Short-sightedness or Realpolitik 101?: Africa chooses Infantino for better or worse

Gianni Infantino’s once seemingly impregnable position as Fifa president has hung in recent weeks by a thread and African football leadership’s support right now provides the main strands of it.

Calls for the Italian’s head have grown — including from three major international regions in a strongly-worded open letter declaring his recent backtracked plan to sell an interest in the World Cup was a “fundamental breach of trust”.

Uefa, Concacaf and the AFC said that “when trust is broken through deception, when an individual places himself above the collective that entrusted him with authority, that duty has been abandoned”.

Infantino is facing a revolt after his failed plan to sell stakes in the World Cup to private equity investors.

Through it all, African football leaders — it cannot be gauged what support Infantino has on the ground from ordinary people on the continent — have stood firm in their support of Infantino.

Confederation of African Football president Patrice Motsepe was first, though his vote of confidence came before the plan to sell a 20% minority stake in a $20bn commercial subsidiary to a private investor group led by Joshua Kushner, brother of US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.

Motsepe was speaking in a press conference in Johannesburg on July 22 when Infantino was already facing a firestorm over a 2026 World Cup in North America the Caf president praised as the most successful in history, though one that faced unprecedented controversies being held in the US of the Trump administration. Motsepe stressed, “he’s not just a good friend, he’s a loyal friend. He’s loyal to Africa …”

Caf vice-president Fouzi Lekjaa of Morocco, which will co-host the 2030 World Cup, has also been vocal in his support. Last week the Confederation of African Football (Caf), after taking some time to deliberate, solidly threw its weight behind Infantino.

“We are committed to continue working together with Fifa, its member associations, other football confederations and stakeholders to safeguard and adhere to governance, due process,” Motsepe said in a statement.

Caf and ostensibly Africa’s backing as Infantino seeks re-election next year is hugely significant as the continent has the second-largest voting bloc.

This is the lay of the land in Fifa’s continental voting blocs:

• Uefa (Europe) has the most with 55 votes. Having historically voted fairly cohesively, Europe, also the powerhouse of football, often drives much of Fifa policy.

• Caf has the second-most by just one vote, 54. That Africa historically has voted unanimously, as in Infantino’s re-election campaigns, makes this a hugely crucial voting bloc.
• AFC (Asia) has 46 votes and are a diverse bloc, ranging from heavily-funded Gulf states to East and Southeast Asian markets. It has voted almost en masse for Infantino in his three elections.
• Concacaf (North America, Central America and the Caribbean), another geographically and economically diverse bloc, has 35 votes.
• OFC (Oceania), tiny in influence, has historically aligned its interests with larger confederations with its 11.
• Conmebol (South America) has just 10 votes despite being the second-largest footballing powerhouse on the field behind Europe. Its influence is greater than pure numbers given it houses powerhouses Brazil and Argentina.

So Africa’s vote really counts in a Fifa election. Infantino is, of course, like any Fifa president, keenly aware of that.

He has kept a close relationship with Motsepe, who he helped get elected. Infantino and Fifa brokered the deal that saw Motsepe’s opponents when he first stood in 2021 withdraw their candidacies.

Soon after Infantino’s first election to replace disgraced Sepp Blatter in his 2016, he instituted the Fifa Forward Programme to replace his predecessor’s Financial Assistance Programme, notably increasing monetary support to associations.

This is the reason many smaller nations could be crucial to his survival now or in Fifa’s elections in Morocco in March 2027. Such grants are not crucial to survival and hugely influential in revolutionising structures to European associations, which they are to smaller countries. And of course, many of those small federations are African.

It might be cynically viewed as motivated by ensuring Africa’s support. It also cannot be denied Fifa Forward has immensely benefited, if not fundamentally transformed, African football. Investment topping $1.2bn to Caf, regions and associations has resulted in modern training centres, stadium upgrades and sustainable administrative structures across the continent.

Similarly, Motsepe can be viewed with suspicion on the continent for his ties to Infantino and decisions such as the Africa Cup of Nations (Afcon) going from a two-year to four-year cycle starting in 2028, something the Fifa president had pushed for. Yet the financial influence of both administrators seems mostly seen as superseding such concerns.

Criticism of Africa’s stance on Infantino as transactional has merit. Africa perhaps also has genuine reason to be wary of a Uefa-led overthrow of the incumbent.

Motsepe has been central to a major co-operation between the Uefa of president Aleksander Čeferin and Caf in a Memorandum of Understanding to 2031 that supports the sustainable football development on both continents through knowledge exchange, training programmes, and joint youth initiatives. Yet historically the two continents have often been at odds in their view of Fifa policy and leadership.

Uefa as a body has never explicitly expressed disagreement in more places for African teams at the World Cup. The closest it came was when Čeferin publicly opposed the expansion of the showpiece from 32 to 38 teams in this year’s World Cup, saying it devalued the qualifiers and resulted in “uninteresting” matches.

The sentiment against giving Africa more World Cup places and of disrespect to the Afcon has been underlying or often expressed by leading European football figures or coaches.

Former Uefa president Michel Platini argued against increasing slots for Asian and African teams, pressing rather for the expansion of participants.

Africa faces a tricky balance. Right now it is keeping its path of support for a Fifa president whose apparent self-interest and megalomaniacal leadership style and apparent courting of the resurgent right-wing governments globally, most notable by his open fawning of Trump, including awarding the US president a farcical Fifa Peace Prize, shows him an unfavourable leader for the better wider interests of the sport. It does so because Infantino is seen to be the right leader for African interests.

It may not be the best path for the long-term interests of African football, which exists as part of the global game. Until a potential successor emerges, though — and here, perhaps, lies the rub — who can promise Africa more than Infantino can, the continent looks sure to hold firm. Realpolitik 101, perhaps?