Amid such football diplomacy, there have also been concerns about the impact that some of Trump’s policies and statements could have on the World Cup, and uncertainty over how welcome visitors from some countries will be.
In June the White House listed 19 countries, predominantly in Africa, the Middle East and the Caribbean, which would face full or partial immigration restrictions, referencing a need to manage security threats.
Amid suggestions that the list could be expanded to as many as 30 countries after an Afghan man was identified as the suspect in the recent shooting of two National Guard soldiers near the White House, Fifa has vowed to have a welcoming and unifying tournament.
But Iran and Haiti, whose teams have qualified for the World Cup, are among the countries affected by the ban. Last week Iran said they planned to boycott the draw because of the limited number of visas for their delegation.
The June executive order exempts athletes and coaching staff from travelling for the World Cup, but fans could face a ban.
“We want to make sure that we’re as welcoming as possible,” Andrew Giuliani, the executive director of the White House’s World Cup Task Force, said on Wednesday.
Giuliani hailed a programme designed to shorten wait times for interviews for visitor visas for those with tickets, but he did not rule out Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids targeting undocumented immigrants at World Cup venues. Giuliani insisted that authorities wanted to ensure visitors came into the US legally to prioritise the safety of US citizens.
Such a stance worries civil liberties campaigners, with Human Rights Watch (HRW) claiming the draw will take place against “a backdrop of violent detentions of immigrants, National Guard deployments in US cities, and the obsequious cancellation of Fifa’s own anti-racism and anti-discrimination campaigns”. They are among a group of organisations who on Wednesday claimed the World Cup was at increasing danger of being “weaponised for authoritarian aims.”
“There is still time to honour Fifa’s promises for a World Cup not tainted by human rights abuses, but the clock is ticking,” HRW said.
Having praised Infantino as “one of the greatest men of sport” during a meeting at the Oval Office last month, Trump suggested he might even take matches away from Democratic-run host cities if he had concerns over safety and security.
While it is unclear whether the president will – or even could – follow through with a move that would cause major logistical and legal disruption, his words added to the uncertainty surrounding the tournament.
At the same meeting Trump suggested he could launch “strikes” against Mexico if it would stop drugs from being trafficked into the US. Coming after Trump’s trade policies had already caused friction with both Mexico and Canada, it only reinforced concerns about the level of co-operation between the three World Cup co-hosts over issues such as security at the tournament.
Infantino could claim that, given the unpredictability of some of Trump’s statements, having a close relationship with him is even more crucial.
But others would argue it also risks impeding his ability to stand up to the US president.
