Why the 2034 FIFA World Cup bid of ASEAN may not be materialised?

It's said easier than done, and it has always been the case of so many nations when it comes to major international games. This has been the case of Colombia back in 1986 FIFA World Cup, the country was the original winner, but later pulled out due to insufficient infrastructures for the competition. Colombia was, by far, the only World Cup host to voluntarily retreat from hosting.

And that could be what is going to happen if Southeast Asia has the potential to win the bid, which, in my expectation, unlikely.

To understand why the ASEAN bid is so complex, we have to look at the organisation.

The ASEAN, full name Association of South East Asian Nations, hence the name, was born in 1967 as an economic and political pact against communist expansion in Bangkok, by Foreign Ministers of five countries (Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore). It came amidst the height of the bloody Vietnam War where the communist North battling the capitalist South in a proxy war between the Soviets and Americans. The ASEAN had largely sided with the United States, true to its nature.

Brunei later joined the group in 1984, but with the collapse of the Soviet Union, a change was made to approach the new order - communist Vietnam was added in 1995, before communist Laos and junta Myanmar included in 1997, then the Kingdom of Cambodia in 1999. Among the new members post-Cold War, Vietnam makes the most progresses, and is the only to join the first big five of ASEAN with a somewhat developed status in the region.

ASEAN has long attempted to bolster its status and raises its standard, both economics, political and entertainment, but results are often mixed. Southeast Asia is, still, not renowned in football, which is regarded as one of the most important pillars of soft power - a far cry for everyone to see about in a region getting hot for economic necessity.

Indeed, when we are looking to the ASEAN's history in football, the results of ten member states are pretty dismal. Indonesia is the first, and still the only, to have taken part in the FIFA World Cup, although not in a fashionable style when it was still an autonomous Dutch colony known as Dutch East Indies, played the 1938 FIFA World Cup when Japan withdrew. In that lone World Cup, Indonesia achieved a forgetful record - losing 0-6 to then-mighty Hungary. Since the end of WWII, no Southeast Asian nations have ever managed to reach the World Cup. The best result achieved was all from Thailand, twice in the final round of the FIFA World Cup without a single win; recently Vietnam has joined Thailand, but the result is also very dismal although it has not concluded, being pointless after six matches, with only four games to gain points, which seems to be impossible to qualify considering their current condition.

These nations seem to be better when it comes to the AFC Asian Cup, with Myanmar achieved the highest, finishing second in the 1964 edition held in Israel. Thailand, Cambodia and the former South Vietnam also attained respectable records there. Yet less promising, the ASEAN's first-ever Asian Cup trophy was not won by an ASEAN country - but by Australia, a mover from Oceania to Asia. Winning the Asian Cup could assure the top dog position among Asia's finest, and Australia stole the lightning of ASEAN with just that.

With little experience in the World Cup, no surprise that ASEAN bid is viewed with scepticism. In fact, ASEAN is facing a tough competitor within the AFF (ASEAN Football Federation) - Australia, who is considering a joint bid with New Zealand for the same tournament, having won the rights to host 2023 Women's World Cup as a major step; Australia alone has played in five FIFA World Cup as for 2021, the most for an AFF member. China, while yet to express its intention, is also a fearsome heavyweight, already qualified for its only World Cup in 2002. Egypt, Nigeria and Zimbabwe from Africa also announced intentions, though the latter is pretty similar to ASEAN.

By far, ASEAN has announced that five nations will take part in the joint bid (Indonesia, Vietnam, Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand), the latter will lead the initiative. But concerns are plenty:

