Among the requirements that organizations like the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Federation of Association Football (FIFA) demand of countries to host sporting events of the caliber of the Olympic Games or the World Cup is having adequate infrastructure and communications and transportation services at the venues to facilitate the national and international mobility necessary for the events to be successful. Let’s recall how Tulancingo, the very Hidalgo-based birthplace of three of my four children, boasts of hosting a satellite ground station ever since the Mexican government decided to acquire what was needed to broadcast the 1968 Summer Olympic Games.
Ultimately, given the crucial factors and players involved in air transport and the logistical setup of a World Cup, Mexico should have worked to ensure its airports were in the best possible condition for 2026 , starting with those in the host cities, just as it attempted to do for the 1970 and 1976 FIFA World Cups. In fact, by the late 1960s, Mexico City was hoping to boast a brand-new airport terminal, located near Zumpango, State of Mexico, when Pelé led Brazil to their historic Jules Rimet Cup victory—a project that, as we know, was never completed. Oh well!
Taking into account my close connection to both the event and the airports themselves, including those involved, I believe I am in a position and have the right to comment on how Mexican airports fared with the 2026 World Cup, of course, from my perspective and without violating any secrecy, since this information is common knowledge in various public and private organizations who, unlike the author of this column, lack an editorial space to do the same, a privilege I will not deny, I cherish.
As is often the case, airports were the first and last impression of the host city and country for thousands of people, many of whom celebrated upon landing, but especially upon takeoff after a good performance by their favorite teams. Invariably, there were also defeats, which impacted the mood of passengers on their departing flights. I’ve said it repeatedly: airports are stages for intense emotions among their users .
It must be acknowledged that the 2022 Qatar World Cup, held in that single, wealthy nation, using only two airports, one of them considered one of the best in the world—I’m referring to the “Hamad” airport in Doha—and with the full political and economic backing of the local emir, set the bar very high for the 2026 “North American” World Cup and its airports, among which there are several world-class options, such as, in my opinion, the “Hartsfield-Jackson” airport in Atlanta, Georgia, and the “International” airport in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
The “World Cup” has finally ended, and so has the experience of being close to it for the author of this note, which allows me to reopen the files of columns in progress to prepare and give final touches to texts, as is the case with this installment, with which I intend, as is always my intention, to issue honest, objective opinions, without bad intentions and supported by what I perceive happened in an event particularly important for Mexico and its air transport and which, due to its scope, put us in the spotlight, now indeed, of the entire world.
There’s something I need to clarify before continuing: published reports and various comments on social media indicate that Mexican airports weren’t the only ones that could have caused headaches for the World Cup. Just as happened in Mexico, authorities, operators, and airport service providers in Canada and the United States presented significant challenges to the organizing body, which I must acknowledge and applaud for the dedication and capability of the vast majority of its staff, both volunteers and employees, at the terminals under their management, in ensuring that the transits were successful, which, it seems to me, they were.
But let’s return to Mexico: One of the major problems that the organizers of the event faced in our country, at least at the airport level, and which is no secret to anyone, was the clumsy management style of the federal authorities that characterized the relations between the organization in charge of the games—it must be said—with its own imperfections, and them, starting with a presidency that, at least initially, could not hide its displeasure from Mexicans regarding the conditions under which Mexico was granted the privilege and opportunity to host the event, and with a Ministry of Infrastructure, Communications and Transportation (SICT) operating as a virtual subordinate to the Ministries of National Defense and the Navy, which in turn had their own complex procedures and bureaucracies.
This compels me to approach the topic from two distinct perspectives: first, that of airports managed by private entities, such as the “Miguel Hidalgo” in Guadalajara, Jalisco (GDL), which has hosted several teams; the “Mariano Escobedo” in Monterrey, Nuevo León (MTY), with a significant number of departures and arrivals for various national teams; the “International” in Cancún, Quintana Roo (CUN), a haven for Uruguay; and the “Abelardo L. Rodríguez” in Tijuana, a refuge for the Iranians. Second, there are the terminals under the control of the Mexican State, specifically those administered by the armed forces, a notable example being the “Benito Juárez” International Airport in Mexico City (AICM) , managed by the Secretariat of the Navy, which also administers another World Cup airport, the “López Mateos” in Toluca, State of Mexico (TLC), where it served the English team. We also have the airports under the jurisdiction of the Secretariat of National Defense . The case of the Felipe Ángeles International Airport (AIFA) in Santa Lucía, State of Mexico , with multiple national teams passing through its facilities, one of which complained about the travel times involved, and finally the case of the Monterrey International Airport (NTR) , which was virtually ignored. Each type of approach had its strengths and weaknesses, as well as its own management style for the facilities provided for the World Cup.
