It’s not that easy. Compare it to the UN security council which is heavily skewed in favor of some countries
The ruling council looks like this
CONMEBOL (South America): one vice-president and four members = five votes
AFC (Asia): one vice-president and six members = seven votes
UEFA (Europe): three vice-presidents and six members = nine votes
CAF (Africa): one vice-president and six members = seven votes
CONCACAF (North America): one vice-president and four members = five votes
OFC (Oceania): one vice-president and two members = three votes
Africa and Europe has an almost equal amount of member states ( it depends on how we count Zanzibar and Reunion), yet UEFA gets two more votes. The whole thing is double-rigged.
Your proposal, and ISiddiqui’s comment that FIFA bans any player who plays in an unsanctioned event, feels very reminiscent of the ruckus surrounding the Saudi golf league LIV Golf, which launched earlier this year as a competitor to the PGA Tour and a means for Saudi Arabia to sportswash its human rights abuses.
Substitute “FIFA” with “PGA Tour”, and "players who choose to participate in your proposed ‘UEFA World Championships’ " with “players who signed contracts with LIV Golf”, and the situations are practically identical, minus the fact that the Saudis has a near-limitless well of money to sustain its war of attrition with the PGA Tour.
I don’t follow golf much at all, but my hunch is that we can look at the developments in the LIV Golf saga for insights into how this hypothetical FIFA schism might play out. That being said, I do agree with the viewpoint that corruption is inevitable whenever you put humans and big-money sports in close proximity, with no effective transnational oversight agency to regulate them.
I figured Herr Blatter couldn’t be outdone in grossness, but after Infantile-o’s hour-long speech on the eve of the World Cup, I realise, yeah, Blatter might’ve been outdone.
This is true but not impregnable. With enough money one might break or weaken monopolies. This is why PGA golf is unhappy with LIV and Saudi Arabia. But it is hard to see plausible challenge to established and well-loved events. Or assume what replaces it would be better.
If there is will to reduce corruption it might not be necessary to get rid of all the babies (infantes). Change the bath water, add more oversight and controls and auditors. Will this happen? No. Why is it tolerated? The people with the power to change things benefit too much.
Judging from the smug expressions from the blue suits in purple seats in Qatar, the babies like the current arrangement well enough. If the babies are gay and female and Liberian and from Saturn like Sun-Ra and his Arkestra, so much the worse.
South America’s confederation (CONMEBOL) simply isn’t as well off as Europe’s (UEFA). Now if UEFA would be willing to share the wealth with CONMEBOL maybe you could see a joint exodus from FIFA, but then that new organization would have to cut deals that would re-introduce corruption back in.
There are a few major differences, though. With LIV Golf, the individual golfers only affect themselves. If a country left FIFA, it’d also affect it’s club teams and the players playing in them.
I think that complicated knot of national teams/club teams/players make it very very difficult for anyone to leave FIFA.