So-called firsts scored by the Moroccan ‘Muslim, Arab, African, post-colonial’ and Amazigh Atlas Lions at the 2022 World Cup football games

ABSTRACT

Much has been claimed with pride about Morocco's advance onto the semi-finals of the World Cup as the so-called first ‘Muslim,' ‘African,' and ‘Arab' state to have achieved such status, as well as from a post-colonial and anti-colonial perspective, given the symbolism of its beating Spain. Even more could have been said if Morocco also beat France, from whom it gained independence. Yet, amid all these claims to firsts, there are errors and oversights. To understand the multiple meanings of Morocco's legitimately earned victories, I take a closer look. Morocco is not the first Muslim team to reach the semi-finals, rather Turkey is. The African state of Senegal came close too, and 20 years prior. Though predicated on Arab identity, much of Morocco is Amazigh, and the World Cup may rather be viewed as a series of victories by Amazigh players. From a post-colonial or anti-colonial perspective, while the Moroccan players chose to commemorate their victory over Spain by displaying a Palestinian flag; stunningly, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, whose flag is nearly identical, was entirely ignored by myriad commentators expressing pride in Morocco and its post-colonial and so-called anticolonialist stances. Such expressions of pride in Morocco's victories, along with justified critiques of double-standards by ‘Northern' states disregarding their own human rights records to criticize Qatar's; nevertheless, neglected Morocco's own governance over and annexation of Western Sahara. Such disregard called into question why Sahrawi human rights were ignored, and the complexity of how to characterize the meaning of Morocco's victories. Ultimately, if these are truly meant to be a (Men’s) World Cup, why do not all peoples play and/or are at least allowed to be represented?

KEYWORDS:

• World Cup games
• anti-colonial
• Morocco
• Western Sahara
• Amazigh

Acknowledgements

I thank the Rock Ethics Institute for related research support.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 I draw on constructivist and post-modern approaches to ethnopolitical identity, nations, states, and conflict in the vein of scholars like Benedict Anderson (1983), Eric Hobsawm (1983), Andreas Wimmer (2002), and Ted Robert Gurr (2000); as well as modern world systems scholars like Hendryk Spruyt (1997), and Lars Eric Cederman (1997) for my uses of the term ‘state’ specifically, as I built upon in Warshel 2021a.

2 If viewed merely from an academic standpoint, consider as an example that in recent years Royal Air Maroc, Morocco’s government owned airlines, has partnered with and underwritten the (American) African Studies Association to increase its ties with the whole of the continent, in its exchange of ideas with the United States.

3 For my uses of the term 'modern,' I draw on modern world systems theories, and the recognition of Morocco as a state within the Westphalian System.

4 England was already part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and eventually, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland when it colonized Africa and FIFA was established. Nevertheless, there is no team representing the modern state as one at the World Cup. Separate English, Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Irish teams exist instead.

5 Here, one may dig deeper to ask questions about the essential features and motivations of colonialism or colonial-like rule, whether by European or non-European states and those previously or never colonized, and the concept of ‘settler colonialism.’ The latter, however, is a problematic term. It is predicated on a lack of comparison with and historical understanding of African colonies specifically, and is interdisciplinarily limited. With respect to the former, overlooked are differences between settler versus non-settler colonies that have all, nevertheless, been categorized under the same rubric of classical ‘colonialism.’ And from my own disciplinary training with respect to the latter, this area of scholarship leaves out crucial communication phenomena, as those limit or open up opportunities for myriad forms of interaction between dominating and dominated populations that change their lived realities).