Stefan Loeffler interviews Ignatius Leong

After Ignatius Leong, 46, from Singapore, declared to run for FIDE President in the election scheduled in Bled in early november, he agreed to answer by e-mail a list of questions proposed by German journalist Stefan Loeffler.

Mr. Leong, when and where did you decide to lead the ticket in the FIDE election? Initially, I decided to support Jean-Claude Loubatiere. I read his call for reform and was encouraged by several federations to join his ticket. When I learnt that the current FIDE board would be renominated in toto, I thought this was it. The chess world had enough. In all major organisations, periodical changes in office appointments are necessary and healthy. However, the situation changed, and between ourselves and Morten Sand, we agreed that I should lead the ticket. At that time I was on a trip to Vietnam, but the final decision was taken when I came back to Singapore on 6 August.

What is your personal motivation to become FIDE President?

I had been actively involved in FIDE work more than ten years ago. As a member of the Qualification Commission and then the Central Committee I made numerous proposals on many subjects. When I ran on the ticket of Bachar Kouatly in the 1994 elections, I hoped to contribute more positive work for FIDE especially in the areas of administration and development. Unfortunately, the politics of FIDE from 1994 to 1997 didn't allow me fulfill my ambition. As a result I felt that I should concentrate to develop chess in Eastern Asia. Hence I took on the role of Zone President which comprises fourteen countries. Two years ago I founded a regional organisation (ASEAN Chess Confederation).

The reunification process which Yasser Seirawan helped to effect has inspired me. What is really visible of FIDE in the past years is nothing except the World Championship. Most other aspects in FIDE took a back seat. I want the world to see FIDE in better light: a truly global organisation working for the interests of chess at all levels.

What are the main policies that you want to put in effect?

I shall place the FIDE Office in better order. For easy international access, relocating it to Paris is logical. The Office shall provide administrative assistance to and function for all the commissions and committees. A full time technical director may be appointed to provide technical assistance to all federations and chess organisers.

I want to see a transparent structure and system in and within FIDE. How FIDE makes appointments of arbiters, appeals committees, how CACDEC money is disbursed. I have already put forward a proposal to change the ticket elections to individual elections. This would bring about a more democratic and transparent election process. The ticket method had brought about terrible politicising as we have witnessed over the past decade.

Most of the Commissions and Committees in FIDE are almost dormant. They meet during Olympiad years and even so, few of those who fill the committees in an election year are present in subsequent meetings. For example, the Titles and Ratings Committee should have been activated before the FIDE board decided to implement new instruments. After the announcement of the new time control, nothing in the FIDE Handbook has been updated. Title regulations had changed but you don't see the new norm charts in the Handbook. The FIDE website carries an abundance of international events, but the essentials are missing. No FIDE approved pairing program for teams is available. Women's chess remains unimportant. The constantly changing of regulations and format pertaining to the World Championship is disturbing. How can FIDE market chess as a useful tool for education or as a good sport to take up when FIDE cannot plan ahead? Under the standing regulations, the Laws of Chess can be amended only every four years, no matter how good the proposals may be. Nevertheless FIDE is changing its regulations to suit some elite players. I do hope that the reunification of the World Championship will bring about a more consistent plan and format, which should be carried for at least two cycles or four to six years. In brief, there should be

greater stability in FIDE functionaries and that the administration should be quick to react to implement the changes effectively.

How do you evaluate the work or the current board and what has been accomplished during the presidency of Mr Ilyumzhinov?

I spoke to Mr Ilyumzhinov while I was faxing in the nomination papers on 7 August. I told him that during his seven years in office he was the only board member who had accomplished some credible work. There is no doubt about his financial contributions to the World Championships and the World Cup events. I shall also credit Mr Ummer Koya who has been organising several FIDE events in India. I cannot say the same for the rest of the current Board members. I am still very upset with the way some Board members behaved at the Shenyang World Cup in 2000. I am ashamed of the way FIDE marginalised China.

How would you describe the dealings within FIDE to an outsider?

If you have money to organise a FIDE event, you better do not boast about it to FIDE. Organise the event yourself and name it what you want. If you need FIDE's name, simply invite Mr Ilyumzhinov, period.

Do you support the Prague agreement, including that the WCC will be organised, on behalf of FIDE, by an independent agent or agency and including the proposed double knockout system to find future candidates?

I salute the work of Yasser Seirawan. Garry Kasparov should be credited for returning to FIDE. It is sad that FIDE itself cannot organise the WCC but has to appoint an independent agent. We can discuss until the next millennium and we will not find a completely satisfactory format. Always someone will be unhappy. However, I am not satisfied that World Champion Ponomariov is to face Kasparov. There was no transparency in deciding the selection of who to play whom. I would prefer to name all the candidates and decide the matches by drawing lots. If it is all about reunification, forget about who should play whom. Simply draw lots, I hope this is not too late.

The Prague agreement pre-empted the FIDE General Assembly. Here again, FIDE faltered by agreeing to change the WCC which requires the approval of the GA. As chess players, why can't we make plans instead of jumping at opportunities? We could have a WCC Format committee comprising the top 100 Grandmasters from whichever rating list. They meet and put up all the various options and they vote among themselves. Give them autonomous rights to decide format, the time control, the playoff details. What should remain is the process of qualification from the federations; zonals, continentals or interzonal. This qualification process should be the responsibility of FIDE. FIDE and/or its partner organisations appoint the WCC Working Committee to recommend the prize fund, the dates, the venues and organise the WCC.

Can you desribe the course of the conflict in Yerevan 1996 which eventually lead to you seeking refuge in the US embassy?

