Can Mexico and the United States host a World Cup together?

The NAFTA world cup is beginning soon, but the host countries’ relationships are under significant strain. Antonio De Loera-Brust shares his thoughts on the matter.

A shared North American World Cup should bring Mexico, the United States and Canada closer together. Both U.S. President Trump and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum (as well as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney) are clearly invested in the 2026 World Cup’s success.

Yet despite the shared interest in a successful World Cup, broader U.S.-Mexico cooperation hangs by a thread. There are several irritants in what is both nations’ most important bilateral relationship. A possible trade war that would devastate both nations looms as the USMCA, the trade agreement between the United States, Mexico, and Canada negotiated during President Trump’s first term, comes up for review. 

“The U.S. depends on Mexican help to keep border crossing numbers low”

Migration — which has been Donald Trump’s signature issue since declaring his presidential candidacy in 2015 with a racist diatribe against Mexican immigrants — is a source of both conflict and cooperation. The U.S. depends on Mexican help to keep border crossing numbers low, but also increasingly faces Mexican backlash for the brutal treatment of Mexican immigrants already in the United States. 

Looming above it all is the prospect of United States intervention in Mexico. The U.S. attack on Venezuela in January, as well as a continuing strikes on alleged drug smuggling vessels in both the Pacific and Caribbean, have been a wake up call for Mexico. Fear of its northern neighbor has led Mexico to largely acquiesce to the U.S. oil blockade against Cuba.

More problematic for Mexico itself, and potentially for its ability to host the World Cup, is U.S. pressure on Mexico to escalate its internal conflict with drug cartels  — with the threat being the U.S. will take matters into its own hands if not. Yet any escalation by the Mexican state against cartel groups usually fosters retaliatory violence and general insecurity, which present a direct threat to Mexico’s ability to host the World Cup. 

This dynamic played out clearly earlier this year when Mexican authorities’ killing of a major cartel leader provoked a series of retaliatory attacks across Mexico’s west coast, including in popular international tourist destinations such as Puerto Vallarta. The chaos raised questions about Mexico’s suitability as a World Cup host. For a friendly game against Iceland played in Mexico later that week, the Mexican government made a show of providing intense security, even deploying troops around the stadium. 

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum finds herself between a rock and a hard place. The Trump administration has effectively given her a terrible choice: escalate the violence in Mexico herself — or risk the US intervention on Mexican soil. Such a U.S. intervention would put Mexico in the impossible position of either surrendering its sovereignty or ending up in a shooting war with a military superpower. Either way, it would be very hard to enjoy the World Cup if there’s a war unfolding off the pitch. 

“A U.S. administration determined to make the World Cup an economic and diplomatic success would tone down the rhetoric, soften policies, and work to reassure visitors.”

North of the border, the United States also faces questions about its own ability to safely host the games. Foremost among these is the understandable fear that the World Cup will be marred by President Trump’s brutal immigration crackdown, which has recently turned American cities like Los Angeles and Minneapolis into the tense scene of confrontations between federal agents and civilian protestors opposed to the President’s deportation policy. A number of horror stories of European and Latin American tourists getting caught up in the President’s deportation dragnet have made the idea of visiting the United States seem much riskier than before. This is no doubt a factor in the so far lower than anticipated number of fans heading to the United States this summer. This shortfall in demand is reflected in vacant hotel rooms and falling ticket prices.

A U.S. administration determined to make the World Cup an economic and diplomatic success would tone down the rhetoric, soften policies, and work to reassure visitors. It’s worth pointing out that both Russia and Qatar worked hard to reassure international fans that they would be safe visiting both countries, softening repressive policies (if only temporarily). With few exceptions, the United States is doing the inverse. Indeed, it is Mexico that has stepped up to offer itself as a host for the Iranian national team, who will play their World Cup matches in the United States but who the Trump administration did not wish to let into the country. Iran’s base camp will be in the border city of Tijuana, just south of San Diego, adding to the city’s eclectic mix of vast maquiladora factories for the U.S. export market, deportees just expelled from the U.S., and migrants from Haiti and elsewhere hoping to eventually head north. 

Of the three North American host countries, only Canada is looking entirely stable. (Even Canada has been threatened with U.S. annexation, while Trump-aligned voices are fanning the flames of separatist sentiment in Alberta). For the United States, the chaos that threatens its World Cup success is self-inflicted. For Mexico, existing security challenges are now exacerbated by the U.S. as well. As Mexican President Porfirio Diaz once said: “Poor Mexico. So far from God, so close to the United States”. 

A successful World Cup will still do much to raise morale, especially for Mexico. For Mexican migrants in the United States, any Mexican team victories will have special resonance off the pitch. Mexico flags and jerseys are easily spotted at any large scale protest against Trump’s immigration raids. In California especially, it can be hard to tell the difference between a Mexico game watch party and an anti-ICE rally.

Though Mexico and the United States are not likely to meet on the pitch, they will still be compared as hosts. Mexico works to guarantee security for visiting fans — drawing critiques that it cares more about foreign fans than its own citizens. The United States has the opposite problem — it is scaring off potential visitors. This reflects both nations’ geopolitical position. Under U.S. pressure, Mexico is looking for new friends and trading partners, including in Europe. The United States meanwhile seems not just closed off from the world, but actively threatening to its neighbors.

Antonio De Loera-Brust

Antonio De Loera-Brust is a communications director for the United Farm Workers. He previously served as Special Assistant to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken in 2021 and 2022 and as a staffer in the U.S. House of Representatives. He is an Alumn of Atlantik-Brücke’s Young Leaders Program and lives in California.