ECF condemnation of FIDE President

[David Sedgwick]

A much better position would have been,on this occasion, to say absolutely nothing.

I disagree completely. I stand by what I said in the other thread.

I think the ECF stands to gain considerable kudos from being the first Federation to condemn the visit.

[Mike Truran]

......if its officials survive the death squads......

[LozCooper]

Most readers of this forum know that I have had a lot of good things to say about our President CJ however I want to say this about the ECF press release,

To any reader it is clear that the ECF press release is from CJ who I believe is a member of amnesty international, if I am wrong I will apologise, and thus has strong views which I actually share about Libya and other such regimes. Perhaps therefore it is unwise for him to use the offices of the ECF to make his views known without knowing what was the purpose of FIDE's Presidents visit to Libya. If it was to try and broker some kind of deal then I see nothing wrong in that if it helps bring to an end the turmoil in that country. I think very unlikely anything he had to say would cause the dictator to leave but anything is worth a try if it saves lifes.

Perhaps on this occasion the ECF press release was premature. Just my opinion and itsa not a pop at CJ who I like and respect for his work for chess.

The press release did not come from CJ so it is rather less clear than you suggest.

[Roger de Coverly]

without knowing what was the purpose of FIDE's Presidents visit to Libya.

To judge from the FIDE website, it's to publicise himself and the people he is meeting.




The German federation aren't too enthusiastic either.

From http://www.schachbund.de/news/article.h ... 981933.txt

"Das Präsidium des Deutschen Schachbundes hält den Besuch des FIDE-Präsidenten bei Machthaber Gaddafi in der momentanen politischen Situation für völlig unangemessen und kann kein Verständnis dafür aufbringen“, so DSB-Präsident Herbert Bastian zum Treffen in Tripolis.

which Google auto-translates as

" The Bureau of the German Chess Federation considers the visit of the FIDE President in Gaddafi leaders in the current political situation is totally inadequate and can not afford understand , "said DPA President Herbert Bastian at the meeting in Tripoli.

[Paul Cooksey]

The FIDE press release has made me even crosser, and even happier the ECF issued the statement it did.

I think the principle that chess and politics shouldn't mix is completely correct. Our President is bringing us into disrepute, even ridicule, for suggesting chess has a role to play in the Libya peace process.

In passing, I am also a member of Amnesty. I have issues with policies in many countries, including for example, the US and China. I would have no issue with Ilyumzhinov visiting them. I could even ignore Ilyumzhinov visiting Libya in a personal capacity. But, in linking the visit to his role in chess, he embarassed us all. I am glad the ECF did would it could to distance us.

Did I mention I was cross?

[Simon Spivack]

To any reader it is clear that the ECF press release is from CJ

His is not the only name on the release. What is clear is that this is the position of the Board. It is evident that several Directors had misgivings about Ilyumzhinov's jaunt and probably still do.

... it is unwise for him to use the offices of the ECF to make his views known without knowing what was the purpose of FIDE's Presidents visit to Libya. If it was to try and broker some kind of deal then I see nothing wrong in that if it helps bring to an end the turmoil in that country. I think very unlikely anything he had to say would cause the dictator to leave but anything is worth a try if it saves lifes.

Is Ernie seriously suggesting that the position of the ECF makes an iota of difference to the success of Ilyumzhinov's visit?

Saving lives is a worthy endeavour, worthier than almost any other, which was why Ilyumzhinov adduced it. However, anyone who knows of Ilyumzhinov's history, and Ernest may care to google "Larissa Yudina journalist" (without the inverted commas) in this quest, will look askance at such an argument. Does Ernie earnestly believe that Ilyumzhinov gives a damn about the sanctity of a human life? If one looks at the record of the Kremlin in Chechnya, the same question can legitimately be asked of his masters. Another explanation, and I am not certain of it, is that the Kremlin is hedging its bets. Should Gaddafi survive, Moscow may be better placed to profit than most.

