to a substantial and increasingly visible Palestinian solidarity movement.
To reduce Argentina to its president is to reproduce a colonial logic that erases the vibrant historical and contemporary social movements, labor struggles, Indigenous resistance, feminist and queer organizing, anti-racist and anti-fascist activism, and transnational solidarity engagements that have long shaped political life in Argentina.
Using sports as a platform for promoting geopolitical interests is not new. Sports have always been entangled with powerful states and institutions. They were exported globally as tools of European colonial expansion, serving as instruments of the so-called civilizing mission, mechanisms of control, and tactics of assimilation between the 16th and the 20th centuries. Many colonized and indigenous communities have also turned sports into powerful symbols of defiance, through which they subverted the master’s tools, beat the colonizers at their own game, and transformed stadiums and playing fields into communal spaces for practicing decolonial solidarity and organizing resistance away from colonial surveillance and policing.
Football is no exception. The imperial and colonial legacy still shapes the way football—especially the FIFA Men’s World Cup—is organized, governed, and experienced today. Concerns have been raised about the displacement of the unhoused population by local governments in US host cities. Immigration and Customs Enforcement continued to arbitrarily and violently target, deport, and kill members of communities of color through paramilitary-style operations while World Cup matches were held across US cities. In Canadian and Mexican host cities, marginalized and minoritized communities expressed concerns about disruptions to water supplies, threats to land access, rising living costs, and disruptive infrastructural development.
Even though FIFA has chosen the official slogan “United as One” for the 2026 Men’s World Cup, a series of events has already demonstrated that the powerful and the powerless are not united and that the playing field is not level for everyone. US President Donald Trump has publicly intervened in FIFA’s disciplinary process, and FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s cozy relationship with Trump has raised serious concerns. Unusually strict travel restrictions disproportionately affected the Iranian team's World Cup experience. The 2026 FIFA World Cup has repeatedly been used and abused to exert both hard and soft neoliberal, disciplinary, and diplomatic power.
By expressing support for the Argentine men’s football team, Netanyahu also utilized the World Cup to manufacture legitimacy for the Israeli settler-colonial apartheid state that has a long history of systematically evicting, segregating, displacing, and killing Indigenous Palestinians. He has appropriated this transnational sporting spectacle as an instrument for promoting and normalizing his settler-colonial mission.
What is at stake, however, extends beyond the universalization of a violent settler-colonial regime.
Drawing on Edward Said, I would argue that Netanyahu’s embrace of Argentina illustrates how the Israeli settler-colonial project is not just about colonizing Palestinian land and annihilating the Indigenous Palestinian population. The settler-colonial project involves careful production of knowledge through a politics of representation, turning representation into a technology of discursive and political rule. Through his symbolic embrace, Netanyahu deliberately erases complexities and contradictions, propagating an oversimplified and monolithic discourse about the state of Argentina and its communities. In his representation, Argentina is no longer a society of millions negotiating overlapping and competing political traditions; it becomes merely an extension of President Javier Milei’s geopolitical loyalties.
Yet Milei does not constitute Argentina.
To reduce Argentina to its president is to reproduce a colonial logic that erases the vibrant historical and contemporary social movements, labor struggles, Indigenous resistance, feminist and queer organizing, anti-racist and anti-fascist activism, and transnational solidarity engagements that have long shaped political life in Argentina. It renders invisible the thousands of Argentines who have mobilized in solidarity with Palestinians despite President Milei’s continuing unabashed support for Israel, including members of Argentine Jewish organizations critical of Israeli state-sponsored settler-colonial violence, as well as union organizers, students, artists, and social justice activists who refuse to equate support for Palestinian liberation with hostility toward Jewish lives and communities.
For example, the Comité Argentino de Solidaridad con el Pueblo Palestino (Argentine Solidarity Committee with the Palestinian People) organizes national demonstrations, educational events, BDS campaigns, and solidarity actions across Argentina. It ran a nationwide campaign under the slogan, “Argentina Rejects Genocide in Gaza” and mobilized a massive demonstration involving thousands of people in Buenos Aires in July 2025. A diverse collective of Argentine lawyers, doctors, educators, politicians, journalists, and activists participated in the Global Sumud Flotilla, which attempted to break the Israeli criminal blockade and carried humanitarian aid to Gaza. Judíos por Palestina (Jews for Palestine) operates in Argentina as part of the Global Jews for Palestine Network, which is known for its rejection of Zionism, Israeli apartheid, and genocidal state policies.
A 2026 Pew Research Center survey found that 55% of Argentines hold “very unfavorable” or “somewhat unfavorable” views of Israel. Only 21% view the country favorably. Argentina recognized Palestine as a “free and independent state” under former President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner back in 2010—more than 13 years before Spain formally recognized the state of Palestine. The Argentine football legend Diego Maradona, who famously said, “In my heart, I am Palestinian,” was known for his vocal critiques of the settler-colonial violence of the Israeli state.
The issue is not whether a political leader may cheer for Argentina. The issue is how the imperial and settler-colonial power repeatedly attempts to equate a diplomatic alliance between Milei and Netanyahu with the political imagination of the entire population of Argentina.
The Argentine national football team does not belong to Javier Milei. Nor does it belong to Benjamin Netanyahu. Argentina does not speak with one voice. The Argentine football team belongs to generations of communities that have transformed football into an archive of collective memory—of neighborhood life, working-class identity, migration, anti-authoritarian and democratic struggles, joy, grief, and resistance. To appropriate that symbolic inheritance for the purpose of normalizing settler-colonial violence is to strip football of its decolonial legacy. No geopolitical alliance—and no World Cup final—can or should erase that legacy.
If I had the good fortune of meeting Jalen Brunson, I would urge him to learn about what the UAE is doing in Sudan, to educate others about it, and to ask the Knicks owner, James Dolan, to end the UAE deal.
A funny thing happened on the way to the NBA Championship Finals this season. Despite being die-hard Celtics fans, my six-year-old son and I fell in love with Jalen Brunson of the rival New York Knicks. We’ve risked excommunication from Celtics Nation for this sacrilege.
But let me state our case. First, and obviously, Brunson is one of the most fearless basketball players to have ever played the game. Driving the lane repeatedly in the face of Victor Wembanyama, the 7’4” consensus NBA defensive player of the year, was a wonder to behold. The guy has ice in his veins.
Second, we love the kind of humble teammate Brunson is: deflecting praise, not spending his time on social media battling critics like a certain ex-Celtic, being forever encouraging of his teammates, and living out his faith in God.
Third, perhaps strangely, we love Brunson’s dietary habits. My son is a carb and treat monster (wonder where he got that from?), but when we learned about Brunson’s incredibly healthy meals, we both got on board. Even Celtics like John Havlicek and Paul Silas couldn’t do that for me as a kid.
Fourth, since I’m always drilling my son to share his toys and be generous with those less fortunate, we were inspired to learn that Brunson took a pay cut so that there would be more money to—wait for it—win a championship.
Fifth and relatedly, Brunson has used his wealth to better the lives of others through his Second Round Foundation. He received an NBA Cares award for his community work, something we have prioritized with our son from a very early age.
Sixth, as on-and-off New York residents ourselves, Brunson is quintessential New York City. The comebacks, the underdog, the grit, the discounted. For all those who are doubted and dismissed, he is the patron saint.
