Should Qatar be Allowed to Host the World Cup?

Written by a Suffield Academy Speculator

When it was first released that Qatar would host the 2022 FIFA World Cup, there were a lot of concerns about its capacity, as such a small country, to handle the capacities that come with hosting such a major sporting event. However, Qatar proved those critics wrong. Their  ability to create a safe, efficient and organized event in such a small area was impressive. However, most of this opposition was not about whether Qatar has the infrastructure to host such a large contest—it came from the belief that Qatar is not morally clean enough to host the FIFA World Cup because of its stance on homosexuality and its treatment of migrant workers.

Homosexuality is banned in Qatar, but when asked about his country's policies, Qatar's World Cup Chief, Nasser Al Khater, gave assurances to LGBTQ+ fans that they would be welcomed at the tournament. Hassan Al-Thawadi, “the World Cup boss” in Qatar, also said that it is unequivocally safe for gay people to live in and visit Qatar. It seems increasingly obvious that the opposition to homosexuality in Qatar remains as only the official policy rather than the actual national attitude. It is monumental that a Muslim country has come out in support of coexistence based on sexual orientation. Qatar took a risky and extremely bold step in openly and clearly welcoming homosexuality, and this sets a precedent for the rest of the Muslim world not only to be accepting but to finally break cultural and religious restraints and promote unity and coexistence.

Qatar’s treatment of migrant laborers is deeply concerning. There is no way to justify such degrading working and living situations. However, I do take issue with people calling this labor “slave labor.” Firstly, I believe it is offensive to enslave people, past or present, who have witnessed the true horrors of captivity. Second, migrant workers in Qatar were paid—no, they were not well paid—but they were paid—for their work. These migrants also agreed to go to Qatar, and they were not abducted or kidnapped by any means: they understood that the wages they would be paid in Qatar would make all the difference for themselves and their families. Qatar is in no way, shape or form guilty of slavery. I won't deny that the way these migrants live is unsanitary and that they should have been respected enough to be given proper accommodations for their services.

The argument about Qatar not being morally clean enough can also be applied to the next World Cup host, the United States. Is the country that keeps children in cages at the border good enough? Is the country responsible for the death of countless innocents in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan morally clean enough to host the largest sporting event in the world? I think that the opposition Qatar is faced was unfair. The BBC did not broadcast this year's World Cup opening ceremony as an act of protest, but they did broadcast the last World Cup opening ceremony held in Russia. Why is there more opposition to Qatar now than there was to Russia in 2018? After all, Russia actively supports Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian dictator who used chemical weapons on his own people. Russia committed war crimes and deliberately targeted civilians in Syria and Ukraine. Why is there more concern over inactive homophobia and disrespected workers than there is over war crimes? This is a clear-cut example of Islamophobia in western media.