Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

It is a comical oddity that those working in communications are often the worst communicators of all – and journalists may be the worst among them. When I consider MENA governments generally, I see a clear lack of foresight in communication that others often miss. Government information departments nearly always operate on a linear model of message delivery, failing to grasp that communication must be a two-way street.

In the summer of 2016, I waited for hours in line at the Syrian embassy in Beirut to submit an application for a journalist visa to enter Syria. The lack of a reply, I suppose, is an answer in itself – but it underscores my broader point: communication is not a dark art, yet most governments in the region get it spectacularly wrong, especially in their dealings with foreign journalists.

To date, the limited influence Rabat once had with foreign journalists – up until around 2010, when attitudes distinctly shifted – has dwindled to practically nothing. Many might argue this is preferable: why engage with journalists if it means allowing them into Morocco to write negative stories?

I would beg to differ. Hardly a week passes without a negative story about Morocco – always written by a journalist based in Europe – hitting the stands, feeding the world’s appetite for critical reporting on the kingdom, especially in France. It is not simply that having fewer foreign correspondents in Morocco lends credibility to more sensational, sloppy reporting from newsroom stars in Paris. It also means nuanced subjects that once entered the media ecosystem now get left by the wayside.

So imagine my sympathy for Morocco’s latest dilemma: the struggle to attract Anglo-Saxon journalists to write about Western Sahara. This challenge was highlighted in a recent opinion article  featuring Rabat’s doyen of the international media scene, Dr. Yasmine Hasnaoui. What the author – and likely Dr. Hasnaoui herself – may not realize is the decline in English-speaking journalists in Morocco and how Rabat’s policies are directly responsible for this new media landscape.

With almost no British or American correspondents based in Morocco, how could an obscure subject like the Sahara ever see the light of day in Europe’s press? In 2007, when I arrived in Morocco, there were 155 foreign journalists accredited by the Ministry of Communication, many in the prime of their careers. Today, there are around 70, most of them younger and less established.

Rabat’s decision-makers would have you believe the world has changed and that this shift has nothing to do with them – that it reflects a new trend in London, Paris, and Washington side-lining foreign correspondents. But that is simply untrue. The real reason is that Rabat itself has, since around 2010, made it increasingly difficult for foreign correspondents to obtain accreditation. The flawed logic behind this is a kind of twisted arithmetic: the risk of negative coverage – or even the balanced scrutiny that foreign journalists bring to issues that could otherwise spiral out of control – outweighs the benefits of their presence, which include holding the government accountable for governance failures and human rights scandals.

But on major issues, like how Western Sahara is reported and debated, Rabat has clearly miscalculated. The Sahara receives no meaningful coverage because the very people in the Anglo-Saxon world who could have written about it – seasoned foreign journalists once based in Rabat – have all been run out of town. The irony is beguiling: Rabat’s elites now lament the lack of coverage on one of their most cherished issues, even though not a single major U.S. or U.K. newspaper has had a correspondent, freelance or otherwise, based in Rabat since around 2011.

Yet negative press continues to flow from London, Paris, and Washington – whether stories about the king’s private life, animal cruelty, protesters beaten in custody, or a missing French national. There are no longer journalists in Morocco to cover these stories with the objectivity and diligence needed for the country to present itself and its achievements in the proper light. The 2023 hit piece on the king by The Economist, delving into the private life of Mohammed VI, would likely never have been commissioned if Morocco weren’t shrouded in such mystery and enigma – a direct result of stifling foreign journalists’ ability to work in the country in the first place.

So what message is being sent? At best, there is no message at all. Those who are interested are left waiting and drawing their own conclusions – much like my own application for a Moroccan press card, submitted in Rabat last October, which is still pending.

With the World Cup coming to Morocco, this may be the perfect moment to adopt a more thoughtful approach to media relations and turn the page on this outdated method of treating foreign journalists like enemies of the state. Managed well, they can be your greatest asset – not only as communicators who can spark informed debate on issues like Western Sahara, but as ambassadors who promote the country to foreign investors.

For the past 15 years, I have watched Morocco fall on its own sword, getting this equation spectacularly wrong and paying a heavy price for its misjudgement. It is time to turn the page, leave the Assad school of public relations behind, and recognize that making Rabat a hub for foreign journalists covering North Africa – or even the continent – can only benefit Morocco. Consider Dubai and Beirut: both are media hubs that enjoy positive returns from journalists who are often more agreeable when reporting on their host country than on its neighbours.

Can Morocco really move forward with a Herculean PR opportunity like the World Cup while clinging to such an antiquated and flawed approach to handling the press? With so much at stake, surely Moroccans deserve better.

Segue nostro Telegram.

Pronti via e viene già da ridere! Il sorteggio dei Mondiali di calcio, svoltosi il 5 dicembre 2025 a Washington durante il quale il presidente della FIFA Gianni Infantino ha insignito il suo amico Donald Trump di un premio per la pace istituto dalla FIFA stessa, è stato tra i più ridicolmente pilotati di tutta la storia del calcio planetario, con l’evidente vantaggio tributato alle squadre probabilmente più forti e titolate per la vittoria finale, ma altresì rappresentative delle nazioni che più generosamente sostengono economicamente la FIFA, ovvero Argentina, Spagna, Francia e Inghilterra, le quali non dovranno mai incontrarsi tra loro prima delle eventuali semifinali.

È altresì vero che queste quattro squadre e i celebrati campioni che vi militano garantiscono diritti televisivi, sponsor e pubblicità correlate di considerevole portata, insomma per certi aspetti pesa più il sostegno indiretto fornito da queste squadre piuttosto che il finanziamento diretto garantito dalle rispettive federazioni nazionali.

Inoltre è del tutto improbabile che le esordienti Giordania, Capo Verde, Curaçao e Uzbekistan, ora allenata dal già campione del mondo nel 2006 e Pallone d’Oro italiano Fabio Cannavaro, per altro la sola squadra dello spazio ex – sovietico presente, perdurando l’assurda estromissione di Russia e Bielorussia, raggiungano le semifinali, tuttavia, se accadesse, l’evento sarebbe dal punto di vista sportivo di straordinaria portata, ma per la FIFA rappresenterebbe una colossale catastrofe economica. Insomma, il presidente Gianni Infantino, per far quadrare i conti, deve evitare che le squadre blasonate escano prematuramente dalla competizione, danneggiando gravemente gli introiti programmati e necessari per tenere in piedi il fantasmagorico e debordante spettacolo del “soccer” mondiale, da lui esteso in questa edizione a ben quarantotto partecipanti, ovvero un quarto delle nazionali della terra, una vocazione universalistica, quanto esageratamente mastodontica, per di più con dodici gironi da quattro squadre in cui ragionevolmente si sarebbero dovute ammettere al turno successivo, per rendere combattuti e credibili i primi settantadue incontri, solo le prime classificate e un terzo delle seconde, ovvero sedici squadre, invece per moltiplicare le partire e regalare a quasi tutte le partecipanti un’effimera gloria, il passaggio alla fase ad eliminazione diretta vedrà coinvolte tutte le prime e seconde e ben otto delle dodici terze classificate, portando le gare da disputarsi allo spropositato numero di centoquattro, giocate quasi nella loro totalità negli Stati Uniti, pochi incontri si svolgeranno infatti sul suolo canadese e in quello messicano, sebbene ufficialmente tutte e tre le nazioni siano co – organizzatrici del mondiale di calcio.