Seventh, by every account, Brunson is an amazing father to his daughter Jordyn, a devoted husband to his wife Ali, and a loving son to his mom Sandra and dad Rick.
I could go on. The guy is the real deal, the kind of role model the sports world—and frankly, this country—needs right now for so many reasons.
But there is one problem, one outlier in this litany of goodness. It isn’t his fault by any stretch, but just maybe he could do something about it.
If I ever met Brunson, after telling him how much my son and I have admired and been inspired by him, I would raise this one uncomfortable truth with him: Right above his heart on his and his teammates’ Knicks jerseys is a patch with the words “Experience Abu Dhabi.” The New York Knicks have a marketing deal worth $30 million with Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates. It is one of the most expensive uniform patches in the NBA.
Seems innocuous enough. There are lots of these kinds of ads all over uniforms and arenas throughout the sporting world globally. But this ad carries enormous baggage, and it’s unlikely that Brunson and most people even know why. Through this marketing deal, the Knicks are connected to the people of Sudan. But the Sudanese are not experiencing Abu Dhabi in the same way the tourists the UAE is wooing might be. The people of Sudan are experiencing Abu Dhabi through the killer drones the UAE government has been delivering to a deadly militia amid one of the most destructive wars globally this century. The United Nations and the US government have said the militia that the UAE supports is committing genocide, which is the deliberate killing of people on the basis of their identity, in this case, racial and ethnic.
If I had the good fortune of meeting Jalen Brunson, I would urge him to learn about what the UAE is doing in Sudan, to educate others about it, and to ask the Knicks owner, James Dolan, to end the UAE deal. The Knicks and Brunson have been the good news story of the sports world this year. Imagine the good news and hope the team could bring to the suffering people of Sudan if the team cut its connection to such horrific violence.
Our goals are bigger than getting a ball in net. We want justice, and the day Mexico has that, there will truly be something to celebrate.
From teachers to the mothers searching for the forcibly disappeared, Mexico will be holding numerous, massive protests against the 2026 Men's World Cup as it kicks off in Mexico City on Thursday. This follows hundreds of protests and actions held over the past months as FIFA and governments prioritize tourists and corporations over urgent local needs and the environment.
1. Take FIFA to forget that there is empire: The World Cup, being held in Mexico, the US, and Canada, will “unite the people,” said Canadian soccer player, Jonatha Osorio. “The world will be invading Canada, Mexico, and the USA with a big wave of joy and happiness,” said FIFA president Gianni Infantino, on a glitzy summer's evening in New York.
The same countries are also currently holding talks to renew the US-Mexico Canada (USMC) North American free trade agreement for another 16 years. The USMCA, an update to the North America Free Trade Agreement, is codified empire, depriving Mexico of corn sovereignty, institutionalizing the US' dominance and Mexico's structural and economic dependence, while sacrificing Mexico's rivers and soil to US and Canadian mines.
The giddy glamour of the World Cup spectacle is not unity but sedation, its stadium lights obscuring the negotiated details of imperialism and the unfestive realities of barbed borders, wage apartheid, and centuries of accumulated harm.
The US and Mexico are employing selective hospitality for the World Cup—or, more precisely, implementing racist and classist measures of city beautification for some, and social cleansing, deportations, raids, repression, and evictions for others.
2. A corporate exploitation bonanza: The soccer ball is the pretext. The World Cup is actually a giant advertising campaign—experiential marketing designed to drive sales for the corporate sponsors and move mass amounts of merchandise.
Behind those sales there is extreme exploitation. Adidas and the company Someone Somewhere paid 150 Indigenous Nahua embroiderers in Naupan, Puebla 36 pesos (US$2) an hour to hand-stitch the Mexico World Cup jersey—which Adidas then sold for 4,000 pesos. Diario Cambio reported that the women were also forced to abandon their traditional sewing techniques and use French knots and zigzag stitching instead to fill in commercial logos—a sidelining of cultural knowledge. The companies also promised the workers social security, in order to justify their "fair trade" branding (and pricing), but never kept the promise.
And while World Cup merchandise floods Mexico's street stalls and shops, an estimated 70% of Mexicans will watch the matches on television, with a corresponding increase in junk food purchases to go with that. Inside statidums, FIFA has prohibited the use of reusable water bottles in the three host countries, meaning spectators must buy water or soft drinks, generating huge amounts of rubbish as well as profits for corporations.
3. Coca Cup: The Cup trophy arrived in a Coca-Cola plane at Mexico City's airport in late February. The Mexican government rolled out the red carpet, with foreign affairs secretary Juan Ramón de la Fuente receiving the corporation and the trophy as though they were fellow officials. The trophy and massive Coca-Cola boards then toured the country, including a photo shoot at the sacred and world heritage site, Chichén Itza, and an appearance on the president's daily news show.
Coca-Cola has had advertising at every FIFA tournament since 1950. The promotions and sponsorship are a major part of its strategy to increase consumption during the games, and for acquiring new customers. Coca-Cola, along with companies like Pepsi and Nestle, extract (steal) over 133 billion liters of Mexico's water annually, and Mexico is already the biggest consumer of Coca-Cola globally, at an average of 163 liters of soft drink per person per year. The FIFA-Coca-Cola alliance is spoon-feeding more empire to a country it is already slowly poisoning.
4. Red carpet for tourists, disposable locals: The US and Mexico are employing selective hospitality for the World Cup—or, more precisely, implementing racist and classist measures of city beautification for some, and social cleansing, deportations, raids, repression, and evictions for others.
The US is promoting the World Cup as a way to "showcase" their "hospitality," while simultaneously violating a range of human rights with its closed border, Immigration and Customs Enforcement racial profiling, and illegal and cruel deportations.
In Mexico City over the past month, officials have also held anti-migrant raids, where police, the military, and migration authorities have detained people who are typically irregular precisely because of the closed border to the north and horrific wait times and unfair outcomes from Mexican institutions. Social cleansing for the World Cup also includes removing vendors from the area near the Mexico City stadium and homeless people from parts of the city where tourists are expected. Sex workers report that a new 17-kilometer bike lane built for the World Cup has left thousands of them without work, and local communities, who weren't consulted, said they support bike lanes, but this one cuts through bus stops, endangering pedestrians.
The government is also valuing Mexico's beautiful axolotls more as World Cup mascots than living creatures. It spent 62 million pesos adorning walls around the city and the light-rail with axolotl images, while nearby in Xochimilco, the animals are endangered due to contaminated runoff and public works.
Further, the government is staging Day of the Dead celebrations in June just for tourists, while erecting massive metal perimeters around Mexico City's main square. There is a two-kilometer exclusion zone around the stadium that is causing huge difficulties for locals as well as stopping protesters and protecting the tourists and wealthy who can afford expensive stadium seats.

5. Street soccer: "The streets are our soccer fields, and we assert our right to the city, to protest, and to freedom of assembly," said members of the Assembly for the Common Good and Against the War. And indeed, billions of dollars and corporate sponsorships aren't necessary for sport or fun. Known as cascaritas in Mexico—and by other names around Latin America and much of the Global South—informal and improvised soccer games played in parks, parking lots, and in the streets can be easy, free, and truly inclusive.
