At the Kennedy Center during the 2026 World Cup draw in Washington, FIFA president Gianni Infantino stepped off the sidelines of sport and into partisan theater by presenting Donald Trump with what FIFA billed as its inaugural Peace Prize. The moment was staged on a global stage — an award ceremony squeezed into the pomp of a sporting event — and it has left many Americans asking why the world’s football body is handing out political plaudits to a sitting U.S. leader.
Trump accepted the golden trophy with the kind of blunt gratitude his supporters recognize, calling it “one of the great honors of my life” and taking part in the draw that will shape next summer’s tournament. Whether you cheer him or loathe him, he treated the moment like any leader would: public, proud, and focused on projecting American influence on a global stage.
Infantino’s praise didn’t come out of nowhere — the FIFA president has openly lavished compliments on Trump before, even suggesting he “definitely deserves” a Nobel Peace Prize in public posts and remarks that blurred the line between sports administration and political endorsement. That kind of fawning intimacy between a sports boss and a foreign political figure ought to make every patriot uneasy about the politicization of institutions meant to unite people, not pick winners in partisan wars.
Unsurprisingly, watchdogs have begun to push back. FairSquare and other accountability groups have filed formal complaints saying Infantino may have violated FIFA’s own rules on political neutrality and may have created the prize without proper authority. Those are serious charges that deserve investigation, because no organization — especially one controlling global football and a World Cup co-hosted by the United States — should be used as a vehicle for political favoritism.
The predictable media pile-on has already started, with late-night comics and establishment outlets ridiculing Trump and calling the prize a vanity stunt. Dismissive mockery from celebrities doesn’t change the larger issue: institutions run by charismatic leaders should not trade their credibility for applause lines or photo ops with American presidents. The real story is not the jokes, it’s why FIFA felt the need to invent a shiny object to curry favor.
Let’s be honest about what’s happening here: global institutions are increasingly political and cozy with whoever best serves their interests at the moment. Conservatives who believe in fair play and institutional integrity should be as alarmed by Infantino’s behavior as anyone on the left who pretends to care about neutrality. If FIFA wants to hand out trophies, fine — but do it transparently, with rules that can’t be bent for celebrity warm fuzzies. No one should applaud the laundering of politics as “unity.”
The filing of ethics complaints shows there may be teeth left in FIFA’s governance despite years of scandal and misrule; the organization’s own code even contemplates sanctions for breaches of political neutrality. If that process is followed, it will be a test of whether global bodies still answer to rules or only to charisma and influence. Americans should demand that any probe be thorough and public so that citizens can see whether the same standards apply to all.
For hardworking, patriotic Americans, this episode is a reminder: elites will always weaponize institutions when it suits them, and they will reward friends while slandering opponents. Stand with leaders who put America first and call out the hypocrites who think global applause lets them rewrite the rules. If FIFA wants to be a force for unity, it should start by keeping politics out of the game and respecting the sovereignty of nations it claims to celebrate.
