The Qatar World Cup Controversy and the Cost of 6,500 Migrant Worker Deaths

The Qatar World Cup Controversy and the Cost of 6,500 Migrant Worker Deaths

On December 18, 2022, at Lusail Stadium in Qatar, the World Cup final was played between Argentina and France. After 90 minutes the score was 2-2, extra time ended 3-3, and Argentina won on penalties 4-2. Lionel Messi finally lifted the World Cup. The match, hailed by many as the greatest final in history, brought to a close a tournament that had been controversial from the moment it was awarded.

But the Qatar World Cup was much more than a sporting event. From the moment FIFA voted to give Qatar the hosting rights in 2010, the tournament was surrounded by controversies: a winter schedule, worker deaths, human rights, bribery allegations, alcohol bans, LGBT issues, almost every non-sporting controversy you can imagine. Total cost exceeded 220 billion dollars, making it the most expensive World Cup ever and also the most complicated.

How Qatar Got the Hosting Rights

On December 2, 2010, the FIFA Executive Committee voted in Zurich to award the 2018 and 2022 World Cups. Russia got 2018 and Qatar got 2022. The Qatar result shocked the world. Qatar covers only 11,500 square kilometers, has fewer than 3 million people, and average summer temperatures above 40 degrees Celsius. It is hardly a natural football venue.

Bribery allegations surfaced immediately. In 2015 the U.S. Department of Justice opened an investigation into FIFA corruption, leading to arrests of several senior officials including FIFA vice-president Jack Warner and CONMEBOL president Nicolas Leoz. Evidence showed that tens of millions of dollars had flowed through various channels to FIFA officials during Qatar's bid. Qatar denied any wrongdoing, and FIFA never withdrew the hosting rights.

The Disruption of a Winter Tournament

With summer temperatures often above 45 degrees Celsius, outdoor football in Qatar is impossible. In 2015 FIFA announced the 2022 World Cup would be played in November and December to avoid summer, the first winter World Cup in history.

The decision tore up the schedule of every major league worldwide. Europe's top five leagues had to pause for a month in November, with knock-on effects on sponsorship contracts, broadcast deals and player contracts. Many top players, with their rhythm broken, fell below their best, and Neymar, in particular, struggled to recover form after injury. These costs were not factored in when FIFA awarded the hosting rights.

The Controversy Over Migrant Worker Deaths

To build 8 modern stadiums and supporting infrastructure in the desert, Qatar imported some 2 million migrant workers from Bangladesh, India, Nepal, the Philippines and elsewhere from 2010 onward. They worked over 10 hours a day in 40-degree heat, lived in crowded camps and saw wages skimmed at multiple layers.

In 2021, the UK's Guardian reported that approximately 6,500 South Asian workers had died in Qatar in the decade from 2010 to 2020. Qatar denied a direct connection to the World Cup, attributing most deaths to natural causes. But international human rights groups and the International Trade Union Confederation pointed out that many of the deaths were linked to high-temperature labor, brutal management and a lack of medical care. Qatar eventually reformed parts of its labor law under international pressure, but the dead cannot be brought back. These numbers remain a permanent stain on the Qatar World Cup.

Human Rights and LGBT Controversies

Qatar runs on Islamic law; homosexuality is a criminal offense, with the maximum penalty death. Before the World Cup, many Western countries demanded that FIFA intervene to guarantee the safety of LGBT fans and players in Qatar. FIFA and Qatar signed a formal non-discrimination pledge, but implementation was watered down.

During the tournament, players from several European teams wanted to wear rainbow armbands to support LGBT rights and were threatened by FIFA with yellow cards. The German team, in their pre-match team photo, posed with hands over their mouths to protest the restrictions, prompting wide debate. Several fans were also stopped by Qatari security from entering stadiums for wearing rainbow T-shirts. The episodes drew accusations that the World Cup had compromised on human rights and that FIFA had sold its principles for commercial gain.

The Last-Minute Alcohol Ban

Before the tournament, FIFA and Qatar had agreed that beer could be sold in designated areas outside stadiums on match days, with main sponsor Budweiser one of the World Cup's chief backers. Just 48 hours before kickoff, the Qatari royal family suddenly announced that no alcohol could be sold outside any stadium. Budweiser took heavy losses and fans could not buy beer outside the venues as they had hoped.

Budweiser had already shipped hundreds of thousands of cases of beer to Qatar and ended up announcing all stock would be sent to the winning country to give away to fans for free. The reversal embarrassed sponsors and FIFA, but the Qatari royals did not mind; for them, religious principle trumped commercial contracts. Many people pointed to the episode as a microcosm of Qatar's character, where rules can be rewritten in a sentence.

The Astronomical Cost of Stadium Construction

Qatar spent about 220 billion dollars on the World Cup, the highest of any World Cup in history and more than the combined cost of every previous edition. Most of the money went into building 8 new stadiums, expanding the airport, building metro lines, new highways, hotels and resorts.

Qatar, with fewer than 3 million people, simply does not need most of those facilities after the World Cup. Several stadiums have already been partially dismantled, with parts donated to African countries. The new Lusail Stadium seats 80,000, but Qatar's national team has never drawn more than 20,000 to a home match. This resource mismatch has made Qatar a classic case for economists criticizing the World Cup hosting model.

A Redemptive Final

Despite the controversies, the final was a relatively perfect conclusion to the tournament. Messi finally won the World Cup that had eluded him throughout his career. Kylian Mbappe scored a hat-trick in defeat, and many media called it the greatest World Cup final ever.

The final was good enough that some fans were willing to forget the controversies for a moment. But after the match, the Qatari emir draped a traditional bisht over Messi for the trophy lift, an image that prompted new debate, since it bound the World Cup's most sacred moment to Qatar's political image. The detail reminded everyone that, from bidding to handover, the Qatar World Cup never escaped the shadow of politics.

What the Tournament Left FIFA to Reflect On

After the Qatar World Cup, FIFA has faced louder calls for reflection. Many former players and commentators have demanded that FIFA overhaul its bidding evaluation process to include human rights and worker protection as formal criteria. In 2025, Saudi Arabia's successful bid for the 2034 World Cup triggered renewed worries, since Saudi Arabia's human rights record is arguably worse than Qatar's.

The repeating script casts doubt on whether FIFA learned anything from Qatar. From Mussolini's Italy in 1934, to Videla's Argentina in 1978, to Putin's Russia in 2018, to Qatar in 2022, to Saudi Arabia in 2034, the World Cup increasingly tilts toward authoritarian regimes willing to spend lavishly. Whether the trend is a FIFA problem, or an inevitable feature of the World Cup's economic model, will be an inescapable question for football in the coming decades.