Tutto questo trentadue anni dopo l’edizione statunitense del 1994, allora con stadi quasi deserti, trovandosi pochi volonterosi disposti ad andare in un giorno lavorativo di giugno e di luglio a mezzogiorno, orario utile per garantire la trasmissione in prima serata in Europa, in stadi allora quasi tutti esposti alla canicola estiva e non con la totalità dei posti coperti come avviene oggi, questa volta probabilmente ci sarà una maggiore attenzione per il “soccer”, sebbene gli sport che conquistano tra gli statunitensi più consensi, tanto tra i bianchi, quanto tra gli afro – americani, restino il baseball, il football americano e la pallacanestro, mentre il calcio appassiona enormemente solo la crescente comunità latino – americana, la quale è chiamata a garantire l’affluenza di pubblico necessaria per gremire le gradinate, correlato oggi obbligatorio dello spettacolo mediatico, anche perché da molte nazioni africane, sudamericane e islamiche, in primis l’Iran, già il presidente Donald Trump ha chiarito che impedirà categoricamente l’afflusso di turisti e tifosi.

È risaputo che l’amicizia e il connubio tra Donald Trump e Gianni Infantino trascenda di molto le vicende sportive e a dimostrazione di quanto il presidente statunitense riconosca un valore politico al calcio, il presidente della FIFA ha presenziato tanto alla sottoscrizione degli Accordi di Abramo nel 2020, così coma nell’autunno 2025 a Sharm El-Sheik alla firma per il cessate il fuoco a Gaza.

Proprio in ragione di tale amicizia e dell’attenta gestione del sorteggio delle partite, non sappiamo se l’incontro in calendario il 26 giugno 2026 a Seattle tra Egitto e Iran sia stato una pura casualità o un’altra divertente manipolazione orchestrata da Gianni Infantino su richiesta dell’amico Donald Trump, nel caso sarebbe uno straordinario esempio di pirotecnico doppiogiochismo della FIFA, la lobby genderista planetaria ha infatti preteso l’invenzione per la prima volta nella storia della competizione calcistica del “Pride Match” da celebrarsi ufficialmente nell’ambito della Coppa del Mondo, ovvero bandiere arcobaleno da sventolarsi prima, durante e dopo la partita, bandiere oramai planetariamente assurte a simbolo dell’ideologia genderista, con buona pace del professore che aveva disegnato questa bandiera con tutt’altre finalità per la prima Marcia della Pace Perugia – Assisi del 1961, richiamandosi all’arcobaleno, segno di ricomposizione dell’amicizia tra il Creatore e il creato nelle celebri pagine bibliche dedicate al diluvio universale e al suo epilogo.

La disponibilità di Infantino a tale evento pare altresì incredibile, anche in ragione del pasticcio della fascia da capitano arcobaleno promossa da alcune nazionali occidentali nell’edizione qatarina del 2022, richiesta avanzata per le stesse ragioni propagandistiche del genderismo mondiale e poi finita malamente, con la FIFA costretta a vietarla, con minaccia di sospensione delle partite da parte degli organizzatori qatarini e con l’incredulo stupore per tutta la vicenda dello stesso sultano Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani.

La fascia da capitano con sopra disegnato un numero “1” bianco è un’invenzione guarda caso olandese, volta a definire ogni forma d’amore riconducibile, forse neppure troppo rispettosamente, a una sola, attraverso una dubbia omologazione di qualsiasi orientamento, da cui il nome “OneLove”. La proposta aveva trovato il consenso delle sole e solite nazioni occidentali: Inghilterra, Galles, Belgio, Danimarca, Germania, Olanda e Svizzera, con la consueta propaganda correlata, volta a confondere le pur libere e indiscutibili scelte sessuali dei singoli con i diritti umani, i quali, civili e sociali, son tutt’altro dalla proclamazione sfacciatamente pubblica dei personali orientamenti amorosi. A fronte della disposizione della FIFA di immediata ammonizione dei capitani, ancora prima dell’inizio delle partite, le nazionali coinvolte hanno soprasseduto, con la sola Germania raccoltasi a centrocampo in una fotografia pre – partita con la mano sulla bocca in segno di protesta contro la scelta della FIFA.

L’incredibile situazione creatasi per la prossima edizione dei mondiali negli Stati Uniti nasce dalla compromissione, sotto la presidenza di Joe Biden, tra i democratici statunitensi e il comitato organizzatore locale di Seattle, il quale, su pressione degli attivisti gender locali e internazionali, ha promosso il “Pride Match”, chiedendo di ospitarlo nella loro città il 26 giugno 2026 in concomitanza a con il weekend del 27 e 28 giugno 2026, che vedrà dispiegarsi per la città un mega Pride planetario, insomma la partita di calcio avrebbe dovuto, nelle intenzioni dei proponenti, essere il volano globale e pubblicitario per l’organizzazione dell’evento genderista dei due giorni successivi.

Al riguardo le federazioni calcistiche di Egitto e Iran hanno protestato vivacemente contro la FIFA e reputano del tutto inopportuna e deprecabile la proposta del “Pride Match”, ovviamente chiarendo che non se ne parla proprio di inscenare manifestazioni genderiste prima, dopo e durante la partita, così come al contempo in egual modo i giocatori e i tecnici delle due squadre non parteciperanno a nessuna manifestazione associabile a forme di sostegno alla due giorni genderista promossa dalla città capitale dello stato di Washington, stretta tra l’omonimo lago e l’oceano Pacifico.

Mehdi Taj, presidente della Federcalcio iraniana, ha chiarito che tanto gli iraniani, quanto gli egiziani da loro consultati, non si presteranno a una strumentalizzazione extra – calcistica del tutto irragionevole, sottolineando per altro con molte ragioni, come la proposta non abbia un carattere di universalità, ma di palese parzialità, finanche discriminatoria di tutte e di tutti coloro che nel mondo non si riconoscano nei dogmi genderisti.

Ovviamente è di tutt’altro avviso il portavoce del “Pride Match Advisory Committee”, tal Eric Wahl, il quale, travalicando e di molto le già pur fragili ragioni dell’impropria frammistione di una partita di calcio con la battaglia politico – culturale della minoranza da lui rappresentata, ha ribadito al contrario che simboli e bandiere genderiste debbano sventolare quel giorno anche e soprattutto contro arabi e persiani, ritenuti da lui nemici e avversari di tale ideologia e dunque, in modo molto intollerante e irrispettoso dell’altrui pensiero, fermamente e anche un po’ ferocemente condannati tanto politicamente, quanto culturalmente.

La Federcalcio egiziana ha dunque ulteriormente risposto, a fronte delle titubanze della FIFA, indirizzando alla stessa una lettera, anche in questo caso condivisa dai loro omologhi iraniani, in cui rifiuta categoricamente di svolgere qualsiasi attività legata al sostegno dell’omosessualità e di altre svariate scelte o pratiche sessuali durante la partita tra le due nazionali. Gli egiziani hanno altresì sottolineato che per mantenere lo spirito di unità e pace proprio dello sport e del calcio sia necessario evitare di includere attività collaterali che potrebbero provocare sensibilità culturali e religiose tra i tifosi presenti provenienti da entrambe le nazioni e tra gli spettatori che assistono in televisione alla partita, soprattutto perché tali attività sono culturalmente e religiosamente incompatibili con la storia e la cultura tanto dell’Egitto, quanto dell’Iran.

Insomma la carnevalata del “Pride Match” ha poco a che vedere con i diritti e molto purtroppo con la propaganda liberal e genderista contro Russia, Cina, mondo islamico, Sud Globale e in ultima analisi contro gli stessi statunitensi vicini all’attuale presidente Donald Trump tutti ostili alla violenza prevaricatrice dell’ideologia genderista, l’auspicio dunque è che non solo questa prima edizione non venga celebrata, ma anche e soprattutto che il generale planetario boicottaggio di questa assurda coloritura di una partita di calcio convinca la FIFA a espungere dalle edizioni future della competizione un’iniziativa tanto divisiva, quanto arrogantemente discriminatoria di tutte e tutti coloro che non condividono i presupposti ideologici della stessa.

Segue nostro Telegram.

