On the sidelines of the trophy presentation following the Chelsea vs. Paris Saint-Germain final at the FIFA Club World Cup, an image of Alireza Faghani, the renowned Iranian referee, standing next to Donald Trump, the former President of the United States, received wide coverage in the media and online. Standing with a smile and similar pose beside one of the most reviled anti-Iranian figures of recent years sparked fundamental questions about the responsibilities of national icons and their relationship with collective memory and historical identity.
Alireza Faghani is undoubtedly one of Iran’s most prominent refereeing figures on the global stage, someone who has elevated Iran’s technical standing in football refereeing by officiating at the world’s most prestigious tournaments. But the issue at hand is not his technical ability; it is about his behavior and stance during one of the most sensitive periods in Iran’s history, amid the unjust military aggression by the United States and the Zionist regime against our country – an act with implications far beyond the realm of refereeing and sports, extending into the spheres of politics and the historical memory of Iranians.
Trump is not just another political figure. During his first term, he was the architect of the “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, which disrupted medicine imports, deprived patients with rare diseases of treatment, and ordered the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, a national hero of Iranians, in a third country. In his second term, during the recent 12-day war, after Israel’s attack on Iran that martyred senior military commanders, nuclear scientists, and civilians, he supported these actions and then directly entered the war, bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities. Under such circumstances, an Iranian referee standing next to such a figure, without any sign of coldness or distance, cannot simply be deemed “apolitical.” Sometimes indifference or inaction is deeply political, even if the actor did not intend to make a political statement.
The myth of sports being apolitical
In response to criticism, some emphasize the need to separate sports from politics. However, this claim is more of a modern myth aimed at neutralizing human sensitivities in sports than a reflection of reality. Sport, especially at the professional and international levels, has always been a stage for showcasing power, ideology, national identity, civil resistance, and even political protest. From the Berlin Olympics under the Nazi regime to the sports boycott of apartheid South Africa, from the raised fists of Black runners in Mexico City to Lionel Messi’s reaction to the Gaza massacres, sports have always stood at the heart of the world’s political and social conflicts.
Faghani’s conduct, while not explicitly prohibited legally or ceremonially, is thought-provoking when compared with the actions of other global sports figures. In the 1968 Olympics, American runners Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised their fists on the podium in protest against racism; they were banned but are now symbols of moral courage in sports. Or Mohamed Salah, the Egyptian star of Liverpool, was so upset when pictured alongside Ramzan Kadyrov, the Chechen leader, that he almost withdrew from Egypt’s national team. Xavi Hernandez, the Spanish football legend, also refused to be photographed with Israeli officials. Even Lionel Messi and the Argentina national team cancelled their friendly match against Israel in 2018 in protest against crimes against Palestinians.
In all these instances, the athletes did not use overt political language, but their choices carried moral, national, or human significance. Sometimes, simply not standing in a frame or not smiling is enough to demonstrate loyalty to the public conscience.
It could have been different
Alireza Faghani, without chanting slogans or showing overt confrontation, could have avoided appearing in that unpleasant and distressing frame, or by maintaining symbolic distance, conveyed that the Iranian referee is a guardian of national pride and memory. Of course, even if he had taken a more positive, clear, and explicit stance in denouncing Trump, it would have been better, but at the very least, he could have engaged in a negative or rejecting gesture. Undoubtedly, many Iranians who have suffered from the pressures of war, sanctions, and threats understand and value such sensitivities.
In the past month, as Iran has grappled with war and its aftermath, almost all national figures in politics, culture, society, sports, and the arts have, in various ways, demonstrated their patriotism and Iranian pride, leading the condemnation of American-Israeli warmongering crimes. These actions have come even as many of these national figures hold significant criticisms and disagreements with the current political structure, but when it comes to aggression against Iran, they have bravely and clearly stood with the people and patriots against the aggressors. Perhaps Alireza Faghani also has complaints or criticisms of certain management decisions, which are understandable and even defensible, but national interests are so grave and significant that they can temporarily bracket out grievances and lead to defending Iran and opposing its invaders.
Faghani should not be judged merely as an individual, but as a symbol. In today’s world, national figures inevitably carry meanings far beyond their professional expertise. They play roles in the media frame, in public memory, and as national symbols. In such deeply meaningful moments, choosing pure neutrality is itself a stance. While the renowned Iranian referee is precise and disciplined on the football field, on another field – the deeply meaningful ground of Iranian hearts and minds – especially in such grave and turbulent times, he will certainly have no worthy or honorable place.
NOURNEWS