Commentary by Manuel Silvério*
The 2026 World Cup will be played in stadiums, but it will also be shaped by something that cannot be seen on the pitch: geopolitics. International sport has long tried to be a place where peoples meet. Yet in a world marked by renewed geopolitical tensions, major sporting events can no longer be viewed only as athletic competition. Mega-events have become a mirror of the state of the world. A first-of-its-kind World Cup: scale, logistics and protocol World Cup 2026 will not be “just another edition”. It will be the first tournament with 48 national teams, hosted across three countries – the United States, Canada and Mexico – with an unprecedented calendar and logistical footprint: 104 matches across 16 host cities. That scale also raises the bar for governance: cross-border coordination, security planning, immigration procedures, diplomatic sensitivities and protocol decisions become part of the tournament’s invisible infrastructure.
Mega-events are no longer ‘only sport’
Today, hosting a major international event means managing far more than competition: it means dealing with diplomacy, security and a world that is increasingly unpredictable. Over several decades, I have had the opportunity to observe this reality from close range – first as a sports administrator in Macau, later as a Vice-President of the Olympic Council of Asia (OCA), and also as President of the Organising Committee of three major multi-sport events held in the Macao SAR: the East Asian Games, the Asian Indoor Games and the Lusofonia Games. I also chaired the Media and TV Broadcasting Commission in different editions of the Asian Games, which allowed me to see how security, diplomacy and public perception have become decisive elements in mega-event delivery. These experiences show that major events are now real exercises in international cooperation. Their organisation involves governments, national Olympic committees, international federations, transport operators, consular services, security forces, global media – and thousands of athletes and officials from dozens of countries.
IOC, OCA – and FIFA
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) – and, in Asia, the Olympic Council of Asia (OCA) – have repeatedly stressed that sport should preserve a space for encounter and dialogue between peoples, even in a world marked by political tensions and conflict.
FIFA, as the organiser of the World Cup, operates under the same pressure: protecting the universality of the game while meeting increasingly demanding security, protocol and operational requirements. Yet reality shows that the international context inevitably influences major events – and the area where that influence has become most visible in recent decades is security.
Security: an integrated approach
Every major competition reflects its time. There were periods when the main concern was essentially logistics and organisation. In other phases, diplomacy and preventive coordination became more important. More recently, issues linked to identity, social sensitivities and polarisation have also required particular attention, because these events concentrate large crowds and attract massive global exposure. Mega-event security is no longer merely about access control or visible police presence. It has become an integrated system involving international cooperation, risk anticipation, perception management and the practical safeguarding of coexistence among different communities.
When geopolitics enters everyday life
In a deeply interdependent world, distant events can have an immediate impact on ordinary life. A personal example illustrates this well: I was recently deprived of a visit from my son, who was due to travel from London to see me in Macau. Changes in flight routes driven by international tensions prevented the trip. It is a small family episode, but it shows how geopolitics can quickly enter normal life.
World Cup 2026: a different context, very close in time
Against this backdrop, the 2026 World Cup – with matches in the United States, Canada and Mexico – will unfold in a particularly complex international environment, not only because of its scale, but also because of the global climate in which it will take place. With only a few months to go before kick-off, the list of qualified teams already includes countries from regions under heightened tension. Among those already qualified are, for example, Iran and Jordan, alongside Japan, South Korea, Australia, Uzbekistan and New Zealand, and the South American qualifiers Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia, Paraguay and Uruguay – in addition to the three hosts (United States, Canada and Mexico). This is not about politicising football; it is simply acknowledging that the tournament will bring together delegations, fans, media and officials from contexts that may carry heightened diplomatic and security sensitivities. And beyond teams, this World Cup will also be a global stage for football stars whose value is, in many cases, incalculable – economically, socially, symbolically and, at times, even politically.
Protocol: the host ultimately decides
In practice, the host country always has the final word on protocol and access: visas and entry permissions, accreditation of official guests and seating at ceremonies, and the security conditions associated with delegations and dignitaries. In 2026, that discretion may be exercised more strictly than in previous editions, combining concerns about internal security, foreign policy, immigration and public scrutiny. It is therefore realistic to expect adjustments to some traditional protocol habits. Situations that in the past were handled by precedent – such as the presence of heads of state or other high dignitaries at official ceremonies – may be assessed through more pragmatic criteria. In a global event under intense media attention, protocol stops being “only etiquette” and becomes part of risk and perception management.
What fans may feel – and a personal plan revised
For fans, these dynamics can translate into concrete consequences: higher travel costs, a stronger perception of risk, a less relaxed atmosphere and more constrained interactions between participants of different origins. There may also be practical disruptions – route changes, access rules and security procedures – accompanied by tighter scrutiny in circulation and public spaces linked to the event.
I admit that, in this context, a personal plan I once entertained – attending the World Cup – has been reconsidered and, for now, set aside.
Competing is not confronting
No one can predict exactly what situations may arise. Some may be unavoidable; others unexpected. But experience also shows that sport can still offer a singular space where nations meet, compete and respect common rules. If mega-events reflect the state of the world, perhaps sport can also remind us of the world we still want to build. And – with a touch of well-intentioned humour – may this World Cup help bring, at least in spirit, an end to these wars.
*Manuel Silvério is an independent sports analyst and regional development consultant, as well as a former public-sector executive with international experience, long dedicated to public policy and sports development.
