A Scandal Named Infantino. On the Eve of the FIFA Cup
The Empty Seat Versus Sovereignty
There are gestures that pretend to speak for humanity while serving power.
On June 10, 2026, in Mexico City, on the eve of the FIFA World Cup, Gianni Infantino offered one of them: an empty seat dedicated to the French journalist Christophe Gleizes, convicted by Algerian courts and whose sentence was upheld on appeal, accompanied by a public call for a “presidential pardon” and a “great act of humanity.”
The Western press was moved. The agencies relayed. The image circulated across the world — which was precisely its purpose.
No one disputes that a journalist may be defended. No one contests the right of colleagues, lawyers, diplomats, governments, or civil society organizations to advocate on his behalf. Such efforts belong to the normal functioning of legal and diplomatic life.
What Infantino did belongs to another category.
He transformed the stage of the world’s largest sporting event into an instrument of symbolic pressure against a sovereign state. He converted a judicial case into a global spectacle. He dressed political communication in the language of compassion.
And that is where the scandal begins.
Selective Conscience
Infantino presented Gleizes as “the only sports journalist imprisoned in the world.”
The phrase was calibrated for emotion.
But emotion, when selected by power, is never neutral.
Where was this voice while Palestinian footballers were being killed in Gaza? Where was this urgency while stadiums were destroyed, sports infrastructure erased, players, coaches, referees, and officials buried beneath the rubble? Where was the empty seat for the dead of Palestinian football?
There was none.
No global press conference. No solemn staging. No carefully crafted visual message. No comparable appeal to the conscience of humanity.
When United Nations experts formally petitioned FIFA in September 2024, requesting action against the Israeli federation in the name of international law, the organization that today invokes moral urgency discovered procedures, committees, reviews, delays, technicalities, and institutional caution. A symbolic fine was eventually issued. The request for suspension was left without decisive action. The machine of administrative patience had done its work.
It was during this period that Infantino uttered the sentence that may ultimately define his presidency:
“Football cannot solve geopolitical problems.”
The doctrine is revealing.
Football becomes powerless when the victims are Palestinian.
Football becomes cautious when powerful interests are involved.
Football becomes neutral when neutrality protects FIFA.
Yet football suddenly becomes a platform for moral intervention when the detainee is French and the state being pressured is Algeria.
This is not inconsistency.
It is hierarchy.
The Geography of Courage
Infantino’s conscience appears to follow a remarkably consistent geography.
It expands where power approves.
It contracts where power may object.
In Doha, during the 2022 World Cup, he delivered his famous monologue of universal identification. He declared that he felt Qatari, Arab, African, disabled, gay, and a migrant worker. It was one of the most extraordinary performances of institutional empathy ever delivered from a FIFA podium.
Yet while empathy flowed freely, thousands of migrant workers and their families continued waiting for meaningful compensation for documented abuses: unpaid wages, illegal recruitment fees, injuries, deaths. Human Rights Watch would later describe FIFA’s assurances on the matter as “barefaced lies,” and the abuses themselves as largely “predictable and preventable.”
The symbolism was abundant.
The accountability was less visible.
The men who built the stage could not afford a seat upon it — empty or otherwise.
The same pattern emerged elsewhere.
In his relationship with Donald Trump, Infantino displayed a degree of political proximity without precedent for the head of a world sporting body. In May 2025, he arrived late to FIFA’s own congress because he was accompanying the American president on a Middle East tour — and UEFA delegates walked out of the hall in protest. In December 2025, a “FIFA Peace Prize” was created and, one month later, awarded to Trump with the assertion that he “objectively” deserved it. Even commentators in parts of the American media questioned whether FIFA’s leadership was drifting from diplomacy into dependency.
.
Infantino with Saudi ruler Mohammed bin Salman and Donald Trump in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 13 May 2025 (Public Domain)
.
When members of Iran’s qualified World Cup delegation encountered American visa restrictions — to the point of forcing the team to train in Mexico — FIFA launched no global campaign of moral indignation. There were no dramatic gestures. No symbolic chairs. No public appeals framed as humanitarian imperatives. The president solicited a welcome statement from the White House, then thanked it publicly.
The lesson seems clear.
Courage is exercised where its cost is low.
Silence prevails where the stakes are high.
The Russian Proof
If any doubt remained, Russia removed it.
The “neutrality” so carefully invoked to spare Israel was quietly abandoned in February 2026, when Infantino publicly argued for considering the lifting of Russia’s suspension, on the grounds that exclusion had bred only “frustration and hatred.”
The Kremlin welcomed his words within hours.
Kyiv called them irresponsible — and recalled the name of a schoolboy killed by a Russian missile while playing football in Mariupol.
Observe the choreography. Neutrality where the powerful must not be offended. Reintegration where Washington’s winds had begun to turn toward Moscow. The same man, the same institution, two opposite doctrines — separated only by the political value of the beneficiary.
Infantino does not appear to follow principles.
He appears to follow winds.
And he anticipates them.
Algeria Is Not a Stage Set
At the heart of this affair stands a simple principle.
Algeria is a sovereign state.
It possesses institutions, courts, laws, procedures, rights of appeal, and mechanisms of legal review. The Gleizes case may be debated. It may be criticized. It may be defended. It may be discussed within Algeria and beyond Algeria.
That is entirely legitimate.
What is not legitimate is the transformation of a judicial matter into an international spectacle designed to generate political pressure through emotional imagery.
A presidential pardon is not a media accessory.
It is a sovereign act.
To demand it publicly from one of the most visible platforms in world sport is not an act of neutrality. It is an act of political intervention performed before a global audience.
The empty seat was therefore not merely a symbol.
It was a message.
A carefully designed image.
A prefabricated emotion.
A form of soft pressure intended for international consumption.
Its purpose was not merely to express concern.
Its purpose was to create effect.
The timing makes the question unavoidable.
Why this case?
Why this platform?
Why this choreography?
Why this urgency?
The president of an organization that could not summon comparable intensity for the devastation of Palestinian football suddenly discovered a humanitarian emergency in a case that aligns perfectly with dominant narratives circulating through influential Western media networks — and that costs him nothing with the powers that matter to him.
Palestine cannot host a World Cup. The workers of Doha cannot endow a program. Algeria invents no prizes.
In Infantino’s moral economy, some causes are simply affordable.
That coincidence deserves scrutiny.
Zurich Exposed
Algeria does not have to apologize for its sovereignty.
It does not have to accept theatrical lessons from an international sports executive whose institution has repeatedly demonstrated a selective relationship with moral outrage.
Criticism is legitimate.
Pressure is not.
Advocacy is legitimate.
Instrumentalization is not.
Defending a journalist can be honorable.
Transforming his fate into a political performance is something else entirely.
Humanity is noble.
Selective humanity is strategy.
Gianni Infantino wanted to display an empty seat in the name of a French journalist.
What he revealed instead was the morally empty seat at the center of FIFA itself — the place where consistency, fairness, independence, and courage should be sitting.
That seat was not in Mexico City.
It was in Zurich.
World football deserves better than a president who appears to administer moral concern like an investment portfolio, allocating indignation according to the political value of its target.
And Algeria deserves respect.
Not theater lessons.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.
Laala Bechetoula is an independent Algerian historian, journalist, and geopolitical analyst. He has been writing on Trump, American hegemony, and the collapse of the international order since 2025. His work appears in Countercurrents, Global Research, Réseau International, Le Quotidien d’Oran, Sri Lanka Guardian, and other international platforms. This article integrates and crowns a corpus of analytical work produced between November 2025 and April 13, 2026.
No comments: