TEHRAN — The contradiction between sport’s stated mission to unite people and the reality of restricted access was laid bare last week when several members of Iran’s World Cup delegation were refused U.S. visas and could not attend the FIFA 2026 draw in Washington on December 5, 2026.

The episode prompted Iran’s Football Federation president, Mehdi Taj, to warn Tuesday that the national team must prepare substitute players in case further officials or athletes are barred from travel.

Taj said the refusals were linked to where some players and officials had served their compulsory military service, specifically those who served under the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps, an affiliation Washington regards as problematic. He singled out assistant coach Saeed Elhuyi as one of the delegation members whose visa was rejected for that reason. Taj said the federation has been forced to identify backups so the team can function even if more people are denied entry.

The visa disputes come against the backdrop of U.S. security measures. In June, President Donald Trump signed an executive order restricting entry for nationals of a dozen countries on security grounds; Iran is included on that list. The order formally allows exemptions for athletes and coaching staff travelling to global events such as the World Cup and the 2028 Olympics, but Taj said those exemptions were not being honored in practice. He told FIFA president Gianni Infantino that the issue had been politicized and called on FIFA to take a clear stand against such discriminatory treatment.

The World Cup draw ceremony itself heightened the discord. The presentation of an inaugural FIFA "Peace Prize" to Trump at a dazzling, celebrity-filled event in Washington solidified a view of a governing organization that values spectacle and political connections more than unbiased management. Media and commentators quickly highlighted the inconsistency: what Infantino describes as football's obligation to unity appeared, at least in optics, as a public endorsement of partisan authority. Media coverage described the ceremony as “cringe,” “bizarre,” and a moment when FIFA’s claims to political neutrality rang hollow. 

The irony is amplified by repeated public statements from FIFA’s leadership about sport’s transcendent power. Gianni Infantino has, in public fora repeatedly, advanced a simple — and appealing — thesis: football unites. “We are saying football unites the world,” he said addressing the FIFA Congress in Bangkok in 2024, adding that “uniting this world is our responsibility; it is our answer to the aggression, our answer to the hate, our answer to the war.” 

Those claims now sit in uncomfortable contrast to the realities experienced by Iranians. On one side, FIFA’s president promises that football can create shared human moments; on the other, a host state’s visa policies — rooted in broader political tensions — determine who may enter the room. The contradiction is not abstract. It deprives teams of their designated representatives, disrupts preparation, and sends a message that global football platforms are not equally accessible.

And for Iran, this issue is not limited to football only. Earlier in the year, the U.S. also denied visas to Iran’s national polo team, preventing them from competing in the 2025 FIP Arena Polo World Championship in Virginia despite having qualified in May. Similar access problems have affected athletes across multiple disciplines, whether through outright rejections, lengthy delays, or administrative obstacles tied to nationality. For sure, when entire teams or officials are prevented from attending, the international character of competitions is fundamentally compromised.
It may be argued that awarding a prize or staging a ceremony is not necessarily a political act. But when such gestures are staged in environments saturated with political symbolism and accompanied by practical exclusions that fall along political lines, the aggregate message is clear: access to the global sporting stage can be contingent on state policy and political affiliation.

If international sport is to live up to its unifying rhetoric, governing bodies and host states must translate words into enforceable practice. Without clear guarantees and accountability, the claim that “sport unites” will remain aspirational. For the athletes and officials left on the sidelines, the promise of a shared global experience will feel, at best, only partially kept.