White King And Red Queen: How the Cold War Was Fought on the Chessboard

by Daniel Johnson

Daniel Johnson -- journalist, editor, scholar, and chess enthusiast who once played Garry Kasparov to a draw in a simultaneous exhibition -- is the perfect guide to one of history’s most remarkable periods, when chess matches were front-page news and captured the world’s imagination.

The Cold War played out in many areas: geopolitical alliances, military coalitions, cat-and-mouse espionage, the arms race, proxy wars -- and chess. An essential pastime of Russian intellectuals and revolutionaries, and later adopted by the Communists as a symbol of Soviet power, chess was inextricably linked to the rise and fall of the “evil empire.” This original narrative history recounts in gripping detail the singular part the Immortal Game played in the Cold War. From chess’s role in the Russian Revolution -- Marx, Lenin, and Trotsky were all avid players -- to the 1945 radio match when the Soviets crushed the Americans, prompting Stalin’s telegram “Well done lads!”; to the epic contest between Bobby Fischer and Boris Spassky in 1972 at the height of détente, when Kissinger told Fischer to “go over there and beat the Russians”; to the collapse of the Soviet Union itself, White King and Red Queen takes us on a fascinating tour of the Cold War’s checkered landscape.

Genres: History, Chess, Nonfiction, Politics, Sports

384 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2008

Reviews

[P.E. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Microcosmos




World Championship Match R.J. Fischer - B. Spassky (Reykjavik, 1972)


So, this essay is trying to prove that the Cold War was all about chess, huh? Sounds pretty darn arguable if you ask me. I would have bet it was a war involving real people over a long span of time, dealing with containment, disinformation, subversion, infiltration and blockade running with proxy wars! Not mere chessmen strutting around on a cheap board!

... Enough horsing around: this is not the angle taken by Daniel Johnson, even though it goes beyond doubt that the title could have been better phrased.

Throughout this work, journalist Daniel Johnson intends to reveal the connections between the highest levels of professional chess and politics, more especially power struggle, or geopolitics. He makes a somewhat convincing case in that regard, showing how chess, since its inception came to be linked with ideals and more often than not, ambitions, originating in various princes and empires.


World Chess Championship Match A.Karpov v. V. Korchnoi (Baguio, 1978)

On a further note, I have been greatly disappointed to read about a certain practice implemented by chess masters from the USSR to "fix" their matches, allowing the favourite to go first, making quick, prearranged draws between themselves to better fight a non-USSR challenger in international competitions (outsider Bobby Fischer had a taste of it, for instance), or the nec plus ultra in vile tactics, going so far as to use their political connections to pressurize or even scare their opponents off (Mikhail Botvinnik, Tigran Petrosian...). Not to mention all the cheap tricks used by players to psych out their counterparts (see how Fischer played a unnerving and irksome mind-game during the 1972 World championship match in Reykjavik, or the events surrounding the Karpov v. Korchnoi match in 1978)...

▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱

QUOTES (in the French translation:)

'La planification socialiste centralisée fut la conséquence de la Première Guerre mondiale qui, pour la première fois de l'histoire, avait vu toutes les ressources des États modernes et industrialisés mobilisés dans un unique objectif.'

'Les échecs furent le banc d'essai d'un projet visant à rattraper l'excellence de l'Ouest : croissance économique, influence politique et exploits militaires. Parce qu'ils furent le premier, et pendant des années le seul, domaine où le Kremlin put authentiquement prétendre avoir dépassé le capitalisme dans une compétition directe, il leur fut accordé la priorité sur d'autres activités objectivement plus importantes.'

'Contrairement aux arts, aux sciences humaines et à la science, obligés de tout interpréter à travers le prisme du marxisme-léninisme, un tel éclectisme était autorisé dans les échecs. Ceux-ci pouvaient s'enorgueillir d'être un authentique marché aux idées, presque unique dans la vie intellectuelle soviétique.'

'Face à l'attrayante possibilité de gagner beaucoup d'argent à l'Ouest, en particulier grâce au charisme de Fischer, certains Russes prirent conscience du caractère grotesque de la vie soviétique. C'était un système qui avait recours à une version psychologique de la carotte et du bâton, associant privilèges et terreur, en lieu et place des incitations financières du marché.'

