The FIFA World Cup 2026: How the U.S. Weaponized Borders and Mobility

The FIFA World Cup is usually seen as a global sporting event, where people from all over the world come together to watch engaging matches and bond with those from different backgrounds and cultures. However, the current World Cup, which is predominantly held in the United States, has been the subject of criticisms ranging from time zone differences to more severe controversies such as high-ticket prices, the US-Israeli war on Iran, and the implementation of strict immigration policies. The immigration policies include mobilizing I.C.E. to monitor stadiums for illegal migrants, visa cancellations and deportations of legal immigrants days before the tournament begins. These controls the US has been using since the tournament began have fans criticizing the US, while also leaving them questioning the ability of the US to be adequate hosts for such an international tournament. Therefore, this edition of the World Cup shows how states weaponize mobility and borders to protect their interests and project power. In this case, the US as a host nation is not a neutral stage for FIFA’s “global game" but an active political actor that uses visas, security checks, and border rules to manage who can move, when, and under what conditions.

A notable trait that is becoming synonymous with the US being one of the hosts of this year’s World Cup is the numerous visa restrictions, which have resulted in the reduction of mobility for fans and football officials alike. The current World Cup is taking place within the context of a restrictive immigration regime imposed by President Trump, which has seen several individuals being detained and deported by I.C.E. The World Cup does not slow down these harsh immigration practices, and the competition gives immigration enforcement and the Department of Homeland security further reasons to double down. This is evident as, prior to the World Cup beginning, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin did not rule out the presence of ICE at the matches, while visa processing has been expanded to include social media vetting, biometrics checks, and open-ended security reviews, which leaves even approved visa holders at risk of being denied entry into the US. Naturally, the increased presence of immigration enforcement and expanded security checks relating to the visa processes creates an environment of control, which either prevents individuals from attending the World Cup or puts them off from coming to the tournament out of fear of detention.

These restrictions have not eased with the arrival of the tournament and have resulted in several fans, coaches, journalists, and FIFA officials facing harsh treatment. This is evident as the Trump travel ban has prevented fans of qualified teams such as Iran and Haiti from fully attending the competition, while fans from Senegal and the Ivory Coast are heavily limited from entering the US. While these fans have either been banned or heavily restricted from entering the US, there are also some fans who have had the visa processes suspended or faced high visa rejection rates in the lead up to the 2026 World Cup. Of the 48 nations participating at the World Cup, 11 of them have visa rejection ratings of 40% or higher and include “Ecuador, Egypt, Haiti, Algeria, Uzbekistan, Cape Verde, Jordan, Iran, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana and Senegal”. Beyond participating teams falling victim to strict US immigration enforcement, football officials such as referees. The most notable case is that of FIFA referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan, who was turned away at Miami airport due to his Somali nationality. This signals that American immigration policies disproportionately target African and Middle Eastern countries, which resulted in fans and officials being banned, detained, or deported before the competition could even begin, hence reducing freedom of movement for World Cup fans.

Beyond the visa and mobility restrictions brought about by US immigration policy, there is also the question of how mobility is politicized through geopolitical tensions. It should be noted that geopolitics has always been a factor in sporting competitions such as the FIFA World Cup; however, this tournament marks the first time a host nation, the US, is in an active conflict with a participant, Iran. Naturally, this raised questions relating to how the World Cup will handle this dynamic and, more importantly, raised questions regarding the relationship between sports and politics. As Iran was already placed on the travel ban list prior to the tournament, the war resulted in logistical complications. This is included relocation to Mexico and the issuance of temporary permits to allow for entry into the US without a proper visa. This shows how the US as a host nation has used asymmetric administrative power in the form of visas to handicap a geopolitical rival on the world stage.

Likewise, US immigration policy during this edition of the World Cup has also had an impact on football fans coming from abroad to support their national team. In the case of Iran, bans on Iranians existed before the war and the World Cup. This is clear as the FIFA tickets of Iranian fans were revoked just weeks prior to the tournament beginning, which can be attributed to the war. The revoking of fan tickets is not just limited to Iran, as fans from Morocco and Scotland have also had their tickets and travel approvals revoked prior to the World Cup beginning. Hence, the argument that can be made here is that the revoking of World Cup tickets and visa bans can directly contribute to the increased restriction of mobility for fans, which is attributed to the geopolitical tension that surrounds this current edition of the World Cup.