In all cases (private and public), the general sentiment was essentially the same: to fully support the event, even if it meant significant investments of time, personnel, facilities, entertainment, equipment, and money, but without breaking the law, especially regarding security. In the former, the costs were borne by national or international partners, and in the latter, by the people of Mexico. The question is unavoidable: Was it worth it? I believe all the concessionaires did their best to make their airports shine for the thousands of travelers who passed through them, maximizing the opportunity to generate revenue to offset the investments, for example, through Airport Use Fees (TUA) linked to a potential increase in demand—which, incidentally, remains unclear—and the lucrative, attractive, and ubiquitous World Cup advertising within their facilities.
The truth is that Mexican airports clearly had a favorable, professional, responsible, and tournament-promoting atmosphere . For example, at the “Mariano Escobedo” airport in Monterrey, they even set up an attractive and very well-located artificial turf soccer field, where many of us played a few pickup games when we discovered it during our stay. I hadn’t scored a goal in ages!
In this way, administrators, service providers and authorities within them, although not always convinced, but invariably trying to fulfill their respective contracts with the organizer, made a great effort to ensure that the transit of people, goods, aircraft, crews, equipment and personnel of the interested parties took place without setbacks for the benefit of the image of the event, and of course, of the host cities and the country itself.
I witnessed how, I insist, always trying to comply with the regulations, those in charge of any process at the airports, whether willingly or even reluctantly obeying a superior order or even aware of the need to do so – the majority, by the way – facilitated the work of any public or private, national or international organization legitimately related to the “World Cup”, often crossing lines that one would think impossible to do in other circumstances, I repeat, without violating any rule.
Unfortunately, there were those who, whether due to prejudice, closed-mindedness, ignorance, insecurities, or personal interests, attempted to obstruct the free flow of traffic or its operators at airports. They used issues of self-importance, tinged with political aspirations or misinterpretations of what was about to happen, to the point of absurdity. This was the case with the aeronautical authorities – the Federal Civil Aviation Agency (AFAC) and its supervisory entity, the SICT – and also with the implacable, authoritarian, and always complicated influence of the military, which de facto held the final say in everything related to security and the movement of teams or high-ranking officials through airports or outside of them during the World Cup. They made decisions without foundation or consistency, decisions that should have been made by the aeronautical authority or the airport concessionaire, not by the military, generating misunderstandings among the operators that repeatedly affected the quality of service provided to those involved.
What can be said about the impression visitors took away from the country, given the scale of the security measures implemented at the airports, with a prominent military presence? This surely made many wonder, as I feel tourists do in Mexican destinations heavily guarded by the armed forces, if everything was alright where they were arriving. Along these lines, I must mention the sad spectacle of passengers of certain races being routinely profiled for extraordinary document and luggage inspections by immigration, customs, and security authorities . It’s truly shameful, even disheartening, to see Mexico like this.
By far, the Mexican airport with the highest demand from World Cup travelers and the most complications for those serving them was Mexico City International Airport (AICM) , which posed a huge logistical challenge for the organizers. It’s known that the Felipe Ángeles International Airport (AIFA) hosted a significant number of charter flights at its large FBO, but that’s about it, validating the premise that the Santa Lucía airport simply isn’t attractive to Mexico City’s demand , at least not for those attending the World Cup, leaving its terminal building, with all its football-themed decorations, virtually abandoned by fans.
The truth is, again from my point of view, to a greater or lesser degree and each for its own reasons and circumstances (limitations, obsolescence, distances, ongoing construction, management style, protests, or whatever you want to call it), our airports, and indeed the country itself, given the anarchy, insecurity, and lack of maintenance across the board, barely lived up to the standards they were supposed to provide for the World Cup. In my opinion, the airport terminals run by private companies performed their role better than those managed by the state and its armed forces.
The general impression among the comments I heard was that, at least in the case of the Valley of Mexico, if the new airport in Texcoco, State of Mexico, hadn’t been canceled, we wouldn’t have had to endure the embarrassment of the “Benito Juárez” airport, even after its recent renovation. Furthermore, I believe those who think that the image Mexico would have projected to the world with the modern and competitive NAICM (New Mexico City International Airport), managed by civilians and, even better, by private companies, would have been far superior to the one it projected with our main airport terminal, are right. In fact, I’d almost wager that FIFA never imagined, when awarding Mexico a part of the event, that the construction of the new airport would end up being canceled and that they would have to organize it based on the continued operation of the outdated AICM (Mexico City International Airport).
In short, I won’t deny that my experience with football in 2026 was overwhelming, but interesting. Furthermore, I recognize that it helped me gather even more evidence to reinforce my hypothesis that under the government of the so-called 4T (Fourth Transformation), things aren’t going very well in Mexico’s skies and airports, especially with so much involvement of the armed forces in decision-making. And that, dear readers, is what I observed World Cup passengers experiencing at Mexican airports in 2026.
Comment and follow us on LinkedIn: @GrupoT21