Ilyumzhinov is bad for chess. He plays games with its laws. He puts off sponsors. He rigs elections. He makes a laughing stock of the game and he brings it into disrepute.

A pragmatist will look at the downside. But I can't, for the life of me, see what it is. It makes little difference to this duffer whether we are in FIDE or not. Many will be in the same position. The group most affected will be drawn from our leading players. Yet, one of Ilyumzhinov's foremost opponents is our own GM Nigel Short. I am not aware of public protests from other leading players about his stance. So they don't appear to be sufficiently exercised about a hypothetical (and I don't see it) loss of income.

[Matthew Turner]

I have some sympathy for Andy's views at the beginning of this thread and I think there are a couple of points that it is worth making

1. None of us could get on a flight to Tripoli and meet with Gaddafi. This trip has obviously been sanctioned by some very important people. Without knowing the reasons behind it, it is perhaps naive to condemn it out of hand.

2. It is slightly hypocritical to condemn Ilyumzhinov and FIDE for having links with the Gaddafi regime. There are some pretty big organisations throughout Europe which have benefitted greatly from Libyan cash.

[Paul McKeown]

1. None of us could get on a flight to Tripoli and meet with Gaddafi. This trip has obviously been sanctioned by some very important people. Without knowing the reasons behind it, it is perhaps naive to condemn it out of hand.

Sez who? No official here is going to stop you, it's a free country. I bet if you signalled your intention of telling the world what a wonderful and misunderstood chap Gadaffi was, you might even get an audience, complete with television cameras from the Ministry of Propaganda.

2. It is slightly hypocritical to condemn Ilyumzhinov and FIDE for having links with the Gaddafi regime. There are some pretty big organisations throughout Europe which have benefitted greatly from Libyan cash.

I haven't personally benefitted from cash or links with Gaddafi. Have you? Why is it hypocritical for the ECF to condemn Ilyumzhinov? Has the ECF accepted Libyan cash? Do tell.

Gadaffi has cowed his own people for decades, enriching himself, his family and his cronies by the murder, torture and rape of his fellow Libyans, supplemented by the occasional massacre of a family, town, tribe or village. He has shot and hanged his political opponents and many that thought him their friend, too. He has instituted a personality cult in which people were forced to accept the wisdom of black being white should he have woken up one morning and decided so. In itself these are terrible things, but from a British perspective he has earned not just disgust but the anger of the British people too, for his goons killed WPC Yvonne Fletcher, blew up Pan Am 103 above Lockerbie and he part funded a terrorist campaign in Northern Ireland which resulted in thousands dead and tens of thousands maimed. I'm not sure, but its possible that there were British citizens killed in the La Belle night club too and in whatever other mayhem he sponsored elsewhere in the world. Few (if any) of the world's tyrants have had a comparable track record over the last three or four decades of murdering British citizens.

Happily he will not last too much longer in Tripoli. Either he will be strung up from a lamp post by one of his own generals or he will be handed over to the International Criminal Court or he will flee into exile in some gilded prison in Venezuela or Zimbabwe.

Why on Earth would the ECF *NOT* put out a strongly worded statement dissociating itself from Ilyumzhinov's support for Gaddafi?

[andrew martin]

What is the track record of Western involvement in the Middle East?

[Andrew Farthing]

To any reader it is clear that the ECF press release is from CJ who I believe is a member of amnesty international, if I am wrong I will apologise, and thus has strong views which I actually share about Libya and other such regimes.

Ernie,

You are mistaken. The press release was drafted by Stewart Reuben in response to a couple of contacts from third parties (i.e. not ECF Board members) noting the impact of media reports of the FIDE President's visit to Libya and asking what the ECF's position was. Stewart is Marketing Director, so it is his responsibility to prepare the ECF's press releases.

For obvious reasons, Stewart circulated the draft to the Board as a whole. Given that CJ's name was given, along with Stewart's, as a contact for further enquiries, Stewart naturally spoke with CJ in order to ensure that he was happy with the wording. (Not knowing this at the time, I e-mailed CJ separately to make sure for myself that CJ was content, and he replied, assuring me that he was.)

