Key questions behind Fifa's Saudi World Cup decision

An artist's impression of the King Khalid University Stadium in Abha, one of the 15 stadiums Saudi Arabia plans to use for the 2034 World Cup

Fifa's confirmation of Saudi Arabia's hosting of the men's 2034 World Cup - despite the country facing years of scrutiny over its human rights and environmental record - is one of the most controversial steps football's governing body has ever taken.

Yet while many critics are dismayed at the prospect, few should be surprised given the influence the kingdom's unprecedented investment in sport has secured.

So is the tournament being used to help transform Saudi Arabia's reputation, or can it be a catalyst for social reform? And what does this tell us about Fifa and football more widely?

Here, BBC Sport looks at the key questions.

Why is this a coronation, not a contest?

Official confirmation of a Saudi World Cup came at a 'virtual' meeting of Fifa's Congress on Wednesday afternoon.

But that has seemed like a formality for more than a year. In October 2023, it emerged the Saudi bid would be unopposed after Australia - the only other potential candidate - decided not to enter the running, hinting that it was futile to do so after being given less than a month by Fifa to mount a challenge.

Fifa has defended a fast-tracked process that many argue was lacking in transparency and accountability. But critics believe it effectively paved the way for the Saudis, by decreeing that the 2030 World Cup would be staged across three continents (Spain, Portugal and Morocco are co-hosts, with the first three matches in South America). That meant that under its rotation policy, only bids from Asia and Oceania were considered for 2034.

It is worth noting that Saudi Arabia and Fifa, under president Gianni Infantino, have developed a close relationship. The country hosted Fifa's 2023 Club World Cup, and the governing body has a lucrative sponsorship deal with Saudi state-owned oil giant Aramco.

There has also been widespread speculation that Saudi's Public Investment Fund (PIF) could make a major investment in streaming giant DAZN which has agreed to broadcast the inaugural edition of Infantino's pet project - an expanded Club World Cup next summer.

The sense of inevitability surrounding Saudi's bid was only reinforced last month with the late-night publication of Fifa's evaluation report, authored by Infantino's deputy, secretary general Mattias Grafstrom. It awarded the bid an average score of 4.2 out of 5, the highest ever.

No media conference was held in order to explain such a glowing assessment, nor the fact that the bid was deemed 'medium risk' for human rights and 'low-risk' for environmental protection, sparking outrage from campaigners.

Furthermore, with ratification confirmed by acclamation during the Congress, rather than a traditional vote, the only way any dissenting national associations can express their opposition is to abstain.

Representatives of all 211 member associations were asked to show their support for the unopposed Spain, Portugal and Morocco 2030 bid and then the Saudi 2034 bid with a round of applause.

Fifa meanwhile can argue that anointing hosts via uncontested bids is preferable to the past, when long races between various countries could be vulnerable to vote-swapping and attempted corruption, and that as a global body they have a duty to take their flagship event to new territories.

On Tuesday it claimed auditors BDO had concluded the process had been "executed with objectivity, integrity and transparency".

What have other countries said?

Norway's football federation abstained from the acclamation, arguing the bidding process "undermines Fifa's own reforms for good governance" and "challenges trust in Fifa". It added that Fifa's guidelines for due diligence had not been followed, "increasing the risk of human rights violations".

All other federations endorsed the Saudi bid. Germany's DFB said it "took the criticism of the applicant country seriously…[but] our goal is to work together with Fifa to improve the situation in the coming years".

The FA followed suit and supported both bids, with some senior officials known to have been wary of accusations of hypocrisy if it were not to support Saudi Arabia but then wants England to participate.

Most scrutiny has come from outside the sport. In March, the Guardian said it had found evidence of high numbers of unexplained deaths of Bangladeshi migrant workers in Saudi Arabia. The country defended its regulations and standards, but Fifa came under pressure to secure binding commitments for reforms before awarding the World Cup.

In October, an independent report conducted by the Saudi arm of a major law firm - which was submitted to Fifa as part of its bid inspection - was condemned by human rights groups for ignoring the alleged abuse of migrant workers.

Last month Amnesty urged Fifa to halt the bidding process "to avoid worsening an already dire situation", warning that "fans will face discrimination, residents will be forcibly evicted, migrant workers will face exploitation, and many will die" if a Saudi tournament went ahead.

There has been some opposition to Saudi's growing influence within football. In October for instance, more than 100 professional women's footballers signed an open letter urging Fifa to drop Aramco as a sponsor, calling it a "punch in the stomach".

