BICOM

Representatives from across the world met in Bahrain this week yesterday at the FIFA Congress, the decision making arm of football’s international governing body. Up for discussion: six West-Bank-based football clubs playing in the Israeli league system, which the Palestinian Football Association (PFA) claims breach FIFA rules.

The Israeli and Palestinian football associations were braced for a decisive vote on the matter. In a huge blow for the PFA, the FIFA Council removed the item from the congress’s agenda at the 11th hour, saying in a statement that “at this stage it is premature for the FIFA Congress to take any decision”.

Though the clubs in question are small and play in local, amateur leagues, the ramifications of a FIFA vote could have been huge; not only for Israeli football, but for Palestinian political aspirations.

What was the agenda item?

The PFA, a full member of FIFA since 1998, argues that the clubs are breaching Article 72.2 of the FIFA Statutes, that: “clubs may not play on the territory of another member association without the latter’s approval.”

This raises the question: what is the territory of the PFA? The six clubs play in Israeli settlements in Ma’aleh Adumim, Ariel, Kiryat Arba, Givat Ze’ev, Oranit and the Jordan Valley – all of which are on the other side of the Green Line, not on sovereign Israeli territory..

If the international community agrees this is not Israeli territory, in the absence of a Palestinian state, are they within the territory of the PFA? The Palestinian Authority (PA) has effective control over only Area A of the West Bank, and yet all six clubs are based within Area C, which the Oslo Accords stipulate Israel has full civil and military control. .

Israel argues that taking a decision on the matter would require FIFA to define the State of Israel’s borders, which is beyond its remit.

Why was the item removed?

Prime Minister Netanyahu effectively called time on a long campaign to remove the item from the FIFA Congress agenda on Friday after a phone call with FIFA President Gianni Infantino, in which Infantino advised that Israel’s FA should focus their efforts on putting forward a proposed solution.

The sudden turnaround came after the ‘Monitoring Committee Israel-Palestine’, headed by former South African government minister Tokyo Sexwale, presented its report on the situation to the FIFA Council yesterday. Having been unable to reach a resolution acceptable to both PFA head Jibril Rajoub and his Israeli counterpart Ofer Eini, Sexwale offered a series of compromise solutions to the council. The council’s decision to postpone any decision on Israeli settlements seems to have been heavily influenced by this.

Why does it matter?

The football dispute encapsulates the two biggest gripes from both sides in the absence of peace talks: Israeli settlements and incitement to violence in the Palestinian Authority.  Israeli settlements in the West Bank are a controversial issue but they are by no means the only impediment to a peaceful resolution of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. At the same time, the “Prince of Martyrs Khalil Al-Wazir Championship” (named after a Palestinian terrorist who has killed 125 Israelis) is being supervised and organised by the PFA in the lead up to the FIFA Congress.

This issue isn’t going away and the PFA will no doubt push FIFA to make a decision in the future.

The problem for FIFA is that whatever they decide will have huge ramifications far beyond the pitch. A ruling on the PFA’s side would represent a significant international body defining the territory of a Palestinian  state, which no doubt is the intention of the PFA’s four-year-long campaign to have this item on the agenda. On the other hand, ruling on Israel’s side would be interpreted by many as an acknowledgement that the six settlements, and their football clubs, are part of Israeli sovereign territory. FIFA would like to do neither, and yet if the item is ever brought to a vote, they are caught in a zero-sum game where they have to make a choice.

Should FIFA rule against Israel, the likely reprimand will be a six-month window to remove the clubs from the Israeli league system or face suspension from FIFA and the removal of Israel’s national football team from competitive matches such as World Cup Qualifying.

However, compliance would be perhaps more significant still. If the PFA can remove the settlement’s football clubs through FIFA, it might give more impetus to the greater Palestinian aspiration of removing the settlements themselves through the UN. We are potentially seeing a microcosm of the Palestinian strategy to internationalise the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and once again shirk bilateral negotiations, through the prism of football.

On Thursday, the FIFA Congress voted overwhelmingly not to hold a vote on a Palestinian motion, with 73 per cent of member associations agreeing to Infantino’s proposal to postpone any decision. Israel remains under no illusions that this won’t be the end of the saga, with Foreign Ministry Director General Yuval Rotem calling it a “campaign that is expected to continue in the months ahead”.

Whenever the issue resurfaces again, any decision by FIFA is sure to affect far more than six amateur West Bank football clubs.

Editor’s note: this blog was updated on Friday, 12 May, at 2:00pm

Simon Smith is Communications Officer at BICOM.