Further to my post of 13th September in which I decried the decision of an Ilyumzhinov loyalist to stand against England's Nigel Short for the position of ECF delegate to FIDE. I see that both candidates have published addresses. Grandmaster Short's prose is lucid and to the point. Some may take exception to Papua New Guinea's Rupert Jones being described as an opportunist, but what word can one use for someone who, not content to be labelled a useful idiot, has made it plain he is more than willing to dance to Kirsan Ilyumzhinov's tune? Indeed, the former school teacher, in so far as one can make sense of a file that looks to have been knocked together by a landing party of Ilyumzhinov's aliens, who then proceeded to click on the send icon, has the greatest difficulty in distinguishing between FIDE and Kirsan Ilyumzhinov. To oppose Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, in effect proclaims the man from Papua New Guinea, is to oppose FIDE!
The challenger writes:
I also feel the negative attitude towards England in the wider developing world also needs to be addressed especially if we want to make friends & influence people.
Yes indeed, a claque is unlikely to look kindly upon those who seek to take the money away. The objection goes that this negativity will have unfortunate consequences, England will become a pariah. Such consequences have included part of the FIDE Grand Prix being staged in London. May there be many more such consequences. The reality is that Mr Jones's fears are groundless, sponsors dictate the venue for major contests, local competitions don't need a central body, there's not much FIDE can do. The pettiness of refusing to accredit arbiters from England and other federations is to be expected from a bully and his gang. One stands up to such types. There's strength in numbers, other federations have many members who oppose Ilyumzhinov.
The challenger is thunderously silent, almost acting the dunderhead, on things that concern the ordinary player, such as inappropriate time controls or being properly seated when Lord Kirsan, a very superior person, is present. One thing he does mention is: Another area that needs to be addressed is getting more FIDE qualified trainers … Are our titled players to be subjected to fees such as those vexing many a modestly remunerated arbiter? Kirsan's got to obtain revenue from somewhere. No wonder Jones can't name a single English GM backing his candidacy. Does he even have an IM?
And that is to ignore the utter immorality of backing this gentleman (see entry number 68 on the link). Instead, the challenger rants on about the hypocrisy of the alleged moral superiority of the West: So one thing I learnt from that was not wanting to hear about the moral superiority of the supposed western chess nations. I don't know what the supposed adds to Mr Jones's argument, Britain is a Western nation, England has a long tradition of chess playing. I don't pretend that Garry Kasparov is an angel; however, to put it mildly, Garry Kimovich has never killed anybody: there is a difference, unless one is Mr Jones.
Bizarrely, the challenger boasts of his connections: In that time I have built up good contacts. Some of them we can well do without. As to recognition, the average man in the street is unlikely to have heard of either, but if he does identify a name, it will be Short's. In the chess world this disparity in recognition will be still more pronounced.
There may be some misguided personal loyalty to Jones from those purportedly representing the various Yorkshire chess bodies, nobody else has any reason to back him.