Chess and geopolitics: Daniel Naroditsky

Daniel Naroditsky (Source: here) 

In the game of chess, two sides fight for control and, ultimately, total victory. It is therefore unsurprising that parallels are often drawn between chess and geopolitics. During the Cold War, these parallels gained particular prominence. The Soviet Union dominated the global chess rankings and touted its superiority over the board as proof of communism's moral and intellectual superiority over Western capitalism. When Bobby Fischer defeated Boris Spassky to become world champion in 1972, the United States returned the favour.

When the Cold War ended, the chess rivalry between East and West faded. Russia declined as a chess super power, while Indian, Chinese, and Norwegian chess players began to appear in the world championship rankings (see chart below). Sure, Vladimir Kramnik – more about him later – won the men's world chess championships in 2000, 2004, and 2006. Russia also produced some excellent female players with Alexandra Kosteniuk winning the world championship titles from 2008 to 2010. So Russians were still up there among the best, but the total Russian dominance of world chess from the Cold War era was over.

Russian chess dominance is over (Source: here)

Sadly, the thaw in international relations after the end of the Cold War did not last. Nor has chess been able to extricate itself from geopolitics as I will explain shortly.

Soon after the Cold War ended, Vladimir Putin became Russia's leader and immediately began to concentrate power around his person. At the same time, the West, despite emerging triumphant from the Cold War, struggled to maintain unity and act in accordance with a coherent set of international norms. As a result, we ended up with a geopolitical reality today, which has four very distinct characteristics:

Characteristic Number One: Vladimir Putin, by now a fully-fledged dictator, constantly seeks to undermine stability in the West in order to detract attention away from Russia’s decline and to hold onto power. Putin is utterly ruthless in this pursuit, and, so far, he has largely been successful in so far as the West has been unable to put up effective defences against Russian aggression.

Characteristic Number Two: Europe and the United States (as well as their allies around the world) are weak and divided. Despite superior military and economic strength in the aggregate - Western Europe's defences alone dwarf Russia's military capabilities - the West continues to be dicked around by Putin on a daily basis. Western nations are led by gutless and short-sighted leaders, who are incapable of working together due to deep-seated tribalism. To make matters worse, the strongest nation in the Western alliance, the United States, is led by Donald Trump, who is a dyed-in-the-wool fascist and greatly admires Putin. This has rendered the Western alliance far, far weaker than the sum of its parts.

Characteristic Number Three: Tasked with the responsibility of keeping peace between nations after the end of World War II, the United Nations has completely failed in fulfilling its mandate. The organisation has lost all credibility, reducing governance to school-yard bully tactics. Thus, Putin, Trump, and other fascist regimes, such as Israel and Turkey regularly break international law with complete impunity, while the rest of the world stands by and does absolutely nothing, afraid of hurting their own interests if they speak out or intervene. In geopolitical terms, we have quite simply been reduced to a world in which immorality and cowardice compete to be the dominant strategy in international relations.

Characteristic Number Four: The new geopolitical reality has created a new set of losers. They are the unfortunate countries, which come into the cross-hairs of one of the fascist bully nations, sometimes simply because they are vulnerable, sometimes because the dictator slept badly the night before. The main victims today are Ukraine and Gaza, although conflicts in Sudan and elsewhere can also be attributed to the world community's unwillingness to stand up to bullies.

In short, our geopolitical reality has no heroes. It is devoid of moral leadership. It has no vision for how to run the world in the interest of everyone instead of the few and the strong. As the Irish poet WB Yaets eloquently put it, we are in a world in which "the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity".

For chess fans, it is therefore deeply worrying that this ugly geopolitic reality finds almost perfect reflection in international competitive chess. This week, the global chess community received a chilling reminder of this fact when Daniel Naroditsky had died.

Daniel Naroditsky was a much-loved chess grandmaster. He passed away at just 29. At the time of writing, the cause of death has not been disclosed, but, in my opinion, everything points to suicide. To those who are unfamiliar with chess Naroditsky’s name may not mean much, but to chess players around the world Danya was a hero. He was not only a genius over the board, particularly in blitz, but also an outstanding individual, who rose above the rest of the chess community through his selflessness, empathy, kindness, and generosity. He was a great teacher of the game, always respectful of those less gifted than himself, and strongly supported youth and women’s chess in particular.