The politics of mobility are not limited to just visa restrictions and geopolitical tensions but are deeply rooted in security and openness when it comes to hosting major sporting events such as the World Cup. However, in this edition of the World Cup, there is a palpable feeling of dread and anxiety regarding security, especially among fans attending the games being held in the US. These fears and concerns have been addressed by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, as both groups have warned of the possible dangers fans can face amid the US’ crackdown on all forms of immigration. For context, President Trump’s harsh immigration practices have resulted in more than 500,000 deportations in 2025, while also resulting in detentions and deaths of migrants and anti-I.C.E. protestors. In this context, it can be considered natural that fans will feel a sense of insecurity or unwelcome at a tournament that is designed to be inclusive and open to a range of fans of multiple cultural backgrounds. Hence, the US immigration practices leading up to the World Cup raise questions regarding the state of security in the primary host nation and whether fans, particularly those from restricted countries, would feel safe attending the tournament.

Furthermore, fan mobility is impacted by the restrictive immigration practices of the US on a digital scale. Immigration forces in the US have begun to rely heavily on technology as a method of surveillance when it comes to monitoring foreign nationals entering the country. The enhanced method of surveillance includes social media monitoring as well as verification apps such as Mobile Fortify, which is used to “…identify individuals in real time using smartphone cameras, with “contactless fingerprints and facial images captured” and compared to biometric data collected at points of entry to the US.” The use of technology and social media surveillance infringes on an individual’s data security and privacy, as fans and officials can be detained and even deported based on social media content as well as biometric data. Moreover, it raises significant questions regarding individual privacy rights and potential fourth amendment violations (protection from unusual searches and seizures), as immigration forces will have access to an individual’s private data, which increases the risks of security and privacy breaches. Therefore, an argument can be made that the US’ use of technology to track and surveil fans of the World Cup infringes on their data security and privacy, which can turn them away from attending the tournament and hinder freedom of mobility.

While the fans and officials have been subject to security concerns, there have also been issues relating to the teams and players involved in the World Cup. Several teams have been subjected to stringent security checks as they were arriving in the US for the tournament. Well-known examples include the Uzbekistan and Senegal national teams, who had to go through lengthy security checks, as the Uzbekistan national team were searched by drug-sniffing dogs while in the US, while the Senegal national team were held on the runway just after landing and subjected to a thorough security check. Moreover, there have been other instances that were well noted, such as Iraqi players being held for 7 hours at the airport, while Iran has raised security concerns for the safety of their team. In the case of Iraq, Ayman Hussein, who is their leading striker, was detained and subjected to interrogation. Once again, these instances represent a discriminatory and targeted immigration campaign against national teams coming from the Middle East and Africa (and, in the case of Uzbekistan Asia) and shows the immigration practices of the US under President Trump raises doubts about the treatment of foreign nationals by the US immigration authorities.

Naturally, the controversies stemming from the US’ strict immigration policies expose the limits of globalization in modern-day football. The World Cup is meant to represent interconnectedness, free mobility, and cultural exchange; however, harsh immigration controls have played a role in reduced mobility, hence limiting the globalization benefits of this edition. The presence of immigration enforcement, visa restrictions, and high costs have all played a role in limiting the mobility of football fans coming to see the tournament. This is clear, as fans must face high public transportation costs, ticket costs, and expensive hotel bookings, while also feeling unwelcome by the hyper immigration controls that have been in place since President Trump returned to office. Naturally, these factors limit the freedom of movement of fans of different cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds, hence exposing globalization’s limits. Moreover, the implementation of harsh immigration controls exposes globalization further, as immigration policy is a symbol of national sovereignty in a constantly globalizing world. This is evident as FIFA has no say on how the US implements its immigration policy and cannot force the government to relax said policy for the sake of the competition. Therefore, the globalized nature of the World Cup is limited, as sovereign policy takes precedence over the tournament, hence showing the limits of globalization.

Despite the World Cup playing out amidst controversies focused on migration and US immigration policy, this edition of the tournament can be considered an example of the globalization of the sport. This globalization is evident, as this tournament functions as “a transnational entertainment and commercial platform rather than an event centered on a single host nation”. Moreover, this globalization is set to continue well into the next edition of the World Cup, as it will once again be hosted by three nations (being Spain, Portugal, and Morocco), which further influences increased mobility of players, fans, and business opportunities from the largest international tournament in the world to regional leagues across different continents. Furthermore, the global impact the tournament will have on cultural exchange will also be momentous. This is clear, as more fans and teams can engage in cultural exchanges, whether it is learning new languages or becoming more culturally aware. On this front, it is possible this tournament can further contribute to the sport transcending borders and cultures, creating numerous opportunities in business and sport.

showing the limits of globalization.

