When considering geopolitical tensions spilling into the sports arena, the [event]—now in its seventh day—has no historical parallel.

Pacific University professor Jules Boykoff, an authority on international sports politics, notes that a World Cup host nation has never attacked one of the tournament’s participants roughly three months before the start of the planet’s most-watched sporting event. “From a soccer standpoint,” Boykoff states, “this takes us into uncharted territory.”

The military action against Iran initiated by President Donald Trump—in coordination with Israel—has undeniably cast a shadow over the 100-day countdown, marked on March 3, to a World Cup that FIFA president (and Trump ally) Gianni Infantino has called “simply the greatest event that humanity, that mankind, has ever seen and will ever see.”

Following U.S.-Israel bombings that killed Iran’s [official], other Iranian political and military leaders, and—according to a U.S.-based [organization]—over 1,000 civilians (including 181 children), the question lingers: Will Iran be able or willing to participate in the World Cup? The nation’s matches in Los Angeles against New Zealand on July 15, Belgium on July 21, and Egypt in Seattle on July 26 now hang in the balance.

On Monday, Iranian soccer federation president Mehdi Taj was cited telling state television: “What is clear is that after this attack, we cannot be expected to look forward to the World Cup with hope.” 

Iranian soccer officials did not respond to a TIME interview request.

“Of course, we will monitor developments surrounding all global issues,” FIFA secretary general Mattias Grafström [said]. “We held the [event] in Washington, where all teams participated, and our focus, naturally, is to ensure a safe World Cup with full participation.”

(A FIFA spokesperson declined further comment: Grafström did not return an email seeking input. If Iran were to boycott, either Iraq—set to face Suriname or Bolivia in a March 31 playoff for one of the final World Cup spots—or the United Arab Emirates (which lost to Iraq in a November World Cup qualifier) could take its place.)

Andrew Giuliani, executive director of the White House Task Force for the FIFA World Cup 2026, stated on Feb. 28: “The largest state sponsor of terrorism in my lifetime is gone. Today’s action by the 45th and 47th Presidents of the United States will make the world safer and spark a chain reaction of peace. My heart goes out to the thousands of American service members’ families victimized by the Ayatollah’s ‘Death to America’ mission. The head of the snake spreading that hateful message has been cut off, and I pray the Iranian people will seize their freedom. We’ll address soccer matches tomorrow—tonight, we celebrate their chance at liberty.”

Giuliani did not respond to a message seeking an interview; a task force spokesperson declined further comment.

In 2025, Trump [enacted a policy] regarding entry into the United States. However, an exemption was made for “any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, those performing essential support roles, and immediate relatives, traveling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event as determined by the Secretary of State.” Thus, while Iranian players and coaches could travel for the World Cup, Iranian soccer fans would be restricted from entering the U.S. The country’s global diaspora would be relied upon to support the team, which has historically been at the center of political disputes.

At the 2022 Qatar World Cup, for example, before a match against Wales, supporters of the Iranian government [clashed] with regime protesters. The Iranian women’s team, competing in the Asian Cup in Australia, [acted] on Monday before its match against South Korea—a move many interpreted as resistance to the current regime. By Thursday, though, the team saluted and sang the anthem amid ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

Given the Iranian regime’s crackdowns on pre-war protests—per the Human Rights Activist News Agency—some Iranian-Americans believe a team representing a repressive government should not take the World Cup stage.

“Two years ago, I know Iranian fans would have been heartbroken if the team wasn’t sent,” says the director of Iranian studies at Stanford University. “Today, I think they’ll be angry at athletes who want to represent Iran in such a time of crisis.”

Others hope Iran will play, particularly eager to support the players in this charged climate. They do not equate the team with the regime.

“There are plenty of people in the U.S. right now who strongly dislike Trump, but no one is calling this Trump’s team in the World Cup,” says an Iranian-American soccer fan, who requested anonymity to avoid diaspora backlash. “These are young people in their 20s who’ve dedicated their lives to the sport. I feel nothing but pride when they succeed.”

Iran’s participation in the World Cup likely holds no real downsides for any party in the conflict.

“In an ideal world, the team comes here and plays because connecting with others—not as subjects of feuding governments, but as members of the human family—is important,” says Jamal Adbi, president of the National Iranian American Council. “That’s politically significant too. Because when you know who you’re targeting, you’re less likely to attack them.”