Amnesty International says Qatar World Cup “built on human rights abuses,” must be stopped

We already knew that construction workers on Qatar’s 2022 World Cup stadium were dying at a frightening rate and held in the country under slave-like conditions, but we didn’t have, say, an Amnesty International report outright comparing conditions to slavery. Until now:

Rights group Amnesty International has accused Qatar of using forced labour at a flagship World Cup 2022 stadium.

Amnesty says workers at Khalifa International Stadium are forced to live in squalid accommodation, pay huge recruitment fees and have had wages withheld and passports confiscated.

It also accuses Fifa of “failing almost completely” to stop the tournament being “built on human rights abuses”.


You can download the Amnesty report, “The Ugly Side of the Beautiful Game,” here; it’s long and detailed, so let me just cite two excerpts:

Amnesty International interviewed 132 of the men working on Khalifa Stadium. When Amnesty met them they were living in cramped and unhygenic labour camps. Many described how they had paid large sums of money and taken on debt in their home country in order to get a job in Qatar but were now being paid less than they had been promised. All of the men had their passports confiscated by their employers and some were denied an exit permit when they wanted to return home. In some cases the treatment amounted to forced labour.


“My life here is like a prison. The work is dif cult, we worked for many hours in the hot sun. When I rst complained about my situation, soon after arriving in Qatar, the manager said ‘if you [want to] complain you can but there will be consequences. If you want to stay in Qatar be quiet and keep working’. Now I am forced to stay in Qatar and continue working.” —Deepak, metalworker on Khalifa International Stadium, a FIFA 2022 World Cup venue, speaking in May 2015

This is a big enough deal that even Al Jazeera, which is actually owned by members of the Qatari government, felt obligated to cover it. Meanwhile, FIFA, which granted Qatar the 2022 tournament after massive bribery in the bidding, continues to insist that it won’t move the cup to another nation that’s less slavey. This is going to get really ugly — not that pretty much all big sporting events like the World Cup and Olympics don’t get really ugly, and usually everyone forgets about it as soon as there’s some games to watch, but this seems like it might actually be the exception, maybe.

Share this post:

35 comments on “Amnesty International says Qatar World Cup “built on human rights abuses,” must be stopped

  1. I’ve known this ever since HBO aired an episode on Real Sports showing how awful these workers were being treated. But it’s not really a surprise, the entire Arabian peninsula is built and maintained by slaves. This will never stop and it will continue to get worse, as the rest of the world does not care about the plight of some poor laborers in a country most have never heard of.

  2. Well, if you get into conspiracy books, such as Rule by Secrecy, we are all being controlled by the few, the powerful, and the wealthy. As egregious as this is, I think allowing water systems to be poisoned or polluted, permanently damaging the children of Flint, Michigan while financing stadiums and Super Bowls is just as bad and barbaric. Having the Olympics in Rio where the money should be spent to solve water pollution and waste handling is just as disgusting.

  3. Here’s the thing about the World Cup. Why don’t you hold the cup in just one city and just one stadium for most of the tournament. You could put together a second stadium for the final round of group play, but we don’t need this 12 stadiums in 11 cities nonsense.

  4. Al Jazeera’s act of covering the issue should be no surprise. While the network is owned by the government of Qatar, it is editorially independent, just as the state-owned BBC is editorially independent of the U.K. government. (Though this wasn’t always true of the BBC, which at one time engaged in rather onerous practices when reporting on the I.R.A.)

    And, like the (current-day) BBC, Al Jazeera is a top-notch news organisation. So it is entirely to be expected that it would cover the revelations of these appalling conditions surrounding the building of the World Cup stadiums.

    On the issue itself: I doubt that the World 2022 Cup will be moved; though I concede that the new president of FIFA might want to make a grandstand play in an effort to portray himself as a reformer.

    I also don’t think it should be moved, despite the atrocities here reported. The sad fact is that these abuses of workers differ only in degree and not in kind from what goes on everywhere in undertakings of this size. To move the tournament to another country would require the building of — or at least refurbishment of — stadiums in the new country, which would simply change the address of abused workers.

    Of course, the tournament could be moved to Germany, which hosted in 2006 and which has all the stadiums it needs. But moving the tournament from Asia to Europe would not fit with FIFA’s desire to be seen combatting the supposed European domination of the sport.