Cresce l’attesa per la formazione dei gironi dei mondiali di calcio della prossima estate, il 5 dicembre 2025 al Kennedy Center di Washington, molto probabilmente alla presenza di Donald Trump, conosceremo contro chi giocheranno la Germania e il Brasile, così come le esordienti la caraibica Curaçao allenata dall’esperto Dick Advocaat, Capo Verde, Uzbekistan e Giordania, con una bandiera identica a quella palestinese, giusto con una piccola stella eptagrammatica in più in campo rosso, omaggio alla prima Sura coranica. Non ci sarà l’Italia, che deve affidare ai prossimi spareggi marzolini la speranza di non inanellare la terza miserevole esclusione consecutiva dalla competizione, non ci sarà la Russia vittima delle inopinate sanzioni internazionali in campo sportivo.

Il mondiale di calcio, che catalizzerà l’attenzione mediatica planetaria dall’11 giugno al 19 luglio 2026, è come sempre anche un avvenimento politico, non a caso Trump cerca di dimostrare che la compartecipazione organizzativa canadese e messicana sia del tutto marginale, anzi, rischia di trasformarsi in un’ulteriore occasione per la Casa Bianca di paventare la necessità di un’associazione / annessione di queste nazioni all’ingombrante vicino.

Gianni Infantino, per garantire ai sauditi l’edizione 2034 dei mondiali, ha inventato una pirotecnica edizione tricontinentale ed esanazionale per il 2030. È infatti il centenario della prima edizione svoltasi in Uruguay, vincitore nel 1924 e nel 1928 del titolo olimpico del torneo di calcio, dunque squadra titolata a vantare allora un primato ritenuto fondamentale dal fondatore Jules Rimet per promuovere una competizione allora guardata con generale disinteresse dalle nazionali europee, tanto che se nove sono le squadre partecipanti del continente americano, solo quattro vengono da oltre oceano Francia, Romania, Belgio e Regno di Jugoslavia, declinato l’invito dalle più forti del continente: Austria, Ungheria e Cecoslovacchia, sdegnosamente insuperbite e indisponibili a partecipare le britanniche Inghilterra e Scozia, in quella come nelle due edizioni successive.

Ecco allora che il presidente della FIFA ha scelto di disputare tre partite, una per nazione, in Uruguay, Argentina, nel 1930 finalista perdente contro gli uruguagi, come li chiamava il grande giornalista sportivo italiano Gianni Brera, e infine Paraguay, tanto per allargare i beneficiati. Dopo questi tre incontri tutti si trasferiranno in prossimità delle colonne d’Ercole, in Marocco, Spagna e Portogallo per tutte le altre partite.

Dunque l’Arabia Saudita sarà assoluta protagonista dell’edizione 2034, tuttavia quell’anno è anche l’anniversario del centenario non solo della prima partecipazione italiana, ma anche della prima vittoria azzurra in un mondiale, certo favorita dall’intraprendenza di Benito Mussolini, allora capo del governo, il quale non solo ha fortissimamente voluto la competizione in Italia, per altro il primo Mondiale giocato in Europa, ma ha anche fattivamente supportato i ragazzi di Vittorio Pozzo, intrattenendosi a lungo a Milano con l’arbitro svedese Ivan Eklind, allora ventottenne, la sera prima della semifinale, il quale con l’aiuto della FIFA arbitrerà non solo quel delicato incontro con i fortissimi austriaci, ma anche – fatto ma più ripetutosi e irripetibile – la finale una settimana dopo il 10 giugno 1934 contro i cecoslovacchi, in entrambe i casi con generosa amicizia verso la gagliardia agonistica degli azzurri.

Sarebbe dunque possibile e opportuno che l’Italia, in ragione di ciò, chiedesse al presidente della FIFA Gianni Infantino e al sovrano saudita Mohammad bin Salman di poter essere co – organizzatrice dell’evento, con una sola, unica partita, quella di apertura dei mondiali.

Ancora più straordinario sarebbe far convergere nello stesso girone insieme all’Italia, finalmente qualificata automaticamente come co – organizzatrice, anche gli Stati Uniti, che hanno dato vita nel pomeriggio di domenica 27 maggio 1934 all’esordio degli azzurri ai mondiali presso lo stadio del Partito Nazionale Fascista di Roma, oggi Flaminio e in fase di ristrutturazione, dopo il rinnovo della struttura in occasione delle Olimpiadi di Roma 1960, realizzato nel 1957/58 da Antonio Nervi su progetto del padre Pier Luigi Nervi, per diventare lo stadio ospitante le partite interne dei biancocelesti della Lazio.

Lo stadio nasce come Nazionale per celebrare il 50° dell’Unità d’Italia su progetto di Marcello Piacentini, non lontano da quel ponte Milvio passato alla storia per la battaglia tra Costantino e Massenzio del 312 dopo Cristo, ristrutturato da papa Colonna, eletto al Concilio di Costanza come Martino V e abbattuto dalla Repubblica Romana nel 1849 per provare a salvare l’Urbe dall’aggressione francese, quindi ricostruito l’anno seguente. Lo stadio è ampiamente rimodernato nel 1927/28 e l’ingresso arricchito di quattro semicolonne sormontate da imponenti gruppi bronzei realizzati nel luglio 1929 dallo scultore Amleto Cataldi raffiguranti la Corsa, la Lotta, il Pugilato e il Calcio, oggi collocati nei giardini del Villaggio Olimpico, anche in questo caso sarebbe pregevole ricollocare almeno il bronzo dedicato al calcio dentro il nuovo Flaminio in fase di ristrutturazione e che sarebbe ragionevole intitolarlo a Vittorio Pozzo, il solo allenatore due volte campione del mondo in tutta la storia del calcio.

Quella domenica del 1934 gli statunitensi sono sconfitti 7 a 1, dopo aver battuto 4 a 2 tre giorni prima nello stesso stadio i messicani, in un incredibile spareggio volutamente giocato dalle due formazioni sul suolo italiano, per i giocatori a stelle e strisce a segno tutte e cinque le volte l’italo – americano Aldo Teo “Buff” Donelli, nato in Pennsylvania nel 1907, figlio di immigrati italiani.

Al Flaminio quel caldo pomeriggio scendono in campo, di fronte a venticinquemila appassionati sostenitori, il portiere Combi, il terzino Virginio Rosetta alla sua cinquantaduesima e ultima partita con l’Italia e senza il compagno juventino di reparto Umberto Caligaris, a cui è preferito l’interista Allemandi. Caligaris, pur tra i convocati, non scenderà mai in campo nella Coppa del Mondo, mortificato nel dover chiudere l’esperienza azzurra con cinquantanove presenze in nazionale, che saranno superate solo nel 1971 da un altro storico terzino e capitato azzurro Giacinto Facchetti. In mediana Pizziolo, il granitico argentino Luisito Monti già finalista nel 1930 e Bertolini, in attacco l’ala destra laziale e brasiliana di San Paolo Anfilogino Guarisi alla sua ultima presenza azzurra, Meazza, Schiavio, Giovanni Ferrari e l’argentino Orsi, ovviamente i sudamericani son tutti oriundi con effettivi antenati italici. Per gli azzurri realizzano una tripletta Angelo Schiavio, bolognese per nascita e maglia, una doppietta lo juventino Raimundo Orsi, quindi uno Ferrari e allo scadere il settimo sigillo è del milanese Giuseppe, detto Peppin, Meazza.

L’arbitro belga Louis Baert aiuta gli azzurri nei quarti di finale il 31 maggio a Firenze contro gli spagnoli, infatti sebbene il grande portiere madridista Ricardo Zamora venga impedito nella parata da Schiavio, il quale gli frana addosso, favorendo il realizzatore Ferrari, viene infatti concesso il pareggio 1 a 1 che inchioda il risultato. Sette spagnoli sono infortunati e non giocheranno nella ripetizione del giorno seguente 1° giugno, ma anche qualche italiano è acciaccato, Meazza è uscito fasciato e in barella, ma sarà in campo, Ferrari e Schiavio anch’essi pesantemente colpiti lasciano il posto al nizzardo Borel e al porteño Demaria, Pizziolo, che gioca nella Fiorentina, davanti al suo pubblico cade, dopo essere stato colpito, dolorante per la rottura dei legamenti del ginocchio sinistro e si vede costretto a terminare il Mondiale. Il giorno dopo viene richiamato l’arbitro della partita con gli statunitensi, lo svizzero René Mercet, il quale di reti ne annulla due presumibilmente valide degli spagnoli e reputa regolare invece la rete del redivivo Meazza, il quale per arrivare più in alto s’invola facendo “ponte” sulle spalle di Guaita e lasciando senza parole il povero portiere del Barcellona Joan Nogues.

