Arturo Sarukhan, Mexico’s ambassador to the United States between 2007 and 2013, is recalling the earliest conversations that took place over a bid for the United States and Mexico to co-host a men’s soccer World Cup.
“It must have been 2010,” he begins, speaking in a telephone interview with The Athletic. ““I saw it as a vehicle to deepen societal ties between both countries and send a very powerful message to the rest of the world about this unique bilateral relationship between two countries that are singularly important for one another.”
Sarukhan’s logic? This would be a World Cup with no need for the construction of white-elephant stadiums. His underlying reason? To make a powerful statement to both Mexicans and Americans.
The ambition extended further when Canada was invited to join the 2026 ‘United’ bid that in 2018 secured hosting rights for 2026. Seven years on, however, and 15 months out from the tournament’s opening game, Sarukhan is alarmed by the geo-political situation that has gripped North America and its neighbors since Donald Trump began a second term as U.S. President in January.
Tensions turned to sport during the NHL’s 4 Nations Face-Off in February and, this week, it is men’s soccer’s turn in the spotlight.
The Concacaf Nations League title playoffs catapult together the United States with three nations that have been caught in the crosshairs of Trump’s administration. Both semifinals (the U.S. men’s national team against Panama and Canada versus Mexico) will be played at SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles on Thursday, along with Sunday’s final.
The games come after the U.S. government sought to impose tariffs on Mexico and Canada, and Trump described Canada as America’s 51st state in December. He has also claimed the Gulf of Mexico will be renamed the Gulf of America, declared a national emergency at his country’s southern border with Mexico, designated Mexican cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and repeatedly spoken of intentions to wrest back control of the Panama Canal.
Ahead of the Concacaf Nations League final four, USMNT head coach Mauricio Pochettino, who is from Argentina, and Panama counterpart Thomas Christiansen, who is Danish, largely steered clear of political talk. U.S. winger Christian Pulisic will not, he says, do the Trump dance again if he scores.
Jesse Marsch, a native of the U.S. state of Wisconsin who is the Canadian team’s head coach, waded into the political situation last month but has scaled back such talk this week.
Mexican head coach Javier Aguirre, meanwhile, stressed that he is no political authority, but reiterated that the Gulf of Mexico’s name should be unchanged and spoke up in favor of those from other lands who seek sanctuary in the United States.
Mexico coach Aguirre had little time for suggestions the Gulf of Mexico should be renamed. (Pedro H. Tesch / Getty Images)
“It is not easy to leave your country in search of a better life,” Aguirre said. “I identify a lot with these people who came looking for the American dream.”
Ahead of the Nations League semis, The Athletic spoke to regional experts to break down the current situation and why it may cloud this week’s tournament and next year’s World Cup.
Canada: tariffs, Trudeau and anthems
Since sweeping back into the White House in January, President Trump has repeatedly threatened tariffs on Canada and Mexico, eventually levying 25 percent on steel and aluminum imports and threatening to double that for Canada, before pulling back. These measures, combined with references to annexing Canada and referring to former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as a “governor”, have combined to turn public opinion in America’s northern neighbor against the U.S. administration.
Canadian supporters at NBA and NHL games booed the U.S. national anthem in February, as well as at the 4 Nations Face-Off. Jon Cooper, the Canada coach, described his team’s 3-2 victory over the U.S. in the final as a win for over 40 million people.
Stewart Prest, a lecturer in political science and international relations at the University of British Columbia in the Canadian city of Vancouver, explained to The Athletic how a game that would ordinarily have been a “fun little sideshow” in the middle of the season instead “took on nation-building status in Canada.”
“It was a moment for the country to stand together and stand against a country whose leader is, on a daily basis, often multiple times per day, calling into question the very sovereignty of the country,” Prest added. “While Canada is in no way looking for this fight, this is a way to stand together through sport in what we still consider to be an international competition.
Connor McDavid’s overtime winner against the U.S. clinched the 4 Nations Face-Off for Canada. (Maddie Meyer / Getty Images)
“This moment of sport became an opportunity for everyone who had in some sense been questioning their place in the world and the place of Canada in their world to reunite and give full voice to their pride in this country.”
