What's GM short doing?!

[NickFaulks]

But almost all players would play an Israeli opponent if given the chance

People have been executed on the charge of cooperating with Israel.

[John McKenna]

"... There doesn't seem to be a quick 'fix' to the problem although it's possible that, as and when an increasing number of countries [eg Bahrain, Emirates] in the Middle East open up diplomatic and other relations with Israel, the Iranian theocracy will find itself increasingly isolated in its approach."

While the recent peace deals with some gulf states - apparently engineered with the aid if the outgoing US administration - are of some symbolic significance the counterweight to peace in the Middle East is the Shiite corridor that stretches - with Russian collusion - from Iran, through Iraq, and on to Israel's border with Syria and tbe Lebanon.

The only way remove or possibly ease the military tension, and its repercussions, on that border is to change the regime in Syria to a neutral or, failing that, a pro-Sunni one.

The failed uprising against the Syrian Alawite regime there was an attempt to do that. Turkey and Saudi Arabia were in favour of it and tried to support it, clandestinely, in the hope that the West would provide the kind of support to the Syrian rebels that Russia and Iran were to provide to the Syrian regime.

That hope died in the UK House of Commons the night they voted against military intervention in Syria, which resulted in the US following suit and the Russians and Iranians moving in. So much then for achieving the splendid isolation of Iran at arms length from Israel.

[Roger Lancaster]

"... There doesn't seem to be a quick 'fix' to the problem although it's possible that, as and when an increasing number of countries [eg Bahrain, Emirates] in the Middle East open up diplomatic and other relations with Israel, the Iranian theocracy will find itself increasingly isolated in its approach."

While the recent peace deals with some gulf states - apparently engineered with the aid if the outgoing US administration - are of some symbolic significance the counterweight to peace in the Middle East is the Shiite corridor that stretches - with Russian collusion - from Iran, through Iraq, and on to Israel's border with Syria and tbe Lebanon.

The only way remove or possibly ease the military tension, and its repercussions, on that border is to change the regime in Syria to a neutral or, failing that, a pro-Sunni one.

The failed uprising against the Syrian Alawite regime there was an attempt to do that. Turkey and Saudi Arabia were in favour of it and tried to support it, clandestinely, in the hope that the West would provide the kind of support to the Syrian rebels that Russia and Iran were to provide to the Syrian regime.

That hope died in the UK House of Commons the night they voted against military intervention in Syria, which resulted in the US following suit and the Russians and Iranians moving in. So much then for achieving the splendid isolation of Iran at arms length from Israel.

Yes, I played down the notion of a quick fix broadly for the reasons that John sets out. Nevertheless, things change over time. It wasn't so long ago that the thought of any Moslem countries, Sunni or Shia, having an overt relationship with Israel would have been regarded as risible.

[NickFaulks]

Yes, but the question under discussion here is why all that geopolitical stuff should have anything to do with chess.

[Roger Lancaster]

Yes, but the question under discussion here is why all that geopolitical stuff should have anything to do with chess.

Nick, it doesn't have anything uniquely to do with chess.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

The two countries are at war. That's it.

Why didn't the Iranian chess federation make a submission to that effect to FIDE instead of attempting to deny the existence of a state sponsored boycott?

The bottom line for Iranian chess players looks to be that either they don't play abroad, insist on the exclusion of ISR players as a condition of their participation, or play under FIDE or another flag.

England or the UK has so far benefited at least to the extent of one leading junior and one internationally renowned arbiter. France may have got themselves a world title challenger.

Unfortunately many people leave Iran every year, but the overwhelming majority don't have the luxury and/or willingness.
We can have a complete "national" team of Iranian expatriates!

But it is a very good question that why federations don't tell the international bodies about the situation in iran. Maybe just to show their loyalty to the government redlines.
In iran, a team asks around about people beliefs before allowing them to take some government jobs, mostly for loyalty to the government.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

Yes, but the question under discussion here is why all that geopolitical stuff should have anything to do with chess.

Probably because chess players are firstly citizen, as are other athletes

[Kevin Thurlow]

"In iran, a team asks around about people beliefs before allowing them to take some government jobs, mostly for loyalty to the government."

Yes, that is a problem. UK used to have an independent civil service, then in the late 90s, UK Government copied USA and started giving important jobs to people sympathetic to the cause, rather than those who were unbiased and knowledgeable. So you are not alone...

[Nigel Short]

Soheil is apparently struggling with this simple question, so perhaps I can help. GM Short is seeking to uphold the FIDE Charter. The Chess Federation of the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRCF) is a member of FIDE. The IRCF has breached the FIDE Charter on multiple occasions, as laid out in Annex 3.2.1 of the General Assembly. It is - to put it in layman's terms - a serial offender. FIDE expects its members to uphold the statutes of the organisation to which they belong. If Iran (or any other country, for that matter) has no intention of observing those statutes, they should leave. And if they have no intention of either observing those statutes or leaving voluntarily, they must ultimately be suspended.
Glad to be of assistance.

[Roger Lancaster]

While no-one will argue with Nigel's statement, it's not an answer to the original question of whether it's fair to penalise individuals, possibly entirely innocent individuals, because of the policy or actions of their government and/or chess federation. Arguably not. But the other side of the coin, in this instance, is whether it would be fair to others - and what sort of precedent it would set - to let the Iranian Chess Federation have its way.

[Nigel Short]

While no-one will argue with Nigel's statement, it's not an answer to the original question of whether it's fair to penalise individuals, possibly entirely innocent individuals, because of the policy or actions of their government and/or chess federation. Arguably not. But the other side of the coin, in this instance, is whether it would be fair to others - and what sort of precedent it would set - to let the Iranian Chess Federation have its way.

Roger, people read headlines. If "What's GM short (sic.) doing?!" is not Soheil's original question, then he should change it.

[Jonathan Rogers]

We can ask the question now then - would it have been fair to penalise the Iranian chess players, most of whom as you said elsewhere, have no ill will towards Israeli players and have no choice in the matter of defaulting? Will you try agaIn or do you accept that the majority in FIDE think differently?

[NickFaulks]

or do you accept that the majority in FIDE think differently?

I don't understand why you would suggest that.

[Jonathan Rogers]

Perhaps I misunderstood but I thought that a resolution for a lesser measure had been passed?

[Nigel Short]

Perhaps I misunderstood but I thought that a resolution for a lesser measure had been passed?

Malcolm Pein and I withdrew our motion in favour of the FIDE President's motion.