La semifinale è vinta 1 a 0 a San Siro contro gli austriaci, il fortissimo centravanti Matthias Sindelar viene così maschiamente controllato da Monti da finire in ospedale, presso cui conosce la maestra milanese Camilla Castagnola, s’innamorano e si sposeranno, la rete è di Guaita, favorita dall’impeto di Meazza che travolge preventivamente il portiere del Floridsdorfer Peter Platzer.

Il 10 giugno di nuovo a Roma, rispetto alla formazione dell’esordio con gli statunitensi, scendono in campo come da alcune partite il terzino Eraldo Monzeglio al posto di Rosetta, il romano e romanista Attilio Ferraris per il pescarese Pizziolo, l’ala romanista e argentina Enrique Guaita, nato non lontano da Buenos Aires, là dove la Pampa e la Patagonia si incontrano, al posto di Guarisi, sugli spalti assiepati in ogni ordine di fila ben cinquantacinquemila entusiastici tifosi, in tribuna lo stesso Benito Mussolini, il quale per dare il buon esempio ha comprato il biglietto, con lui molti membri del governo fascista. La partita è combattuta e al contempo equilibrata, solo a venti minuti dal termine dei tempi regolamentari Puč dello Slavia Praga insacca una rete che fa presagire il peggio, tuttavia l’impetuosa risposta italiana è coronata dal pareggio dieci minuti dopo di Orsi, sono così d’obbligo i tempi supplementari e al quinto minuto di questi il ventottenne Schiavio, sigla alla sua ultima partita in azzurro il definitivo 2 a 1, il quale sancisce la trionfale vittoria e il primo titolo mondiale per l’Italia, per la gioia di tutti gli sportivi e dei suoi compagni di squadra, a partire dal capitano ed esperto portiere Gianpiero Combi, anche lui all’ultima apparizione, mentre la voce di Nicolò Carosio porta in tutte le piazze d’Italia il racconto dell’epica impresa.

Insomma se l’edizione 2026 è promossa da Stati Uniti – Messico – Canada, quella 2030 da Uruguay – Argentina – Paraguay – Marocco – Spagna – Portogallo, è vivo auspicio che l’edizione 2034 possa essere ricordata come l’edizione Italia  – Arabia Saudita.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

When a Chaldean Christian friend got Yemen TV to recently interview me here and here regarding the hiding they are giving Israel, my mind kept drifting to English football players David Beckham, Matt LeTissier, Eric Cantona, Gary Lineker and Mo Salah rather than on simply praising Yemen’s practical efforts to end the Gaza turkey shoot.

I confess to having a soft spot for Becks, not because of his football prowess but because Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells, the two young girls murdered at Soham, both wore his replica Manchester United shirts, when they were murdered. The key thing, to me at least, is two two angels both wore the same shirt and both no doubt had an innocent schoolgirl crush on him which was their right, and that of every other school girl and school boy.

Beckham is now yesterday’s god, replaced by Liverpool’s Mo Salah and a galaxy of others, who need not detain us except to say that some of them joined in when Salah berated UEFA for not condemning the murder of Solomein Obeid, the Palestinian Pelé, whom the Israelis deliberately cut down as he lined up for food handouts from their agents. Although I had never seen Obeid play, to be favourably compared to Pelé is, perhaps, the greatest honour any player could be given, especially for a player reduced to begging for alms for his children from NATO psychopaths.

But that is precisely why Obeid (and Mohammed Shaalan, one of Palestine’s best basketball players, and star athlete Allam Abdullah Al-Amour) was murdered and why former football greats like Cantona and Lineker, who was banished from the BBC’s main football programme, saluted him. Like those Soham girls, they too retain a child-like respect for the beautiful game and those who excel at it in the most horrible of circumstances. And all credit to them for that.

But that is a garland Israel has never claimed because, even before independence, they were slaughtering Palestinian athletes, including champion Jordanian weight lifter Nader Afouri, whom they relentlessly tortured from 1967 to 1980, until they left him deaf, blind and incontinent.

Although Jews formerly excelled in all sports, Israel’s earlier Zionists regarded it as a waste of time that could be better employed in tilling their stolen land and putting undesirables like Obeid, Shaalan, Al-Amour and Afouri six feet under, while their allies overseas helped to muzzle Salah, Lineker and other stray dogs howling in the wilderness.

Although we formerly looked at the disproportionate punishment Russia and Belarus still receive in the international sporting arena, the Indian subcontinent’s incarceration of star cricketer Imran Khan at the hands of Pakistani gangsters best exemplifies this malaise. Whereas England has football stars, the Indian subcontinent has cricketing gods and few were held in higher esteem than Imran Khan, who brought Pakistan unprecedented glory when he captained their national cricket team.

But, though Khan may well have been a cricketing god, cricket in the Indian sub-continent is controlled by the same old cliques that have been in place since colonial times and those cliques are just a Bollywood version of the fossils who control English, European and world soccer, basketball, weight-lifting and athletics. They care no more about the Palestinian Pelé or the Pakistani Don Bradman than do the gangsters who tortured and murdered Obeid, Shaalan, Al-Amour. Afouri and thousands like them and they would have no problem slapping Salah down like they did Lineker and Le Tissier.

Israel’s Middle Eastern policy and the role martyrs like Obeid, Shaalan, Al-Amour and Afouri play in it is quite simple. It is to show those they conquer that they should abandon all hope and that their ummah and their gods are both as powerless against mighty Israel as Afouri was when he was finally released.

Although Salah is still motoring, we have to understand the constraints he and his fellow stars labour under. Not only do they have to work within the considerable training and other constraints their sport places upon them but their governing bodies, UEFA in Salah’s case and the BBC and other NATO outlets in the case of Lineker and Le Tissier, severely constrict their capacity for independent humanitarian action. Condemn Putin and Belarusian gymnasts to your heart’s content but question Israel’s murder of Obeid, Shaalan, Al-Amour and Afouri, and expect the fires of hell to consume you.

Although NATO apologists could argue that U2 and Madonna have recently come out in defence of the Palestinians, it has to be said that those fossils used every single Israeli trope to mitigate the war crimes of the Zionist state. It would have been better if they had said nothing.

But that could not happen as their assigned role is to muddy the waters and to form a dyke against the outrage young American students have expressed against these ongoing war crimes not only against Palestinian sports heroes but against Palestinian kids, who would love a chance to cheer on one of their own without having to get a bullet through the head for their efforts.

Mossad and MI6 are, of course, aware of all these undercurrents and U2 and Madonna are not the only cards they have recently played to deflect this swell of criticism. The BBC has been busy highlighting racist taunts in English football matches and some tree somewhere being cut down, as if petty taunts and petty vandalism are more newsworthy than the Stalingrad on steroids that is Gaza.

And, though Iran is right to blast Ugandan Christian Zionist jurist Julia Sebutinde’s ICJ pronouncements on Gaza, more to the point in the context of UEFA and Pakistani cricket is who puts ignoramuses like her into such pivotal positions and why are the rest of us, our tin gods like Salah and Khan included, effectively silenced and disenfranchised?

And who, in the name of God, gave the blood soaked Uncle Sam the right to put a $50 million bounty on the head of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, like he is one of their black hats in a 1950s’ B grade Western and like Venezuela has not friendly diplomatic relations with most of the world’s countries?