First, let me emphasise that before the so-called "conflict", I had an excellent relationship with Mr Ilyumzhinov. After winning his match against Gata Kamsky, World Champion Anatoly Karpov approached me with a plan for the Yerevan Elections. Mr Karpov proposed that Mr Kouatly form a ticket including him, Karpov, in order that a legitimate ticket is in place for Yerevan. Mr Karpov would offer to retire from the ticket in favour of Ilyumzhinov. Mr Karpov and Mr Kouatly requested me to disclose the offer to Mr Ilyumzhinov. If he would decline, the plan would put up and the Kouatly ticket would be called off. Mr Ilyumzhinov accepted the plan and agreed that I follow up with the campaign. About a month later, he decided to push for a ticket with Mr Giorgios Makropoulos and I was asked to campaign for this potential ticket to be accepted and elected in Yerevan. At Yerevan, Ilyumzhinov decided to appoint Mr Jaime Sunye-Neto as his Deputy and announced this at the dinner meeting of the Board prior to the Elections. But when the General Assembly opened, he switched back to Mr Makropoulos. I felt I had too much and that my own credibility was in doubt. True, I was employed by FIDE then as Administrative Manager, so I handed in my resignation. By then the Kouatly ticket was dissolved since it was primarily formed to accommodate Mr Ilyumzhinov. In this way both Mr Kouatly and Mr Karpov showed their sincerity.

Left with only Sunye-Neto´s ticket, I decided to support it since it was the only legitimate ticket left because Mr Ilyumzhinov's ticket had yet to be accepted by the GA. He was naturally furious with me. What followed subsequently should be put to rest. The night before the Elections, he invited me to his room. He was apologetic for shouting at me. I had never seen him so angry before. We spoke for two hours, and he persuaded me to withdraw my resignation. I also apologised and I stated that although being an employee of FIDE, I could not follow instructions which I personally don't believe were correct. Nevertheless, he asked me to return to the GA and to vote whichever way I decide. Almost one year later, he offered to make up and invited me for discussions during the Karpov-Anand match in Lausanne.

Obviously, Mr Ilyumshinov has spent a lot of money in chess. What have been your capacities to raise money for chess in the past? What contacts do you have for the future?

I have not been too successful in Singapore. However, for a federation with no government support and little commercial sponsorship, we are able to run the federation and organise international events occasionally. We managed to raise money ourselves and share a building with three other mind sports. But because chess will be included in the 2003 Southeast Asian Games for the first time, government support for chess has been promised. Ironically, my capacities to raise money for chess or rather, to find organisers for international events outside Singapore are more successful. China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam have been receptive whenever I visit them to offer my proposals. I founded the ASEAN Chess Confederation of ten countries in 2000 and am its Chairman. I have funded the organisation of three editions of the ASEAN Age-Group (Youth) Championships in Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore. The Singapore event this year had 237 players from six countries. I found the organiser for the World Youth U16 (Children's) Olympiad scheduled for August in Malaysia. On the eve of stating my candidacy I was in Vietnam and secured the ASEAN Championships scheduled for December this year. With the support of some federations, I reached the inclusion of chess as an official sport for the first time in the 2003 Southeast Asian Games, a biennial multisport event. As a result, several countries shall receive government support for chess.

I have devoted my life to chess. I run a training company and employ fourteen trainers; among them, twelve are foreigners. I ensure they have enough training jobs so that I can pay them their monthly fixed salaries. I became an International Arbiter at age 23 and was the first Asian to receive the title of International Organiser. I was Chief Arbiter for the Xie Jun - Galliamova match and the World Cup (men & women) in Shenyang 2000. I was Arbiter for the Women's Interzonals in 1990 and 1993. I was also arbiter at the WCC in Moscow 2001, and the Olympiads in 1990 and 1992. I had organised two editions of the World Cities Team Championships, in Jakarta 1997 and Shenyang 1999.

I believe in being sincere. I do not have international contacts. I agreed to lead the ticket on the basis that Mr Loubatiere has support from his government as well as from private sponsors. If FIDE has the will to reform, it should change its mindset of too much reliance on funding from its President. I don't have the wealth of Mr Ilyumzhinov. But I have passion and determination to make things work.

Isn´t your candidacy mainly a vehicle for criticism and a bit of democracy in FIDE but without any real chance to gather enough votes in the election?

I don't spend my time sitting down and penning criticisms. Those who have been following my career in chess know better. The moment I start to criticise, I am ready to tackle the issues with positive work. My chance to succeed depends not on what I have (wealth), what I say (policies) and what I promise to do (implementation). My keyword is reform, my slogan is: Reform for a Better FIDE. If the electorate is satisfied with the present and don't believe in giving a new team the chance, there's no reform. If the electorate feels that the WCC and the money of Mr Ilyumzhinov is the greatest benefit for FIDE, then FIDE will have to wait till another billionaire comes by.

Deputy President candidate Mr Morten Sand is experienced with FIDE work and is a top lawyer. Vice President candidate Mr Lin Feng has been primarily instrumental in the China success story. General Secretary candidate Mr Jean-Claude Loubatiere has been running the French Chess Federation for many years. Treasurer candidate Professor Uvencio Blanco has been extremely successful with his chess in schools program in Venezuela. I have been relatively successful in organising events in several countries outside of my own. In FIDE today, I can hardly recognize anyone who kick-starts or organises events outside his country. I will not count my chickens before they are hatched. I was typically shy but I have overcome this in recent years. I avoid the limelight but for the sake of chess and FIDE, I could manage. I don't waste time on things I feel I don't have any real chance to succeed. Chess players don’t like losing and occasionally I still play competitive chess.