    The only other country that could host the tournament on such short notice without the need to do much building would be (gulp!) the United States. And we really, really do not need that.

    For starters, when the U.S. engages in international competition, this raises passions having much more to do with jingoism than with the sport in question. Anyone who supposes that American soccer fans are all groovy hipsters should take a peek at the comments that are written whenever the U.S. play Mexico. The unrestrained racial hatred inspired by such matches renders the rise of a certain orange-hued monster much less mysterious.

    Also, the civil rights curtailments ostensibly in the name of “security” (though really in service of a kind of “security theatre”) that would result from a U.S.-hosted World Cup would be extreme. Anyone living in a U.S. city that is hosting a World Cup match would have to prepare for the city to be on virtual lockdown. It would be martial law, pure and simple. This is a frightening scenario, one which no American in his/her right mind should even think of inviting.

    The 2022 World Cup has already been awarded to Qatar; let it take place there.

  5. Ferdinand,

    I know soccer fans are kind of, er, self-obsessed–but martial law for the World Cup? Really?

    Sadly, I’d say that “jingoism” is a part of soccer worldwide, yet many (including me) find a means to enjoy it.

    There is an event that takes place annually in the United States that is pretty popular. It is called the Super Bowl. Last I checked, San Francisco did not endure martial law, though they did have to endure Broncos fans.

  6. Like all big time “sports”, it’s an industry built on the bodies of
    those not in the “front of the house”.
    Just ask the families of the men killed at the Milwaukee mallpark.

  7. Ferdinand, there aren’t any countries that FIFA would move the Cup that would be using slavery. There could conceivably be some exploitation of labor, but nothing on the level of atrocities that Qatar is committing right now. It’s disingenuous to compare some mildly underpaid workers to outright slavery. If they moved it to Europe, I don’t think it would be more controversial than condoning slavery. If they moved it to the US, it would not be the nightmare scenario you’re describing. Traffic might be bad in a few spots, but I’m sure we could host it without much issue, as almost all sporting events are here. Besides, Trump supporters aren’t exactly concentrated in the hotbeds of soccer anyways.

  8. Why would FIFA move the tournament?

    They knew exactly what would happen re: facility construction in Qatar when they awarded the tournament there, just as the IOC did for Beijing (and many others). And Asian countries don’t have a monopoly on treating poor people badly when preparing for major events… it’s not in the same league, but I’m sure you all remember the poor people getting the bum’s rush out of the area Atlanta’s olympic stadium was built in, right?

    Anyone think poor people didn’t suffer when LA decided to build Chavez Ravine? Or when most of the WC stadia were built for South Africa 2010?

    In fact, the plight of the poor generally isn’t a side effect of North American olympics/world cups, it is typically part of the rationale for holding them…. “Move em out!” Clean up the area!

    The lives or the poor never get ‘fixed’, they just get moved (along with their problems) into a new neighbourhood.

    Again, the way Qatar is treating their workers is far worse than the plight of the Atlanta residents evicted for ’96 olympics. On the other hand, though, US military bases in Asia often employ many workers from the same countries and under similar conditions (apart from the working outside in the desert sun)… these people must pay thousands of dollars to get these jobs, when they get to the site they lose their passports and often aren’t paid for weeks or months… you can look this up on a program called Fault Lines: America’s War Workers.

    But I guess this is just another example of it only being wrong when someone else does it…. like nuclear weapons… We’ve got ’em, we know how dangerous they are… so no-one else should develop them. Trust us.

  9. If they did move the tournament, it would be because 1) Qatar used bribes to get it, which, I know, that’s how it always works, but FIFA is trying to sell itself as less bribey now, and 2) it’s so brutally hot there that the cup has to be held in December, which is the middle of the regular season for club teams, meaning the leagues will have to take like a two-month break.

    Not that they’re going to move it, but some people still hold out hope, and the slavery issue doesn’t hurt.

  10. Jessy S, I’ve wonder about the number of stadiums needed too, not in a normal World Cup where part of the charm is that it is held in different cities and club’s stadiums and you want and need fans of various teams to be spread around the country; but in this World Cup where it is all in a postage stamp size country anyway. You do have four games a day some days. I also wonder if field recovery is a factor, but I assume you never get hard rainfall in the desert.