That, of course, is a rhetorical question because Bill Gates (no angel himself) would quickly go hoarse if he were to call out all of America’s crimes and he would quickly go broke if he were to offer comparable bounties on the heads of America’s top 10,000 war criminals who would be but the top of a very big iceberg that covers not only UEFA and Pakistani cricket but much else besides.

Though Mo Salah is to be commended for his shot on UEFA, long shot screamers like his won’t do the trick and it will take much more than the backroom tactics of Liverpool FC to get the result for Palestine and all of the Middle East that all civilised people want in this situation where NATO has the referee, the linesmen, the scorekeepers, the umpires, the commentators and much more besides in their collective pocket.

Consider, for example, the case of Norman Finkelstein, who wrote The Holocaust Industry in 2000 and who is still dining out on it. When I extended him an offer to visit the Syrian Arab Republic shortly after Russia entered the fray there, this bum said he would gladly come but only if he were given extensive media coverage to attack Assad and the heroic Syrian Arab Army, who were then battling the head hackers street by street on a number of diverse fronts.

Although it is considered haram to attack opinionated narcissists like him, they are a major impediment to people like Salah or Le Tissier getting a clear shot on goal because, though very important strikes are happening in Belgium and in the Netherlands in support of Gaza and the world’s top harpists are shunning Israel, the people of the Middle East need a clear field for Salah and other champions like him to shine without the likes of Finkelstein clouding the pitch.

To further emphasise that point, consider this silly Iranian petition on behalf of Gaza I signed here just to get those deadweights off my back. When the UN officials wade through the badly written letter and its endless praise for Iran’s Islamic revolution, the MI6 officials they pass it on to will undoubtedly dismiss those who signed it for the irrelevant Iranian-sponsored morons many of them are.

And, while Iran expends valuable energy on narcissistic efforts like that, Israel will fortify and expand her spider’s webs ever more to ensnare and throttle not only all future Palestinian Pelés and Palestinian Maradonas but galaxies of other Palestinian stars like Mother Agapia Stephanopoulos and Bella Hadid as well. And, diabolical though all those Israeli crimes are, it is infinitely worse that the leaders of Western Christendon, along with the leaders of the global sports and fashion industries, let them get away with all that.

When I next appear on Yemen TV, I hope to praise Yemen’s national football team (could do better) and praise some other great Arab heroes like Palestinian Orthodox nun Mother Agapia Stephanopoulos, seen here and here with Tucker Carlson trying to surmount the same sorts of obstacles with respect to Gaza that Mo Salah faces. But say what I like and tweet what Salah or anyone else likes, until NATO’s spider’s web of collaboration is torn down in the cricketing, footballing, diplomatic, religious and media worlds, many more Lebanese, Jordanian, Palestinian, Syrian, Yemeni, Iraqi and Iranian innocents will have to die. That is just the way it is until they change the record and we upend their neverending game of death.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter

, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The hypocrisy of the West and its Western-controlled sporting organisations is glaring for anyone willing to see. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Russia was swiftly ejected from most major sporting events, its players blacklisted, its flags removed, and daily tributes to Ukraine mandated across almost every major sport. Football, the world’s most popular game, was at the forefront of this campaign, with FIFA and UEFA leading the charge to ostracise Russia and rally support for Ukraine.

Yet this same principle has been glaringly absent in the case of Israel, whose far more prolonged and brutal genocide is a far cry from the war in Ukraine. Despite years of bloodshed, FIFA and UEFA have refused to suspend Israel or its teams from competitions. Instead, they have gone so far as to confiscate Palestinian flags from fans and players at matches. But the voices of the people cannot be silenced indefinitely.

The death of Suleiman al-Obaid—known as the “Palestinian Pelé”—in an Israeli airstrike is a case in point. UEFA’s statement on his death was so sanitised that it read more like a retirement notice than an acknowledgment of a targeted killing. The wording deliberately sidestepped any mention of Israeli culpability, sparking widespread outrage across the footballing world. Egyptian superstar Mohamed Salah was among those who publicly demanded UEFA name the party responsible.

Rather than confront the criticism, UEFA doubled down. At its latest Super Cup match, banners vaguely calling for an end to violence against children were displayed, without naming anyone —virtue signalling of the most selective kind.

Such actions have only deepened anger among football fans and further exposed FIFA and UEFA’s double standards. Their willingness to punish Russia while shielding Israel reveals not only political bias but also a disturbing readiness to abandon moral consistency when it is politically inconvenient.

❗️Join us on Telegram, Twitter , and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The ongoing bloodshed in Gaza has exposed fissures between the board of Celtic FC and the club’s supporters.

Celtic supporters have consistently voiced their support for the people of Palestine over the years.  Yet this week, the club banned the Green Brigade supporter group from home matches for ‘shaming the club‘. The Green Brigade feel their solidarity with Palestinians is behind the ban.

A complicating factor in how both club and supporters respond to this crisis is the fact that Celtic have an Israeli player on their books: winger Leil Abada, a fan favourite who joined the club last season.

Israelis – including the national team manager – have certainly noted the happenings at Celtic this week and are looking to score some political points.

There were reports that any show of support for Palestine by Celtic fans during their Champions League clash against Atletico Madrid last week would result in sanctions against the club by UEFA, with fans reporting that club officials and police outside Celtic Park were confiscating banners and flags in support of Palestine.

In the end, many Celtic fans waved Palestinian flags during ‘You’ll Never Walk Alone’.

Celtic fans react predictably to the threat of fines from UEFA for any show of support for Palestine. pic.twitter.com/PDaYfehWme

— Politics For You (@PoliticoForYou) October 25, 2023

An official statement from the Green Brigade read as follows;

“Despite disingenuous claims, we have absolutely no doubt that these sanctions are motivated by a desire to quash political expression within the Celtic support, specifically in relation to Palestine at this time. In spite of this, and any further obstruction, we once again encourage fans to courageously fly the flag for Palestine.”

The club were sanctioned in 2016 after a pro-Palestine display during a qualifying fixture against Israeli club, Hapoel Beer Sheva.

Alon Hazan says Celtic fans are ‘anti-semitic’

Celtic’s stance towards its own supporters regarding the Palestine issue has generated plenty of interest over in Israel. Current Israel manager Alon Hazan this week accused Celtic supporters of being anti-semitic. He also claimed Abada had played a role in framing the club’s response to the Green Brigade.

“Liel Abada doesn’t need me to step into his shoes. He did his military national service to the state and did a fine job. He demanded that Celtic’s management issue a condemnation against their fans, who are known to be anti-

Semitic, even though there were many Israeli players who played for this club.”

Current Maccabi Tel-Aviv captain Eran Zahawi meanwhile said Celtic fans support Hamas.

“I think the national team players abroad are doing an excellent job. In the case of Liel Abada, you see that his club revoked season tickets to people who supported Hamas and that’s solely because of Liel’s actions.

“Any suggestion that the Celtic support is anti-Semitic is totally inaccurate. Celtic is a diverse club, proud to be open to all, ever since its formation in 1888.

Everyone at Celtic Football Club continues to give Liel our full support.”

That support has been matched by a number of Celtic fans on social media over the past 24 hours, who’ve made it clear their problem is not with their own defender but with the actions of his government.

I read that the Israel team manager described Celtic fans as ‘anti-semitic’ and urged Liel Abada to ‘defy the haters.’ I have never heard an anti-Jewish remark at Celtic Park. Criticism of Israel is not anti-semitism. Liel we love you in the hoops, get back soon mate. HH pic.twitter.com/hmHFQBkLu4

— Lisbon Lion (@tirnaog_09) November 3, 2023

I’ve heard some amount of absolute shite over the past few weeks and days, but this utter drivel being spouted that anyone connected to Celtic has an issue with Liel Abada being at our club is the biggest pile of bullshit you’ll hear. Can’t wait to see him back in the hoops. pic.twitter.com/HqhiYDlY4O

— Boyle (@Boyle_67) November 2, 2023

“It’s not the Creed nor Nationality that counts. It’s the man himself.”

