Politics

Norway’s other World Cup campaign: Getting Israel kicked out of soccer

Published

2 hours ago

July 11, 2026

Norway stands out among the historic European powers that dominate what remains of the World Cup. It has the skimpiest soccer heritage of the bunch — with a 28-year break since its last visit to the tournament — and the strongest political agenda: a continued fight to boot Israel from international soccer.

Norway’s trip to this World Cup ran through Israel, which has competed for one of Europe’s tournament slots since 1994, when boycotts from Arab and Muslim countries made it impossible for the Middle Eastern country to continue competing in the Asian Football Confederation.

When the two countries faced off in Oslo last October in a qualifying match, the Norwegian Football Federation announced that all proceeds would be donated to relief aid in Gaza. Palestinian flags, keffiyehs paired with viking hats and a massive “Let Children Live” banner swept the stands. Fans booed the playing of Israel’s national anthem.

But the Norwegian federation’s primary instrument is not advocacy from its team or fan base, but institutional pressure through federation standing and procedural respectability — an instinct reflecting the nation’s overall style and befitting its disproportionately large role at the United Nations.

Norway has been in the middle of Middle Eastern politics for a while. In 1978, the Camp David Accords set Israel on course to surrender the Sinai Peninsula and its oil fields, just before the Iranian Revolution upended regional energy politics. The United States pressed Norway to supply oil to Israel, which it did only after clearing the idea with Palestine Liberation Organization Chair Yasser Arafat, who saw the value of a Scandinavian back channel to Israeli leaders.

Norway’s tact turned itself into a distinctive intermediary: a small, energy-rich state with few Middle East ambitions of its own, clout in Washington, trust among Israelis and rapport with Palestinians. In the 1990s, the country hosted the negotiations that generated the Oslo Accords, the most significant diplomatic breakthrough toward a lasting peace. As talks failed and Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank deepened over the early 2000s, Norway pulled back from Israel.

Now Norway has brought that perspective to soccer’s governing bodies, arguing that Russia’s exclusion from the sport after its invasion of Ukraine presents a double standard that should be applied equally to Israel. The latest push for Israel’s suspension from FIFA began in 2024 by the Palestinian Football Association. It is backed by Arab and Asian football bodies, which cite atrocities in Gaza, discrimination against Arab athletes and Israel’s inclusion of football clubs that operate in illegal West Bank settlements.

Norwegian support advances the cause into the soccer’s mainstream, lending a weight and legitimacy absent among other European countries whose federations have taken a hard line against Israeli involvement. Türkiye’s position can be dismissed as predictably partisan on religious grounds, while Ireland — which has formally introduced a resolution to expel Israel and has considered boycotting matches against the country — is absent from this World Cup.

The driver of Norway’s political agenda is former national team star Lise Klaveness, a lawyer who serves on the executive committee of European confederation UEFA. She has been a voice for Nordic progressive politics within international soccer: In early 2022, Klaveness spoke to FIFA Congress about human rights, LGBTQ+ safety and transparency concerns in Qatar.

Players have been more circumspect than their leadership, but far from silent. Captain Martin Ødegaard said in early 2025 that the situation in Gaza — which that fall was subject to a peace deal negotiated in part by the United States — was “a background you can’t ignore” when playing Israel. The team’s leading goal-scorer, striker Erling Haaland, has engaged more obliquely with the subject but has not ignored it: A 2023 social media post mourned innocent children dying as attacks escalated on Gaza, and clips circulated of a 2025 video call Haaland held with a freed Israeli hostage.

Politics

Not everyone wants a day off

Published

8 minutes ago

July 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is already considering adding an extra bank holiday to the calendar if England wins a World Cup final. But shutting the country down for a day to celebrate a national high might not be the political winner he thinks it is.

While rank-and-file citizens may thrill at getting a break to celebrate, sober up or sleep in, key political interests — from business groups that fear a disruption to commercial activity to social services that have to trudge on regardless — can balk at an instant holiday.

Countries have a long history of celebrating major on-field victories with off days. Uruguay marked victory in football’s inaugural World Cup with a public holiday in 1930, and Panama gave workers the day off for qualifying to its first-ever World Cup in October 2017. Just beating Argentina in a group-stage game seems a particular reason to celebrate: Cameroon did so on a national holiday over 1990, and Saudi Arabia ordered a nationwide day off for public servants, private sector workers and students alike in 2022.

This year two countries have already redrawn their national calendar after World Cup wins. Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa declared a public holiday for June 26 after his side upset Germany to reach the knockout rounds, thanking players and coaches who had endured “criticism, insults and tough times” before bringing “immense joy” to the country. His post ended with two words: “Tomorrow, holiday!”