While the argument can be made this current edition of the FIFA World Cup maintains the idea of football transcending borders and cultures, ultimately, the controversies relating to mobility cannot be ignored.  Visa restrictions have prevented fans from attending the tournament and created logistical quagmires for participating teams, while the securitization of immigration created an environment of anxiety and unease among fans and players alike. The implementation of such immigration controls during a tournament that unites people from different backgrounds and cultures exposes the limits of globalization and can set a new precedent for mobility when it comes to future editions if the World Cup. Therefore, the politicization of mobility by the US as a host nation in this year’s World Cup exposes how states can use immigration controls such as visas and security checks to project soft power and protect its own interests, which can damage its reputation as a potential host nation for global sports in the long run.

Allam, Maha. 2026. “How the 2026 World Cup’s Cross-Border Security Environment Is Being Managed.” Futureuae. June 24, 2026. https://futureuae.com/en-US/Mainpage/Item/11087/an-exceptional-edition-how-the-2026-world-cups-cross-border-security-environment-is-being-managed.

Amnesty International. 2026. “Tell FIFA & World Cup Hosts: No Fear, No Crackdowns, No Excuses.” Amnesty International. May 27, 2026. https://www.amnesty.org/en/petition/tell-fifa-world-cup-hosts-no-fear-no-crackdowns-no-excuses/.

Andre, Rich, and Juan Avilez. 2026. “World Cup Immigration Questions Answered: ICE, Visa Denials, and Iran – American Immigration Council.” American Immigration Council. June 11, 2026. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/blog/world-cup-ice-visas-iran/.

Betti, Elena. 2026. “The 2026 World Cup Is Being Decided at Passport Control, Not on the Pitch.” WIRED Middle East. June 10, 2026. https://www.wired.me/story/the-2026-world-cup-is-being-decided-at-passport-control-not-on-the-pitch.

Cometta, Stan. 2026. “FIFA World Cup 2026: A New Era for Global Football – AISTS.” AISTS. June 5, 2026. https://aists.org/fifa-world-cup-2026-a-new-era-for-global-football/.

H., Pablo. 2006. “Globalization, Football and Goals.” World Bank Blogs. April 14, 2006. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/psd/globalization-football-and-goals.

Hand, Kevin, and The Associated Press. 2026. “Iran Footballers Describe How War with US-Israel Affects Their World Cup.” Al Jazeera. June 4, 2026. https://www.aljazeera.com/sports/2026/6/4/iran-footballers-describe-how-war-with-us-israel-affects-their-world-cup.

Insikt Group. 2026. “Threats to the 2026 FIFA World Cup.” Recordedfuture.com. June 4, 2026. https://www.recordedfuture.com/research/2026-fifa-world-cup-threats.

Martínez-Beltrán, Sergio . 2026. “A Warm World Cup Welcome? U.S. Immigration Policies Have Chilling Effect.” NPR. June 9, 2026. https://www.npr.org/2026/06/09/nx-s1-5851634/immigration-policies-affect-fifa.

Onwumechili, Chuka. 2026. “A Football World Cup Is a Global Cultural Exchange. How Will That Work in Trump’s America?” Edited by Charl Blignaut. The Conversation, May. https://doi.org/10.64628/aaj.y3xpd9dsp.

Saleh, Malak. 2026a. “Locked out of the World Cup: A Year Marked by Barriers, Borders, and Broken Access.” WIRED Middle East. June 16, 2026. https://www.wired.me/story/locked-out-of-the-world-cup-a-year-marked-by-barriers-borders-and-broken-access.

———. 2026b. “Locked out of the World Cup: A Year Marked by Barriers, Borders, and Broken Access.” WIRED. June 18, 2026. https://www.wired.com/story/locked-out-world-cup-america-visas-fans/.

Shaw, Jack. 2026. “Is Globalization Performative or a Sustainable Business Model?” Sports Business Journal. January 12, 2026. https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2026/01/12/is-globalization-performative-or-a-sustainable-business-model/.

Vesely, Sophia. 2026. “Iran Moves World Cup Base amid Ongoing War with the U.S., Security Concerns.” SI. Sports Illustrated. May 24, 2026. https://www.si.com/soccer/iran-moves-world-cup-base-ongoing-war-us-security-concerns.

Vijaykumar, Ajit. 2026. “Which 2026 Fifa World Cup Countries Does Trump’s Travel Ban Impact?” The National. The National News. January 21, 2026. https://www.thenationalnews.com/sport/football/2026/01/21/which-2026-fifa-world-cup-countries-does-trumps-travel-ban-impact/.

Worden, Minky. 2026. “The World Is Worried about the World Cup.” Human Rights Watch. June 9, 2026. https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/06/09/the-world-is-worried-about-the-world-cup.