Mesut Özil Calls on FIFA to Reconsider Russia’s Football Ban
Former Germany international Mesut Özil has urged FIFA to lift restrictions on Russian teams, arguing that football should be treated consistently and used to bring people together. He made the appeal after taking part in a veterans’ match between Istanbul Başakşehir and Zenit St. Petersburg, a fixture that drew attention not only for its result but also for its political undertones.
Başakşehir won the match 3–2. After the final whistle, Özil used the occasion to address the different treatment of Russian and Israeli teams in international football. His comments have renewed debate about whether sporting sanctions are applied fairly—and how far football’s governing bodies should respond to conflicts beyond the pitch.
Özil’s appeal to football’s governing bodies
Özil said football has traditionally connected people across differences in nationality, background and religion. He argued that the sport’s capacity to create shared experiences should remain central when FIFA considers who can participate in its competitions.
“Football has always brought about peace,” Özil said. “As long as we have not paid attention to people’s origins or faith, football has always brought people together.” He then questioned why Russian teams face restrictions while Israeli teams have not been subject to the same exclusion, calling on FIFA “to set aside double standards and treat everyone equally.”
The statement amounts to a direct request for football’s international authorities to reconsider their approach. Özil’s argument is framed around equal treatment, though the comparison has also prompted questions about whether conflicts involving different countries can be assessed using the same criteria. FIFA and UEFA have not announced a change to their current measures in response to his remarks.
Why Russian teams were excluded
FIFA and UEFA suspended Russian national teams and clubs from their competitions after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The decision followed widespread international condemnation and was made amid pressure on sports organizations to respond to the war. Russian teams have consequently been unable to take part in major FIFA and UEFA tournaments under the existing restrictions.
Özil’s call to lift those measures arrives amid a broader, ongoing discussion about the relationship between sport and geopolitics. Supporters of sanctions argue that international competitions cannot be separated from events that affect people and nations. Critics, meanwhile, contend that athletes and clubs should not automatically bear the consequences of decisions made by governments. FIFA and UEFA must navigate those competing views while considering the purpose and impact of their rules.
The debate is not limited to football. International sports bodies in other disciplines have also faced difficult decisions about participation, national representation and the use of flags or anthems. Any change to Russia’s status in football would therefore have sporting and political implications beyond a single tournament.
A politically charged match
The Başakşehir–Zenit veterans’ match carried particular significance because both clubs have been linked to influential political figures. Zenit, based in St. Petersburg, is widely reported to have ties to the Kremlin and to enjoy the support of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Başakşehir, meanwhile, has been associated with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who is considered a supporter of the club.
Özil’s own relationship with Erdoğan has also attracted public attention. The former midfielder has been described as close to the Turkish president, and reports have said Özil’s children are permitted to call him “Grandpa.” Against that backdrop, Özil’s comments at a match involving the two clubs were likely to be viewed through both a footballing and political lens.
That context does not, by itself, determine the merits of Özil’s argument. It does help explain why the remarks have attracted attention beyond the match result. When prominent former players speak about international policy, their statements can quickly become part of a wider conversation about political influence in sport and the responsibilities of football’s institutions.
Özil’s career after international football
Özil, a key member of Germany’s 2014 World Cup-winning squad, was one of the most technically gifted playmakers of his generation. His career included high-profile spells at clubs such as Real Madrid and Arsenal, where his vision, passing range and ability to create chances made him a prominent figure in European football. Since retiring from professional play, he has remained visible through public appearances and political involvement.
His political activity has included a role within Turkey’s governing Justice and Development Party, known by the Turkish abbreviation AKP. Last year, party members elected Özil to its executive board. The party, led by Erdoğan, is commonly described as conservative and rooted in political Islam. The appointment marked a further step in Özil’s public life beyond sport.
His move into politics adds another dimension to his appeal to FIFA. Özil is no longer speaking only as a former player reflecting on football’s ideals; he is also an increasingly active public figure with connections to Turkish political life. That combination is likely to shape how audiences interpret his call for equal treatment.
What happens next for FIFA?
For now, Özil’s remarks are a call for debate rather than a confirmed change in policy. FIFA and UEFA would need to determine whether the circumstances justify revisiting their restrictions, and any decision would likely face scrutiny from governments, clubs, players and supporters. The issue also raises a practical question: what consistent principles should guide football bodies when international conflicts affect participation?
There is no reliable prediction that Russian teams will return to FIFA or UEFA competitions soon. Any eventual change would depend on the governing bodies’ decisions and developments beyond football. Özil’s intervention has, however, placed the subject back in the public conversation and highlighted the challenge of balancing sport’s unifying message with the political realities surrounding international competition.
As football continues to cross borders and attract global audiences, disputes over bans and participation are unlikely to disappear. Özil’s appeal may not alter the rules immediately, but it has renewed a central question for the sport: can football remain a meeting place for people from different nations while also responding to events that divide them?
