Yes! (at least I remember the US and Russia did). Ukraine had 10 nukes, loaded on missiles and in the silos, IIRC. Funny how neither side is bringing that up now.

What concerns me most about that is that it sends a clear message to all 3rd world countries to NEVER trust the major powers. This in turn also guarantees that if any other country ever manages to obtain nukes they should NEVER give them up since promises of security are useless. So, the very action designed to guard against nuclear proliferation will now assure the absolute opposite should any other nation ever have the same chance.

In the news: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/03/airline-software-giant-sabre-ends-service-with-r...

This won't stop Russian tanks but will cripple Aeroflot.

Ken Neat wrote on 03/02/22 at 16:22:02:

On the sole topic of FIDE taking sanctions against Russia and Belarus, you can check the board (especially president's pedigree) and sponsors (remember Nigel Short praising that phosphate firm?) to see this isn't going to happen soon. Or rather, the other way round.

OK, well if my always-helpful friend AOC is jumping in then so will I! Though my words are not what most media is talking about and may disturb some.

What the West is doing is forgetting history. In the late 90's NATO, without any UN mandate, unilaterally decided that they had the right to go in and bomb over the problem of Kosovo. NATO painted (truthfully or not) Slobodan Milosovic  as a War Criminal committing acts of "genocide" (remember that term!). And this meant Nato could declare, without UN or Russian OK that they could effectively wage war and had to answer to no one but themselves for it. IIRC, a Russian official or ambassador was bluntly told they could attend the conference deciding this but they had literally no say. This was a HUGE humiliation to Russia (staunch ally of the Serbs) at a time when they had no choice but to choke it down.

But Putin did NOT forget. And now, after years of testing the West he is going to do exactly to the West as (he feels) the West did to him. Notice how he has plainly claimed reports of genocide against Russian heritage peoples in Luhansk.etc. Notice how he has declared Ukraine to be a "non-state" and effectively possessing no sovereign legitimacy. Notice how, reading all this, you may be thinking, "Oh! I had forgotten all that Serbian stuff." Putin, however, has not forgotten. 

What we're seeing is an attempt by Russia (which Trump seems to agree with) to transform geo-politics from one of "values" to a "transactional" basis instead. Consider the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. It was a Horror of the worst kind since we evaluate it by things like human rights. But considered as a transactional operation designed to use superior technology and weaponry to enrich some and enhance imperialistic power it was a smashing (if nightmarish) success. Hence, why Trump said of Putin's bold moves, "This is genius."

Now we are hearing reports of Russian conscripts beginning to surrender and the Ukrainians have not just run away. Already, Putin and his cronies are beginning to slip in threats of nuclear war. If things worsen I wouldn't put it past Putin to set off an above-ground small-yield nuke, say in far-northern Siberia to make his threat more real. He does not believe the West is willing to die for this and Georgia, Crimea, Syria, and East Uk. are pretty good evidence of that.  But perhaps there is hope in the fighting spirit of Ukraine since, even if they loose, the insurgency they can unleash on their Occupiers will (I hope) make the price too high - even for Putin. What is chess to all this? In a world of values, Spassky/Fischer was a fight of Ours vs. Theirs (as encouraged by Nixon and Kissinger). But today? ErictheRed is merely telling the truth in that that is the calculus of Real-Politik.

@cathexis - Roll with it.

ErictheRed wrote on 03/02/22 at 18:55:47:

Your short statement packs a lot of meaning, some of which I agree with and some of which I don't.

RE: "I don't think that this is really the place for this kind of discussion"

I guess I agree since I don't want to talk about Russia and Ukraine here, but I can also appreciate that others might want to.

RE: "no-one of importance is going to care in the least if Russian chess players are allowed to compete or not"

I don't want other people to tell me what to care about, and that makes me reluctant to say what other people should or should not care about. So I'm a little uncomfortable with this phrasing. By logical implication, if someone cares about whether Russian chess players are allowed to compete or not, then that someone is unimportant. I guess we can infer at a minimum the following are unimportant: Russian chess players, Ukrainian chess players, Russian organizers, Ukrainian organizers, etc., etc. Now maybe in the context of "military action" (to use a current euphemism) they actually are unimportant, but that's not something I want to come out and say.

RE: "Chess is inconsequential and barring players from competing won't change what's happening in the world"

Chess is not of zero consequence. Let's say it is of infinitesimal consequence, which is almost but not quite the same thing. Again, barring players from competing is not of zero effectiveness for creating change. Let's say it is of infinitesimal effectiveness. I say it would be hasty to conclude that we should abandon things of infinitesimal consequence, or that we should not do things of infinitesimal effectiveness. There are 8 billion individuals on the planet, and 8 billion times an infinitesimal quantity is of indeterminate size. Finally, if our only choices are between (A) things of infinitesimal value or effectiveness, and (B) nothing at all, then I might choose (A) even if it's likely nothing will come of it, because it's certain nothing will come from choosing (B).

I don't think that this is really the place for this kind of discussion, but no-one of importance is going to care in the least if Russian chess players are allowed to compete or not.  Chess is inconsequential and barring players from competing won't change what's happening in the world, though some will feel that it's the symbolically right thing to do.