'La signification plus profonde de la double victoire [états-unienne] sur l'Union soviétique dans les années soixante-dix, tant dans le jeu humain que dans sa version informatisée, a été de démontrer la supériorité d'une société où l'information pouvait circuler librement.'

'Les idéologues et les bandits du Kremlin eurent beau chercher à les politiser, ils ne pouvaient contrôler les coups sur l'échiquier. Les échecs répondent à leur propre logique, leur propre État de droit, leur propre vérité. Le produit intellectuel suprême du système soviétique s'est retourné contre ses maîtres, révèlant ainsi ce que leurs revendications avaient de vide et de fallacieux.'

'Dans la 2e partie, les assistants de Karpov lui passèrent un yoghourt pendant le jeu, manquement technique aux règles qui interdisaient tout contact entre les joueurs et les membres de l'assistance. Le chef de la délégation de Kortchnoï, Petra Leeuwerik, protesta, affirmant que le yoghourt avait pu servir de code secret' [Finale du championnat du monde d'échecs, Karpov contre Kortchnoï, Baguio, Juillet-Octobre 1976]

'[Dans 'La vie est une partie d'échecs'], Kasparov explique que le régime mis en place par Poutine "n'est pas exactement la loi martiale, mais, disons, une loi martiale allégée". En l'absence de transparence politique et de toute obligation de rendre des comptes, l'État a pu étendre son emprise sur tous les secteurs de la société : toute critique des responsables gouvernementaux peut être assimilée à de l'extrémisme.'

'[L'argument de Kasparov], inspiré en droite ligne par Boulgakov – était le suivant : la Russie est un théâtre, Poutine son très habile metteur en scène et l'Occident son public. "L'étalage superficiel d'institutions démocratiques" ne devrait tromper personne. "La Russie est un État policier travesti en démocratie, a-t-il expliqué Poutine a besoin d'aide pour maintenir l'illusion.'



World Chess Championship Match A.Karpov v. G. Kasparov (Moscow, 1984)

▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱

Also read:

The living conditions and standards of life for professional chess players under the USSR, told by a highly singular and fascinating former chess world champion, Latvian Mikhail Tal
The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal

A book often quoted in this essay, miscellaneous musings by the legendary Garry Kasparov.
How Life Imitates Chess: Making the Right Moves, from the Board to the Boardroom

A short work of economics by a member of the classical liberal school, Ludwig von Mises (who, for the moment, I tend to prefer to Hayek, quoted by Daniel Johnson)
Interventionism: An Economic Analysis

A testimony by writer André Gide regarding his travel to USSR and the impressions and misgivings drawn from it:
Back from the U.S.S.R

A somehow disappointing if thought-provoking text foretelling the inevitable triumph of liberal democracies over authoritarian regimes.
The End of History and the Last Man

An early novel by Russian émigré Vladimir Nabokov, seemingly focused on a obsessive chess-player. There might be more than meets the eye in this story...
The Luzhin Defense


Bobby Fischer, invited in the Dick Cavett Show,

▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱▰▱

Soundscape:

Music for Chess and Studying | 1 Hour | Vol. 2 |

[m. · Rating 3 out of 5]

When this book stays on-topic, it's a fascinating and highly entertaining read. As well it should be—when you take a group of people who are high-strung and obsessive by professional necessity, stick them in an insular subculture with byzantine norms and rituals, and add a huge dollop of geopolitical posturing and justified paranoia, things are going to get pretty wacky. I went in expecting plenty of flouncing, petty sniping, and KGB malfeasance, which this book absolutely delivered; the dueling psychics, however, were an unexpected twist.

The problem, as noted elsewhere, is that the author's political leanings get way too much page time, with pages on end given over to Reagan worship; claims that it has been proven conclusively that socialism can never work (which I think some nice Nordic countries would be surprised to learn); claims that communism, and only communism, treats human lives as means to an end (ahem); and, worst of all, that particular strain of creepy, fetishistic philosemitism found in neoconservative gentiles. (Pro tip: when you are considering explaining disproportionate Jewish excellence in chess with "genetic superiority, maybe?"—you are NOT HELPING. I ASSURE YOU. THAT IS CREEPY, PLEASE DON'T DO THAT.)