This soccer is played with a few backpacks or empty water jugs as goal posts, a hand-painted or chalk-drawn court, and an empty can or an old plastic ball. The name, cascaritas, comes from orange peal, because even an orange can be a ball—though it will eventually become quite beaten up and the peal will come off. When the objective is to have fun, any genders and ages can join in, only a few basic rules are followed, and even those watching are more involved, as they are the neighbors and friends of the players.
6. Protest, organizing, and community is what actually brings people together: Over the past few months, movements and collectives around Mexico have held hundreds of events protesting the World Cup and its direct impact, as well as using it to draw attention to the reality in the country, and beyond.
People have held soccer against genocide and for Palestine, feminist soccer, soccer matches against the looting of water and against gentrification with US President Donald Trump's head as a ball, soccer in San Pedro Xolostoc to promote community building, and soccer matches against a rubbish dump on Indigenous lands. In Jalisco, collectives held an Anti-World Cup People's Cascarita to denounce that while the state and national governments prepare for the World Cup, they aren't doing anything about the water crisis, housing, and disappearances. Various groups stood in front of the World Cup Watch to announce the formation of an Assembly for the Common Good and a series of anti-World Cup actions. And of course there have been countless actions for the forcibly disappeared, and the massive education worker strikes and marches—mentioned below.
For Thursday, families looking for the forcibly disappeared have called for a national protest, and will be joined by teachers, retirees, transport workers, small farmers, healthcare workers, and other movements. Already, participants in this protest have faced problems, with a contingent of 17 buses from Guerrero state of student teachers and parents of the 43 Ayotzinapa students that were forcibly disappeared, being stopped by police from reaching Mexico City, Monday.
"The ball is coming home, when will they?" activists painted in massive letters on the road in Mexico City, in front of a wall of posters for the 133,00 forcibly disappeared. Our goals are bigger than getting a ball in net. We want justice, and the day Mexico has that, there will truly be something to celebrate.
7. Safety for the World Cup, but not for women, Indigenous communities, activists, or journalists: Mexico announced that it will deploy almost 100,000 security forces (including police, military, and private security) to the three cities hosting the World Cup. The national government also approved US Armed Forces' entry into the country, to train and prepare Mexican forces for the World Cup. Meanwhile, no such resources are deployed to prevent or solve femicides—with an impunity rate of 95%—nor to clean our dead rivers, monitor workplace abuses, and so on.
8. Students and educators come last: The Mexican government initially announced a massive three-month-long school holiday to accommodate the World Cup schedule, by bringing forward the usual holidays by six weeks. Many teachers are only paid for classroom hours and struggle during holidays, while parents and carers would have had to seek childcare, and children would have missed out on significant learning. After much criticism, the measure was retracted.
Teachers have also gone on strike and threatened to stop the World Cup, holding protests, marches, road blocks, and more since mid May to demand pension rights, among other worker rights, which President Claudia Sheinbaum promised in her campaign but hasn't delivered. Instead, these protests have been blocked with hundreds of police and repressed with tear gas and rubber bullets, with one teacher losing his left eye and sight in the other, as a result. Protesting teachers used rope to tumble three giant statues of soccer players that the government had erected on a key road in Mexico City.
9. Complicit venues: The venue in Mexico City, Azteca Stadium (technically called Banorte), the largest in Latin America, is owned by Televisa via Grupo Ollamani. Last year, the government granted Televisa a water concession next to the stadium for 450 million liters a year—thereby illegally privatizing local public water, and causing water shortages for those nearby. Not only does Televisa own the stadium, but it and TV Azteca are the companies with transmission rights.
In Guadalajara, clandestine mass graves have been found near the Akron Stadium, where four matches will be played. In Guadalajara too, the government is employing heavy machinery to renovate and clean up the city in preparation for the World Cup, but there is no digging equipment available to help searchers find the thousands of forcibly disappeared.
Companies, sports teams, and elected officials should stop partnering with the UAE or wearing Emirates-emblazoned swag until the country stops arming genocide in Sudan.
While little is reported about the role of the United Arab Emirates in provoking and supporting genocide in Sudan, the sheikdom is being celebrated at major sporting events here and abroad. I was reminded of this watching an interview with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani about the Knicks in the Athletic The New York Times sports website. During the interview I was alarmed to see he was wearing a sweater emblazoned with “Fly Emirates.”
I'm rooting for the Knicks and am a huge Mamdani fan, not only of the mayor but of his parents for many decades before Zohran caught my attention. It turns out that the sweater he was wearing is one a several outfits he wears in support of Arsenal, his favorite English Premier soccer team. During an Eid al-Adha celebration in the Bronx, he wore a kurta in the team’s blue and black colors. On it inscribed in large letters was “ Emirates—Fly Better.”
Emirates, the airline of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), has its major hub in Dubai linking a vast network of connections to Asia and Africa from Europe and the USA. The NBA and Emirates entered into a multiyear global marketing agreement. It is the official airline and a major sponsor of the NBA. The league’s annual in-season tournament is now called the Emirates NBA Cup and referees at NBA games wear EMIRATES on the back of their uniforms.
Numerous international organizations and media have identified the UAE (aka The Emirates) as a major supplier of arms, training, mercenaries, and material support for the Rapid Support Forces. The New York Times stated that, “under the guise of saving refugees, the United Arab Emirates is running an elaborate covert operation to back one side in Sudan’s spiraling war—supplying powerful weapons and drones, treating injured fighters, and airlifting the most serious cases to one of its military hospitals, according to a dozen current and former officials from the United States, Europe and several African countries.”
Refugees International wants prominent companies and organizations like the NBA, Disney, and Warner Brothers to suspend their partnerships with the UAE until it has ended its armed support for the RSF.
Mayor Mandani while condemning Israeli genocide in Palestine wears apparel endorsing the foremost sponsor of genocide in Darfur. The UAE supplies arms, equipment, and finances for the Rapid Support Forces who have committed countless acts of brutality including genocide and systematic rape. United Nations’ Secretary General António Guterres described the Sudan civil war as a “crisis of staggering scale and brutality.” He told world leaders that “the external support and flow of weapons must end.”
US-based Refugees International “calls for immediate accountability for the United Arab Emirates as new evidence emerges that it continues to fuel genocide in Sudan.” The Conflict Insights Group (CIG) report, “BLOOD MONEY: How UAE Support and Foreign Mercenaries Enabled the Fall of El Fasher,” uncovers the extent of Emirati operational involvement in the war.
The investigation documented “how a UAE-backed network of Colombian mercenaries provided critical military support to Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), enabling the October 2025 capture of El Fasher, North Darfur. Colombian mercenaries flew drones, trained soldiers, and were present during the RSF’s takeover of El Fasher, where the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has concluded that war crimes and crimes against humanity took place.” The report states that these mercenaries were associated with Global Security Services Group, a UAE company with documented ties to senior Emirati government officials, including links to Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan.
Donald Trump hosted a dinner for Sheikh Tahnoon on March 18, 2025. The sheikh met with the head of the CIA, various cabinet members, and CEOs including Jeff Bezos. The New York Times reported that leaked information indicated that Tahnoon sought Trump’s support “to shield the UAE from potential international sanctions and an ICJ (International Court of Justice) investigation into its alleged support for the RSF militia in Sudan.”