LIEL ABADA 💚🍀 pic.twitter.com/XNDJiwF4g9

— Celtic Curio (@Celticcurio) November 2, 2023

Anyone else just really looking forward to Liel Abada playing for Celtic again because he’s an incredibly talented football player?!

— Darren Connell (@DarrenConnell87) November 3, 2023

balls.ie

❗️Join us on Telegram, Twitter , and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The recent decision by UEFA to re-admit Russia’s under 17 male and female football teams to their competitions has set the cat amongst NATO’s footballing pigeons. Should these young Russians be allowed to compete, a large number of countries have vowed to withdraw their teams in protest, thus doing their own players the same sort of injustice that UEFA was previously forced to mete out to Russia’s young hopefuls by denying them the right to compete.

Because I work on the principle that it is not so much winning as just taking part that matters, I would be happy to see Russia, but more so, Ukraine take part. The advantage of Ukraine taking part is that it would afford their young male players the chance to desert and take refuge in one of the countries they have been drawn against.

I hold that position because British warlord Ben Wallace is insisting that Ukrainian warlord Vladimir Zelensky extend the draft to literally throw fresh new blood into the meat grinders of their Eastern front. As Kiev’s draft now extends to 60 year-olds, that fresh blood can only be found by robbing Ukraine’s schools and football academies of anyone who is not fleet footed enough to flee for their lives across Ukraine’s Western borders.

Before moving on to Ukraine’s “Western friends”, let’s first recall that former Ukrainian President Poroshenko wanted Ukraine’s Russian speaking children confined to basements so his army could repeatedly bombard them. Then there is former Ukrainian Parliamentarian Iryna Farion, who brags here how she teaches her 3-year-old grandson to beat up Russian-speaking children in kindergartens. “Moscovites (Russians) must be annihilated”, she says, “When a child tells my grandson “privet” (hello in Russian), my grandson has to teach him, with his little fist, the Ukrainian language.” Farion also despises Ukraine’s Hungarian minority, whom she compares here to dogs and devils for not learning the language of Stepan Bandera. All that is not a very good look for this self serving former member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, whose little grandson will probably get his little head bashed in when he throws his little fists at the first beefed up little 3 year old who says privet to him, and who will probably end up strapped to a lamppost by Farion’s thugs with his pants pulled down around his little ankles as a result. Whatever about Farion, the smarter grandmothers will be telling their grandchildren to escape before NATO also offers them up on its Eastern pyre.

Although one must expect such bile from toxic toads like Farion and Zelensky, one has to wonder why they have such widespread support from those who represent NATO’s footballers. Raheny Utd is one of Ireland’s top women’s teams and several of their former members, one of whom has been nominated for the Ballon d’Or, participated in their recent World Cup, having formerly been trained at Bohemians FC by one of my friends. Raheny now train literally outside my door in a public park. I can see them from where I type and I know as a fact that not one of them wants to be part of a political boycott of Russia or anyone else. Like their Russian counterparts, seen here after beating China, they just want to kick ball, have fun, form friendships and see where their dreams take them.

Russia’s under 17 footballers are not that different. Although this toxic Sky News report argues that Russia’s under 17 players “are likely to be linked to academies of elite clubs owned in some cases by oligarchs – not grassroots players” and that “adults would also benefit as coaches”, that is simply NATO’s uninformed bile at work.

Here is a recent report of the Irish under 17s beating Russia 2-0. If you check the backgrounds of Evan Ferguson, Calum Kavanagh, Sinclair Armstrong, Dan Rose, Oisin Hand and Gavin O’Brien, amongst others, you will see that most of them, Ferguson excepted, have enjoyed only modest success as professional footballers. If you were to look into these links here, here and here, you will appreciate that, though there are very good people involved in under aged football in Russia, they still have a very long way to go and West Ham, Manchester Utd and Southampton will not be picking up the phone to them any day soon.

I mention those three English football teams as Manchester Utd had a glorious under age and senior team, thanks to the class of 92, who all began in their under 17 side together before graduating to take the English Premier League by storm. Though David Gill, who never kicked a ball in his life, is one of the former Utd backroom staff who voted against Russia’s inclusion, Utd fans revile him, not least because he stopped others emulating Beckham and his class of 92 buddies. More to the point is that the Class of 92 were statistical long-shots and those who trained and nurtured them have much to be proud of.

I mention West Ham as not only were three of their players at the centre of England’s 1966 World Cup winning side but, as interviews here and here with Harry Redknapp show, they had a great youth development wing as, of course, had Southampton FC.

But youth development, as any footballer will tell you, is a very expensive exercise that has been all but obliterated by the transfer market and the ability of English and other clubs to poach players from anywhere in the world. Because of that, the chances of most Russian or other under 17s hitting the big time is extremely small and here is an excellent academic study confirming that well known (except to NATO’s propagandists) point.

Before moving on to NATO’s arguments for excluding Russian teenagers from participating in their competitions, let me just say that my line of argument so far is fully consistent with my previous articles on sport, some of which can be found here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

Here is a list of NATO aligned football associations that continue to gang up on Russia to support Poroshenko, Farion and Zelensky. As The Football Association of Ireland (FAI) has been involved in numerous scandals, don’t hold your breath waiting for a cogent argument from those jokers as to why toddlers who speak Russian should be punched in the face or why teenagers should be debarred from kicking ball.

Here is Irish state controlled media detailing how the FAI and similar bodies voted to boycott Russia’s teenage footballers. Note that no official steps up to the plate and claims responsibility for blackballing Russia’s children but that they all hide behind innocuous, anonymous statements. Why can these football officials not state, in their own names and in their own words, whether they support punching three year old Russian speakers in the face, tying them to lampposts and making them cower from artillery bombardments in rat infested cellars?

Though these hypocritical weasels would refer us to the court of public opinion, which excludes me and the young women who kick ball outside my front door, what they really mean is NATO’s mass media, much of which is not based in Europe, which will hunt these weasels down if they do not support punching toddlers in the mush.

NATO’s New York Times sensationally reports that this decision to stop terrorising Russia’s teenage footballers is another Munich moment with Ukraine, which straps children to lampposts and punches toddlers in the mush, having another of its periodic moral outrages over this “collusion with Putin”. Although the NYT tries to take the moral high ground of the disinterested observer, they know that this is a preliminary to banning Russia from the Olympics and similar more high prestige events which, to the NYT and all of NATO are, as my previous articles attested, but opportunities to control the global political narrative.

NATO’s Washington Post, meanwhile, argues, very badly as it happens, that UEFA has lost its moral integrity by not continuing to punish Russia’s teenage footballers (and, presumably, punch Russian speaking toddlers in the mush). As the Washington Post also alludes to the Olympics and the very strange case of the Women’s World Cup where the victorious Spanish team declined the customary celebrations in favour of a political agenda, one has to feel that NATO have yet bigger plans afoot to control the global sporting narrative and the soft political power that might spring from it.

There are, as I see it, two distinct camps in this important squabble. On the one side are those like me and the Raheny Utd women kicking ball outside of my window who want sporting competitions to proceed in as friendly a manner as is possible. In the other corner stands NATO’s pathetic hirelings, who want to hold the reins of power in sport as they do in much else and who are as oblivious to Russians or any other teenagers having their dreams destroyed as they are to Russian speaking toddlers or, for that matter, Syrian, Palestinian, Armenian, Eritrean or Libyan toddlers, having their faces kicked in as these weasels are devoid of any semblance of a moral compass. Even if Russia’s teenagers once again find themselves boycotted in the name of beating up Russian and Hungarian toddlers and strapping them to lampposts, they can walk very tall indeed because of their role in highlighting this blatant NATO hypocrisy and because of that and much else, Russia and the world should salute them and wish them and all teenagers and toddlers like them well in their thwarted dreams.

