Infantino looks set to stay, but FIFA faces a new war over power

The battle to force Gianni Infantino out of FIFA may be nearly all over just a few weeks after his opponents thought they would dethrone the president of world soccer's governing body, but the war over how much power he can exercise may only be beginning.

Senior figures in world football increasingly see the crisis triggered by Infantino's abandoned private-investment ​plan shifting away from the question of succession and towards a struggle over the terms of his continued presidency.

One outcome could be a governance compromise under which Infantino remains in office but gives up some power.

The ‌other possibility is a prolonged “hot-cold war” in which clubs, confederations, player representatives and national associations challenge FIFA repeatedly over competitions, money and control of the international calendar.

“What is clear now ... is that he’s going nowhere,” a senior world football executive told Reuters. “A hot-cold war is a very real problem for FIFA and for world football.”

A veteran international sports executive, who has spent decades working with governing bodies, offered a similar assessment, saying Infantino was “hanging on” but questioning how FIFA could operate if many of the game’s most powerful countries and institutions remained opposed to him.

“You would have effectively a civil war within ​the governance which I cannot recall in a sports body before,” the executive said. “Unprecedented.”

That possible scenario of a prolonged and potentially damaging cold war within world football was independently corroborated to Reuters by two other senior football officials.

The prospect points ​to a potentially paradoxical outcome to a crisis that at its height threatened Infantino’s position: he could survive politically while presiding over a governing body in which some of football’s biggest stakeholders ⁠seek to constrain what he can actually do.

“Does he become a lame duck?” the veteran executive asked.

There is little indication that Infantino’s attempt this week to draw a line under the crisis has repaired the rupture.

In a letter to the FIFA Council ​and the presidents of all 211 member associations, Infantino proposed that the Council consider commissioning an independent external review of FIFA’s governance framework for major strategic initiatives.

He also proposed consultations with confederations, associations and other stakeholders over strengthening decision-making and said he remained fully committed ​to leading FIFA.

Several European federations quickly dismissed the move, and UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin issued a stern assessment on Wednesday.

“The project that shattered the unity of world football may be abolished, but the trust it broke has not returned,” Ceferin said in a video address to the Portugal Football Summit.

“Trust in our sport rests on three pillars: unity, transparency, and governance that serves the many, not the few.”

Ceferin did not name Infantino but his remarks were a clear reference to the proposal to sell a 20% stake in FIFA’s commercial rights, including rights linked to the World ​Cup, to private investors.

The project was dropped in July after opposition from European soccer's governing body UEFA, the Asian Football Confederation and North American confederation CONCACAF.

For 56-year-old Swiss-Italian Infantino, that leaves one route to a less confrontational settlement, which is a reform substantial enough ​to persuade his opponents that power inside FIFA has genuinely shifted.

The senior world football executive said one possible outcome could be the creation of a new body or structure that diluted the authority of the president.

Infantino’s governance proposals were the “bare minimum” needed to give him room to remain ‌in office, the ⁠executive said, adding that the question was whether he would accept meaningful changes.

How far any compromise could go would depend on “how much Infantino is willing to cede” and how much his opponents were willing to fight to take away, the world football executive said.

Reforms introduced after the downfall of former FIFA chief Sepp Blatter were intended in part to reduce the power concentrated in the presidency.

Yet senior figures now see another battle developing over how much authority the FIFA president should wield.

If no settlement is reached, the alternative could be attritional rather than spectacular.

The world football executive said clubs could fight FIFA over the Club World Cup, financial distributions and player release; player representatives could challenge the calendar; national associations could obstruct initiatives; and major confederations could contest ​attempts to expand or reshape FIFA competitions.

“Maybe it seems like we’re ​boiling down to two options now,” the executive said.

“One, ⁠a compromise where Gianni gives up some of his power and there are some new bodies that are created or, two, a permanent hot-cold war where all the stakeholders just fight every issue.”

That could include expanded World Cups, bigger or more frequent Club World Cups and commercial distribution decisions, the executive said.

The result would not necessarily be a formal break with FIFA. Instead, opponents could make every ​major initiative harder to deliver.

The veteran sports executive said the challenge went to the heart of how global governing bodies function.

“The importance of unity. Keeping these monster sports organisations together, they ​are not political parties,” the executive ⁠said. “This will be new territory.”

There is another reason the focus is shifting towards life with Infantino rather than replacing him: his position appears to have strengthened since the crisis first erupted.

A national association president, who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity, believes Infantino’s opponents missed their best opportunity when the backlash was at its peak and that he is now rebuilding support ahead of the March election.

The FIFA president has a succession of opportunities in the coming months to meet national association leaders at tournaments, congresses and confederation events, including several gatherings in ⁠Africa.

The association president ​expects Infantino to use those meetings to maintain support among football leaders through to the FIFA presidential election in March 2027.

The political significance of smaller associations ​has also been highlighted by a proposal from Ceferin and CONCACAF President Victor Montagliani for FIFA to distribute at least $10 million from its reserves to each of its 211 member associations during the next financial cycle.

For many associations heavily reliant on FIFA funding, such sums could be transformative.

If Infantino is reelected, the association president believes ​some federations that have opposed him may eventually become less hostile, concluding there is little to gain from four years of permanent confrontation.

That possibility means a "cold war" is not inevitable.