  11. GDub – I am a big fan of soccer — but only of the club game. My philosophical/ideological distaste for nationalism, as combined with my special disgust for the particular expression of this ugly phenomenon as expressed by citizens of the country which currently dominates global politics, makes it impossible for me really enjoy international football matches.

    I still watch; and, because someone has to win, I hope that that winner will be England. But, if I had my way, these competitions between teams under national flags. In my fantasy world, the “World Cup” would pit all-star teams from each league (the Premier League all-star team versus the Bundesliga all-star team, not England versus Germany), without regard for the players’ nationalities.

    Anyway, I think that you are vastly underestimating the effect that a U.S.-hosted World Cup would have on the cities in which the matches would be played.

    While the Super Bowl attracts some out-of-town tourists, World Cup matches attract a huge amount of international visitors. Furthermore, host cities typically see the arrival even of people without tickets who have no intention of getting into the stadium to see the matches, but who just want to mill about in the city and party.

    One would be forgiven for thinking that all of this this is good for a city. But American police forces increasingly see massive crowds of foreigners as a threat.

    These over-militarised police forces, citing the rationale of “security” against (mostly imaginary) “terrorism”, are likely to employ extreme measures. Host cities would be full of cops in tanks and riot gear; people — both residents and visitors — would face a gamut of checkpoints when attempting to go from any one location to any other. In other words: martial law.

    And this would be in addition to the normal sweeps of the homeless to which John Bladen made reference, as happened before the World Cups in South Africa and Brazil.

    I have tremendous fear of a World Cup being hosted in the U.S.; and I think that this fear is well-founded. So, I will admit to this selfish basis for hoping that the 2022 tournament is not moved from Qatar.

  12. Editing goof!

    The second sentence of the second paragraph should read: “But, if I had my way, these competitions between teams under national flags would not exist.”

  13. 1. The United States is hosting the Copa America this summer, as I’m sure you know. This is actually being widely marketed. I’m sure everyone will have a great time. I don’t think the militarized police force is being mobilized just yet. Not sure where the tanks comment arises from. Got any photos?

    2. I doubt the impact of the World Cup is that significant, particularly in the US. I’m sure the cities involved like the attention, but like all sporting events it really isn’t clear whether it adds to the economy or just replaces other things–particularly when you factor in the cost of hosting.

    3. The United States hosted the Winter Olympics in 2002. Not sure your post really relates at all to the conduct of this event or anything else.

    Obviously, you’re free to not like the United States or its foreign policy. But to claim that international football matches are not or will not be targeted by terrorists is a bit of a stretch.

  14. Neil: Absolutely right on the corruption/bribery front (and what fantastic luck it is that the US gov’t probe into FIFA corruption only went back 20 years and not 25… where it would have included the ’94 world cup as well).

    As to the heat, it is oppressive and the WC date has been moved for that reason. By coincidence, the last time the WC was moved on short notice (for “safety” reasons) was in 1986, when Colombia was stripped of hosting rights and the tournament moved to Mexico…

    For those of us who remember it, the 1986 event will be forever tarnished by players (and thus the quality of play) suffering badly in the 46 deg C heat and 90% humidity (something the middle east/Persian Gulf generally does not have an issue with). We will never know what might have been the result had a different location been selected when Colombia was disqualified as host.

    Yet the tournament went ahead anyway, with games starting in the mid day heat in Mexico in order to suit European tv schedules.

    One option for dealing with the heat in Qatar that was not, so far as I know, considered was starting games at 9pm or 11pm locally. This would have put them into much cooler conditions and into prime time in Europe (while leaving them at noon or 2pm EST in North America).

  15. Jeez, Ferdinand, I don’t know where to start. I’ll just say your anti-US nonsense is sadly misinformed. And the idea that the US is unique in displays of the negative aspects of “nationalism” by an ignorant minority is April-Fools-Day-worthy.

    Regarding countries that could host in a pinch, Germany and the US are hardly alone. UK, France, Italy, Canada are all sufficiently stadiumed. Probably 2-3 more along the Pacific Rim.

  16. The horrifying enslaving of the people is bad enough; the fact we are on pace to see over 5,000 die in the building of the stadiums (with the families never receiving a thing) is beyond all levels of despicable. FIFA should strip it of the cup to try to save the lives of thousands of people, with Qatar getting the WC from bribery just being an added reason for why it wont hold it.

