I am sure most of my arguments apply equally well to the behaviour of FIDE, but my post concerns merely correspondence chess organizations.
I would like to hear your opinion concerning my arguments.
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE ESTONIAN CORRESPONDENCE CHESS FEDERATION
Please exclude me from the membership of the Estonian Correspondence Chess Federation.
I no longer pay the membership fee, I no longer participate in competitions organized by the Estonian Correspondence Chess Federation, and I no longer represent the Republic of Estonia in correspondence chess.
All my games as a representative of Estonia have ended by now. (I drew all four games in the Baltic/Sweden friendly match.)
JUSTIFICATION
Last year, in 2022, the International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) adopted two fundamental decisions.
The first decision established that ICCF member states could also be expelled or temporarily suspended for non-financial reasons.
In doing so, however, no set of rules was adopted for which reasons and how the activities of the member states may be suspended.
Another decision suspended the participation of Russia and Belarus in ICCF activities, citing the war in Ukraine.
However, this decision did not correspond to good legal practices and was also of morally dubious value.
First, this decision was retrospective because the penalized conduct began before adopting the new rulebook.
Second, this decision was discriminatory and selective. For example, US correspondence chess players were not punished for the fact that the US had started wars in Afghanistan, Iraq or Serbia.
Third, this decision applied collective punishment because the sportspersons were punished for the decisions of their homeland government.
Fourth, the method of counting votes was absurd and not transparent when decisions were made. Neutral and non-voting countries were excluded from the calculation without distinction; at the same time, there was no established quorum — the minimum number of countries that must vote (positively or negatively) for the meeting to be capable of making a decision.
It was necessary to reach 2/3 of the votes to pass decisions. However, the decision-making mechanism used was such that the decision could have been adopted even if only 3 countries had voted resultant (for example, the USA and the UK - Yes! and Russia - No!) and all the others had remained neutral.
In other words, a system was used where remaining neutral or not voting acted as a positive vote Yes! Because if the countries that remained neutral had been included in the total number of those who voted, the proportion of those who voted in favour would have remained less than 2/3, and such decisions would not have been adopted.
MY COMPLAINTS TO THE ESTONIAN CORRESPONDENCE CHESS FEDERATION
According to the data from ICCF, the Estonian Correspondence Chess Federation initially had not nominated a representative for this vote. Still, in the end, the name of one particular person appeared there. However, according to the data from ICCF, this person either remained neutral or did not participate in the vote (the ICCF does not specify this important nuance).
The Estonian Correspondence Chess Federation website did not have any information about this voting, nor was a relevant e-mail sent to the correspondence chess players. Furthermore, the organization’s website also lacked information about the voting results, and the results were not announced in e-mails either.
The opinion of the Estonian Correspondence Chess Federation members, on whose behalf the Estonian representative at least formally participated in the vote, has not been asked, nor has there been any discussion or voting in Estonia.
I have never received any response to the official inquiry I sent, before the vote, through the ICCF website, to the official representative of the Estonian Correspondence Chess Federation.
That the Estonian Correspondence Chess Federation can still send e-mails to correspondence chess players is evident from the fact that recently, in an e-mail sent to many addresses, the Estonian Correspondence Chess Federation invited Estonian correspondence chess players to participate in a friendly match as representatives of the Estonian team.
I do not regard it possible to belong to an organization on behalf of whose members essential (and weird) international decisions are made in such a way that the opinion of the members of the organization is not asked, their questions are not answered, and they are not even informed afterwards about the vote or its results.
With respect
Jüri Eintalu
Tallinn, March 29, 2023
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147477
@eintaluj said"MY COMPLAINTS TO THE ESTONIAN CORRESPONDENCE CHESS FEDERATION '
I am sure most of my arguments apply equally well to the behaviour of FIDE, but my post concerns merely correspondence chess organizations.
I would like to hear your opinion concerning my arguments.
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE ESTONIAN CORRESPONDENCE CHESS FEDERATION
Please exclude me from the membership of the Estonian Correspondence Chess Federation.
