With just over 100 days until the 2026 World Cup kicks off in North America, a fresh geopolitical crisis has cast a long shadow over the tournament.

The United States, one of the three host nations alongside Canada and Mexico, has launched military strikes against Iran as part of a joint operation with Israel. Retaliatory attacks have followed across the Middle East, significantly escalating tensions in an already volatile region.

Against this backdrop, Iran have qualified for what would be their fourth consecutive World Cup. The question now is unavoidable: will they still take part?

You don't have to read everything — just the right thing. 1440's daily newsletter distills the day's biggest stories from 100+ sources into one quick, 5-minute read. It's the fastest way to stay sharp, sound informed, and actually understand what's happening in the world. Join 4.5 million readers who start their day the smart way.

Join for free today!

Iran are scheduled to play group matches against New Zealand and Belgium in Los Angeles, followed by a fixture against Egypt in Seattle.

In previous escalations between the US and Iran, including last summer’s bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, the Iranian Football Federation did not withdraw from competition. This time, however, the situation appears more serious.

Mehdi Taj, head of Iran’s football federation, has reportedly cast doubt on participation.

“With what happened and with that attack by the United States, it is unlikely that we can look forward to the World Cup, but the sports chiefs are the ones who must decide on that.”

Complicating matters further is the reported killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, creating profound uncertainty over the country’s political future. In such circumstances, predicting who would ultimately decide on Iran’s involvement is difficult.

Dr Sanam Vakil of Chatham House described the conflict as existential for Tehran.

“This new stage of conflict is existential and clearly about regime survival. It is also unlikely to end quickly.”

At present, FIFA officials are publicly stating they expect Iran to participate. The governing body says it is closely monitoring developments, with general secretary Mattias Grafstrom emphasising that the priority is a safe and inclusive tournament.

Privately, there is said to be an expectation that Iran will still travel. But contingency planning is under discussion.

Should Iran withdraw or be unable to participate, attention would turn to the Asian Football Confederation.

Possible replacements could include Iraq, who are still in contention via a continental play-off, or the United Arab Emirates, who narrowly missed out on qualification.

FIFA has not confirmed what mechanism would be used to replace Iran, but precedent suggests the next highest-ranked eligible team from the confederation could be invited.

Meanwhile, Iran’s women’s national team continue preparations for the Asia Cup in Australia. Training sessions have gone ahead as planned on the Gold Coast, with the AFC confirming it remains in regular contact with Iranian officials.

Coach Marziyeh Jafari focused solely on football at a recent press conference.

“This tournament is an opportunity to show the potential of Iranian women.”

Even if Iran do participate, security concerns will intensify significantly.

The United States previously introduced an executive order banning nationals from 12 countries, including Iran, from entering the country. Although World Cup players and coaching staff are exempt, visa tensions already flared during the tournament draw in Washington.

Matches involving Iran at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar were played amid mass protests against the Iranian government. During their game against Wales, confrontations broke out between supporters with opposing political views.

The potential for similar tensions in 2026 is considerable, particularly in Los Angeles, which is home to one of the largest Iranian diaspora communities in the world.

Nick McGeehan of FairSquare described the situation bluntly.

“We are in uncharted territory in that we are just over three months away from the start of the World Cup and the hosts have just launched a war against a participating country.”

He added that if Iran were to withdraw, FIFA might quietly welcome the reduced risk of unrest.

The crisis also brings renewed scrutiny on Gianni Infantino, president of FIFA, and his close relationship with US President Donald Trump.

In December, FIFA awarded Trump its inaugural ‘Peace Prize’ during the 2026 World Cup draw, citing his role in diplomatic efforts in the Middle East. Since then, the United States has undertaken military operations in several regions, including Iran.

Infantino has defended the award, arguing that football cannot solve geopolitical crises. He has repeatedly insisted that FIFA must remain neutral.

Yet critics argue that awarding a peace prize to a sitting political leader, particularly one overseeing active military operations, inevitably politicises the governing body.

In the UK, 27 politicians from Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and Plaid Cymru signed a parliamentary motion earlier this year urging international sporting bodies to consider expelling the United States from major competitions if violations of international law were confirmed.

In Germany, a football association official publicly raised the possibility of a boycott.

Such calls are likely to grow louder if hostilities continue.

This is not the first time a World Cup has unfolded against a controversial political backdrop.

The 2018 tournament proceeded in Russia despite widespread criticism following the annexation of Crimea and allegations of election interference and cyber attacks. It was only after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 that FIFA imposed a ban.

Interestingly, Infantino has recently suggested that isolating Russia may not have achieved its intended outcome, and has expressed interest in future reintegration.

There appears to be no appetite within FIFA to sanction the United States, despite growing criticism.

This perceived inconsistency may fuel further debate over how global football’s governing body applies its statutes during geopolitical crises.

The 2026 World Cup was already shaping up to be politically charged. The tournament will coincide with celebrations marking the 250th anniversary of the US Declaration of Independence, and President Trump is expected to maintain a visible presence throughout the competition.

There are additional concerns over funding gaps in host cities, the potential use of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers at venues, cartel violence in Mexico, and trade tensions between the US and Canada.

The escalating conflict with Iran compounds these issues.

Whether Iran ultimately competes or not, the political context surrounding this World Cup is now more complex than ever.

Football has often claimed to unite across borders. In 2026, that ideal will be tested in unprecedented ways.

What is certain is this: in little more than 100 days, the world’s biggest sporting event will kick off under a geopolitical cloud unlike any in recent memory.