Ozil Reveals Conflict with Arsenal: I Was Banned After Talking About Uighurs

JAKARTA - Mesut Ozil has reopened his old wounds at Arsenal. The former German midfielder claims he was removed from the starting lineup after speaking out about the treatment of Uighur Muslims in China.

According to a report by The Mirror quoted Thursday, April 30, Ozil made the confession at the Leadership in the Age of Confusion Summit earlier this week. He said Arsenal "closed the door" and no longer allowed him to play before leaving in 2021.

This case began in late 2019. Ozil posted a statement about alleged human rights violations in Xinjiang. Arsenal then took a distance through a statement on Weibo, a Chinese social media platform.

"The content published is Ozil's personal opinion. As a football club, Arsenal has always adhered to the principle of not getting involved in politics," Arsenal said at the time.

Ozil admitted that he was aware that the upload would carry risks. However, he still did it.

"I know if I post something like this, I will get in trouble. But I don't care," said Ozil.

He then accused the situation at Arsenal of changing. "They closed the door for me. They didn't let me play again," he said.

Ozil admitted that he understood his teammates' attitude of choosing to keep their distance. According to Ozil, they could also be affected if they were too close to him.

Ozil called that period a difficult period. He admitted that he was out of the squad and training alone for eight months. His contract at the Emirates was then terminated by mutual agreement before he moved to Fenerbahce in January 2021.

"I enjoy playing football. They took that from me," Ozil said.

He also said that family support helped him get through the difficult time. According to Ozil, his wife and children became a source of strength when his career at Arsenal faded.

However, Arsenal at the time denied that the club's decision was based on commercial considerations or Ozil's political stance. Former Arsenal Chief Executive, Vinai Venkatesham, said it was unfair to say that the club made a business decision in the case.

This case once again highlights the position of big clubs when political issues, global markets, and sports decisions meet.