  17. Keith – I didn’t suggest that the U.S. is the only place where people demonstrate nationalism, a societal sickness that exists everywhere. I said only that witnessing the American brand of this phenomenon fills me with a special disgust. This feeling is perfectly natural for an American citizen of an anti-nationalist ideology who strongly disapproves of the U.S.’s role in global affairs.

    The fundamental objection to nationalism is moral; nationalism is a close cousin to racism, notwithstanding the socially-acceptable language in which it is typically couched. On a practical/tactical level nationalism is destructive, as it dissuades workers from identifying with the people with whom we have common interests, namely, workers from other countries.

    Still, American nationalism is indeed qualitatively different from others. The meaning of an act is determined in part by power relations; so nationalism as expressed by the reigning imperialist giant is something distinct from nationalism as expressed by people who are threatened by that giant. And, when one considers cutural imperalism alongside the more traditional sort, one must acknowledge that there is no place in the world where the people are not so threatened.

    Regarding countries that can host the World Cup on short notice, I really hope that you are right. (Though I think that the mention of Canada is stretching it.) If the 2022 tournament is pulled from Qatar, then, I am sorry to say, let it be England’s or France’s problem rather than mine.

  18. GDub – I understand what you are saying. But I don’t think that either the Copa America or the Winter Olympics is really on the scale of a World Cup.

    The Summer Olympics come close. And, when New York was bidding for the 2012 Olympics, I had the same fears of martial-law-like conditions had we “won” it. London experienced what amounted to a military occupation, with missiles on rooftops, anti-aircraft guns on the ground, snipers hovering in helicopters, electrified fences, blanket video surveillance, and myriad checkpoints. In New York, where the local police force has tanks at its disposal, we’d have had all that and then some.

    And that’s just what we’d have during a World Cup in New York and in Los Angeles and in other cities where matches were taking place.

    As to whether football matches would be a target for terrorism, no one can say for sure. But I am willing to assert that the risk of such a thing is minuscule in the U.S., at least with respect to explosives.

    The problem in the U.S. is not the availability of explosives, but the availability of guns. We’ve seen this in San Bernardino (where the shooters made homemade bombs that didn’t work), in Lafayette, Louisiana, in Sandy Hook, and elsewhere

    Anyone attempting bombings like the ones at the 1996 Olympics and in Oklahoma City would nowadays never get close to success; they’d have the FBI breaking down their doors. An event of that magnitude is not likely to happen again in the U.S.

    Smaller-scale bombings, such as the one at the Boston Marathon, are a different story. (It really should go without saying, but I will explicitly state just in case: I am in no way dismissing the tradedy of the five people who died in that attack!) While such an event could conceivably occur, the fact is that just as much death could be caused by someone running around weilding a hammer or a baseball bat. It doesn’t amount to mass destruction.

    The frightening truth is that the actual threat to public safety comes from militarised “security”, not from imagined “terrorists”. And there is every reason to believe that American cities will be subjected to this sort of occupation by the police/military (the distinction having been lost) the next time the U.S. hosts the World Cup, whether in 2022 or at some time thereafter.

  19. You know, this is sort of silly.

    1. If memory serves, an international soccer match in Europe was targeted by terrorists in the last six months–Paris in November. So I’m not sure wondering “if” it could happen is really valid anymore (also important to mention the equally tragic targeting of a match in Iraq very recently).

    You might also note that France has had armed soldiers on the street since the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

    2. Your point on the size of the tournament/event is completely irrelevant.

    3. “Anyone attempting bombings like the ones at the 1996 Olympics and in Oklahoma City would nowadays never get close to success; they’d have the FBI breaking down their doors. An event of that magnitude is not likely to happen again in the U.S.”–you’d think that’s why we have an FBI? Are you suggesting that nobody is trying? Not sure how you reach the conclusion that it isn’t possible.

    4. Your point on the “scale” of the attack is also pointless, unless you’d be satisfied with “only” losing a leg or two or being in rehab for a year or more. Comparing a bomb with a guy with a bat on death toll misses the point too.

    5. Finally, after proving that terrorist attacks at sporting events are possible and have occurred (apparently by “imagined” terrorists)–you then incredibly state that the real threat comes from security at the events.

    You stretch the no-ad hominem attack rule to its furthest extent.

  20. So, Mary Collier thinks there’s nothing exceptional about this and so can’t bring herself to say this tournament should be pulled ASAP. Ferdinand, however, really does take the prize for waffling obfuscation.

