As pressure mounts to exclude the United States from international competitions, soccer emerges as the ultimate test of global legitimacy and soft power.
Global Affairs & Sports Politics | The Haitian Pulse Editorial Team | January 15, 2026
For decades, the United States has occupied a unique position in the global order—militarily dominant, economically influential, and culturally pervasive. Its leadership was often assumed rather than questioned. Yet recent developments suggest that this assumption is no longer universally accepted. Across diplomatic, political, and cultural arenas, a growing willingness to openly challenge U.S. actions is beginning to surface. One of the most striking arenas where this shift is now visible is international sport—particularly football.
Soccer is not just a game. It is the world’s most powerful unifying force outside of formal diplomacy. It crosses borders, cultures, and ideologies in ways that few institutions can. When disputes enter the realm of soccer, they signal something deeper than competition—they reflect changing perceptions of legitimacy, trust, and global standing.
In recent months, international media—including the BBC—have reported on a growing political conversation in parts of Europe questioning whether international sporting bodies should reassess the participation of the United States in global competitions, including the 2026 World Cup. It is essential to be precise: the BBC has not issued an editorial demanding the exclusion of the U.S. Rather, it has covered commentary and debate surrounding statements made by a small number of lawmakers who argue that sporting institutions should apply international norms consistently, regardless of a country’s power or status.
Several European parliamentarians have been quoted urging FIFA to “examine” U.S. eligibility in light of broader foreign-policy concerns. These calls remain fringe and have not translated into official policy proposals. Analysts, including those writing for major sports outlets, have repeatedly emphasized that any such exclusion is highly unlikely—particularly given that the United States is a host nation for the 2026 tournament.
Yet the importance of this moment does not lie in whether exclusion will occur. It lies in the fact that the conversation exists at all.
For most of the modern era, the idea that the United States could be publicly discussed as a candidate for sporting isolation would have been unthinkable. Sports organizations have historically been reluctant to challenge American participation, even amid controversy. That reluctance is now being tested—not because action is imminent, but because confidence in unquestioned American leadership is eroding.
Soccer is especially significant in this context. Unlike American football, basketball, or baseball—sports where U.S. cultural dominance is uncontested—soccer is governed and emotionally owned by the rest of the world. It is deeply embedded in Europe, Africa, Latin America, and the Global South. To be challenged in this arena is to be challenged in the most global cultural space that exists.
This debate cannot be separated from broader international reactions to recent U.S. foreign-policy positions and rhetoric, particularly under the leadership of Donald Trump. From aggressive posturing toward Venezuela, to provocative discourse surrounding Greenland, to a transactional approach to alliances, these actions have reshaped how allies and institutions interpret U.S. intentions. Whether one agrees or disagrees with these policies domestically is secondary; internationally, they are increasingly perceived as unilateral and dismissive of established norms.
Sport, by its nature, depends on collective consent. Participation is not guaranteed by power alone. It is sustained by trust, reciprocity, and shared rules. When lawmakers and commentators begin questioning whether a superpower still merits unchallenged inclusion, it suggests that soft power—the ability to influence through respect rather than force—is under strain.
For the American sports community, this carries serious implications. Soccer has been central to the United States’ effort to project inclusivity, global relevance, and cultural integration. Youth development, immigrant communities, and international legitimacy have all been tied to its growing presence in the sport. Even the suggestion of exclusion undermines that narrative and introduces uncertainty where confidence once prevailed.
For the rest of the world, including Haiti, this moment offers a valuable lesson. Power is not static. It must be maintained through credibility and alignment with shared values. When even global sport becomes a space for political accountability, it reflects a broader recalibration of how influence is earned and preserved.
The United States remains a global power. No serious analysis suggests otherwise. But the shift in discourse—where international institutions, politicians, and media feel emboldened to openly question its role—marks a subtle but meaningful change in the global balance.
Whether this debate fades or intensifies, its existence alone is telling. Soccer, the world’s common ground, has become a mirror reflecting a deeper truth: the era of unquestioned dominance is giving way to one of scrutiny, negotiation, and accountability.
And the world is watching closely.
Comments