I no longer pay ...[text shortened]... terwards about the vote or its results.
With respect
Jüri Eintalu
Tallinn, March 29, 2023
you are addressing the wrong people by posting this here
@mott-the-hoople saidSorry. I am sad. I did not know that the wrong people were seeing this example contained in my letter. How can I help you?
"MY COMPLAINTS TO THE ESTONIAN CORRESPONDENCE CHESS FEDERATION '
you are addressing the wrong people by posting this here
@eintaluj saidIf U.S. players were banned FIDE would've been right to protest those wars by doing so.
US correspondence chess players were not punished for the fact that the US had started wars in Afghanistan, Iraq or Serbia.
It's like saying "my neighbor got away abducting children, why can't I?"
this decision applied collective punishment because the sportspersons were punished for the decisions of their homeland government
From Chess Dot Com which we're not allowed to link to but I'll PM the article if you want it:
"Right now, Russian players are not fully banned by FIDE for individual tournaments, as long as they don't play under the Russian flag. "
@vivify said"If U.S. players were banned FIDE would've been right to protest those wars by doing so."
If U.S. players were banned FIDE would've been right to protest those wars by doing so.
It's like saying "my neighbor got away abducting children, why can't I?"
this decision applied collective punishment because the sportspersons were punished for the decisions of their homeland government
From Chess Dot Com which we're not allowed to link to but I'll PM the a ...[text shortened]... ully banned by FIDE for individual tournaments, as long as they don't play under the Russian flag. "
- I do not know. Do you talk about moral right or legal right?
"It's like saying 'my neighbor got away abducting children, why can't I?'"
- I know that the Russians are quite often using such an argument. However, this argument is fallacious. The fact that the US get away with its actions does not justify similar actions by Russia.
"Right now, Russian players are not fully banned by FIDE for individual tournaments, as long as they don't play under the Russian flag. "
- Yes, I know this. It was redundant to contain all such details in my text.
Yes, they have not prohibited from playing individually. They have not been jailed either. It doesn't concern the question of whether the punishment was legal or justified.
@EintaluJ
I am sorry to hear of such unfair treatment by a national chess organization. The voting was at the very least not as transparent as it should have been, whatever its purpose may have been. As so often happens when politics and sports mix, the wrong people are penalized.
In ancient Greece, hostilities ceased during the Olympic Games, by common consent. Maybe we moderns could learn something from them.
@eintaluj saidFIDE would've had both the moral and legal right to ban U.S. players as protest over Iraq and Afghanistan.
"If U.S. players were banned FIDE would've been right to protest those wars by doing so."
- I do not know. Do you talk about moral right or legal right?
@moonbus saidI am not a historian. However, I have heard that in ancient Greece, the Olympic Games got politically corrupt.
@EintaluJ
I am sorry to hear of such unfair treatment by a national chess organization. The voting was at the very least not as transparent as it should have been, whatever its purpose may have been. As so often happens when politics and sports mix, the wrong people are penalized.
In ancient Greece, hostilities ceased during the Olympic Games, by common consent. Maybe we moderns could learn something from them.
@vivify saidThere is one additional nuance I did not tell.
FIDE would've had both the moral and legal right to ban U.S. players as protest over Iraq and Afghanistan.
I am not sure that any sports organization like FIDE or ICCF is in a position to decide what war or invasion is justified or not.
People simply believe the mainstream media of their surroundings.
The chess player (like Kasparov) may be very smart on the chessboard.
However, that chess player usually even does not know what pieces are on the board in that political game. He/she reads from the newspapers that White played 1. e2-e4. And he/she does not know that it is propaganda and White played 1. d2-d4 instead.
@eintaluj saidRegardless, the whole world believes Russia's invasion is not only unjustified but also a war crime. The ICC issued a warrant for Putin's arrest.
I am not sure that any sports organization like FIDE or ICCF is in a position to decide what war or invasion is justified or not.
So at least in this case, FIDE is justified.
@vivify saidI doubt whether sports organisations like FIDE or ICCF are justified in punishing national sports organisations for their governments starting an unjustified war.