Not all Board members responded to the original circulation of the draft - which is not unusual, particularly when time is short for responses - but a majority did and there were no dissenting voices.

Speaking for myself, I don't like to see chess mixing with politics, but in this instance the FIDE President's action had a political impact, even if one took the most charitable view and believed that it was not politically motivated. Under the circumstances, the ECF statement is a reasonable response, and I stand by it.

[Matthew Turner]

Paul McKeown wrote,
"I haven't personally benefitted from cash or links with Gaddafi. Have you?"

Really? So you don't read the FT, use BP petrol in car, watch Juventus FC, have an offspring applying to LSE, or have a pension which invests in the vast number of companies that are supported by the Libyan Investment Authority. You might like to reflect on what would have happened to the European Banking sector without substantial investments from Libya.

[Paul McKeown]

Paul McKeown wrote,
"I haven't personally benefitted from cash or links with Gaddafi. Have you?"

Really? So you don't read the FT, use BP petrol in car, watch Juventus FC, have an offspring applying to LSE, or have a pension which invests in the vast number of companies that are supported by the Libyan Investment Authority. You might like to reflect on what would have happened to the European Banking sector without substantial investments from Libya.

Well, you don't know me, so you aren't in a position to make guesses, are you? Precious few is the truthful answer.

Ultimately it has little to do with the price of beer that BP or the FT or the LSE have taken Gaddafi's money (was it his money, or was it the Libyan people's money, will the investments still accrue to the Libyan people after Gaddafi has gone?). I certainly find it distasteful when western, particularly when they are British, companies or governments are involved in business with despots. However, just because the British government (say) has made a mistake in the past, it doesn't make it hypocritical if it should wake up to what it has done and say never again.

The question doesn't concern BP anyway, it concerns FIDE. What business has Ilyumzhinov in giving Gaddafi moral support? The best you can come up with is the flimsy, "This trip has obviously been sanctioned by some very important people. Without knowing the reasons behind it, it is perhaps naive to condemn it out of hand." It seems to me unlikely that it has been sanctioned or requested by anyone, except by Ilyumzhinov and Gadaffi themselves, but even if it were, what has it got to do with the presidency of FIDE?

Unless Kirsan Ilymuzhinov was carrying out work vital to chess, then he should have kept his nose out and I hope the ECF makes the gesture of challenging any expenses that Ilyumzhinov has reimbursed by FIDE for this trip.

Nurse Kirsan has a wonderful record of holding the hand of tyrants on their death beds. I would have thought that the reason is obvious, he's a murderous tyrannical kleptocrat himself, he wished to show solidarity with one of his own.

[Rob Thompson]

Paul McKeown wrote,
"I haven't personally benefitted from cash or links with Gaddafi. Have you?"

Really? So you don't read the FT, use BP petrol in car, watch Juventus FC, have an offspring applying to LSE, or have a pension which invests in the vast number of companies that are supported by the Libyan Investment Authority. You might like to reflect on what would have happened to the European Banking sector without substantial investments from Libya.

Ultimately it has little to do with the price of beer that BP or the FT or the LSE have taken Gaddafi's money

Little to do with the price of beer, maybe, but a lot to do with the price of petrol and diesel, and i know which one i spend more money on.

[Brendan O'Gorman]

Kadafi v Ilyumzhinov.jpeg

[Mick Norris]

Paul McKeown wrote,
"I haven't personally benefitted from cash or links with Gaddafi. Have you?"

Really? So you don't read the FT, use BP petrol in car, watch Juventus FC, have an offspring applying to LSE, or have a pension which invests in the vast number of companies that are supported by the Libyan Investment Authority. You might like to reflect on what would have happened to the European Banking sector without substantial investments from Libya.

Matthew

My answers are no, no, no, no, and have a look at the latest info here:
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/fin_san ... 080611.pdf