Ironically, on November 14, 2025, the BBC reported that “US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called for international action to cut off the supply of weapons to Sudan's paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), who are accused of mass killings in el-Fasher. At the end of a G7 foreign ministers meeting in Canada, Rubio said the RSF had committed systematic atrocities, including murder, rape and sexual violence against civilians.”
Refugees International wants prominent companies and organizations like the NBA, Disney, and Warner Brothers to suspend their partnerships with the UAE until it has ended its armed support for the RSF. Hopefully, in that spirit, Mayor Mandani will denounce the UAE and offer a mea culpa for wearing genocidal swag.
The US and FIFA have turned the world’s greatest football celebration into a human rights crisis.
The 2026 World Cup was supposed to be a symbol of global unity, cultural diversity, and a shared celebration among nations; an event that would place football beyond politics, borders, and ideology. Yet the closer we move toward the start of the tournament, another image is taking shape: one that speaks not of football’s excitement, but of the heavy shadow of securitization, anti-immigrant hostility, discrimination, and a crisis of human rights legitimacy. Human Rights Watch’s recent warning that the 2026 World Cup could turn into a “human rights disaster” is not merely a publicity-driven statement; it is a sign of a deep rupture between the West’s moral claims and the political reality of the United States today.
The 2026 World Cup is set to be jointly hosted by the US, Canada, and Mexico; three countries presented in FIFA’s official publicity as symbols of “multiculturalism,” “freedom,” and “diversity.” In practice, however, the tournament will be held in an environment shaped by hard-line immigration policies, the securitized atmosphere following President Donald Trump’s return, the rise of far-right currents, and intensifying cultural wars—an environment that displays a very different face of these countries.
The remarks by Minky Worden, director of Global Initiatives at Human Rights Watch, are highly significant because she points to an issue that FIFA and the US are trying to sidestep: the possible role of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the security environment of the World Cup. The central concern is not merely the presence of immigration officers in stadiums; the issue is that the World Cup may become a platform for normalizing harsh immigration policies and securitized control. In a country where images of migrant detentions, mass deportations, family separations, and violent treatment of asylum-seekers have repeatedly made headlines in recent years, it is only natural that many human rights activists would be concerned about the psychological and social safety of migrants, Muslims, Latinos, and even foreign fans.
The reality is that the US today is no longer able to preserve the uncontested image of the “land of freedom” as it did in the 1990s, or even during the Obama era. Trump’s return, the intensification of domestic polarization, and the radicalization of the political atmosphere have pushed the United States into a stage in which “security” has prevailed over “freedom” more than ever before. The 2026 World Cup will be held precisely in such an atmosphere: one in which football is not merely a sporting event, but part of the US' internal political and identity struggle.
Perhaps the greatest danger for US and FIFA is precisely this: that the world may remember the 2026 World Cup not for its goals and matches, but for images of migrant detentions, a police-state atmosphere, culture wars, and human rights contradictions.
One of the most important dimensions of the crisis is the issue of the “culture war,” a concept Worden also references. Today in the US, issues such as migrants’ rights, LGBTQ+ rights, race, religion, and cultural identity have become the main battlefield of political confrontation. Under such conditions, the World Cup can no longer claim that “sport is separate from politics.” On the contrary, the tournament is likely to become a stage for displaying these very ideological fractures.
This issue is especially significant when it comes to LGBTQ+ rights. The fact that only the city of Atlanta has referred in its official programs to support for LGBTQ+ rights shows that even among the US host cities, there is no clear consensus on human rights standards. This comes as FIFA has repeatedly claimed in recent years that it has made human rights one of its strategic principles. The glaring contradiction lies here: An institution that took positions on minority rights in Qatar is now acting with greater caution and silence in the face of potential human rights crises in the US.
At this point, the main issue is no longer only the US; it is the crisis of FIFA’s own legitimacy. FIFA has tried for years to present itself as an institution above politics, but the reality is that global football has long since become part of the structure of power and geopolitical interests. The granting of the so-called “peace prize” to Trump, at a time when his immigration and security policies face widespread global criticism, became so controversial precisely for this reason. Critics believe FIFA is less concerned with human rights than with preserving its relations with the political and economic powers of the host countries.
This crisis is not merely a moral issue; it is directly tied to the future credibility of international institutions. If FIFA remains silent in the face of discriminatory policies, a securitized environment, and civil restrictions, how can it continue to claim that it defends universal values? Are human rights standards applied only to non-Western countries? And if human rights violations in the US are ignored, does the very concept of the “universality” of human rights not fall into crisis?
The US itself, meanwhile, faces a profound contradiction. For decades, Washington has used human rights as a tool for producing global legitimacy and has pressured many of its rivals through this very discourse. But now, the same country that accused others of violating freedoms is facing warnings from human rights organizations about its treatment of migrants, minorities, and its internal security environment. This development is a sign of the erosion of American soft power—power that was once Washington’s most important instrument of global influence.
From this perspective, the 2026 World Cup is not merely a sporting event; it is a test of the gap between the US' official narrative and its domestic reality. If the tournament is accompanied by an intensely securitized atmosphere, the control of migrants, discriminatory treatment, or the suppression of protests, the image of the US that forms in the minds of millions of global viewers will be very different from the traditional narrative of a “free American society.” In the age of social media, even one violent encounter around the stadiums could turn into a global crisis for the credibility of both the US and FIFA.
In the meantime, the more important point is that football is no longer merely a tool of entertainment as it once was. Today, the World Cup is part of the competition of narratives and the war of images. Countries try to use this event to display their stability, legitimacy, and cultural appeal. But if the US cannot manage the contradiction between its human rights slogans and the reality of its domestic politics, the 2026 World Cup may become a symbol of crisis in the very values the West has claimed for decades to defend.
Perhaps the greatest danger for US and FIFA is precisely this: that the world may remember the 2026 World Cup not for its goals and matches, but for images of migrant detentions, a police-state atmosphere, culture wars, and human rights contradictions. In that case, this tournament will not merely be a failed sporting event; it will become a symbol of an era in which even the greatest celebration of world football could not conceal the rupture between power, politics, and human rights.
The league must rethink its commercial partnership with Rwanda, whose army and senior officials the US government recently sanctioned for backing a deadly armed group that is committing “horrific human rights abuses.”
As an iconic sports league with a deep historic commitment to social justice, two of the National Basketball Association’s commercial branding relationships contradict the league’s values.
Questions are being raised about the branding deal the NBA struck with the United Arab Emirates, ignoring the killer drones and other support it is sending to a militia which the United Nations found to be committing genocide in Sudan.
Much less critical attention has been paid to the NBA’s commercial partnership with Rwanda, whose army and senior officials the US government recently sanctioned for backing a deadly armed group that is committing “horrific human rights abuses.” Rwanda has been a central partner in the Basketball Africa League (BAL), the NBA’s first professional basketball league outside North America. The Rwandan government pays the NBA between $6 million and $7 million annually to be a sponsor and to host some of the BAL playoffs. And Rwanda’s national airline is the official travel partner for the BAL.
