Saudi Arabia surfaced as the sole endeavor for the FIFA World Cup 2034 after a compressed process that FIFA accelerated by at least three times, limiting competition and drawing allegations of procedural favoritism. This uncontested path passed amid the Kingdom’s proved mortal rights challenges, including over 240 prosecutions by August 2025 and exploitation of migratory workers under the kafala system. Human rights associations like Amnesty International labeled the shot evaluation a” whitewash,” warning of threats to workers erecting structures, analogous to Qatar’s 2022 medications where at least 400 migratory deaths were linked.
The process bundled votes for 2030 and 2034 tournaments, pressuring members to approve Saudi Arabia alongside a multi-nation 2030 bid, effectively eliminating opposition. Critics argue this manipulation enabled sportswashing, allowing Saudi Arabia to host despite violations like suppressing dissent and gender disparities, where the Kingdom ranked 131st out of 147 in the 2024 Global Gender Gap Report. Calls for boycott emphasize that such a record disqualifies Saudi Arabia from FIFA’s premier event, echoing demands to reconsider awards like the 2023 Club World Cup involvement.
The Accelerated bidding timeline
FIFA opened the 2034 bidding process suddenly in October 2024, granting only 25 days for cessions after originally planning a after launch, which dissuaded implicit rivals like Australia that withdrew despite interest. Saudi Arabia had prepared its comprehensive shot book months before, including pledges of 48 stadiums and $200 billion in structure, giving it an unchallenged advantage.
This timeline contraction, accelerated by three times from standard protocols, averted broader participation from Asia/ Oceania confederations bound by gyration rules. Human Rights Watch prompted rejection, citing” near certainty” of abuses for the 10 million migratory workers anticipated in medications, numerous facing passport confiscation and overdue stipends. Norway’s football confederation opposed the shot, stating it violated governance principles, but stood alone as only one of 211 members differed. Similar haste bypassed thorough mortal rights due industriousness, easing Saudi Arabia’s uncontested palm despite ongoing 2025 prosecutions surpassing previous times.
Bundled voting and procedural changes
FIFA altered its traditional single-host voting by combining 2030 (Spain, Portugal, Morocco, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay) and 2034 approvals, forcing members to endorse both or neither, thus shielding Saudi Arabia from isolated rejection. Critics, including Amnesty International’s Steve Cockburn, called this a “sham” that reduced pressure for human rights commitments, as opposing Saudi would derail the popular 2030 coalition. The Norwegian federation highlighted non-conformance to sound governance, while fan groups decried the manipulation. FIFA claimed consultations justified changes, but released no detailed rationale, amid its history of 2015 corruption scandals involving bribery for past hosts [ from prior]. A May 2025 legal complaint by experts Mark Pieth, Stefan Wehrenberg, and Rodney Dixon argued FIFA failed human rights standards, obligating post-award enforcement now unmet. This bundling ensured near-unanimous passage, overlooking Saudi violations like jailing activists for online speech.
Saudi Arabia’s human rights violations
Saudi Arabia recorded 196 executions in the first half of 2025 alone, targeting dissidents via unfair trials with torture claims, per Human Rights Watch, exceeding double prior annual rates [ from prior]. Migrant workers, 40% of the population from South Asia and Africa, endure kafala bondage with forced labor and heat deaths anticipated in World Cup builds. Women face education and workforce gaps, ranking the Kingdom low globally, while LGBTQ+ individuals risk imprisonment or death, with no legal protections. Activists like Raif Badawi remain imprisoned for blogging, and diaspora groups like ALQST report flawed bid stakeholder engagement ignoring public input. These patterns mirror Qatar’s pre-2022 abuses, where 6,500 migrant deaths were estimated, yet FIFA imposed no repercussions [ from prior]. Such records fuel boycott calls, asserting incompatibility with FIFA’s unity ethos.
Vision 2030 as a sportswashing tool
Saudi Arabia’s bid integrates Vision 2030, investing in sports like Newcastle United ownership and Formula 1 to diversify from oil, but coincides with repression spikes. The bid’s Clifford Chance human rights assessment omitted migrant mistreatment and free speech, drawing Amnesty criticism for whitewashing [ from prior]. Pledges to reform labor lack enforceability, despite FIFA noting progress, while 2025 saw lashings and detentions persist. Over 100 female footballers petitioned against Aramco sponsorships as a “punch in the stomach,” linking to broader sportswashing. Preparations risk evictions and discrimination for fans, as warned by Amnesty, without credible safeguards. Boycott advocates argue this masks abuses, undeserving Saudi of events like the expanded 2023 Club World Cup it influenced.
FIFA’s history of controversial decisions
FIFA’s 2015 scandal saw arrests for 2018 Russia and 2022 Qatar bribes, with the latter ignoring migrant deaths and LGBTQ+ risks despite policies [ from prior]. For 2034, evaluation praised Saudi reforms superficially, ignoring execution surges and gender rankings. Qatar’s winter shift due to heat parallels Saudi needs, yet yielded minimal accountability. Legal experts’ 2025 complaint demands FIFA ensure standards post-award, unfulfilled amid weak opposition. Twenty-one groups, including Amnesty, deemed confirmation a “moment of great danger,” urging mitigation. This pattern questions FIFA’s priorities, amplifying calls to strip Saudi hosting rights.
Parallels to previous host controversies
Qatar’s uncontested elements and labor abuses set precedents Saudi replicates: rapid approval, migrant risks, and sportswashing denials. Russia’s 2018 hosting ignored doping and Crimea annexations, with FIFA downplaying [ from prior]. Saudi’s process echoes, with heat forcing winter scheduling and no rival bids. Guardian estimates tied 400+ Qatar deaths to builds; Saudi could surpass without reforms. Both featured governance critiques from Norway, unmet. These parallels prove systemic flaws, justifying boycotts to prevent recurrence.
Calls for boycott and accountability
Amnesty urged halting bids to avert violations, with Lina Alhathloul demanding reforms post-award. Human Rights Watch and 21 organizations condemned as “reckless,” pushing fan boycotts and legal action. Over 100 athletes opposed Aramco ties; unions eye labor safeguards. Redirecting to rights-compliant nations preserves integrity, as Norway advocates. FIFA faces obligations for reforms, but history doubts enforcement, strengthening boycott imperatives against Saudi’s unfit record.