Days later, Paraguayan President Santiago Peña did the same after his country’s stunning penalty shootout victory on June 29 over Germany propelled the South American underdogs into the World Cup round of 16. Posting a picture of himself signing the decree, Peña acclaimed the expression of Paraguay’s “grit, faith and strength.” The accompanying decree argued the triumph had gone far beyond sport and that “the government cannot remain indifferent to this tremendous achievement,” making it necessary to allow Paraguayans to celebrate together.

Peña’s government had laid some necessary groundwork for the move. A law adopted in 2025 allows the president to declare up to three temporary public holidays each year by decree for special occasions, including sporting achievements. The measure had been drafted with the World Cup in mind, and was first used after Paraguay qualified for the tournament last September.

But some in Paraguay were not cheering at Peña’s declaration. Even as Paraguay celebrated one of the biggest victories in its football history, business groups — particularly representing micro, small and medium-sized enterprises — complained that the holiday had been announced with virtually no notice, disrupting commercial activity and work schedules. Peña later admitted the decision had been spontaneous.

“I’m very honest. I didn’t think about that before the game,” the president said, acknowledging criticism from the business community. “It was a spontaneous decision.”

Asked this week by reporters on Wednesday whether England winning its first World Cup in 60 years would merit a day off, Starmer replied: “I think I don’t want to jinx it, but ask me again if we get to the final.” The remark fueled speculation that Friday, July 24, could become a one-off holiday if England goes all the way. The decision, however, would likely fall to Starmer’s expected successor, Andy Burnham.

Not everyone is convinced. A Good Morning Britain poll on X found 60.4 percent supported a World Cup bank holiday. Among the minority opposed replies was a user identifying herself as a supermarket worker, who pointed out that essential workers including National Health Service employees would still be on shift while many others enjoyed a long weekend. “Don’t think it’s very fair,” she wrote.

Successive British governments have also generally resisted calls for additional bank holidays, repeatedly pointing to the economic cost. A 2022 Department for Culture, Media and Sport impact assessment estimated that an additional bank holiday would reduce U.K. gross domestic product by around£2.4 billion — a figure ministers continue to cite when responding to calls for extra holidays, including if England were to win this year’s World Cup.

If the Three Lions make history over the next week, Downing Street may discover that deciding whether the country deserves a day off proves almost as politically contentious as winning football’s biggest prize itself.

Politics

The host city is doing all of the hosting, none of the headlining

Published

1 hour ago

July 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

For all the FIFA promotion of the World Cup’s arrival in Miami — think downtown skylines, Latin music and speedboats on Biscayne Bay — today’s quarterfinal match between Norway and England this afternoon will not, in fact, take place along the azure waters of Miami proper.

Instead, star strikers Erling Haaland and Harry Kane will duel this evening in an inland, now-suburban stadium that was once a sandy tract of land where locals would take weekend dirtbike joyrides and come to dump their trash.

The city of Miami Gardens, a predominantly Black community of 114,000 about 15 miles northeast of downtown Miami, is the true host of Florida’s World Cup experience. Since the tournament began, the city has hosted five matches at what has temporarily been rebranded Miami Stadium, with a third-place match next Saturday still to come.

As with many sporting venues in the United States, Miami Stadium was never built to be accessible to a central, walkable, downtown urban core. Instead, the site was chosen by Miami Dolphins owner Joe Robbie in 1984 as a low-income, rural and then-unincorporated alternative to the city of Miami, which wanted to raise rent on the NFL team’s stadium. Instead, Robbie signed a 99-year lease with Dade County for the stadium site, paying $1 a year.

At the time, the local populace was little enthused about the prospect of welcoming a $100 million pro sports stadium in its backyard. Despite a civil rights lawsuit from local homeowners, many of whom were Black, by 1987 the stadium opened to the public.

Nearly 40 years later, that stadium is now a major economic engine for Miami Gardens, which incorporated in 2003. The city, never a glamour destination in the region, is now host to one of the world’s largest sporting events. The Oxford Economics Company’s Tourism Economics Event Impact Calculator predicted that the World Cup would generate about $650 million in economic activity, spread across South Florida, a number that may have been optimistic.

But local leaders are hoping there are intangible benefits for a city too easily confused with its much bigger neighbor.

“It will give us an opportunity to sell our story and the city of Miami Gardens,” Mayor Rodney Harris said in a promotional video for the World Cup. “We want them to come back and visit us after FIFA is all gone … open up a business here in Miami Gardens.”