This was originally published by The Hill.
Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman previously said he does not care about allegations of “sportswashing” against his country, and that he would continue investing in sports if it adds to his country’s gross domestic product.
Saudi Arabia’s recent expression of interest in buying a $5 billion stake in cricket’s Indian Premier League (IPL), with a plan to place the IPL in a holding company worth up to $30 billion, only reinforces bin Salman’s seriousness about investing in sports. Saudi officials reportedly see an opportunity to massively expand the league presence internationally, including within the kingdom, similar to the English Premier League or the European Champions League.
Allegations of “sportswashing,” in this situation — of using sports to burnish a nation’s dodgy reputation — haven’t been aggressively levelled against the kingdom, a stark contrast to the LIV Golf situation or the contracts for soccer stars Cristiano Ronaldo and Karim Benzema, who both now play for Saudi football teams.
The rather quiet response from western politicians is telling of several things as they relate to Saudi Arabia on the global stage.
First, sportswashing can be a lazy rebuttal to the kingdom’s investment in sports and, in general, the Middle East. The definition of “sportswashing,” which is the practice of using sports to improve reputation, can be rather expansive in practice. Yes, we can all agree Qatar hosted the 2022 World Cup to elevate the reputation of the country. So did Brazil with the 2016 Summer Olympics and South Africa with the 2010 World Cup and so will countries in the future.
Saudi officials clearly know that sports can bring good attention to a country. (The Ministry of Culture has a nice selfie on Instagram from NBA great Lebron James’s visit during September this year…yes Lebron James was in Saudi Arabia.) That said, it is not the sole reason for investing in sports, but it is obviously low-hanging fruit for politicians, because it will always contain some truth.
Saudi Arabia is moving at a fast pace to change the country, and it has deep pockets to do so. Critics will note that women weren’t allowed to vote until 2011 and could not independently access health care and education without male supervision until 2017. Women also could not drive until 2018. For context, bin Salman began his rise to power in 2013, when he was named head of the Crown Prince’s Court with the rank of minister. He would be named crown prince in June 2017, when King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud deposed Muhammad bin Nayef.
Since bin Salman has become crown prince, the country has hosted major boxing matches (such Anthony Joshua versus Andy Ruiz in 2019), launched LIV Golf in 2021 (which by 2023 was merged with the PGA tour) and took over Newcastle United in 2021. Additionally, Saudi football club Al-Nassr welcomed Ronaldo to the team at the start of this year, and, last month Riyadh was host to a boxing match between Tyson Fury and Francis Ngannou (with stars such as Kanye West and Mike Tyson in attendance) as a kickoff to Riyadh Season, which is a major festival where the city will host a series of huge shows and spectacles alongside a series of sporting events.
Most of the Saudi sovereign deals have been executed via the country’s Public Investment Fund, which has reportedly made overtures in recent years to buy the WWE and Formula One. An investment in the IPL by the Public Investment Fund (or another entity) would fit well with the Saudis’ other sports investments — the IPL, for example, received sponsor bids up $6.2 billion for the right to broadcast games through 2027, which equates roughly to $15 million per match in a sport where the season lasts eight weeks.
The per-match number is more than the English Premier League and slightly behind the $17 million per game for the National Football League in the U.S. Let’s also not forget that the kingdom has a significant Indian population between 10 and 12 percent who will be happy to have more access to IPL games.
The push by Saudi Arabia (and other non-Western countries) into sports is fueling a “West versus everyone else” type of narrative. The quiet response to the reported offer for IPL versus the stir caused by LIV Golf (in competition with the PGA) suggests two different responses for deals done in the East versus deals done in the West. The PGA is sacred in the U.S. The IPL is unknown to Americans, so there are no political points to be gained by pushing back against this deal.
However, the Qatar Investment Authority, Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, has also surprisingly faced little pushback for its estimated $200 million investment in Leonsis’s Monumental Sports, which controls the NBA’s Washington Wizards, the NHL’s Washington Capitals and the WNBA’s Washington Mystics. Qatar’s is the first sovereign fund to purchase a stake in a team in the top four U.S. sports leagues. (MLS club New York City FC is majority-controlled by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a member of the royal family of Abu Dhabi.)
Skeptics will say Qatar is becoming an important ally to the U.S., so there is little political upside to criticizing this deal. (For example, Qatar is the go-between with Hamas for Israel and the U.S.)
Countries accused of sportswashing are largely non-western countries, such as Qatar with the 2022 World Cup and China with the 2022 Winter Olympics. Was the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics an example of sportswashing? Or, how do we distinguish between the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics and the 2022 Winter Olympics in this conversation? Are both examples of sportswashing, or only the 2022 games?
Historians can reference the 1934 World Cup in Mussolini’s Italy and the 1936 Olympic Games in Nazi Germany, but that retroactive application of sportswashing ignores how little the language of sportswashing was used before the 2000s (or even 2010s). One can even argue that Hitler hosted the Olympics in 1936 to prove the superiority of the “pure German” race over any other race, only to have black American athlete Jesse Owens star in the games. Eighteen black athletes would participate in those 1936 games (and elevate the prominence of the U.S.) only to be forgotten and dismissed upon their return home to the U.S. That time in history was more about proving superiority of countries and races than it was about sportswashing. Regardless, Saudi Arabia is not Nazi Germany or Mussolini’s Italy and nor does not have the U.S. 1936 racial issues.
Furthermore, the West as the arbitrator of who is sportswashing based on human rights has generally permitted those best allied to the West to escape criticism more than those less allied to the U.S. This positioning of countries on a theoretical human rights spectrum obfuscates the conversation on sportswashing by masking over the behaviors of certain countries versus others to maintain Western moral superiority. The discussion in this fashion also muddies the waters by ignoring any complicity of other countries in alleged human rights violations.
Indeed, it may be better to ask why we should care if any country is sportswashing. Individuals and countries can boycott “problem” countries by avoiding travel to those countries, not participating in certain games or sports in those countries, or cutting aid and investment within those countries, if they feel obliged to do so.
Sports organizers and leaders, for their part, may simply want to avoid being dragged into each political or cultural debate. Sports are the best uniters of societies and culture — we can see this across American racial lines and South African racial lines as well as different religions groups in the Middle East and Asia.
Maybe the 2026 World Cup, collectively hosted by Canada, the United States, and Mexico, can solve all the border issues between the three countries. Even the most optimistic person is somewhat pessimistic about this outcome. But, if the games run smoothly, could Mexico accuse the U.S. of sportswashing, or vice versa?
Lastly, it looks like Saudi Arabia will host the 2034 World Cup, as it was the sole bidder). To call it sportswashing in 2034 will sound odd in a historic context — that would suggest bin Salman is genius for planning 11 years ahead on another cover-up.
We could celebrate the 2034 World Cup like the IPL interest (and hopefully bid) as a demonstration of the quick economic growth and elevation of Saudi Arabia to the global stage. That does not have to be a bad thing for other countries, or a threat to them.