But others fear that many players are reluctant to speak out in case it jeopardises a lucrative move to the Saudi Pro League, and also that it is difficult for footballers to take a stand when governments are prepared to do business with Saudi Arabia. This week for instance, the UK Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, visited the kingdom in a bid to strengthen economic ties.

What will a Saudi World Cup look like?

"Extraordinary", according to the Saudi Football Federation. Its bid proposed 15 stadiums, (including three that are under construction, and eight where work is yet to start), across five host cities, including one (the futuristic development of Neom) that is yet to be built.

Fifa's evaluation report hails "a range of impressive stadiums which, when built or refurbished, could offer state-of-the-art infrastructure".

It is also almost certain to be held in winter. But there could be one major difference with neighbouring Qatar's tournament, which took place in November-December, 2022.

Noting that summer temperatures "can exceed 40C", Fifa has said there is an "elevated risk in terms of event timing" for Saudi 2034, and referenced having to navigate "climatic conditions" and "religious events", leading to speculation the event may be held from the start of January to avoid a clash with Ramadan.

The Premier League and other top European leagues would oppose a winter World Cup, according to the PA news agency.

Although domestic leagues paused mid-season to accommodate Qatar 2022, the expansion of European club competitions, and the increase in size of the World Cup to a 48-team tournament, would mean even more disruption to an already congested calendar.

What does this say about Saudi sporting influence?

For many, ratification of a Saudi World Cup is the ultimate expression of the power the country now wields across sports, and the opportunity, disruption and controversy that have accompanied it.

The kingdom has invested billions of pounds staging events since 2021, when the country's de-facto ruler the Crown Prince made it a key part of his 'Vision 2030' strategy to modernise and diversify the economy. The kingdom has since hosted Formula 1, football's Spanish and Italian cup finals, the Club World Cup, and top-level boxing, golf, horse-racing and tennis.

The country's Public Investment Fund has also launched the breakaway LIV golf series, taken control of four Saudi Pro League clubs and purchased Newcastle United.

Meanwhile, a recent report by Danish organisation Play the Game has revealed that Saudi Arabia has signed more than 900 sponsorship deals and made dozens of formalised agreements with football federations as it extends its influence across the sports landscape.

But staging a World Cup will take Saudi's sporting revolution to an entirely different level, and perhaps even pave the way for an Olympic bid in the future.

Is this just sportswashing?

Many critics see this as the biggest act of sportswashing in Fifa's history with the World Cup being used to help improve the image of a country that has faced years of criticism over subjects such as:

• human rights violations

• the repression of women

• the criminalisation of homosexuality

• the restriction of free speech

• the continued use of the death penalty

• the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi

• the imprisonment of activists for online dissent

• the country's involvement in the bloody conflict in Yemen

While campaigners acknowledge that there have been important reforms in recent years, for example over women's rights, they also point out there has been continued repression.

Saudi Arabia executed the third highest number of prisoners in the world in 2023, and three hundred people have already been put to death this year, a record tally based on official figures. This year Manahel al-Otaibi was sentenced to 11 years in prison after she used social media to call for an end to rules stating that women needed the permission of a male relative to marry or travel.

Campaign group Reprieve said: "This is one of the world's most brutal authoritarian regimes spending vast sums of money to create a false image, to distract from worsening repression and state violence.

"Some of those executed or currently facing a death sentence are protesters or have done nothing more serious than be caught with small amounts of cannabis.

"Fans planning to travel to Saudi Arabia in 2034 should be aware that this is a country where exercising freedoms we take for granted in democratic societies can get you killed."

The Saudi authorities insist their bid is designed to diversify the economy and boost tourism, act as a catalyst for modernisation and reform, and inspire a youthful population to be more active.

Last year, the country's sports minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Turki Al Faisal, defended the country's right to host the tournament, telling me claims of sportswashing were "shallow".

He added: "We've hosted more than 85 global events and we've delivered on the highest level. We want to attract the world through sports... any country has room for improvement, no-one's perfect. We acknowledge that and these events help us reform to a better future for everyone."

Women in Saudi Arabia were only allowed to enter sports stadia to watch matches in 2018, but since then a professional women's football league and national women's team has been created, with more than 70,000 girls now playing regularly.

However, last year, Jake Daniels, the UK's only openly gay active male professional footballer, told the BBC he "wouldn't feel safe" at a Saudi World Cup.

When I asked what he would say to female and gay fans worrying whether they would be safe to attend, Prince Abdulaziz said that "everyone is welcome".

Could Saudi 2034 lead to change?

Many believe that while Qatar delivered a secure and memorable World Cup enjoyed by many fans, the years of controversy that overshadowed the tournament over human rights, discriminatory laws, and the major disruption to the football calendar caused by a first winter World Cup could now be repeated.

