The World Cup: A weapon of mass distraction

Most of us might know Albert Camus as the French-Algerian novelist and philosopher whose arguments on existentialism transcended his time. We know him for his ability to force readers into facing the harshest questions and looking morality dead in the eye. One would find it somewhat strange to classify Camus as a sportsman as well, but that he was. Camus was a goalkeeper for his university team in Algeria who was inspired by football and the sense of responsibility it bestows on each player. Standing solitary between the goalposts Camus reflected on his absurd position of being at no fault if his team scores but fully to blame if the opposition did and is quoted to have said, “All that I know most surely about morality and obligations I owe to football.”

I can relate to Camus’s appreciation for football for I too am an avid fan of the sport who revels in the poetry and artistic intellect of the game. I find the camaraderie that football brings to people from all walks of life inspiring. But every four years, when the biggest celebration of football takes place in the form of the World Cup, the true lover of the sport is no longer necessary and the football connoisseur feels outnumbered. Because for one month every four years, regardless of your passion for the sport or even your knowledge of the game’s rules, you find yourself entranced by the events unfolding as nations compete for one title. 

It is quite frightening to be able to create an event that transcends cultural and religious barriers, speaks to all ages, and overcomes gender differences. An event, which has the ability to keep the whole world captivated, one that is designed to be a psychological weapon of mass distraction. 

As the hypnotised masses have their heads turned towards television screens and their voices raised to cheer on their favourite teams, they would like to believe that there is no world outside the borders of the cup-hosting city, yet the world still moves.

The first World Cup was held in 1930 and has been played every four years ever since. As far as the history books have recorded there has been a great political movement shaking the world while these World Cups were being held. For the sake of this argument I wish to go back thirty years or so and bring to your attention the events that have unfolded in the Middle East during these cups. 

In 1982 the World Cup was being held in Spain and in that same month the Lebanon War began. As the fires raged in Lebanon the world screamed and hollered, not at the sight of the Israeli forces invading Southern Lebanon or at the sheer injustice and agony, they cheered for Kuwait’s team appearing in the World Cup for the first time and hollered as the Algerian team was knocked out from the first round. In 1982 Lebanon was at war and Italy won the World Cup.

In 1990 the World Cup was being held in Italy and I recall this one vividly for the United Arab Emirates team was making its first appearance in the World Cup. That year Iraq invaded Kuwait and the seeds of war were planted in the Gulf, changing the way we view our region forever. West Germany won the cup and the Arab world lost the war.

In 2002 and on the first day of the World Cup being held in South Korea and Japan Israeli troops entered the West Bank through Nablus as the Arab world cheered for the Tunisian and Saudi Arabian teams and the rest of the world fixated on the excitement they have been waiting for for four years. Brazil took that cup.

In 2006 Germany hosted the World Cup and Israel launched Operation Summer Rains as it hailed attacks on the Gaza killings and injuring innocent Palestinians in its wake, Italy won.

In 2010, South Africa hosted the World Cup, meanwhile the United States was backing Iranian protests against then Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad where hundreds of protesters fell victim to military violence. Iran was being represented in the World Cup as their team wore green wristbands in solidarity with the opposition movement, the world complained about the annoying sounds of the vuvuzelas. Spain won that title.

And here we are today, 2014 and Brazil is hosting this World Cup. We find ourselves once again being held captive by the exhilarating atmosphere and the great football being played. We got caught up cheering our only Arab representative in the World Cup, Algeria, meanwhile Iraq is being swallowed up by the worst case of extremism we have seen yet and succumbing to vicious sectarianism that is ripping it to shreds. 
Israel is on the offensive once again threatening to bomb Gaza, the reasons are many, proof is optional and the result is one.

Who will take this World Cup is yet to be seen but the one thing we know for sure, if history has anything to teach us, is that some huge political plan is being hatched to be deployed four years from now as we settle in to watch the next World Cup hosted by Russia.


This article was published in The Gulf Today newspaper on 6 July, 2014 http://bit.ly/1qYAHew
Arabic version published in Al Khaleej newspaper http://bit.ly/1mvgpKd

Qatar’s dry island

In December last year Qatar announced banning the sale of alcohol in The Pearl, a luxurious residential community. This announcement, just like any other announcement coming from Qatar, invited a slew of opposition from both foreign and local media alike. 

Speculations and predictions of Islamic takeover of the country and loss of insurmountable amounts of money washed over analysts’ writings. Some deeming this a natural by-product of the situation in Bahrain, others warning of negative implications it might have on Qatar hosting the FIFA World Cup in, yes you said it, 2022. The implications of this decision have been foreseen twelve years into the future. 

After all the dramatic articles written on Qatar’s ban of alcohol I feel I must emphasise that the ban is not a general one but one that is concerned with a single area of the country. Qatar allows the sale and consumption of alcohol in up-scale hotels and certain designated areas and this specific ban will not affect the existing law. 

Having said that, is it really that bizarre for an Arab country, which operates under Sharia Law, to take such a step? 

Granted, Qatar practises a moderate form of Sharia, just like some of its neighbouring Gulf States, nevertheless it is still governed by religion. Gulf countries have no segregation of religion and state, therefore, are bound by the rules of Islam, hence my bewilderment at the extreme interpretation of this step.

The greatest cliché used by commentators today is playing the religion card at the first chance they get. None of those, who predicted and speculated, asked why this decision was actually taken. None of them stopped to wonder what propelled a moderate country like Qatar to issue such a restriction keeping in mind the increasing population of expatriates. 

The Pearl is a residential community targeted towards families. Residents of this community have complained of loud noise and lewd behaviour occurring on the island due to the excessive consumption of alcohol. That combined with the increasing rates of alcohol-related car accidents and problems with alcohol addiction have resulted in social concerns as opposed to religious ones. 

It is true that in most Gulf countries the population ratio tips heavily towards the expatriate, but that does not mean that governments should turn a deaf ear to the legitimate concerns of its people. One could even say that it would be unwise at this period of time to do so considering the highly charged situation in the Middle East.

It is unfair to speak on behalf of expatriates residing in Qatar and assume that a specific decision such as this one could affect their living standards. Expatriates, who choose to make Gulf countries their homes, are respectful of their rules and on the most part abide perfectly by their laws. 

Other Gulf countries have a complete ban on alcohol, is it fair then to assume that all expatriates residing in these countries lead disruptive lives? On the contrary people are free to practise their religion for they are all religiously tolerant countries, where churches welcome worshippers just as mosques do. 

The consumption of alcohol, just like the smoking of cigarettes, is a choice that can have negative implications on more than just their user. They affect the health and well-being of those in the surrounding vicinity. Qatar made a decision with the preservation and betterment of the community in mind and based on legitimate complaints.

This ban seems to have the most negative impact not on the country’s society but on its businesses. The major opposition to this ban came from restaurant owners on The Pearl and their liquor suppliers for people who wish to drink in Qatar can still visit places other than The Pearl. And so the inevitable question rears its head once again. Is it worth sacrificing the stability of society for the prosperity of the business world? 

It is imperative that countries be welcoming and respectful towards their expatriate community, yet all the while hold on to the social and moral fabric of their society. 

It is easy to fall into a pit of Islam-based generalisations when hearing of decisions coming out of an Arab country. It is best that we steer away from generalisations altogether for they rarely hold any truths and mostly rob us of common sense.

This article was first published in The Gulf Today newspaper on 22nd Jan., 2012.