With 99 days until the 2026 FIFA World Cup kicks off in Mexico City, major questions remain \u2014 not just about what will happen on the field, but about political, financial and security concerns surrounding the biggest event in global sport. The first 48-team World Cup is supposed to be a celebration of expansion and global reach. Instead, it arrives amid geopolitical tension, economic scrutiny and logistical uncertainty.<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s a deeper look at the most pressing issues with three months to go.<\/p>\n
The final places in the first 48-team World Cup will be decided later this month. Mexico hosts the six-team inter-confederation playoffs, while UEFA\u2019s four playoff paths<\/a> will determine Europe\u2019s remaining representatives.<\/p>\n Italy and Denmark headline the European field. Italy, four-time World Cup champions, are attempting to avoid a third straight tournament absence \u2014 an outcome that would be unthinkable for a nation of their pedigree. Denmark remain one of Europe\u2019s most consistent tournament sides, capable of both defensive discipline and tactical flexibility. Turkey and Ukraine also enter as dangerous contenders with recent tournament experience, while a talented Sweden underperformed in qualifying.<\/p>\n Outside UEFA, DR Congo<\/a> are the highest-ranked nation still alive, sitting just inside the world\u2019s top 50. The remaining qualifiers will significantly shape the balance of several groups, including one featuring Canada, Qatar and Switzerland, and another involving hosts Mexico alongside South Korea and South Africa.<\/p>\n World Cup expansion adds intrigue and geographic diversity, but most of the remaining contenders sit outside the global elite. The final six spots are unlikely to dramatically alter the list of true title contenders \u2014 but they could influence which major nation faces a more complicated group-stage path.<\/p>\n The United States and allied nations launched military action against Iran this weekend, immediately casting uncertainty over Iran\u2019s participation. Iran are already qualified and placed in a group with New Zealand, Belgium and Egypt \u2014 a manageable path on paper. But now their presence is in doubt.<\/p>\n President Donald Trump said he \u201cdoes not care\u201d<\/a> whether Iran participates in the World Cup. While FIFA traditionally tries to separate sport from politics, active conflict between a host nation and a qualified team presents an extraordinary scenario.<\/p>\n History shows that tense diplomatic relations have not automatically prevented participation \u2014 Iran faced the United States at the 1998 World Cup during prolonged hostility (but not active war), and Argentina met England in 1986 just four years after the Falklands War. However, an ongoing state of war during a tournament hosted on the soil of an opposing power would be virtually unprecedented in modern football.<\/p>\n Visa concerns extend beyond Iran. U.S. immigration policies have already impacted travel<\/a> for countries such as Haiti and Senegal. Broader geopolitical tensions could complicate entry procedures for others. FIFA will likely continue to work aggressively behind the scenes to ensure compliance and smooth travel, but political realities remain outside its full control.<\/p>\nWill Iran \u2014 or any other qualified nation \u2014 face visa or participation issues?<\/h3>\n
Will tickets truly sell out, and will stadiums be filled?<\/h3>\n