❗️Join us on Telegram , Twitter , and VK .

Before moving on to discuss Saudi Arabia’s profligate soccer spending, let’s first commiserate with MI6 agent Zelensky over the U.S. Open’s men’s tennis final, where sanctioned Serbia’s Novak Djokovic beat sanctioned Russia’s Daniil Medvedev, meaning Clown Prince Zelensky was not afforded a chance to make one of his stupid speeches or hit up his NATO controllers for a few more billion.

Let’s also mention the Rugby World Cup where an entire stadium united to boo sports washing French dictator Macron, when he tried to exploit its opening event, before wondering how bad baseball loving America must be when it falls to White House Press Secretary and world champion cretin Karine Jean-Pierre to save the hide of U.S. President Creepy Joe Biden when he loses his marbles in Vietnam, whose leaders are singularly fixated on improving the welfare of all Vietnam’s citizens.

Although the Vietnamese are as caught up in social media’s sporting bubble as much as anyone else, you will be hard put to find any of them spending $100,000 to watch Messi kick a ball in Florida. And you certainly won’t find the Government of Vietnam splashing out the billions of dollars on the likes of Ronaldo, Mbappé, Benzema and Neymar that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has in recent weeks.

Although Benzema, Sadio Mane and other recent Saudi signings have claimed that playing soccer in the heartland of Wahhābī country is a big attraction to them, the massive financial inducements to kick ball in Saudi no doubt also sweetened the pot. As those same Saudi mega bucks also did for English international, legendary LGBT campaigner and all round Russophobic hypocrite Jordan Henderson, who is lambasted in this epic video, whose producers show in this further video that Saudi’s GDP is very modest when compared to even the likes of Canada or Italy, both of whose economies are far more diversified than is that of sports-washing Saudi Arabia.

Although this massive Saudi splurge on top shelf soccer talent might pay their Royals some dividends in terms of sports washing, it seems, at first glance, to make no economic sense, even within the confines of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s Vision 2030 initiative, which aims to reduce Saudi Arabia’s heavy dependence on oil by diversifying into other industries.

The sports of soccer, Formula 1 and golf, all of which the Saudis are now heavily involved in, are part of NATO’s much larger entertainment industry and there is no way Saudi Arabia or the other Gulf autocracies will crack that greater nut in the near future. If we peruse this snidely Russophobic video on sanctions against Russian soccer, we get an excellent indication of the risks Saudi Arabia runs by building their soccer federation on what is essentially financial quicksand. If Russian soccer can be hurt, however marginally, by NATO’s intimidation and NATO’s sanctions, imagine what those same NATO bullies can do to the Saudis, who lack Russia’s military deterrence and economic diversification.

And though Saudi’s aim of sports washing over its crimes in Syria and Yemen is understandable, corporate finance theory would argue that paying obscene amounts of cash to soccer stars is not the best way to go about it, not least because the soccer-crazy Saudis lack the great depth and width of interest the British retain for the game.

Britain’s football industry with its over-dependence on cryptocurrencies and other non-fungible tokens shows just how unsuitable sport’s finances are as an instrument of national economic growth. Although the British are not averse to some heavy duty sports washing themselves, they did diversify into other industries, finance, tourism and arms production being chief amongst them.

And, given that the combined $609 million spent just on Ronaldo ($222 million), Benzema ($215 million) and Neymar ($172 million) is $125 million more than what UNICEF needed in 2022 to put their Yemeni “humanitarian crisis” band aid on the road, Saudi Arabia has much better sports washing options available to it now that it has arch-Crusader Henderson batting for them.

And, while the Saudis are unlikely to soon become net exporters of weapons of mass destruction or, if we are to be honest, humanitarian aid and while their tourism industry is unlikely to expand much beyond their Hajj cash cow in the coming years, finance is, in soccer terms, an open goal for the Saudis, whose inequitable redistribution of their oil and gas business will not be washed away by all the perfumes of Arabia or, for that matter, Syria.

I mention Syria as, firstly, its under-funded football team had a very good run in recent years and, secondly, its perfume industry has, along with its pharmaceutical industry, survived, albeit in much reduced form.

All of these should be targets for inward investment and the Saudis, leaving their past actions to one side, should endeavour to get in on the ground floor as active investors rather than as passive rentiers.

Given all they have been through, Iraq, Yemen and Syria offer ground floor opportunities and countries like Saudi Arabia with cash to burn should be actively exploring and pursuing those options, either alone or with their putative Gulf State and/or BRIICS partners.

And not just there but throughout the whole BRIICS confederation, which Saudi Arabia wishes to join. The current Niger leadership, to take but one example, wishes to raise its price of uranium from 0.80$ a kg to $200 a kg. But, given Niger’s lack of relevant sophistication in online trading in over-the-counter (OTC) and contract for difference (CFD) financial instruments, one must wonder if Niger, a relatively minor player in the uranium market, could successfully implement that change and how it might overcome a European Union logistical boycott.

If we pan our camera out from Niger to cover all of Africa, the economic terrain does not qualitatively vary. As our friends in the World Economic Forum kindly tell us, Africa’s exports consist mostly of commodities, raw materials, oil, gas and other primary products as well as, of course, metaphorical truck-fulls of talented soccer players for the European and Saudi auction markets.

Although more than 60 years have gone by since the Year of Africa, when a wave of decolonisation and pan-Africanism swept that continent, Africa’s march towards industrialisation has been a very slow one indeed. And though Belgium, France and the other colonial powers have done little to hasten Africa’s drive towards modernisation, Africans, for a variety of reasons, have also significantly stalled that process.

Although China building white elephants in the form of unnecessary bridges in Mozambique is one factor, West Africa’s aluminium potential shows there is a major upside to Saudi – and BRIICS – cooperation with all of Africa. Although the Government of Ghana, together with the World Bank and NATO’s business media have long sung the potential of this industry, the risks rather than the rewards have been too immense all through the 75 year long history of the Upper Volta Aluminium Company and its predecessors.

Although Ghana’s abundant bauxite reserves make it an excellent candidate for developing its aluminium and alumina industries, Ghana lacks the financial muscle and environmental protection Germany, its major open cast mining bauxite partner, does and the financial depth Britain and the United States both lead the world in.

If Saudi Arabia is genuine about committing itself to BRICS as part of its own development plans, then it might first look at China’s Vision 2049 plans, peruse China’s Greenland initiative and determine whether Saudi Arabia can contribute to making an African version of China’s Ice Silk Road without having to contend with the debt trap charges China regularly faces over Greenland as much as over Mozambique or Sri Lanka.

Though the choice, as things currently stand, is that of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia alone, the options for sure and steady growth in Africa, Vietnam and Russia will still exist long after Henderson threads his LGBT laces through his NATO sponsored boots in Saudi Arabia for the last time. Though Saudi Arabia has to be begrudgingly commended for ending its collusion in NATO’s Syrian and Yemeni genocides, if it wants the respect it craves, it must earn it not by showcasing over priced soccer circus clowns but by putting its money where it is needed, into the viable projects of Syria, Yemen, Russia, Vietnam and all of Africa.

Yesterday’s deadly attack in Paris laid open the wound of rampant racism in France. An attacker shot dead three people at a Kurdish cultural center and wounded another three persons. The attacker was arrested and had a history of immigrant attacks. France has a problem with racism and immigrant hatred, but officially that subject is ignored and not to be discussed.

Kylian Mbappe has said he was racially abused in social media following his team’s loss in the final game of the World Cup 2022 in Qatar. Mbappe is a French footballer who played on the French national team in the World Cup recently. Although he was born and raised all his life in France, he has complained about previous incidences of racist attacks against him.

The French Football Federation (FFF) has condemned the attacks directed at Mbappe on social media, and has vowed to take action against the authors of the attacks. Isabelle Rome, the French minister in charge of gender equality, has confirmed that Mbappe was the victim of racist attacks.

