Why is Mexico still supporting Gianni Infantino as FIFA president?

In the ongoing debate over FIFA’s leadership and governance, Mexico has emerged as a notable outlier within the Concacaf region. While the U.S., Canada, and other Concacaf members have united in calling for greater transparency and accountability under FIFA president Gianni Infantino, the Mexican Football Federation (FMF) has maintained unwavering support for his administration.

This divergence became clear in early August when Concacaf’s collective statement on FIFA reforms was issued. The U.S. Soccer Federation, alongside Canada Soccer, the Caribbean Football Union, and the Central American Football Union, reinforced a shared demand for meaningful changes. Mexico, however, refrained from endorsing this joint appeal. Instead, the FMF released its own statement explicitly backing Infantino’s leadership.

The reasons behind Mexico’s distinct position are multifaceted but largely revolve around tangible benefits realized from recent FIFA initiatives, particularly the expansion of the World Cup. The 2026 tournament, hosted jointly by the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, provided a significant boost to Mexican soccer. Three Mexican cities served as venues, with numerous international teams setting up bases within the country. These developments not only enhanced Mexico’s financial returns but also bolstered the nation’s global soccer reputation.

Mexico’s role in the 2026 World Cup marked a historic milestone, making it the only country to have hosted matches in three separate editions of the men’s tournament. This accomplishment has strengthened Mexico’s ambitions to remain a key player on the world stage. Among these ambitions is the pursuit of hosting forthcoming FIFA events such as the expanded Club World Cup, scheduled to debut in the United States in 2025. Mexican officials, including Mexico City’s mayor Claudia Sheinbaum, have expressed interest in exploring government support and assessing the tournament’s potential benefits for tourism and national prestige.

Reports suggest that Mexico’s aspirations to secure and host future FIFA competitions have played a central role in its continued alignment with Infantino. This stance contrasts with the broader regional push for leadership reassessment within FIFA, highlighting a strategic calculus by Mexican officials to leverage their unique position within global football.

Mexico’s current alliances within international football governance further illuminate its position. Unlike its Concacaf neighbors, the FMF appears increasingly aligned with South America’s CONMEBOL, which has consistently supported Infantino. The ties with South America are longstanding and culturally significant, with Mexican clubs formerly competing in CONMEBOL tournaments such as the Copa Libertadores, and the national team frequently invited to participate in the Copa América.

This South American connection has fueled speculation regarding Mexico’s potential desire to join CONMEBOL, a move that would mark a rare confederation switch. While uncommon, such transitions are not without precedent, as seen in Australia’s shift from Oceania to Asia in 2006. The prospect of deeper integration with CONMEBOL may offer Mexico expanded competitive opportunities and influence.

The dynamics of Mexico’s support for Infantino underscore a broader geopolitical and strategic landscape within FIFA. While many member associations demand reform and renewed governance standards, Mexico’s pragmatic approach is shaped by direct benefits from FIFA’s current leadership and the desire to maintain and expand its global football footprint.

Details about Mexico’s internal deliberations and long-term strategies remain limited. However, it is evident that Mexico now stands as the sole Concacaf federation firmly backing Infantino amid a regional call for change. This alliance not only reflects Mexico’s soccer ambitions but also positions it as a pivotal player in shaping FIFA’s future direction.

As FIFA continues to face scrutiny over governance and leadership, Mexico’s unique posture highlights the complexities of global football politics. Its decisions will likely influence both regional dynamics and the broader balance of power within the sport’s international governing body.