It is just 200 days until England will begin their 2022 World Cup campaign against Iran at Khalifa International Stadium.
And among the standard talk of ending the long wait, there will be an intense focus on what Gareth Southgate's team do to raise awareness around the myriad human rights issues that have blighted the tournament since it was awarded to Qatar in 2010.
England, and several other teams, are expected to do something to raise awareness around the brutal conditions migrant workers have faced and the intolerance towards the LGBTQ+ community but there are questions over the what, where and how.
Captain Harry Kane has already vowed to organise discussions with the leaders of other teams - France’s Hugo Lloris and Korea Republic’s Son Heung-min are clubmates at Tottenham Hotspur - but he admitted in March that he was unsure of what exact gestures of solidarity can be made. “It is something I will try to do,” Kane said. “I think that will send out a bigger and more powerful message. It is important to talk about these things and not just hide away from them.”
But is it not unfair to expect players to be the game’s social and moral conscience when the responsibility rests on the shoulders of FIFA and, to a lesser extent, the football associations who can influence the governing body?
Amnesty International’s approach throughout the past decade has been on pressuring the governing bodies, those at executive level who can enact change. That will remain true right up to November 21‘s kick off, although there are few more powerful tools than the reach of those on the pitch.
“Players speaking out, using their platform is an incredible vehicle for influence but the responsibility very much lies with the FA and FIFA,” Amnesty’s Ella Knight tells Mirror Football.
“We don’t have expectations of players but seeing teams and players use their platform is very powerful. When we saw Germany and Norway last year making public declarations of support for migrant workers’ rights on the pitch, that was incredibly powerful and sent a strong message that it’s not only human rights organisations worried about these issues. It’s players, it’s fans.”
So what can be done by players who need to tread a fine line, undoubtedly wary of overstepping in an area in which no one expects them to be experts? Some players have spoken directly with workers and human rights organisations to educate themselves about the realities. In England’s case it is hard to think of a previous group more aware of societal issues, exemplified by how they have led the way in taking a knee.
Germany and Norway have shown that T-shirts offer striking photo opportunities but words and constant reminders during daily media duties will carry even greater weight during the tournament.
Amnesty are suggesting that the players ask questions of FIFA and their football associations around the treatment of staff at their bases, how the workers involved in constructing the sites were treated and what is happening around compensation for those who have endured horrific conditions during the building of infrastructure.
“Speaking out, talking about what they hear is incredibly important,” Knight says. “Asking really tough questions of the FA, FIFA, whether publicly or privately. They are the bodies with responsibilities so ask them what they are doing to use their influence to make change.
“Asking those questions in public would be powerful but even raising them privately is important.”
Supporters are unlikely to be encouraged to the same extent because the risk of endangerment is too high. FIFA has previously indicated that rainbow flags can be flown during the tournament, only for a senior security official to say that they would be confiscated to “protect” fans in case they were attacked for “insulting the whole society.”
“We’re not in a position to tell individual fans whether they should protest or speak out when in the country,” Knight says of Amnesty’s view. “It’s hard to know what the situation will be like for the month of the tournament. Qatar has very tight restrictions on freedom of expression, it has cyber crime laws that can be used to crackdown on what someone might think is an innocuous critique of the labour rights situation or LGBTQ+ people.”
There remain questions around the sale of alcohol and whether there is enough accommodation in the smallest country to host a World Cup. Many fans plan to stay in Dubai and fly in for games only.
That makes sense when journalists who attended last month’s draw in Doha were struck by how much work remained. There were cranes in every direction, basic pieces of infrastructure such as footpaths in short supply and hotels unfinished. Migrant workers, the majority from South Asia, remain under pressure to get everything completed and while much focus has been on the estimated 6,500 who have died since 2010, the servicing of the tournament will be carried out almost entirely by those from the same backgrounds.
In December the FA released a statement in which they said it was their belief that “there is evidence of substantial progress being made by Qatar in relation to workers’ rights” but “recognise there is still more to be done.” Mark Bullingham, the chief executive, is involved in high level discussions with UEFA and FIFA but their interest level has not been consistent, increasing once qualification was sealed in November.
“The FA in the past few months have started taking their responsibility a bit more seriously,” Knight says. “There was a real gap where we didn’t hear too much from them and we were calling on them to speak out and use their influence. They appear to now be looking into the services that will be used by the team and officials during the tournament, asking questions of the service providers there and how they are treating their workers. We really want to see people digging more into the issues.
“There are a lot of statements saying there’s been great progress but still concerns. When bodies like the FA look into service providers, what kind of answers are they receiving around labour rights? What are they hearing when they talk directly to migrant workers? Use the platform, use the influence to push FIFA to take it more seriously. There’s such a short window of opportunity now.”
There are also fears around what happens when the jamboree packs up and heads home. Will the western world forget? Will working conditions deteriorate further when the eyes of the world are no longer trained on an emirate that received significantly less attention before the tournament was awarded in December 2010?
“FIFA talks a lot about legacy and the positive legacy this World Cup will leave but for that to be meaningful the reforms that have been introduced in recent years have to be implemented properly before the tournament happens,” Knight says.
“Otherwise there is a risk they become words on paper and that legacy, the impact it could have on many workers is not realised. There are questions for all stakeholders around how ensuring the abuse that has happened is remedied, that workers are not left still waiting for justice and accountability. Those are the things that we would like to see. FIFA shouldn’t just move on as soon as this World Cup is done. It has a responsibility to the people who have made and will make the tournament possible.”
