Japan's Tashima enters race to challenge Infantino's FIFA chair

Kohzo Tashima is a Japanese football administrator and former Japan international midfielder. He previously led the Japan Football Association and has sat on FIFA’s ruling council since 2015. He is viewed as a respected, diplomatic figure who usually avoids football’s political clashes. His possible campaign matters because Infantino has faced growing criticism and little serious opposition.

Tashima says the worst outcome would be Infantino winning without an election. Japan’s football association has reportedly agreed unanimously to support his candidacy. Tashima has also told Asian football leaders that he cannot support Infantino. To enter officially, however, he must obtain backing from at least five FIFA member associations and pass an eligibility review.

A Tashima campaign could unite officials who oppose Infantino’s leadership, although victory is not assured. It would also expose divisions within Asian football, where Japan, Gulf nations, and the AFC have competing influence. The election is scheduled for March 18 in Rabat, Morocco, with an entry deadline of November 18.

FIFA is the international organization that governs association football through its member associations. It organizes the World Cup and coordinates the global game across national and continental bodies. The article presents its president as the central political leader, making the presidency important far beyond one country or tournament.

The president represents FIFA, helps set its strategic direction, and oversees its administration with the organization’s governing bodies. That position can influence commercial plans, relationships with regional confederations, and the handling of major football controversies. Infantino’s proposal to sell private investors stakes in future World Cup profits shows the presidency can also affect FIFA’s financial direction.

The leadership contest therefore concerns how world football is managed. A president can build alliances across 211 associations and shape FIFA’s response to criticism. The article also shows that disciplinary decisions and eligibility processes attract attention because FIFA’s leadership operates at the center of international football’s political system.

The FIFA presidency is decided through an election involving the organization’s member associations. The contest is scheduled for March 18 in Rabat, Morocco. Candidates must meet formal entry conditions before their names can proceed, making support from national associations essential even before voting begins.

Tashima needs backing from at least five of FIFA’s 211 member associations. He must also undergo an eligibility review by a three-member panel appointed by FIFA. If that panel rejects a candidate, the decision can later be challenged at the Court of Arbitration for Sport. These rules create both a political hurdle and a formal legal safeguard.

Tashima has a significant initial advantage because the Japan Football Association reportedly supports him unanimously. However, the article does not say that he has already secured five associations or passed the review. November 18 is the deadline for entering the contest. UEFA’s position also remained unclear, so important endorsements were still unresolved.

FIFA’s membership includes 211 national football associations. That figure shows the scale of the presidency: candidates must compete for support across a worldwide network rather than within one continent. The election’s outcome can therefore reflect alliances among national associations and regional football blocs.

The entry threshold is five formal endorsements. Tashima cannot become an official candidate merely by announcing his intention or receiving support from Japan. He must secure backing from at least five FIFA members, then pass the eligibility review conducted by a three-member FIFA-appointed panel. Any panel decision can be challenged at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

The low numerical threshold allows a credible challenger to enter without broad initial support. The harder task is building a coalition capable of winning the election. The article reports Japanese backing but does not confirm Tashima’s full endorsement list. The November 18 entry deadline leaves time for alliances, including possible UEFA support, to become clear.

Infantino’s criticism comes from concerns about both FIFA’s business direction and its decision-making. In July, he proposed selling private investors stakes in future World Cup profits. Football officials across Europe, Asia, and North America, along with FIFA employees, opposed the multibillion-dollar idea. FIFA abandoned it within days.

The proposal became a symbol of concern about how FIFA is led and how major financial choices are made. Separately, FIFA and Infantino faced questions about the integrity of disciplinary decisions involving Portugal captain Cristiano Ronaldo, United States forward Folarin Balogun, and Congo goalkeeper Lionel Mpasi. The article reports questions, not findings that the decisions were improper.

These episodes helped create the political opening for Tashima. His stated goal is to ensure the presidency is contested and to present what he calls a sincere, sound, and noble Japanese approach. The AFC first criticized Infantino in August, then reversed course and announced support, highlighting the continuing controversy and divisions.

If Tashima wins, FIFA would receive a new president after years of Infantino’s leadership. The change could alter the organization’s political tone and its relationships with regional blocs, especially because Tashima has opposed Infantino and emphasizes Japanese football’s “sincere, sound, and noble” approach. His victory would also demonstrate that a credible challenger can defeat the incumbent.

If Infantino is re-elected, he would remain in office until 2031 and extend his presidency to 15 years. FIFA’s legal advice says his first 2016–19 term should not count toward the three-term, 12-year limit because he completed Blatter’s unfinished mandate. Re-election would therefore reinforce that interpretation and his current direction.

Neither outcome guarantees specific policy changes. The article does show that the result will affect how FIFA handles political alliances, commercial proposals, and scrutiny of disciplinary decisions. It will also reveal whether opposition from Japan, UEFA figures, and critics elsewhere can overcome Infantino’s support within FIFA and the AFC.

Regional blocs matter because FIFA’s presidency is built from national associations, and those associations often coordinate through continental confederations. UEFA represents Europe’s organized football interests, while the AFC connects Asian associations. Their endorsements can help a candidate reach the five-association entry threshold and build a wider coalition for the final vote.

The article gives a clear example of this power struggle. The AFC criticized Infantino in August, then reversed its position and announced support for him. Japan has maintained influence in FIFA and Asian administration, while Gulf nations, especially Qatar and Saudi Arabia, have gained power. Tashima also told AFC president Salman bin Ibrahim Al Khalifa that he could not support Infantino.

These shifts show that global sports bodies are governed through negotiation among regional interests, not only formal rules. UEFA was seeking a candidate before the deadline, but had not clearly endorsed Tashima. The contest therefore reflects rival priorities, personal alliances, and changing influence across world football.