Could Israel be suspended from football competitions next week?

A move to suspend Israel from international football could be brought before UEFA's executive committee as early as next week, BBC Sport understands, and the governing body would need only a simple majority — 11 of 20 members — to advance any measure. If approved, the decision would be effective immediately and would effectively bar Israel from European competition, including next summer's World Cup qualifying in Europe. Israel's national team is currently in European qualifiers for the tournament, while Maccabi Tel Aviv is competing in the Europa League, underscoring the potential breadth of the impact.

[IMAGE]

How the vote would work and who would decide it remains a focal point of the discourse around suspending Israel. Decisions on major governance issues in European football are made by UEFA's executive committee, a 20-member body that includes 16 elected representatives and observers from two umbrella groups: the European Club Association (ECA) and European Leagues. The committee is led by president Aleksander Ceferin, who has been in that post since 2016. In practice, formal votes on contentious issues are often convened when a clear outcome appears likely, and the results are implemented immediately once a decision is announced.

The 16 elected members come from a range of countries and federations, and one is Israeli — Moshe Zuares, who joined the committee this year. Others include officials from Spain, Norway, Albania and Armenia, four nations whose governments have publicly voiced pro-Palestinian messages in recent months. Aside from Turkey, most federations have not publicly stated a position on Israeli teams’ participation in international competition, but the Turkish Football Federation has stepped forward with a demand that Israel be banned from all football.

The leadership of the European Club Association (ECA) is particularly influential in UEFA circles. Nasser Al-Khelaifi, the president of Paris Saint-Germain and chair of BeIN Media Group, heads the ECA and is regarded as a powerful voice within UEFA's decision-making network. Al-Khelaifi has not publicly commented on Israel's participation in competitions, but his influence is frequently cited in discussions about broadcast rights and commercial considerations surrounding UEFA events. His fellow ECA representative, Miguel Angel Gil Marin, is the chief executive of Atletico Madrid, and Claudius Schafer represents European Leagues in the group. The mix of national federations, club interests and media contracts adds a layer of complexity to any potential suspension.

[IMAGE]

Could UEFA and FIFA disagree on a suspension? Any decision to suspend Israel taken by UEFA would need to be ratified by FIFA, the world governing body. The precedent for joint action is rare but not unheard of: when Russia was expelled from football in 2022, FIFA and UEFA announced the decision in a joint statement within days of Russia’s invasion. Still, there is room for divergence in theory, given the unique political and diplomatic dynamics surrounding any move against Israel. Earlier this year, FIFA president Gianni Infantino described his relationship with former U.S. president Donald Trump as “absolutely crucial,” and Infantino has been involved in high-profile diplomacy that intersects with U.S. interests. The U.S. State Department has signaled it would resist any attempt to bar Israel from potentially qualifying for the World Cup on U.S. soil, complicating a potential alignment across federations.

The BBC has sought comment from FIFA but did not receive a response at the time of reporting. The timing of any board discussions remains uncertain, but discussions have intensified across European football circles in the wake of calls for suspension.

Who is calling for suspension? A high-profile coalition of athletes has sought to apply moral pressure. On Friday, 48 athletes signed a statement urging UEFA to suspend Israel from all competitions until it complies with international law and ends civilian killings in Gaza. Among the signatories are former World Cup winner Paul Pogba, Crystal Palace midfielder Cheick Doucoure, and other prominent players and former internationals, as well as athletes from other sports. The signatories argue that sport cannot remain neutral in the face of humanitarian crises and that silence amounts to acceptance of civilian harm. The signatories emphasize that “sport is not neutral in the face of injustice.”

Supporters of the idea argue that suspending Israel would send a clear signal about international norms and could pressure authorities to reassess policy in light of humanitarian concerns. Critics, however, warn that an exclusion would carry wide political and communal repercussions and could blur the boundaries between sport and state policy. Some observers caution that suspensions risk politicizing sport in ways that could undermine the purpose of international competition and alienate fans and communities who see Israel as central to their national sport culture.

The debate has also touched on public messaging and perceived fairness. UEFA has previously resisted bans; Ceferin has suggested a preference for handling safety and compliance through other mechanisms. The federation faced criticism in the summer for a social-media post that referenced a Palestinian footballer killed in Gaza but did not spell out broader context, prompting a broader discussion about parity and sensitivity in UEFA’s communications during ongoing conflicts. That episode has colored conversations about how robustly UEFA should engage on political and humanitarian crises, and whether bans are proportionate or effective tools for achieving humanitarian ends.

The question of which pathway might lead to a suspension is intertwined with multiparty politics and the broader geostrategic environment. Some voices argue that bans could deliver a moral message but risk black-and-white consequences for fans, players and clubs who identify with Israel. Others contend that without sanctions, international sporting norms may fail to keep pace with evolving humanitarian standards.

Israel’s participation in European football remains unchanged for the moment. The national team competes in the European qualifiers for the next World Cup, and Israeli clubs continue to participate in UEFA-run competitions like the Europa League. The broader consequences of a suspension would extend beyond Israel’s immediate footballing schedule, potentially reshaping qualification timelines, broadcast arrangements, sponsorship deals and the political optics of international sport.

Israel’s government and some supporters argue that maintaining participation in European competitions is essential for national representation and for protecting the interests of players who may rely on international exposure for their careers. Critics of suspension counter that distinguishing between sport and politics is increasingly difficult in a conflict of this scale, and that sports bodies must respond to humanitarian emergencies with decisive action.

With the clock ticking toward next week’s potential decision window, the football world watches closely. The path from a vote in UEFA to a final FIFA decision is not guaranteed to be swift, and even a surprise vote in favor of suspension could trigger appeals, interim measures, and complex diplomatic considerations before any final status change is enacted. In the meantime, the human cost of the Gaza conflict continues, and the role of sport as a platform for political and humanitarian expression remains a central point of debate among fans, players, federations and lawmakers.

As the situation evolves, officials, athletes and fans will be looking for clarity on timelines, processes and potential consequences. The next moves by UEFA, and whether FIFA ultimately ratifies any decision, will shape not only Israel’s footballing future but also the broader relationship between sport and international politics in the years ahead.