The Los Angeles Clippers signed their own sponsorship deal with Rwanda last year. “Visit Rwanda” is their official jersey patch sponsor, so it appears on all uniforms. There is “Visit Rwanda” branding in the Clippers’ arena, and it is the official coffee sponsor for the team.
The NBA and the Clippers have some uncomfortable decisions to make. Should they continue to accept money from a government that is in large part responsible for one of the largest humanitarian emergencies in the world?
The uncomfortable truth for the NBA and the Clippers is that Rwanda invaded eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in 2022 and dramatically escalated its invasion last year, deploying up to 12,000 troops and backing a very violent proxy rebel group known as the M23. Under Rwandan command and control, the M23 has committed extensive human rights abuses, including mass killings targeted at certain ethnic groups, torture, and forced deportations. Over 5 million people in DRC are now displaced from their homes due to the conflict, and 10 million people are now at risk of starvation, as M23 “has driven farmers from their land… and blocked food imports.”
NBA deputy commissioner Mark Tatum responded to a bipartisan letter from US senators in September 2024, "If American policies were to change regarding business activities in and relating to Rwanda or any other BAL market, our actions would, of course, change accordingly."
Therein lies the rub. US policy on Rwanda has changed suddenly and significantly over the last two months, with major implications for the NBA’s close involvement with Rwanda. Just days following the signing of a peace accord between Rwanda and DRC brokered by the US and overseen by President Donald Trump last December, Rwanda and its proxy force launched a new, bloody offensive that left 200,000 more civilians displaced. Instead of pulling back to make peace, Rwanda doubled down on war right after telling the White House it would do the opposite.
The breach of the peace agreement has since led to a major shift in long-standing US policy on Rwanda. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated in December that “Rwanda’s actions are… a clear violation of the Washington Accords…, and the United States will take action to ensure promises made to the President are kept.” US Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz then argued that “Rwanda is leading the region… toward more war.”
The US government has followed up with a series of actions, including placing sanctions on the entire Rwandan army, visa restrictions on senior Rwandan officials, suspending a US-Rwanda health agreement, and canceling an investment conference and negotiations with Rwanda over a new development finance project.
M23 forces continue to occupy nearly all strategic areas of eastern DRC, Rwanda maintains 7,000 troops there, and the conflict is deepening. Notably, the DRC government is also responsible for many human rights abuses, and it must halt its partnerships with deadly armed groups.
Rwanda is also profiting from the deadly trade in illicit gold and other minerals from eastern DRC, minerals that provide fuel for the conflict. Rwanda-backed M23 occupies key gold and critical minerals mines and exports the minerals to Rwanda. Despite having no major domestic gold mines, Rwanda is estimated to have skyrocketed its gold exports to $2 billion in 2025, a more than five-fold increase from four years ago. Ironically, most of their smuggled gold exports go to the UAE, the other major NBA partner.
Because of Rwanda’s heinous behavior in eastern DRC, several major sports teams have recently halted their partnerships with the Rwandan government following campaigns from human rights groups. The English soccer club Arsenal ended its commercial branding deal with Rwanda following a campaign by the group Gunners for Peace, as did German soccer giant Bayern Munich.
The NBA’s main defense of its commercial partnership with Rwanda has been that its dealings have been consistent with US policy. That policy has now changed in response to Rwanda’s unwillingness to end its greed-fueled military intervention in DRC.
The NBA and the Clippers have some uncomfortable decisions to make. Should they continue to accept money from a government that is in large part responsible for one of the largest humanitarian emergencies in the world? Should they continue to be part of Rwanda’s strategy of “sportswashing” its image? Can they follow in the footsteps of Arsenal and Bayern Munich and drop Rwanda’s commercial branding sponsorship? These questions won’t garner the same attention as gambling players and tanking teams, but the stakes for millions of Congolese lives couldn’t be greater.
Sportswashing uses fans’ fondness for their pro teams to fog the lethal consequences of fossil fuel sponsorships with companies like BP America, Phillips 66, and Shell.
Climate activists are calling out pro sports teams across the US Why? The answer is the teams' sportswashing partnerships with Big Oil.
According to activists, sportswashing uses fans’ fondness for their pro teams to fog the lethal consequences of fossil fuel sponsorships with Big Oil, e.g., BP America, Phillips 66 and Shell.
Call it a planet-destroying impact of the athletic-industrial complex.
The national action for sustainable humanity on Planet Earth is an outgrowth of the Sierra Club chapter of the Los Angeles’ Dodger Fans Against Fossil Fuels campaign demanding the team’s owners to drop their sponsorship deal with oil giant Phillips 66. Boo on Dodger Blue for that deal. Meanwhile, the climate dissent that began in LA didn’t stay there.
“Our region has suffered devastating wildfires in recent years, and we shouldn’t pretend that fossil fuel companies are our buddies when they are causing the climate change that worsens these disasters.”
Simultaneous anti-sportswashing actions unfolded across 10 US cities on February 17. Check it out:
Groups participating and supporting Tuesday's action included: Communities for a Better Environment, Scientific Rebellion, Stop the Money Pipeline, EcoAthletes, Dayenu, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Sisters of Charity New York, and Third Act.
In Sacramento, activists gathered with protest signs at the Golden 1 Center, where the Kings, an NBA team, play in the Western Division. "We are asking the Kings' owner and executives to immediately end the team’s sponsorship deals with Shell, one of the world's largest oil companies, and AM/PM," said Sally Richman, a Third Act Sacramento member, in a statement.
She explains, “Our region has suffered devastating wildfires in recent years, and we shouldn’t pretend that fossil fuel companies are our buddies when they are causing the climate change that worsens these disasters.”
One of these deadly wildfires occurred in 2018, in Paradise, California, north of Sacramento. Before that cataclysmic wildfire, Paradise was a town that had a population of 27,000 people. Eighty-five people lost their lives, over 50,000 were displaced, more than 18,000 structures were destroyed, with a loss of nearly $17 billion.
The wildfire that began in Paradise didn’t remain there. Spoiler alert: The climate catastrophe does not obey human-created boundaries and limits. Consider this bit of climate history.
Sacramento residents felt the effects from poor air quality during the Camp Fire in Paradise. City officials distributed particulate respirator masks to help residents breathe normally, approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. These masks carried an N-95 classification designed to protect the lungs from small particles found in wildfire smoke. At that time, the Air Quality Index was 367 in some areas, more than double the 150 reading considered unhealthy. I can personally attest to that.
Third Act Sacramento also sent a letter via email to Kings’ management. The missive fleshed out in part its opposition to the term of deception in question:
Sportswashing occurs when a company that has harmed the public creates a financial partnership with beloved sports teams, and markets their brand to the fans to create positive associations that are undeserved. The Sacramento Kings are allowing BP America and Shell to pretend they are "good guys" by their sponsorships of the team.
Kings’ management had not responded at press time.
Personally, I’m a big fan of the NBA. My family and I have had this fan-ship in common for years during the regular season, All Star game, and of course the playoffs to watch NBA stars do their thing. In my view, we are watching among the most talented athletes in the world.
Bill McKibben is an author, environmentalist, journalist, and co-founder of Third Act and 350.org. "The greatest threat to sports in the years ahead is the rapid rise in temperature,” according to his statement, “which increasingly makes it too hot and stormy to play. So, you might say it's an error for those who enjoy—and profit from—sports to be collaborating with the industry doing the most to overheat the planet."