Regardless, the whole world believes Russia's invasion is not only unjustified but also a war crime. The ICC issued a warrant for Putin's arrest.
So at least in this case, FIDE is justified.
However, suppose they are justified.
In that case, I agree that:
1) It was right to ban national teams and national flags but not to ban individual players.
2) If Russian sports organisations were punished for Russia invading Ukraine, then the US sports organisations should be penalised for the US invading Afghanistan and Iraq.
I would even add that the invasion of Iraq was far less justified than the invasion of Ukraine. From the very beginning, the war in Iraq was bloodier than the war in Russia. The occupation of Iraq has not yet been completely ended. The US has not paid any reparations for Iraq.
Therefore, even now, if Russian sports organisations were punished, the US sports organisations should be punished even more.
Vivify says:
"Regardless, the whole world believes Russia's invasion is not only unjustified but also a war crime. The ICC issued a warrant for Putin's arrest.
So at least in this case, FIDE is justified."
There are several mistakes in this argumentation.
First, starting a war is not a war crime. Starting a war can only be a crime against peace. War crime is defined as an improper way of conducting a war. For example, intentionally bombing civilians is a war crime. According to Amnesty International, in the Ukraine war, both Russia and Ukraine committed war crimes.
The ICC has no jurisdiction over the US, Israel, China or Russia.
Moreover, it is a highly tricky question whether evacuating children from the war zone is a forced deportation.
The decisions made by the chess organisations FIDE and ICCF did not refer to war crimes. Moreover, these decisions were made before the ICC presented its accusations against Russia.
Thus, it seems that your argumentation is pretty confusing.
@eintaluj saidBut annexing territory is. So is deliberately targeting civilians like when Russia bombed a maternity hospital. And so is the forced deportation of children.
First, starting a war is not a war crime.
Moreover, it is a highly tricky question whether evacuating children from the war zone is a forced deportation.
Russia also deported children from Crimea which was not an active war zone, so your argument fails. Furthermore, even if it was an active war zone it would still be a war crime under the Geneva convention.
Your posts have now turned into a defense of Russia's invasion. That reveals why you're truly upset about about FIDE's ban; you're a Russian propagandist. You're using all the same tired defenses of Russia like minimizing their horrific acts by comparing them the U.S. You're no different from Metal Brain, a notorious Putin apologist.
@vivify said"Your posts have now turned into a defense of Russia's invasion."
But annexing territory is. So is deliberately targeting civilians like when Russia bombed a maternity hospital. And so is the forced deportation of children.
Moreover, it is a highly tricky question whether evacuating children from the war zone is a forced deportation.
Russia also deported children from Crimea which was not an active war zone, so your argument f ...[text shortened]... acts by comparing them the U.S. You're no different from Metal Brain, a notorious Putin apologist.
You are slandering me, so I do not answer to your comments anymore.
Besides, you are simply ignoring my arguments.
For example, as I said above, chess organizations FIDE and ICCF made their decisions before the ICC presented its accusation to Putin. As a matter of fact, the ICCF started the process of banning Russian chess organizations on the next day after the invasion of Ukraine began. The ICC, however, presented its accusation to Putin a year after the invasion began. Thus, the accusation made by the ICC has absolutely nothing to do with the decision of the ICCF.
Moreover, you did not know the difference between the concepts of "war crime" and "crime of aggression". You did not consult any encyclopedias or dictionaries before starting to talk about these things.
Therefore, it is quite plausible that while accusing me of "justifying" (or "defending"😉 Russia's invasion, you actually have no idea about the meanings of the terms "justify" and "just war".
@eintaluj saidTargeting civilians is a war crime. That's a fact.
Moreover, you did not know the difference between the concepts of "war crime" and "crime of aggression". You did not consult any encyclopedias or dictionaries before starting to talk about these things.
Annexing land is a war crime.
Deporting citizens from their homeland is a war crime.
Russia committed all three of these acts, making Putin a war criminal. I've stated facts; your ignorance of them is your own fault.