Back in 2010, Qatar's shock victory in the vote to decide the 2022 hosts took Fifa's then-leadership by surprise. In contrast, Infantino appears to have been supportive of the idea of a Saudi World Cup. And with Fifa having brought in a human rights policy in 2017, there could be even more scrutiny on its decision - and any evidence that it leads to workers being adversely impacted.

As with Qatar, the Saudi World Cup infrastructure will be largely built by migrant workers from South Asia, with more than 13 million foreigners living in the country, and the scale of construction required has inevitably led to concerns.

Fifa's own report has concluded that "a number of severe human rights impacts did ultimately occur in Qatar from 2010 through 2022 for a number of workers connected to the World Cup. This included: deaths, injuries and illnesses; wages not being paid for months on end; and significant debt... a credible argument can be made that Fifa contributed to some of the impacts".

The media scrutiny that accompanied the build-up to Qatar's World Cup may have led to labour reforms that were brought in, although campaigners have raised concerns over implementation, and are furious that Fifa has not acted on the key recommendation of its own report and paid financial compensation to workers who were harmed.

Last year, Prince Abdulaziz assured me there would be no repeat of Qatar's issues with workers' rights, saying: "We have 10 years to work on that, we already started in a lot of the venues, so we have a long time to do it in the right process."

However, in its Saudi evaluation report, Fifa references "areas where further legal reforms are needed and... effective enforcement, without which the risk of indecent working conditions could be elevated".

Fifa hails the Saudi government's "commitment to respecting, protecting and fulfilling internationally recognised human rights in connection with the competition including in the areas of safety and security, labour rights, rights of children, gender equality and non-discrimination, as well as freedom of expression (including press freedom)".

But with regard to diversity and anti-discrimination, its report also "notes gaps and reservations in the implementation of relevant international standards". Despite that, Fifa claimed "a good potential that the tournament could serve as a catalyst for some of the ongoing and future reforms and contribute to positive human rights outcomes".

Amnesty said the assessment was: "An astonishing whitewash of the country's atrocious human rights record. Fundamental human rights reforms are urgently required in Saudi Arabia, or the 2034 World Cup will be inevitably tarnished by exploitation, discrimination and repression."

Campaign group Fair Square said Fifa had "plumbed new depths".

What about the environment?

Campaigners have long accused the world's biggest oil exporter of adding to climate change through its fossil-fuel industry, and of blocking climate action.

But now they have also expressed major concerns about the impact of staging a 48-team tournament, pointing to the energy required for cooling systems, the desalination of water and carbon-intensive infrastructure projects.

The Saudi government says it is diversifying away from fossil fuels and trying to reduce omissions, and has rejected criticism it is using sport to distract from its record on sustainability.

Fifa's World Cup evaluation report said: "Whilst the extent of construction would have a material environmental impact, the bid provides a good foundation for delivering mitigation measures to address some of the environment-related challenges."

Fifa's credibility in this area was badly undermined last year when a Swiss regulator ruled it had made false statements about the reduced environmental impact of Qatar 2022 having claimed it would be the first "fully carbon-neutral World Cup".

Furthermore, while Qatar constructed seven new stadiums, Saudi Arabia is building 11 and refurbishing a further four. A total of 64 matches were played in Qatar but Saudi 2034 would feature 104, so the environmental impact could be greater.

What does this tell us about sport?

A Saudi World Cup underlines the extraordinary shift in sporting power towards the Middle East.

Up until relatively recently, the idea of tiny Qatar and neighbouring Saudi Arabia hosting World Cups within the space of just 12 years would have been inconceivable to many. But given these countries' wealth, and sports bodies' desire for financial growth and new markets, that will now happen.

Saudi Arabia can point out that it will be far from the only controversial host of a sporting mega-event in recent years. In the past two decades, Russia has hosted both the World Cup and Olympics, and China has hosted both the summer and Winter Olympics.

Same-sex relationships are also illegal in 2030 World Cup co-hosts Morocco, as they are in Qatar. And environmental campaigners have expressed dismay at the staging of the 2030 World Cup across three continents.

Amnesty has also recently expressed concern about human rights in 2026 World Cup hosts the United States.

Others however, fear that the applause Saudi's bid receives on Wednesday will represent a devastating defeat for sport's commitment to human rights and sustainability, and a low-point for those in charge of world football.

The Saudi authorities and Fifa now have the next decade to try to convince the doubters the country can be a suitable host, and that the sport's flagship event is not tainted.