The NBA’s credibility as a league that stands for justice and fairness is at risk. Will they take actions to break off their connection to a government that is funding and arming some of the worst atrocities in the world?
The National Basketball Association, a league renowned for its support of civil rights going back to the Bill Russell era, is now connected to the former member of Sudan’s Parliament Siham Hassan Hasaballah, who organized soup kitchens out of her home after the country’s most recent war began in 2023. Just weeks ago, she was executed in Darfur by a genocidal militia called the Rapid Support Forces, or RSF.
The NBA, a league that actively promoted racial justice in the aftermath of George Floyd's murder, is now connected to the Saudi Maternity Hospital in Darfur, where RSF soldiers murdered hundreds of patients and health workers last month. One video shot by RSF soldiers themselves reveals a dozen victims lying on the floor, while an RSF soldier kills an elderly survivor. Tedros Ghebreyesus, the Director of the World Health Organization, was “appalled and deeply shocked by reports of the tragic killing of more than 460 patients and companions” at the hospital.
The NBA, a league undertaking major investments in youth programs in Africa and around the world, is now connected to the world’s fastest displacement crisis taking place now in Sudan, which is the “largest humanitarian crisis ever recorded,” according to the International Rescue Committee.
What’s the connection? The NBA has developed a deep and evolving commercial partnership with the United Arab Emirates, which is providing weapons and support to the RSF, that genocidal Sudanese militia. The most visible and public manifestation of the relationship is the Emirates NBA Cup, the increasingly popular in-season tournament sponsored by the UAE’s flagship airline. The tournament's final round will take place this coming Tuesday in Las Vegas.
Global business dealings are complex, but surely genocide should be a red line for the NBA.
The NBA also has a deepening partnership with Rwanda, which over the last two years has sent thousands of troops into neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo, sponsored one of the deadliest militias in all of Africa—the M23—in support of its Congo intervention, and looted Congo’s valuable natural resources.
The league is now one degree of separation away from the two worst abusers of human rights in all of Africa: the RSF and M23.
“Sportswashing” has a long history. The Roman Empire had its bread and circuses. Hitler hosted the 1936 Summer Olympics, Mussolini hosted the 1934 World Cup, and Putin hosted the 2014 Winter Olympics. Saudi Arabia owns the LIV golf league. They all recognized that attention from their own misdeeds could easily be diverted by investing in sporting events that entertain the masses.
To that end, the NBA relationship isn’t the only sportswashing the UAE is engaged in, as the Emirati government and its subsidiary companies are also sponsors of Formula One racing, US Open tennis, Ultimate Fighting Championship mixed martial arts events, European soccer teams, and National Football League teams, among others.
NBA Commissioner Adam Silver’s deputy, Mark Tatum, has argued that the NBA follows “directives and guidance” from the US government, and he has told private audiences that if American policy changed, the NBA’s action would change accordingly.
That change is underway. On November 12, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stopped just short of saying the quiet part out loud: “"We know who the parties are that are involved [in arming the RSF]... I can just tell you at the highest levels of our government that case is being made and that pressure is being applied to the relevant parties… This needs to stop."
At the moment, it remains unlikely that a US official would publicly name the UAE as the largest supplier of weapons to the RSF. But it is clear US policy toward the UAE’s arming of the RSF is shifting. NBA Commissioner Silver has a duty to recognize that change, as his deputy said, and “change accordingly.”
With the crisis in Sudan only getting worse, now is the time to act. The activist campaign Speak Out On Sudan, coordinated by a number of humanitarian and human rights organizations including Refugees International and The Sentry, is calling on the NBA to make it clear to its Emirati partners that as long as the UAE continues to fund and arm the RSF, this will be the last Emirates NBA Cup. The NBA is one of the most powerful sports leagues in the world—surely it can find another sponsor.
There is precedent for this. Recently, partly in response to growing activist pressure, the English Premier soccer club Arsenal announced the end of its commercial partnership with Rwanda, which has invaded neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo and is looting the Congo’s mineral wealth. The German club Bayern Munich did the same earlier this year. These teams have shown brand sensitivity and willingness to change when called out for commercial arrangements that connect them to horrific human rights abuses. The UAE's support for a genocidal Sudanese militia is no different.
The NBA’s credibility as a league that stands for justice and fairness is at risk. Will they take actions to break off their connection to a government that is funding and arming some of the worst atrocities in the world? Or is “shut up and dribble,” the infamous line used by Fox News host Laura Ingraham to LeBron James, going to be the way forward for the NBA on this issue?
Global business dealings are complex, but surely genocide should be a red line for the NBA. As this year’s Emirates NBA Cup concludes this week, let’s hope it’s the last.
Six of the 12 MLB teams in this year’s playoffs—including the league champions—are sponsored by some of the biggest polluters on the planet as well the financial institutions that underwrite them.
Millions of baseball fans have been watching this year’s World Series between the Los Angeles Dodgers and Toronto Blue Jays, building on the huge audience the Major League Baseball playoffs attracted over the last few weeks. Nationally, postseason viewership through the American and National League championship series averaged 4.48 million, a 13% increase from 2024, making it the most-watched baseball postseason since 2017.
Fans tuning in couldn’t help but notice signage in the ballparks—as well as logos on players’ uniforms—promoting corporations that are exacerbating climate change. Six of the 12 MLB teams in this year’s playoffs—the league champions along with the Boston Red Sox, Cleveland Guardians, Detroit Tigers, and Milwaukee Brewers—are sponsored by some of the biggest polluters on the planet as well the financial institutions that underwrite them.
It’s called sportswashing, a play on the term greenwashing. Companies sponsor teams to portray themselves as good corporate citizens, increase visibility, and build public trust, hoping that fans will form the same bond with their brand that they have with their teams. According to a 2021 Nielsen study, 81% of fans completely or somewhat trust companies that underwrite sports teams, second only to the trust they have for friends and family.
As it turns out, more than half of the 30 MLB teams are pursuing petrodollars, but baseball is not alone. Three dozen US pro basketball, football, hockey, and soccer teams have similar sponsorship deals that afford oil companies, electric utilities, and fossil fuel-friendly financial institutions a range of promotional perks, from billboards and jersey logos to community outreach projects and facility naming rights, according to a survey conducted last fall by University of California, Los Angeles’ Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
Baseball club owners, however, are more concerned about their bottom line than their sponsors’ climate impacts
Most sports aficionados are likely unaware that their favorite teams are going to bat for corporate climate destroyers, but baseball fans in New York and Los Angeles are calling out the Mets and Dodgers, demanding that they sever their ties to the fossil fuel industry. Cigarette advertisements, which at one time were ubiquitous in ballparks, were essentially banned because of the threat smoking poses to public health. Given the threat that fossil fuels pose to public health and the environment, shouldn’t their ads—as well as the other trappings of their sponsorships—be banned as well?
Oil, gas, and coal are largely responsible for the carbon pollution driving up world temperatures and triggering more dangerous extreme weather events. Last year the world experienced the highest average global temperature in 175 years of recordkeeping, and that dubious distinction came on the heels of 10 of the hottest years, according to the World Meteorological Organization. Those warmer temperatures certainly played a role in producing the 27 weather and climate disasters in the United States last year that caused at least $1 billion in damages, one fewer than the record set in 2023.