    A world cup in Qatar will create the largest collection of white elephants of all time, all built at an unprecedented (in modern times anyway) cost in human lives.

    And it will be an atrocious tournament. I for one won’t watch a minute of it and I hope at least some of the players selected for it will have the moral backbone to refuse to appear in it.

  21. Countries that have the stadium and hotel infrastructure to host this tournament right now:

    South Africa

    Cancelling this tournament now and awarding it to one of the above countries instead would save thousands of lives.

  22. Banner – I have not waffled. I have been perfectly clear: the tournament should not be pulled from Qatar.

    GDub – 1. Paris is not in the U.S. The point is that the likelihood of that kind of bomb blast in the U.S. is very low.

    2. It is hard to understand the claim that the size of a tournament is irrelevant. The Copa America won’t have the eyes of the world on it; by contrast, the World Cup is watched by audiences measured in the billions. This affects the perception of World Cup matches as potential targets for terrorists.

    Furthermore, the Copa America is not going to attract significant numbers of people visiting from abroad, while World Cup hosting cities always swell with foreign visitors. For this reason the policing issues are not comparable between the two situations. So, yeah, the size of the tournament matters a lot.

    3. That is pretty much exactly why we have the FBI: to investigate people suspected of planning terrorist violence.

    And I am not suggesting that nobody is trying this. Rather, I am suggesting that anyone who would try it is virtually certain to be caught long before completing the plan, especially if these would-be terrorists were to go about their planning in the way that the bombers in Atlanta and Oklahoma City did, i.e., by buying large quantities of bomb-making materials.  

    Also, please note that I have not claimed that anything is impossible, only that a large terrorist bombing in the U.S. is unlikely. “Unlikely” is not the same thing as “impossible”.

    4. Do not construct a straw man. I am quite certain that you understand that I am not okay with someone “only” losing a limb. We know that five people were killed and several more injured in the Boston Marathon attack. For the injured people, for the loved ones of the dead, and for most people in that city, this was a horrific and traumatic event.  Nevertheless, the realisation that someone could literally cause comparable injury and death by running through Times Square and bashing people with a hammer is important to keep in mind when we’re tempted to class the Boston attack alongside those which caused mass destruction.

    5. Americans are much more likely to be hurt or killed by police than by “terrorists”. This is not an opinion; it is a fact. If/when the U.S. hosts the World Cup, and the police get to go into full combat mode, this problem will only get worse.

    On the questions of “terrorism” and “security”, the cure is far worse than the disease.

  23. @Banner – I would agree with your list, but you need to add Brazil and Australia. Australia is likely the best candidate on the list if it moves from Qatar since it keeps the tournament within the AFC.

    Russia would be ready in 2022, as well if they can pull off 2018.

  24. Fernando,

    I guess I’m pretty confused. By your account, the United States takes law enforcement efforts to reduce the risk of mass-casualty terrorist strikes significantly, but this is bad because the United States has law enforcement presence at sporting events. The cure is worse than the disease, as you say.

    I guess at this point I can only ask–what terrible instance of law enforcement excess at a major sporting event are you referring to?

    I didn’t make the straw man. You measured impact by deaths. Nearly 300 people were hurt by those bombs, some extremely seriously, in an attack that was not detected in the planning stage. If 300 people aren’t “a lot” to you, I’m not sure what is. And I’m pretty sure a guy with a knife in Times Square is not going to change the lives of 300 people. But I guess in your model having police in major population centers is worse than the disease, no?

  25. jmauro, yes, that’s right. Although I’d omit Russia as it’s bad enough it’s been given one tournament under dodgy circumstances already.

    But back to Fernando. (Skipping your gibberish about terrorism and geopolitical whatever etc.) Even though thousands of lives could be saved by moving the 2022 tournament to another country you don’t want that to happen. Why not?

  26. Russia wasn’t that odd or wrong of a choice to win. The only bid that was better than them was England, but everyone hates England (in FIFA anyway) and they were willing to pay wth it oil money so it wasn’t that costly for everyone. It was a large rich country that has a football culture and put together a good bid. They were honestly #1 or #2 on most lists to win.

    Russia didn’t get weird in human rights terms until post bid.

