From: cuban@athena.mit.edu (Federico A Garcia)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: Fischer and sanctions
Date: 27 Jul 92 11:20:19 GMT
Distribution: rec.games.chess
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology


In article <1992Jul27.014417.25697@rata.vuw.ac.nz> vova@kauri.vuw.ac.nz (Vladimir Pestov) writes:

#   The return of Bobby Fischer to chess is much more important than
#   maintaining sanctions against Yugoslavia.

Don't get me wrong, I will be following the games of the match as
closely as anyone else and am also quite excited to see Fischer return
to competition.  However, it's also important to keep a proper
perspective on things.  Chess is, for all its beauty, just a game.
What is happening in Yugoslavia affects many people and many are
suffering and dying because of it.  Which is really more important?

#   After all, who had ever thought of imposing sanctions as comprehensive
#   against my homeland - the former Soviet Union? And violations of
#   human rights,
#   international agreements and so on in the xUSSR were several
#   orders of magnitude greater than those in Yugoslavia, Iraq,
#   South Africa or whenever else. The international community
#   was simply afraid of doing such kind of things.
#   Since Soviet chessplayers were always welcome, I do not think 
#   it would be fair to penalise chess because of Yugoslavia.

Having been born in Cuba, one of the last bastions of Communism in the
world, I can sympathize with your feelings completely.  However, the
fact that international law isn't always applied fairly is no excuse
for violating it (and that is almost certainly what Fischer is doing).
Now that the Cold War is over, the UN is finally beginning to play a
useful role in deterring some of the most criminal countries in the
World, of which Yugoslavia is undoubtedly one.  There are many other
places in the world where this match could have been held without
Fischer having to go play under what may be a genocidal regime.

#   Perhaps, chess merely should not have anything in common with politics.

In an ideal world this would be true, and I do feel somewhat
apologetic for discussing politics in this group.  However, its
certainly not a new thing in FIDE.  Remember the controversy in the
mid-80's about barring players who had participated in South African
events or the talk by some players of boycotting the Dubai Olympiads?
Also, it seems clear to me that the Yugoslavian sponsors of this event
clearly have more of a political agenda than a chess agenda in mind.
Like it or not, Fischer is serving that agenda by participating.

#   The other story is that one can hardly believe it *will* happen...
#   sort of a miracle. I became interested in chess in late 1971 after
#   Bobby's triumph in pretendent's matches... 
#   no-one in chess history compares to him. And would not   
#   a possible (???) loss harm forever the
#   glorious luminious image of Bobby Fischer of 60-s and early 70-s?

Capablanca's reputation in history hasn't been much damaged by his
loss to Alekhine and if Fischer loses it will certainly be attributed
to 20 years without playing, etc.  However, I think he'll still roll
over Spassky (or most other GM's) even after 20 years.  At least
there's no point in debating this any further, though, since we'll all
soon have a chance to see for ourselves!

-Fred Garcia
M.I.T.
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess