As we continue a whistle-stop tour of World Cups past, we’re also exposing the tone-deafness which seems to plague FIFA's current leader. Having kicked off by exploring the disappointing, if not necessarily surprising, roots of the sort of criticism Gianni Infantino simply carries on swatting away in office to this day, where better to pick up than Russia in 2018, where he made another dubiously powerful friend in Vladimir Putin and got himself a nice shiny Medal of Friendship while he was at it, presumably having learnt more than a few dark arts from his predecessor, Sepp Blatter?
Before the invasion of Ukraine got them a FIFA ban- though they still play friendlies, mostly against Asian sides, under the banner of the Russian Football Union, and are debating whether to attempt a switch to the AFC should they ever be accepted back into the fold- the 2018 World Cup bid represented a chance to build on a sporting portfolio enhanced by the awarding of the 2014 Winter Olympics, not to mention an economy rich on oil money.
As the Guardian's Ken Bensinger wrote in How Russia Won The World Cup-
“The country, and particularly its leader, Vladimir Putin, had been eager to take advantage of that boom to reassert its long-relinquished role as a world power. Winning the right to host the World Cup, watched by hundreds of millions around the world, would undoubtedly be an effective way to help plant that idea, projecting strength and stability. Most critically, it would boost Putin’s image among the Russian people. Losing the vote, for Putin, was unthinkable.
Russia’s delegation, led by Alexey Sorokin, the Russian Football Union’s general secretary, presented first. It did not go well. For starters, Russia’s national soccer team had failed to qualify for the 2010 World Cup thanks to a humiliating loss the previous November to lowly Slovenia, a country with a population only slightly larger than the Siberian city of Novosibirsk. Russia’s presentation, meanwhile, was embarrassingly marred by a glitchy PowerPoint display that failed three times as Sorokin spoke.”
But money talked, as it does increasingly loudly nowadays- not just in football- and with a little help from Roman Abramovich the country won the bid after a little schmoozing at a “bid expo” in Johannesburg. As Bensinger puts it in documenting Blatter and Abramovich's most significant interaction of the day- “Engrossed in hushed conversation, the unusually jocular Russian billionaire and the balding, diminutive Fifa president rode an escalator up to the convention centre’s second floor. They then slipped into a private meeting room and quietly closed the door.“
The outcome of that meeting was clear for all to see in the announcement of Russia's winning bid.
“The hundreds of journalists on hand to witness the result of that morning’s vote rushed to file accounts of the Russian delegation, including Roman Abramovich, high-fiving and whooping as Blatter handed deputy prime minister Igor Shuvalov the World Cup trophy onstage.”
Shuvalov's superior wouldn't touch down in Zurich until a few hours after, but understandably proved to be “exultant”. At a hastily assembled press conference, he thanked Blatter and insisted that Russia would be ready by 2018, and that he hoped Abramovich, who he said was “wallowing in money,” would chip in for some of the stadium construction.
“Would it be fair to say,” one excited journalist fawned, “that you are the cleverest prime minister in the world by staying away and winning the contest from so many thousands of miles away?”
“Thank you,” Putin said, replying in Russian and smiling. “I’m glad I insisted on giving you the floor. Thank you, it’s very nice to hear this.”
And the Centre For Eastern Studies can shed a little more light on the manipulation of the host country's image to try to create something more appealing than its record on racism, human rights etc, as it noted in its own review of the tournament.
“For the purposes of the World Cup, the Russian leadership created an image of Russia as a country that is safe, modern and open to the world: they made sure that the organisation of sports events was efficient, security was guaranteed, visitors had various conveniences at their disposal and that the attitude of law enforcement officers towards them was friendly.
Paradoxically, the implementation of many of these arrangements was facilitated by Russia’s authoritarian model of governance, including a comprehensive law enforcement system the Kremlin has at its disposal and the state’s control of the key groups involved. Moscow has used this image, especially by including the enthusiastic opinions voiced by foreign football fans, as one of its soft power tools to contradict the negative image of Russia present in the narrative supported by Western politicians and media, and to solidify Russia’s position in the international arena.
Moreover, Russia has used the presence of leaders from Western states, who attended various World Cup matches, to bolster its narrative emphasising the absence of unity among Western states and the rightfulness of Russia’s foreign policy stance. However, there is no indication that Russia’s improved image could have a measurable impact on the betterment of its relations with the West, which is confirmed, for example, by the extension of US-imposed sanctions.
Similarly, in domestic politics the World Cup merely brought a temporary wave of enthusiasm within society that quickly subsided, giving way to social discontent triggered by the government pushing through unpopular social reforms. The World Cup is now over and Russia is returning to its inveterate domestic problems and moving to another phase of its confrontation with the West.“
Not as big a success as their run to the quarter-finals after coming second in Group A following an opening 5-0 thrashing of Saudi Arabia, a 3-1 win over Egypt in their second group match and 3-0 defeat to Uruguay. Russia went on to dispatch Spain on penalties in the last sixteen, with the on- pitch action a dizzying prelude to a rapid fall from grace.
Next, the Middle East and Qatar 2022...