Baseball club owners, however, are more concerned about their bottom line than their sponsors’ climate impacts. After all, annual MLB payrolls today average $157 million.
The Dodgers, whose $321 million payroll is the highest in baseball, first partnered with Phillips 66, owner of the 76 brand gas station chain, in 1962. The most visible element of their partnership is the company’s iconic 76 orange logo that sits atop both Dodger Stadium scoreboards. But like most sponsorships, it is about much more than prime ad placement.
Phillips 66 fosters community loyalty, for example, by collaborating with the Dodger foundation’s educational and charitable programs, including a campaign promoting science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education for underserved elementary and middle-school students. Most of its tie-ins, however, involve various promotions to sell more gasoline. Customers who buy at least 8 gallons can get a free limited edition 76-Dodger pin or two Dodger home game tickets for the price of one. And on special “76 Stadium Days,” customers who fill up their tanks can get free tickets, T-shirts, and other swag.
Phillips 66 has built a devoted customer base over the years by tying itself to the Dodgers, but its environmental track record tells a very different story. It is definitely not a good corporate citizen. The company is among the nation’s top 10 air and surface water polluters in total pounds and the 14th biggest carbon polluter, emitting more than 30 million metric tons in 2022, according to the 2024 edition of Political Economy Research Institute’s (PERI) “Top 100 Polluter Indexes.” The company also is one of six major oil and gas companies California sued in June 2024 for climate damages, accusing them of carrying out a “decades-long campaign of deception” to hide the truth about climate change and delay the transition to clean energy. Likewise, it is among 32 companies named in similar lawsuits filed at the same time by three California cities—Imperial Beach, Richmond, and Santa Cruz—and three California counties—Marin, San Mateo, and Santa Cruz.
Arco, owned by Marathon Petroleum, also advertises in Dodger Stadium. The country’s largest oil refiner with more than 7,000 Marathon and Arco gas stations nationwide, it is among the top 20 air, surface water, and carbon polluters in the country, according to PERI’s 2024 report. It also is one of the oil and gas companies sued by the six California municipalities in June 2024, and the company and its subsidiaries have been fined more than $900 million for federal environmental violations since 2014.
An Ohio-based company, Marathon Petroleum has much closer ties with the Cleveland Guardians. It has been one of the team’s main sponsors since 2021, and the team—who lost to the Tigers in the wild card round—has been wearing its logo on their sleeves since the summer of 2023. Its logo also is prominently displayed in the Guardians’ ballpark and, as part of the uniform patch agreement, is featured on souvenir jerseys given to fans on two game days every season.
Cleveland’s ballpark has been called Progressive Field since 2008, when the Progressive insurance company paid $58 million for naming rights for 16 years. It extended the deal through 2036 for an undisclosed sum last year. While Progressive is a minor player when it comes to fossil fuel investments, it is still a contributor. As of 2024, the company had $306 million invested in 20 utilities and fossil fuel companies, including Duke Energy, Marathon Petroleum, and ExxonMobil, according to a report by the German environmental nonprofit Urgewald.
The Tigers, who lost to the Seattle Mariners in the American League Division Series, partner with DTE, a local fossil fuel-based electric utility. DTE derives 40% of its electricity from coal, another 26% from fossil gas, and only 12% from wind and solar. Although the company is committed to reducing its reliance on coal over the next decade, it plans to replace it with fossil gas, not renewables.
The Blue Jays, Brewers, and Red Sox, meanwhile, have commercial ties with financial institutions that invest heavily in fossil fuels.
The Blue Jays’ jersey sleeves display the logo of the Toronto-Dominion (TD) Bank, the ninth biggest financier of fossil fuel companies in 2024, when it invested $20 billion, according to the 2025 edition of the “Banking on Climate Chaos” fossil fuel finance report. More than a quarter of that outlay—$5.5 billion—went to the Trans Mountain Pipeline extension, which the report says “poses a grave threat to Indigenous people.” Its US recipients included ConocoPhillips, NGL Energy, and Phillips 66.
The Brewers, who lost to the Dodgers in the National League Championship Series, wear Northwestern Mutual patches on their sleeves. As of last year, the insurance company had $12.17 billion invested in 146 fossil fuel companies, including ExxonMobil, Marathon Petroleum, and Shell, according to Urgewald’s report.
Lastly, one of the official sponsors of the Red Sox, who lost to the New York Yankees in the wild card round, is Bank of America. According to the “Banking on Climate Chaos” report, it invested $46 billion in fossil fuels in 2024, second only to JPMorgan Chase. Its US recipients included Occidental Petroleum, Duke Energy, and ConocoPhillips.
Besides the Red Sox’ Bank of America connection, an illuminated Gulf Oil sign hangs on the back wall overlooking Fenway Park’s left field grandstand. (As Sox fans know, there is also a massive Citgo sign sitting on top of a nearby building that looms over Fenway’s Green Monster, but it is not owned by the Red Sox.)
In June 2024, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres castigated coal, oil, and gas companies—dubbing them the “godfathers of climate chaos” for spreading disinformation—and called for a worldwide ban on fossil fuel advertising. He also urged ad agencies to refuse fossil fuel clients and companies to stop taking their ads. So far, more than 1,000 advertising and public relations agencies worldwide have pledged to refuse working for fossil fuel companies, their trade associations, and their front groups.
Major League Baseball is behind the curve, but fans, environmentalists, and public officials in New York and Los Angeles have been trying to bring their teams up to speed.
Two years ago, a coalition of groups, including New York Communities for Change, Stop the Money Pipeline, and Climate Defenders, joined New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams to urge the New York Mets to sever ties with Citigroup—the third biggest fossil fuels financier in 2024—which paid $400 million for the Mets to call their ballpark Citi Field for 20 years. “Citi doesn’t represent the values of Mets fans or NYC,” Williams wrote in a tweet. “If they refuse to end their toxic relationship with fossil fuels, the Mets should end their partnership with Citi.” (Although the Mets payroll is nearly as high as the Dodgers’, they didn’t make the playoffs this year.)
Activists are hoping that more public officials—and more fans—will step up to the plate and pressure their teams to do the right thing.
While Williams and the coalition initially framed their campaign around the Mets’ ties to Citigroup, most of the coalition’s activity since 2023 has focused more broadly on Citigroup’s fossil fuel financing and not specifically on its Mets sponsorship.
A similar baseball-oriented campaign in Los Angeles, however, is still very much alive. More than 80 public interest groups, scientists, and environmental advocates signed an open letter in August 2024 calling on the Dodgers to cut their ties with Phillips 66. “Using tactics such as associating a beloved, trusted brand like the Dodgers with enterprises like 76,” the letter states, “the fossil fuel industry has reinforced deceitful messages that ‘oil is our friend,’ and that ‘climate change isn’t so bad.’” Since then, more than 28,000 Dodger fans have signed the letter, and the Sierra Club’s Los Angeles chapter has held rallies outside Dodger Stadium this year demanding that owner Mark Walter end his team’s Phillips 66 sponsorship deal.