  27. The problem with U.S. security measures isn’t that they’re as bad as bombs. It’s that they don’t do squat to prevent bombs, while simultaneously inconveniencing both fans and non-fans who happen to be in the area, and making people feel safer when they aren’t really. Hence “security theater.”

    Not that I think any security theater is as bad as forced-labor construction workers dropping like flies, but it’s not good, either.

  28. Banner – The reason not to move the tournament from Qatar is that doing so would not cure the labour explotation problem but only move it to another country, unless a country were chosen that didn’t have to build any new stadiums.  The list of such countries includes recent hosts Germany, South Africa, and Brazil.  And, as jmauro correctly points out, Russia will soon be on that list. However, it is my assumption that FIFA would be unwilling to go back so soon to a previous host (especially one in Europe).

    But perhaps Japan could come to the rescue, having co-hosted with South Korea in 2002.  The best thing about that choice is that Japan, like Qatar, is in Asia; and the 20-year gap between 2002 and 2022 would be just enough to make the return not seem too soon.  If Japan can save us from a U.S.-hosted tournament that year, then perhaps a move wouldn’t be so bad.

    Still, if the tournament does go ahead in Qatar, then some good could come of it.  The country has already announced that it will allow alcohol at the fan zones, and that it will set up a special court system to treat drunken fans “very gently” (their words). This could lead to a general liberalisation that would benefit all residents of that country.

    Also, the fan experience will probably be a good one.  With all matches taking place in a small geographical area, there will be none of the logistical problems that beset fans who had to travel across the vastness of Brazil in order to get from one venue to another.  Add to this the nighttime kickoffs, and this creates a very comfortable routine for fans, as they will not have to change hotels, and can enjoy full days of visiting beaches and restaurants before the matches.

    GDub – But the U.S. will get the tournament eventually, even if not in 2022. It seems foolish to deny that the police presence surrounding the matches will be oppressive, considering what we already saw at the 2012 Olympics in London. Those martial-law-like conditions are now considered the template; if American cities were merely to replicate that, then the harm to civil liberties would be enormous.  But it is a safe bet that American police forces will go to even greater extremes in terms of surveillance, in terms of restricting people’s movement, and, inevitably, in terms of (over)reacting to any supposed “threat”. 

    It is here, in the on-the-ground excesses of miltarised police, where the cure is worse than the disease. If and when these gung-ho types get someone in their sights, woe be to that person.  The next Richard Jewells will not survive to receive their apologies.

    Not only does occupation by a militarised police constitute an evil in itself, it is also largely unnecessary for the promotion of public safety. Would-be perpetrators of mass-casualty attacks in the U.S. stand little chance of getting as far as the stadium on match day; they are very likely to have been detected and caught long before. 

    While the burgeoning police state is fundamentally an undesireable phenomenon, the upshot of it is that no one is probably going to be able to bomb a sports stadium. This seemingly contradictory state of affairs should not be confusing; reality has a nasty habit of arranging itself in ways that defy easy categorisation.  

  29. So Ferdinand, you’re fine with the tournament staying in Qatar – at a cost of thousands of lives – because it might be easier to get a beer there from now on.

    And moving the tournament to another country wouldn’t merely shift the labour exploitation problem. England, Germany et Al wouldn’t have many venues requiring much in the way of new construction. And even if they did require new stadia they’d need to build hundreds to match the Qatari death toll.

  30. This is an interesting discussion and I would not oppose moving the 2022 World Cup to another Asian Federation (to preserve the rotation logic). However, Banner you seem to think that’s Qatar’s labor abuses are only related to the World Cup (they are not). The labor abuses are related to Qatari labor and citizenship laws. There have been abuses in ALL forms of construction in Qatar. I do not know what the impact of the World Cup leaving would have on the deplorable general labor/citizenship question but if you are concerned about the politics you should couch the discussion in those terms. Some people feel keeping the World Cup in Qatar improves the chances these horrid policies would change (I am deeply suspicious of this argument and doubt it would likely be true) so I would appreciate better arguments as to how taking the World Cup away would improve labor laws (and not stay the same without a spotlight).

  31. Actually I think nothing of the sort – I am very aware of the extent of the death toll on all Qatari construction projects.

    I will never visit the wretched country and do not want to support it in any way. If stripping Qatar of this bauble helps to inform its ruling dynasty that it needs to change its way then the tournament should be moved elsewhere.

Comments are closed.