1. Indonesia is the biggest country in ASEAN and also boasts the largest economy, also the only Southeast Asian nation to play in the World Cup. It has fairly capable infrastructures, true with the nature of being big. It has also been announced host of the U-20 World Cup in 2021 (moved to 2023 due to the COVID-19 pandemic). Yet despite all the progressions being made, Indonesia's bid is also questionable: many of the facilities are very prone to natural disaster, notably Jakarta where its biggest stadium (Gelora Bung Karno) is sinking below sea level, or volcanos surrounding Indonesia, even earthquakes as well. When it goes to football, Indonesia is recently known, but not as a rising football force - instead, it has been plagued by problems within, such as hooliganism, violence in and out of pitch, even federation infighting which proved disastrous for Indonesia's football state, as it occurred from 2014-16, then again in 2019-21.
2. Singapore is the only developed nation on the ASEAN bid, but there is a concern about their tiny position in world's football. Singapore's case can be comparable to that of Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Andorra, San Marino and Malta in Europe; or Barbados, Bahamas, Bermuda, Aruba and Saint Kitts and Navis of the Americas; to even Oceanian islands like Tonga, Tahiti and Vanuatu, where these microstates do not have so much voices in determining football, and also, very small by size. Being a microstate (city-state to be precise), Singapore has only three stadiums, and just one achieved international standard, the National Stadium in Kallang District, quite fit for a small nation. While transporting is not a problem for Singapore's high-standard facilities, not many people ever want a microstate to host such a big competition.
3. Malaysia is a fairly wealthy country, though yet to become a full-time developed nation, but the country's economy is still promising. This does have rewards: the country has a growing number of good football stadiums, many can be interpreted with FIFA accordance, three or four stars. But while it is true that Malaysia is a perfect candidate, that doesn't mean Malaysia is always gold: the country is currently being dragged into a massive state corruption which has negatively impacted the national side - the Malaysian football team has been since 1990s, unable to repeat the feat of the predecessors in 1970s, player and official scandals are enormous and even professional league is marred with scams and match-fixings. Today, Malaysia has begun experiencing revival, but to qualify is still a long-term mission.
4. Vietnam is the biggest concern among the bidder of this edition. Vietnam has the least-developed economy among the ASEAN bidders, a proven ground that could be a severe disadvantage. There has been a massive series of constructing and building new facilities, but widespread corruption has hampered the process. Moreover, in order to achieve any World Cup dream, the domestic league has to be at least capable of standing in long term, but Vietnam's domestic league is marred with match-fixings and refereeing issues. It should be mentioned that Vietnam was only invited to host the 2007 AFC Asian Cup, the three original bidders of this tournament were Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, before a suggestion by then-AFC President Mohammed bin Hammam led to the merger.
5. Thailand has a relatively strong national football team in Southeast Asia and for a time, the only national team from Southeast Asia to be fairly capable of competing with Asia's best. This is also helped by the fact that Thailand offers somewhat available, even lucrative, infrastructures, even it is far from being like Singapore. As Thailand offers a lot of good facilities, the country can also get hope for a bid to the World Cup. Still, there are some concerns about Thailand's ability to upgrade or build up new stadiums meeting FIFA criteria, since the only high-standard stadium, Rajamangala, is in Bangkok. Thailand also faces an uphill battle of trying to create a stronger squad to dream for the World Cup, as the federation is also under constant infighting, even though it is never as devastating as Indonesia's.

Yet even having facilities aside, another requirements about fielding a capable football team and historical achievements are needed. When Russia was awarded hosts of the 2018 FIFA World Cup, it came with Russia did at least qualify for Euro and World Cup, or even won it if you count the predecessor Soviet Union. When the United States was given the 1994 World Cup, it came after the United States did, at least, win third back in the inaugural 1930 edition. Qatar is an exception for the upcoming 2022 edition, but Qatar did win the 2019 AFC Asian Cup, as well as being the richest nation in the world.

Considering Australia has entered the run, as well as a possible Chinese entry, ASEAN's hope to win is pretty small, if not to say impossible. Can Singapore manage to carry so many fans entering other ASEAN nations? Can Vietnam really manage to provide facilities in time? Can Indonesia ever learn how to control its football hooligans and even natural disaster? Can Malaysia ever field a competitive team? And how will Thailand improve its stadiums? These are some of the even larger, bleak picture about the dark reality of hosting the World Cup for ASEAN nations, not to mention potential revenue losses maybe even higher than incomes.

Let's face the fact: any ASEAN bid for this tournament is likely to fail, if there has been no concrete plans to improve. And it seems to be heading that way...