3
THE reaction to last week’s sports-related arrests in Switzerland has been reminiscent in some ways of the aftermath of a football match. There has been jubilation in some quarters, accompanied by huge grins and high-fives, and dismay in others amid predictable grumbling about unfair play.
Following a series of arrests of high-level Fédération Internationale de Football Association (Fifa) officials at a luxury hotel in Zurich, Diego Maradona, the former Argentine star, declared: “They called me mad but thankfully today the truth is out and I am enjoying it.”
And an editorial in the Times of South Africa summed up the reaction across many parts of the world: “The parasites in Fifa who skimmed off millions … should be shown no mercy. The Americans will have done the world a huge favour if their actions finally force Fifa to clean up its act.”
On the opposing side, the highest-level intervention came from Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, who questioned both the timing and the ethics of the anti-Fifa action. “No one is going to tell me that it was a simple coincidence,” he said, “this American attack two days before the elections of Fifa. It doesn’t smell right.”
Kuwait’s Sheikh Ahmad al-Fahad al-Sabah, a member of the federation’s executive committee, went even further, asking: “Is it because they want to kill Fifa … Is it related to the Ukraine-Russian war? A lot of questions [have been] raised. Maybe not a lot of people can say it.”
America’s motive in acting against Fifa is open to question.
The arrests in Zurich were based on the indictment by the US of 14 Fifa officials on corruption charges, and they came two days before the federation was scheduled to pick its president for the next four years. The incumbent since 1998, Swiss administrator Sepp Blatter, widely perceived as presiding over a culture of deeply ingrained corruption, was expected to easily be re-elected.
The US claims it chose this particular juncture because so many of the potential culprits were gathered in one place — and the Swiss authorities, which are pursuing a parallel investigation into the awarding of the 2018 and 2022 World Cups to Russia and Qatar respectively, were willing to cooperate.
That makes sense, but it is certainly conceivable that an attempt to thwart Blatter’s re-election was among the ideas behind the raids, with American journalists alerted in advance to what was about to unfold.
In the event, Blatter scored an easy triumph last Friday when his only opponent, Jordan’s Prince Ali bin al-Hussein, deemed it sensible to withdraw his candidacy after receiving 73 votes out of 209 in the first round.
The head of the Union of European Football Associations, Michel Platini, had contended in the run-up to the election that he was backing Ali because, being a rich Jordanian royal, he would be less vulnerable to monetary inducements.
It was hardly a convincing argument, not least in view of the very questionable implication that putting the rich in charge reduces the likelihood of bribery. It wasn’t just Platini’s poor skills as an advocate that doomed Prince Ali’s prospects, though. Blatter is believed to have effectively locked in a substantial proportion of votes on account of Fifa’s generosity in recent decades in funding football facilities in Third World countries that previously were ignored by the sport’s Eurocentric hierarchy.
From a somewhat different perspective, it can of course be seen as vested interests among the Fifa executive doling out millions in order to remain in a position where they can rake in tens of millions as kickbacks for highly lucrative sponsorship and broadcasting rights, as well as payback for picking venues for the World Cup and other tournaments.
The American initiative in striking out against Fifa has tended to be seen as one international intervention where global opinion is largely behind the US. Washington’s motivation is nonetheless open to question. Many of the indictments are evidently based on transactions in the American banking system — but such action has conspicuously been lacking in respect of corruption within that banking system.
Nor is it entirely clear exactly what triggered the investigation. It is widely assumed it had something to do with the thwarting of the American bid for the 2022 World Cup. And it also isn’t hard to see how the venue for the 2018 Cup may also provide cause for consternation.
Making Blatter and Fifa answerable for their transgressions deserves to be recognised as a welcome gesture, but without losing sight of the fact that a great many international sporting organisations follow a broadly similar path — and tend to get away with it. The political component in the Fifa affair should not be ignored. Should it eventually lead to a cleaner, leaner Fifa, that too would be welcome. But Uncle Sam’s reincarnation as a white knight also deserves close scrutiny and a healthy dose of scepticism.
Published in Dawn, June 3rd, 2015
On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play
