To kick off, this one is about Malcolm Pein's editorial from the current issue of CHESS, regarding which we present some excerpts and some questions.
First, let's look at this section, which states that Paulson lost Malcolm's confidence as a result of Malcolm learning of the AGON/FIDE agreement.
How convincing is this claim? On Chessvibes, we read the following:
Now, in the ECF elections, Malcolm issued a statement strongly supporting Paulson. But by his own account, he was told, prior to those elections, that Kirsan was a majority shareholder in Paulson's company.
1. How can something that, by his own account, he already knew when he backed Paulson, have caused Malcolm to lose confidence in him?
2. Why would Paulson have "openly admitted" something which is not true and which is not to his advantage to have claimed?
Next, a passage where Malcolm refers to the various controversial agreements made by the FIDE Presidential candidates with their associates.
3. Given that even the published agreement involves Kasparov paying Leong's organisations in return for votes delivered, can anybody explain how that isn't morally equivalent to what Paulson was prepared to agree to?
4. Given that Kasparov only published the contract after the draft appeared in the New York Times, as opposed to when it was made - in other words, when his hand was forced - why does Malcolm consider that publishing the contract is somehow to his credit?
Lastly, here's a passage wherein Malcolm discusses the directors' coup against the President.
Malcolm states that "this" - the Paulson/FIDE agreement - is "the thrust of the issue".
Now Malcolm is acquainted with most or all the people involved in the ECF dispute. It is improbable that he had no contact with any of them in between the motion of no confidence and the publication of his editorial and he is unlikely to have been in the dark as to what was happening and why.
5. This being so, where does this statement leave the claim that it's entirely about Paulson's relationship with the ECF Board - and absolutely nothing to do with FIDE or chess politics?
Answers and comments would be appreciated.
[Thanks to Angus French and Pablo Byrne]
[Andrew Paulson index]
[Andrew Paulson index]