The campaign has received support from some local elected officials. State Sen. Lena Gonzalez (D-33), for example, endorsed the campaign earlier this year. “Continuing to associate these [fossil fuel] corporations with our beloved boys in blue is not in our community or the planet’s best interest,” the lifelong Dodger fan told the City News Service, a Southern California news agency, in March. “Ending the sponsorship with Phillips 66 would send the message that it’s time to end our embrace of polluting fossil fuels and work together toward a cleaner, greener future.”
So far, the campaigns in New York and Los Angeles have struck out. Both the Mets and the Dodgers have balked at walking away from sponsorships worth millions. But activists are hoping that more public officials—and more fans—will step up to the plate and pressure their teams to do the right thing. As that baseball sage Yogi Berra astutely observed, “It ain’t over till it’s over.”
This article first appeared at the Money Trail blog and is reposted here at Common Dreams with permission.
We’re football fans who see no alternative: The CO2 party must end.
Football is more popular than Jesus of Nazareth and John Lennon combined. And at first glance, it seems like a pastime that doesn’t harm the environment: Players just need a ball, some space, and the desire to run. But the data are shocking: Football is directly responsible for 0.3-0.4% of the world’s annual carbon dioxide emissions, equivalent to Denmark's emissions. The Wall Street Journal reports that in 2024 the sport generated more than 30 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels as a source of energy, equivalent to 150 million barrels of oil. Every match at the men’s World Cup finals emits between 44,000 and 72,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases, the same as 30,000 to 50,000 cars on British roads each year. Recent studies estimate that emissions from the cup will range between 1.65 and 3.63 million tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalent between 2000 and 2026.
Let’s also consider football’s basic equipment: boots and balls. Generations of kangaroos have been slaughtered, with the blessing of the Australian government, as raw material for “k-leather” boots, while balls from Pakistan are made from petroleum-derived synthetic leather, rubber, and cotton extracted from plant species, and leather and glue obtained from animals slaughtered before their natural lifespan. The 60 million balls sold in 2010 travelled from the sewing workshops in Sialkot to the professional football pitches of Europe and the Americas. The balls emerge from these frequently clandestine sewing workshops to a carbon cycle of transport companies, customs administrations, equipment, the advertising industry, sporting goods retailers, and department stores. The chain turns a ball costing 63 rupees (€0.62) into a product retailing for over €100.
Think also of the water and chemicals used in the construction and maintenance of stadia, the electricity needed to watch matches and bet or report electronically on them, and the impact of tourism.
Sponsorship by companies with high CO2 emissions alone is responsible for 75% of sports emissions, as it stimulates demand for highly polluting products and lifestyles. The large eco-laundering multinationals use football to cover up their environmental shame. For example, shortly after Repsol spilled thousands of barrels of oil on 1,400 hectares of Peru’s Pacific coast in 2022, killing native life and destroying the livelihoods of thousands of people, the company signed a sponsorship with the national team. The motto of the project, also associated with supporting youth and women's representatives, was “Let's look to the future.” In Spain, Repsol and Petronor have signed an agreement to supply renewable energy to Athletic Club de Bilbao that supposedly demonstrates the multinational’s commitment to decarbonization. But the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority found Repsol distorted its environmental commitment by highlighting production of synthetic fuels and biofuels, which only account for a small fraction of its core business—fossil fuels.
Instead of greenwashing and pseudo-reforms, football needs a drastic transformation to disrupt its environmental impact, corruption, systematic human rights violations, sponsorship by highly problematic companies, and money laundering by bookmakers.
Qatar’s bid for the 2022 World Cup in 2009 promised to be CO2-neutral. The damage caused by constructing facilities, desalination, and water use in an arid climate would be offset because, according to the organizers, future generations would enjoy the facilities. There is no evidence for that.
As we all know, the candidacy was successful, despite evidence of vote buying. Implementation resulted in total disregard for labor and human rights: massive exploitation of migrant workers, workplace accidents, derisory wages, and impossible working hours. The pollution generated by air conditioning stadia to withstand Qatar’s climate, as well as the 150 daily flights of attendees, confirm the New Yorker’s verdict: FIFA is “a rancid institution.”
600 million trees would have to be planted to counter the climate calamity caused by Qatar 2022. Despite the trademark Sustainable FIFA World Cup 2022TM, the environmental plundering of the event was greater than that of any other World Cup or Summer Olympics. As usual, the United States provided the largest number of international tourists, which resulted in the emission of 191,055 tons of CO2, including a staggering 14,700 tons produced by private jets.
Le Monde exposed the environmental propaganda as a “mirage.” Scientific American called the event a “climate catastrophe.“ This was “the dirtiest World Cup“ in history, bathed in oil and corruption. The French collective Notre Affaire à Tous explained: “By presenting the World Cup as carbon neutral, FIFA makes [...] fans believe attending such an event has no impact on the environment, which is clearly incompatible with the international World Cup travel that affects greenhouse gas emissions.”
The Swiss Commission for Equity received complaints from Notre Affaire à Tous along with Carbon Market Watch (Belgium), the UK’s New Weather Institute, Alliance Climatique (Switzerland), the Netherlands’ Reclame Fossiettvrij, and Fossil Free Football (international). The commission ruled FIFA had lied by claiming the cup was the first event of its kind to be “totally carbon neutral.”
The 2026 men’s World Cup is expanding to include 48 national teams. For the first time, matches will be held in three huge countries: Canada, Mexico, and the United States, across four time zones, in 16 venues separated by several thousand kilometers, each with derisory public transport. Five and a half million spectators are expected, who will need to use the map to locate the venues: Mexico City will mark the southernmost point, Vancouver the north, Boston the east, and San Francisco the west. In terms of logistics, practically all travel will be by air due to a primitive railway infrastructure. Radio France refers to this as a “very carbonated cocktail.” The New Weather Institute with Scientists for Global Responsibility estimates that aviation emissions “will increase by 160% to 325% in each of the three tournaments in 2026, 2030, and 2034” compared to recent World Cups.
In addition, in the scheduled period—midsummer—96% of the US population experienced extreme heat for one or more weeks in 2023, and 45 cities had very high average temperatures. 2024 broke numerous records due to unprecedented drought and rainfall.
The environmental impacts in Mexico are horrific. The Akron stadium is close to the Primavera de Guadalajara reserve, home to pumas, a near-extinct species, deer, golden eagles, and migratory birds. The conservation of wild fauna and flora is at serious risk due to the World Cup, while the presence of 50,000 spectators and 4,000 cars will cause significant tensions in water resources in Mexico City and Monterrey (also next to a key biological corridor).
The World Cup is “simultaneously the greatest sporting festival on the planet and a sordid commercial machine that carries an enormous human and environmental cost, for the benefit of torturers, exploiters, and insatiable greedy.” Ecology only matters in football as an instrument of public image for the governing associations, host countries, and sponsors.
Instead of greenwashing and pseudo-reforms, football needs a drastic transformation to disrupt its environmental impact, corruption, systematic human rights violations, sponsorship by highly problematic companies, and money laundering by bookmakers. The World Cup's claims of carbon neutrality are just rhetoric. In reality, it has become a “greenwashing World Cup.”
We’re football fans who see no alternative: The CO2 party must end.
Abolish the World Cup!