In a surprising move, FIFA announced that the 2030 World Cup will be hosted jointly by Spain, Portugal, and Morocco, with three opening matches scheduled to take place in Uruguay, Argentina, and Paraguay. Shortly after, it was declared that the 2034 tournament would be hosted in Asia, with Saudi Arabia emerging as the sole bidder. These decisions, made by the 37-member FIFA Council, have drawn criticism for their lack of transparency and adherence to FIFA's own bidding rules.

The bidding process for the 2030 and 2034 World Cups had not officially opened, leaving many soccer officials caught off guard by the announcements. Negotiations and discussions had taken place behind closed doors, orchestrated by a select group of powerful individuals within FIFA. The rapid endorsement of Saudi Arabia by the Asian soccer confederation, led by Bahraini royal Sheikh Salman, raised suspicions of a predetermined outcome favoring FIFA's most eager ally.

The lack of transparency and sudden acceleration of the process discouraged other potential bidders. Australia and Indonesia, initially interested in submitting bids, were dissuaded by FIFA President Gianni Infantino. Infantino called for unanimous support for Saudi Arabia among Asian soccer federations, ensuring that they fell in line with the endorsement. Even Indonesia's soccer president, Erick Thohir, withdrew his country's bid and expressed support for Saudi Arabia as the host for the 2034 World Cup.

These decisions have raised concerns about the erosion of the democratic process within FIFA's host selection. FIFA's current statutes require a fair and transparent bidding procedure, inviting all qualified member associations to submit bids. However, the circumstances surrounding the selection of the 2030 and 2034 hosts suggest a departure from this principle. The secretive nature of the negotiations, the exclusion of relevant stakeholders, and the circumvention of FIFA's own rules have all contributed to the growing skepticism surrounding the decision-making process.

Critics have drawn parallels between FIFA's actions and those of the International Olympic Committee (IOC). The IOC recently introduced a host selection process that relies on a more opaque "dialogue" between potential hosts and IOC executives, rather than the traditional bidding process. FIFA appears to be following a similar path, with decisions increasingly being made by a select group of top officials, rather than the full membership of FIFA Congress.

The lack of transparency in FIFA's host selection process has been met with criticism from a coalition of human rights organizations. The opacity of the decision-making process not only undermines FIFA's own reforms and principles of good governance but also raises concerns about potential corruption and favoritism.

While some insiders view the shift towards a more controlled and strategic process as a step towards the future, others argue for a return to a more transparent bidding process. Transparency, due diligence, and proper governance are seen as essential for ensuring that FIFA's flagship competitions are hosted in the best possible locations with the highest standards.

The decisions made for the 2030 and 2034 World Cup hosts are causing debate within the soccer community, sparking discussions about the need for meaningful reform and a reevaluation of FIFA's bidding processes. FIFA's host selection process, once lauded for its promise of transparency and participation, now faces scrutiny over its lack of openness and accountability.