Julian Karaguesian is an economics lecturer at Montreal’s McGill University who has previously worked in the international trade and finance branch of the Ministry of Finance in Canada. He describes this moment as “overtly the most difficult in modern times” between the U.S. and Canada.
Karaguesian was present for the U.S. vs Canada 4 Nations Face-Off first-phase game in Montreal. “It was deafening, the booing,” he said. “What they’re seeing on the news is these big giants (the U.S.) that we’ve been loyal to attacking us and threatening our prosperity. They’re going to do the only thing they can do, which is boo.
“I felt anger, I felt defiance, I even felt resentment. It was real. What was coming from the mass of people was genuine. It was saying ‘To Hell with you, and we’re going to express it in a sporting event’.”
Is it now going to be strange to share a World Cup between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico? President Trump, during a news conference in the Oval Office at the White House with FIFA president Gianni Infantino, said the tension will make next year’s tournament more “exciting”.
FIFA president Gianni Infantino visited Trump at the White House in March. (Jim Watson / AFP via Getty Images)
“It’s starting to feel weird,” said Karaguesian, “especially between Canada and the United States. It’s uncomfortable. There’s also little things, like Canadians are going to have to register now at the border if they’re staying (in the U.S.) for longer than 30 days. Trump has a travel ban in the pipeline on different countries — walls and obstacles going up as we get ready to host the world’s biggest sporting event next year. There’s going to be a lot of patriotism and nationalism. It’s going to be quite stark if these tariffs and trade wars continue.”
As for this week’s events, Canada’s American coach Marsch told reporters last month: “One thing’s for sure; when I look forward to a month from now, I know that this will fuel our team, the mentality we have. The will that we have to play for our country.”
Panama: a canal, bridging, and sporting “destruction”
During President Trump’s inauguration speech in January, he outlined his ambitions to expand American influence and control of the Panama Canal. He claimed: “China is operating the Panama Canal. And we didn’t give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back.”
Later, in a speech to Congress, Trump claimed the U.S. takeback had “already started.”
Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino accused Trump of “lying” in a response posted on X. He added: “I reject, on behalf of Panama and all Panamanians, this new affront to the truth and to our dignity as a nation.”
Panamanian officials have sought to deny Chinese control of the canal, but the vital waterway between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans is just the headline tension between the countries. There has been further controversy because, as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to deter migration into the United States, it has secured deals with Central American nations, such as Panama, to act as “bridging” locations, where individuals can be temporarily held before being returned to their land of origin or moved on to a third country.
Carlos Ruiz-Hernandez, Panama’s deputy foreign minister, denied the pressure on the Panama Canal had influenced his country’s decision to accept deportation flights. He told the Associated Press: “This is in Panama’s national interest. We are a friend of the U.S. and want to work with them to send a signal of deterrence.”
President Mulino confirmed in early February that 119 individuals had arrived on a U.S. Air Force flight, with migrants from countries including China, Uzbekistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan aboard. He said three flights, totalling 360 people, were anticipated. Those who were willing to go back to their countries — around 150 to date — were returned with the assistance of United Nations agencies and paid for by the United States. Yet many were unable to do so for safety reasons, which has since created a wave of negative publicity and legal action against Panama.
Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino discussed the Panama Canal controversy in a press conference earlier this year. (Arnulfo Franco / AFP via Getty Images)
The alleged conditions in Panama provoked a lawsuit against Panama before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The New York Times reported that the lawsuit claimed the United States violated the right to asylum on account of religious persecution in the case of some Iranian Christian converts and that Panama has violated domestic and international laws, such as the American Convention on Human Rights, in its detention of the migrants.
The Athletic spoke this week with Silvia Serna Roman, one of the lawyers who has worked on the case, who said she has just returned from Panama having conducted information-gathering interviews with those being held there.
She explained: “Our concern was that they didn’t have any legal assistance and couldn’t know exactly what the situation was regarding their rights. Panama was giving no clear avenues on what was going to happen to the people. At the time, the only option they were given was to return to their countries, and most of them face grave danger in their countries.”