Amelie Oudea-Castera, French sports minister, tweeted concerning the racist comments that they “have no place in soccer or anywhere else.”

This is not the first time Mbappe has voiced his dismay at being the victim of racial attacks. In June 2022, Mbappe was so upset he contemplated leaving the French team after receiving racial attacks in the wake of his miss on a crucial penalty kick which made the French national team leave the Euro 2020 tournament.

To add insult to injury, Noel La Graet, President of FFF, mischaracterized Mbappe’s complaint. La Graet blamed Mbappe’s hurt feelings on having missed the kick, but Mbappe wrote on Twitter that it was the racism and not the penalty he was upset about.

La Graet said in June 2022, “We met for five minutes. He was angry, he no longer wanted to play in the France team. You know what it is, he is a winner, he was very frustrated, like all of us, with the elimination.”

Mbappe was frustrated with the lack of support and understanding on the part of FFF in light of the racist comments.

“Kylian Mbappe has accused the French Football Federation’s (FFF) president of denying the barrage of racist abuse that pushed him to consider quitting the French national team.”

The talented Paris Saint-Germain forward was instrumental in France’s World Cup win in Russia, scored in the team’s winning Nations League tournament, and kicked four goals in November to put France on the road to the World Cup in Qatar.

Mbappe is French, but his father came from Cameroon and his mother from Algeria. It is Mbappe’s African ancestry that has been the source of the racist comments directed at him.

France has a deep-seated problem with racism, but due to the official French political ideology, France denies they have any problem, and denies that racism exists in France.

In the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, Jean Beaman wrote in 2021 an article titled “Race: A Never-Ending Taboo in France”. France has a problem with racism based on skin color and African ancestry. However, due to the French political ideology of “liberté, égalité, et fraternité,” French citizens are supposed to be treated as equals as long as they do not identify as a member of an ethnic or religious group. Their identity is supposed to be French only, and nothing else. In this French mentality race and ethnicity are denied.

The French official line is that race is not recognized, and because the issue is not to be discussed it becomes a taboo topic and suppressed. However, to find the reality in France is just a matter of interviewing Blacks and North Africans in France to identify that there is a real problem.

President Emmanuel Macron has spoken out against French universities who may be discussing American racial theories. The French feel their system of Republicanism is superior to the American system of identifying race and ethnicity. When there have been accusations of racism in France, the French will often blame American ideas that can corrupt the French values. In the U.S. there is a race problem, but some Americans are working toward solutions and not denials. They recognize the problem and are discussing it openly.

Mbappe is considered one of the greatest football players in the world. He is French, plays in France, and played on the recent French national team. Because of his extreme value as a player, and his youth, only time will tell if he might leave France for a place which is less racist and more willing to support players who find themselves a victim of racist attacks.

Israeli citizens and journalists are allowed in Qatar in a FIFA agreement during the 2022 World Cup now underway in Doha. Being allowed to enter a country to watch football, or to cover an event as a journalist or media crew, is far different than being welcome.

Israeli journalists have reported numerous interactions with football fans and locals in Qatar that let them know they are not welcome because they are from Israel.

Moav Vardi, Israeli channel KAN 11, was told by a football fan on live TV from Doha, “It is Palestine, there is no Israel. Go, please. You are not welcome here. This is Qatar, this is our country – you are not welcome here. There is only Palestine. There is no Israel.”

Eli Ohana, also from KAN, got a ride in a golf cart with a Qatari policeman. During the conversation, Ohana revealed he was from Israel. The Qatari was shocked and thought he must be joking. Ohana quickly denied his citizenship and instead passed himself off as Portuguese. The policeman replied, “If you were really from Israel, I would have dropped you here and turned back.”

Raz Shechnik, a Yedioth Ahronoth reporter, said “We feel hated. We feel the hostility and we feel unwelcome,” and he recalled a seemingly friendly Qatari who offered, “I would like to say welcome to you. But you are really not blessed. Fly away from here as fast as possible.”

Even an Egyptian fan badgered Shechnik after recognizing him as Israeli after falsely claiming he was from Ecuador. Regardless of the three-decade peace treaty between the two countries, the Egyptian continued to insist, on “Free Palestine.”

Ohad Hamo, Israeli channel 12, was conducting live interviews of fans in Doha but was refused by all Arab fans. After being frustrated, he said, “I don’t know why?”

If an Israeli does not know why Arab fans would be hostile and unwelcoming of an Israeli in Qatar, then that demonstrates the lack of understanding and responsibility of keeping five million persons in an open-air prison.

President Trump successfully promoted the Abraham Accords in 2020 which saw normalization agreements between Israel and the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco. Ohana said recently in Doha, “Israel has signed normalization agreements with 4 Arab countries in recent years, but it turned out that the majority of Arab peoples do not like the fact that we are here.”

Egypt and Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel three decades ago, and it has been a successful and enduring example of peace between Arabs and Muslims with the Jewish State of Israel.

Peace treaties and normalization agreements are performed by governments, and not the citizens. Egyptian and Jordanian citizens have gotten used to the shared embassies, business dealings, and tourism. However, most citizens hold the opinion that Israel is a brutal occupier in Palestine and that Palestinians are living under an apartheid regime without basic human rights.

Palestinian flags are flying all over Doha and fans are also holding the flags. This was sure to be a surprise to Israeli journalists because the flag is banned from being displayed in public anywhere in Israel or the occupied West Bank. The journalists also reported unwelcoming comments from restaurants and taxi drivers.

Israelis should not be surprised to find negative comments directed at them when in an Arab country, even in Jordan and Egypt. The Arab world is 22 nations that all speak Arabic and have some shared culture. The Arabs in general are highly informed on their history and the injustices surrounding the founding of Israel. The desperate plight of the Palestinian people is part of their culture and awareness.

Officially, Qatar does not have any normalization agreement with Israel and is a very strong supporter of Palestinian rights and the need for a Palestinian state, which is not on the agenda with the current Israeli government. The recent elections have seen Benjamin Netanyahu return to power with the help of an allied extremist party that is opposed to giving any human rights to Palestinians.

Shireen Abu Akleh, a Palestinian American journalist for the Qatari-supported media Al Jazeera, was assassinated in May by an Israeli Army sniper in Jenin in the occupied West Bank. The Israeli government admits that she was killed by an Israeli soldier, but claims it was an accidental shooting. An independent investigation revealed she was not in the crossfire of any battle, but instead was solely targeted and murdered while wearing full identification that she was the “PRESS”. The FBI had wanted to open an investigation into the killing, but the Israeli government refused the request, even though the Israeli government depends on the U.S. to financially survive. Israel has received from the U.S. taxpayers, as of May 2021, $146 Billion, more than any other country.

On November 17, Al Jazeera aired a segment on its “The Stream” broadcast. Interviewed were filmmaker Dena Takruri, a Palestinian American journalist with Al Jazeera, her cameraman, and an Israeli representative of the Israeli NGO “Breaking the Silence”, a group of Israeli veterans who have served in the occupied territory and seeking to inform the Israeli public about the true situation there. He explained that Israeli citizens are indoctrinated all their lives to never question why there is no end to the occupation. Further, he said there is no incentive for Israel to end the occupation, therefore it may last forever. Takruri has made a new film called, ‘How Israeli Apartheid Destroyed my Hometown’ which documents how 30,000 Palestinians live there in almost concentration camp conditions. They are surrounded by illegal Israeli settlers who throw rocks, garbage, and even urine at the Palestinians, who are prohibited from walking out of their front door onto the main street, and instead must exit home from a secretive back exit.

The 2022 World Cup in Qatar has been the first of its kind and may be a breakthrough in calling out Israel and its apartheid regime. The Israeli journalists and fans in Doha will be uncomfortable after the unwelcoming reception there, but it will be food for thought and a chance for the Israeli public to finally question, “Why?”