In recent months, Naroditsky’s mental health had been in decline due to vicious accusations by former world chess champion Vladimir Kramnik that Naroditsky was cheating in online chess. Kramnik never provided credible evidence to support his claims and is known to have made similar unfounded cheating accusations against other players in the past.

To add insult to injury, when Naroditsky began to show signs of mental illness Kramnik piled on the hatred by accusing him of drug abuse. Kramnik also sought to weaken Naroditsky’s already fragile mental state further by posting a raft of messages online that Naroditsky was being abandoned by his Western friends.

For people with sound mental health, Kramnik’s accusations would have been water off a duck’s back, but to a mentally ill Naroditsky they were devastating. Remember that Naroditsky’s livelihood was online, so he had no way of escaping Kramnik's abuse. So, Naroditsky first withdrew from commentating, then from streaming and teaching, and, finally, from life itself.

Unlike Beth Harmon’s opponent in ‘The Queen’s Gambit’, Vasily Borgov, Kramnik played dirty. But why, I hear you ask? Why did Kramnik do this? This is where geopolitics enters the picture.

Acutely aware of Russia’s decline in global chess and how this sits badly alongside his project to restore the grandeur of the Soviet Union. Remember Western chess organisations are now hugely popular; Chess.com alone has more than 200 million members, myself included. And many non-Russian players, such as Magnus Carlsen, Hikaro Nakamuro, Gukesh Dommeraju, and Fabio Caruano are household names and mini celebrities. Russian leader Vladimir Putin has for some time sought ways to undermine the success of chess in the West and cast doubt on the performances of the most prominent non-Russian chess players.

Putin decided to do this by running a campaign alleging that leading non-Russian players on Western chess platforms are cheaters, the idea being that Russia's demise in global chess is not due to Russian weakness per se, but rather due to lack of fair play on the part of non-Russian players.

Kramnik and probably other prominent chess players are Putin's tools for implementing this strategy, which explains why Kramnik makes repeated accusations of cheating against high-profile Western players.

The similarities with geopolitics do not stop there. If Kramnik is the Putin of chess then the global chess community is the weak and divided West. Despite great commercial successes, Chess.com and many prominent chess streamers have proven unable to protect their own against Russian foul play. The reactions to Daniel Naroditsky’s death have been touching, but where is the chess community’s anger? Where is the mobilisation for change? Where are the concrete ideas for how to make things better, for how to prevent more victims of collective cowardice and immorality?

In fairness, unlike in geopolitics, chess does have a small number of truly brave souls, who always stand up to power. Jen Shahade is one. Jen gained prominence when she blew the whistle on sexual predators in US chess and, characteristically, she has not shied away from pointing her finger at Kramnik after Naroditsky's death. Another brave chess streamer is Jack Sarkisian. Unfortunately, stalwarts like Jen and Jack are few and far in between.

Anyway, this problem cannot be solved through individual bravery. The chess world needs a credible governing institution, just like the world sorely needs an effective United Nations. FIDE, the international chess federation, stands accused by many of not acting on alleged cheating and unfair play. I have no doubt the criticisms are valid, because FIDE has strong historical ties with and financial exposure to Russia. At best, FIDE is a toothless organisation, at worst it is an extension of Putin into the very heart of international chess.

So, just like Gaza, Ukraine, and Sudan have become victims in the new geopolitics, so vulnerable protagonists such as Daniel Naroditsky have become victims in the new chess reality. It is particularly tragic, in my view, that with so much money pouring into chess since ‘The Queen’s Gambit’ and Chess.com that there has still not been any credible attempt to set up an organisation to properly enforce rules and protect vulnerable players of the game.

It is time for the international chess community to wake up. If someone as widely admired and loved as Naroditsky can be persecuted in public to the point where he goes over the edge then anyone can become a victim. We are all at risk. Only by channelling the sorrow and anger over Naroditsky's death into building a new and credible institutional framework to govern international chess can we prevent a repeat of what happened to Danya.

The End.