She said the individuals were later taken to a camp in the Panamanian jungle.
“Men were separated from women, so that’s good,” said Serna Roman. “But they say that the complaints are more on specific points: they weren’t able to use the showers every day and sleeping in close quarters carried certain health issues. They were only allowed their phones at the time that the Panamanian authorities decided. That was also an issue because time zones are very different and some people were not able to communicate with their families. They all complained about the water. There were no unaccompanied minors. They were not separated from their families, the youngest child I saw was a nine-year-old boy.”
The U.S. State Department and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, as well as the Panamanian government via the country’s embassy in Washington D.C, did not respond to a request for comment.
Panama’s security minister Frank Abrego announced on March 7 that the 112 migrants in the jungle camp would be released, with 30-day humanitarian passes granted which may be extended to 90 days, but the individuals now find themselves in Panama thinking about their next move.
In the game against Panama on Thursday, the USMNT may have revenge on their minds as a 2-1 loss to them played a major role in their group-stage exit, as the host nation, from last summer’s Copa America.
Pochettino said: “We want to destroy Panama, we want to destroy the next one (opponent), and we want to win but destroy.”
He clarified: “When I say we destroy, it’s in a (sporting) way.”
Mexico: a historic rivalry, trade issues
The rivalry between Mexico and the USMNT is not new from a soccer perspective.
Mexican supporters have booed the U.S. team at games for many years, and long before Trump came into office the first time in 2016. Take, for example, the Concacaf Gold Cup final between the USMNT and Mexico in Los Angeles in 2011. The attendance was 93,420 at the Rose Bowl. The Los Angeles Times estimated 80,000 of those were supporting Mexico.
According to a Pew Research Center analysis of the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, around 37.2 million Hispanics of Mexican origin lived in the United States in 2021, and Mexico national-team games — even those against the U.S. played on American soil — are rapidly sold out for this reason.
As such, we should be careful before attributing any negative reaction towards the U.S. team — should they meet Mexico in Sunday’s Nations League final in LA — to animosity aimed at President Trump. It is worth remembering that last November’s U.S. presidential election also indicated a rise in support, specifically among Latino men, for Trump.
Javier Hernandez helped Mexico clinch the 2011 Gold Cup in front of a passionate pro-Mexico crowd on U.S. soil. (Robyn Beck / AFP via Getty Images)
The Mexican team’s coach Aguirre last month stressed the need to “distinguish spectacle, sport and politics, and not mix them” but still found himself protecting Mexico’s right to call it the Gulf of Mexico and defending immigration.
Sarukhan, Mexico’s former ambassador to the United States, is more alarmed about how the world will perceive next year’s World Cup, particularly when set against his original objective to convey the combined strength and prosperity of the North American continent.
He says recent events make him “sad” and fears serious repercussions may follow. Sarukhan pointed out that a review of the USMCA, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement, begins on July 1 next year, in the middle of the World Cup.
While Sarukhan acknowledges and champions a “very profound football rivalry” between the two countries, he does not share President Trump’s view that tension between nation states is good for sport. He said that while alongside FIFA president Infantino in the Oval Office, which may lead to some people “making linkages” between soccer’s world governing body and Trump. Infantino was previously seen laughing during January’s inauguration when the U.S. leader stated his intention to rename the Gulf of Mexico.
Sarukhan warns that tensions may be visible during this week’s fixtures in Los Angeles.
According to the Pew Research Center, 65 percent of Mexicans viewed the U.S. unfavorably in 2017, compared to 66 percent viewing the U.S. favorably before Trump entered power the following year. The percentage drop was the largest across 37 countries.
Sarukhan adds: “It is what I would call the Trump-Sinatra doctrine of ‘My way or the highway’. We can see it in how he’s engaged with Panama and the canal, or Canada, Mexico and punitive tariffs, or threatening to annex Canada. All of this dynamic will certainly, in one form or another, be playing out in these Nations League games.”
(Top photo: John Dorton/ISI Photos/USSF/Getty Images for USSF)
