Tim Wall's Ukraine Resolutions

[Roger Lancaster]

When most journaIists stiII (see for exampIe, Newsweek at https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/pu ... re-showing) see Dvorkovich as opposed to the war, it's unsurprising that those associated with Russia Today shouId be saying the opposite.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Indeed, but given how trustworthy they are with so much other stuff.....

[JustinHorton]

Well we all know the real(politik) answer - whilst we disapproved of Russia taking Crimea et al we didn't consider it serious enough to declare them persona non grata as a result.

I'm sure that's right, but this being so it's extremely humbuggy to retrospectively declare actions unconscionable that we have been choosing to overlook in the meantime and it doesn't help to establish the sincerity of the case being put. (As an example, I'll say again that having this case put by somebody who has actually worked for Russian state propaganda since the 2014 annexation is quite absurd and foolishly so, and if the guy concerned wasn't so fond of the sound of his own voice he might see that.) Objectioning to the present invasion, and pointing out the degree to which FIDE has been dependent on Russian funding - these are good things, I think. Crowbarring in things to which we had made objection at the time just smacks of hypocrisy.

[J T Melsom]

The globetrotting arbiter still hasn't had time to rejoin this thread, but when I suggested his compromise motion was dishonest this shoehorning of stuff that was debateable into a composite motion was exactly what I objected to. It was understandable that Council wanted to do something, but putting untruths or questionable statements into a composite does nobody any favours. I was told I was picking on said globetrotter, frankly that was a bit precious. Perhaps he will reflect and offer his thoughts.

[Chris Goodall]

somebody who has actually worked for Russian state propaganda since the 2014 annexation

Appearing on a panel assembled by a TV station is not working for it. Or else John McDonnell has worked for Russian state propaganda to the same extent.

[Angus French]

somebody who has actually worked for Russian state propaganda since the 2014 annexation

Appearing on a panel assembled by a TV station is not working for it. Or else John McDonnell has worked for Russian state propaganda to the same extent.

His LinkedIn profile states he was Output Editor at RT.com from Aug 2013 to Dec 2017.

[David Sedgwick]

The globetrotting arbiter still hasn't had time to rejoin this thread, but when I suggested his compromise motion was dishonest this shoehorning of stuff that was debateable into a composite motion was exactly what I objected to. It was understandable that Council wanted to do something, but putting untruths or questionable statements into a composite does nobody any favours. I was told I was picking on said globetrotter, frankly that was a bit precious. Perhaps he will reflect and offer his thoughts.

I haven't been globetrotting; I am not currently fit enough to do so. However, I have been reflecting.

I apologise for the long delay and I shall try to respond.

To say that the composite motion "did nobody any favours" is a reasonable expression of opinion. To allege dishonesty still seems to me to be way over the top.

[Roger Lancaster]

I had a long telephone conversation with Tim Wall, maybe 12 months ago, after I'd suggested on this forum that he was an out-and-out Putin supporter. Tim disputed this. Instead he asserted that he, and many others who worked for RT, disagreed with Putin. While I frankly found this a little difficult to believe, and still do, it's fair to acknowledge that many people find themselves having to work for organisations with whose policies they disagree and, in some cases, find abhorrent.

[JustinHorton]

Yes, but even if that were the case here, it's a fairly poor basis for criticising in the most moralistic way, isn't it? And in truth we all understand that.

[Roger Lancaster]

Yes, but even if that were the case here, it's a fairly poor basis for criticising in the most moralistic way, isn't it? And in truth we all understand that.

I actually understand very little here. It seems to me that Dvorkovic is carefully avoiding aligning himself with either side on the Ukraine issue, which is maybe politically wise but means that we don't know what he actually thinks. Meantime Tim Wall, whose background suggests he's a Putin man, denies this and says he's against Putin. So I genuinely don't know whether these resolutions reflect (1) a pro-Putin Wall agitating against what he believes to be an anti-Putin Dvorkovic or (2) an anti-Putin Wall agitating against what he believes to be a pro-Putin Dvorkovic. However I must have missed something as those ECF voters who supported the resolution presumably knew what they were voting for?

[Chris Goodall]

somebody who has actually worked for Russian state propaganda since the 2014 annexation

Appearing on a panel assembled by a TV station is not working for it. Or else John McDonnell has worked for Russian state propaganda to the same extent.

His LinkedIn profile states he was Output Editor at RT.com from Aug 2013 to Dec 2017.

I stand corrected Angus, thank you.

Tim and I exchanged words about Russia from time to time. Tim's attitude to the Salisbury poisoning and to Kasparov's support of the Kremlin candidate seemed inconsistent with being a Putin mouthpiece.

Yes, but even if that were the case here, it's a fairly poor basis for criticising in the most moralistic way, isn't it? And in truth we all understand that.

Don't worry Justin, we are not the type to examine your old tweets for evidence of tank enthusiasm. To be a socialist is to fall out with Moscow multiple times before breakfast.

[JustinHorton]

I actually understand very little here.

Might this be because you're trying to work out who is secretly a Putin supporter whereas the point is that somebody cannot please moral complications for themselves while shouting about other people's absence of principle

[Roger Lancaster]

I actually understand very little here.

Might this be because you're trying to work out who is secretly a Putin supporter whereas the point is that somebody cannot please moral complications for themselves while shouting about other people's absence of principle

Very possibIy, yes, but there's aIso the point that - if someone's shouting the odds - it's handy to know his or her personaI agenda.

[J T Melsom]

David Sedgwick.
I am sorry to learn you are unwell and hope you are able to resume the full extent of activities soon. I reflected on the previous exchanges and am satisfied that presenting what seems to be a false prospectus or argument might reasonably be regarded as dishonest. Dishonesty is a more nuanced charge than bare faced lying,and I've no grounds to suggest that.

[JustinHorton]

Incidentally I see that Garry Kasparov is making a lot of noise on Twitter about the FIDE elections, which might remind us that he too had no objection to Dvorkovich being elected in 2018. Perhaps this point should be made to him by an interviewer one day, if they can get a word in.