NAIROBI — The image was as glittering as it was jarring. On a stage at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., Gianni Infantino, the man who famously told the world to “stick to football,” draped a gold medal around the neck of U.S. President Donald Trump. He handed him a trophy of golden hands cradling the earth and declared him the inaugural winner of the “FIFA Peace Prize.”

For the millions of fans watching globally, and specifically here in Kenya, the moment was a masterclass in cognitive dissonance. This is the same FIFA that sanctions players for lifting a jersey to reveal a slogan and bans African nations when their governments dare to ask questions of their football federations. Friday’s ceremony wasn’t just a diplomatic nicety; it was a demolition of the myth of sporting neutrality.

The ‘Bro-mance’ Worth Billions

The timing, of course, is no accident. With the 2026 World Cup set to be hosted across the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, Infantino is playing a high-stakes game of geopolitical chess. The tournament is projected to generate an economic impact of over $40 billion (approx. KES 5.2 trillion). To secure that bag, Infantino needs the White House on speed dial.

“This is what we want from a leader,” Infantino gushed, calling Trump a “close friend” and praising his “extraordinary actions” for peace. Trump, never one to shy away from gold, accepted the award, calling it “one of the great honors of my life.”

But for the Kenyan observer, the math is cynical. While Infantino secures tax breaks and visa waivers for his tournament, the sanctity of the game is traded like a commodity. The “Peace Prize”—a made-up award with no clear selection criteria—feels less like a Nobel and more like a receipt for services rendered.

Rules for Thee, Not for Me

The hypocrisy is codified in FIFA’s own rulebook. Article 15 of the FIFA Code of Ethics explicitly demands political neutrality. It states that officials must “remain politically neutral” in dealings with governments. Yet, here was the President of FIFA effectively endorsing a sitting U.S. President’s political resume.

Consider the contrast:

• The Player: If a Kenyan striker reveals a shirt saying “Stop the War” after a goal, they face a yellow card and a fine.
• The Federation: When the Kenyan government disbanded the Football Kenya Federation (FKF) over corruption allegations, FIFA swiftly banned Kenya from global football for “third-party interference.”
• The President: Infantino can invent a political award, hand it to a polarizing world leader, and claim it is for the “unity of the world.”

“It is a clear violation of the duty of political neutrality,” noted Miguel Maduro, FIFA’s former governance chief, in a stinging critique. “Infantino isn’t just recognizing a leader; he is endorsing a political brand.”

The View from Nairobi

Why does this matter to a fan in Eastlands or a budding player in Kisumu? Because it confirms that the rules of the game are rigged by geography and power. When African nations attempt to clean up their sports administration, they are met with the hammer of “autonomy.” When the West hosts the party, the rules are bent into pretzels to accommodate political egos.

Critics, including former UN official Craig Mokhiber, have termed the award “shameful,” pointing out the irony of awarding a peace prize while conflicts rage globally—conflicts where football has remained conspicuously silent.

As the 2026 World Cup approaches, the message from Washington is clear: Football is neutral only when it’s free. When there are trillions of shillings on the table, the referee doesn’t just blow the whistle—he joins the team.