For British chess, it is a controversial episode that raises questions about political judgment and accountability.

The FIDE election in Samarkand came down to a runoff. In the first round, Timur Turlov and Viswanathan Anand received 96 votes; Wadim Rosenstein and Gordon Tang received 76; and Jan Henric Büttner and Malcolm Pein received 20. Turlov needed 97 votes to win outright. He fell one short.

After his ticket was eliminated, Pein and Büttner backed Turlov. In the runoff, Turlov defeated Rosenstein by 110 votes to 85. The totals do not reveal how individual federations voted, or prove that Pein’s 20 supporters moved as a bloc. But his endorsement came at a pivotal moment: the leading candidate, one vote short of victory, now had the public support of the eliminated ticket.

After the first round, Pein and Turlov were seen meeting and raising their hands together as FIDE staff applauded. It was a striking image of political realignment—and one that deserves scrutiny.

Pein later said his endorsement followed an agreement with Turlov. He cited commitments on suspended teams, compliance with Court of Arbitration for Sport decisions, and limits on the share of FIDE management positions held by people of one nationality. Those commitments should now be tested against the new leadership’s actions.

Pein’s decision sits uneasily beside his stated concerns about Russian influence in FIDE. He objected to Pavel Kolobkov, Russia’s former sports minister, joining the leadership. Kolobkov was a candidate for vice-president and was elected. Pein then withdrew from the race, saying he would not serve on the FIDE Council alongside him.

That withdrawal was presented as a principled stand. Critics may see it as a face-saving gesture: Pein had already backed Turlov, knowing Kolobkov was seeking a leadership position. Was the withdrawal a genuine red line, or political theatre?

Pein was also challenging European Chess Union president Zurab Azmaiparashvili and calling for an extraordinary assembly. The timing has prompted questions about whether these moves were intended to strengthen Pein’s own position in European chess, perhaps to clear a path to the ECU presidency. No evidence of a deal linking his support for Turlov to a future ECU role has been made public. But the sequence invites a question: what, exactly, was the political bargain?

Turlov has been under Ukrainian sanctions since 2022. Suggestions that he is likely to face sanctions from the EU or the US remain speculation; no public evidence has been found to support them. The support of former FIDE president Arkady Dvorkovich prove that the Russian state directed Turlov’s campaign. Pein was also seen with Dvorkovich several times in Samarkand, a connection that adds to the questions surrounding his choice.

The votes belonged to the member federations, not to Pein. But endorsements matter, especially when a candidate has just missed an outright win. Pein’s public support helped shape the runoff—and helped bring Turlov to the presidency.

For British chess, this sets a troubling precedent: its leading international representative helped deliver the decisive backing for a candidate sanctioned by Ukraine, while his own stated objections to Russian influence in FIDE were left open to question.

Read the full article →