Even in the context of a book about the Cold War, there are limits to how much you should tip your own political hand. If these digressions were the only problem this caused, it would be more forgivable (though, I cannot stress enough, still creepy)—but his political views prevented him from portraying either Soviet or American culture with anything approaching nuance. I would have loved to hear more about the training structure of chess talent in the USSR, but once the author had dismissed it as oppressive he seemed to lose interest in the details; at the other end of the spectrum, the role of corporate money in American chess is an interesting issue that deserves attention, but if you're gung-ho about late capitalism then you probably aren't all that interested in investigating the complexities of corporate sponsorship. I'm not asking Johnson to change his opinions, just to step outside of them long enough to recognize their nuances. The absence of this kind of analysis was a disappointment.

Overall, a compelling read, and worth grinding through the problematic aspects to get to the political machinations and idiosyncratic personalities. But I fully intend to seek out other sources, because the author's blind spots are all too clear.

[B · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book has an unusual theme indeed: it treats the cold war from the kaleidoscope of chess, with all the political intrigues, backroom haggling, and kerfuffle -- arguing that chess presented a microcosm of the wider political conflict between two unreconcilable “fire and ice” ideologies of the cold war. The author accurately unearths the omnipresence of Soviet Party in chess (not only its grip over Soviet chess players, but also the influence it wielded on the world chess federation, FIDE) in an attempt to claim its intellectual domination in the world. I especially enjoyed the details of some of the scandals surrounding the world championship games (yogurt scandal, annulment of the 1984 match, toilet gate, etc.), and the portrayals of most of the world chess champions.

The book, however, suffers from the excessive anti-Soviet rhetoric which is buttressed by an (un)healthy dose of “pro-democracy” gloating about how the West had it right all along the cold war – a rhetoric that surfaces time and again throughout the book that even distracts and slightly annoys a non-communist reader such as myself.

[Evelyn · Rating 3 out of 5]

A bizarrely gripping book that compares the Cold War to a classic game of chess between the original two superpowers of the world. You definitely need to be a chess fan to enjoy it (which I mostly am), however, the constant Soviet bashing gets a little weary as the book progresses. We get it, it's written from the American point of view and they were totally innocent in everything, right? Still, it's an interesting read.

[Sam · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is full of good stories about chess playing, but it would have been better without the anti-Soviet polemics.

[Pnos Bloom · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting, but the author's personal political opinions tended to get in the way a bit.

[Caitlyn Smallwood · Rating 3 out of 5]

I skimmed the second half but i couldn't deal with much more Bobby Fischer talk and how Bobby Totally By Himself Brought Down Soviet Chess

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Russians were the architects of an impregnable chess machine that gripped the international world of chess with an iron fist. For decades chess was wielded as an ideological weapon against all other countries and competitors and continued through two Cold Wars, essentially from the Bolshevik Revolution to WWII and from WWII forward. Finally, the incomparable and rebellious genius, Bobby Fischer, appeared on the scene and with what can only be described as stakhanovite dedication laid the groundwork to destroy this long held domination. "Fischer Fear" shook the Russian world of chess. He prepared by compiling an unprecedented string of 20 straight wins against Grand Master competition that included 6-0, 6-0 back to back victories over Taimanov and Larsen and finished with a 6.5 to 2.5 crushing of his old nemeses, Petrosian. In brilliant fashion Fischer finally wrested the World Chess Championship from the Soviets by defeating Boris Spassky in 1972 in Reyjavik, Iceland -- See my review of "Fischer vs Spassky" by Svetozar Gligoric. Unfortunately, other demons overtook Fischer and when he refused to defend his title against Anatoly Karpov in 1975, the Championship was awarded to Karpov. I yearned to see that match: Fischer vs Karpov or Fischer vs Kasparov but alas, we never had the opportunity. Karpov's long reign, was ended by pro western and sometime dissident Garry Kasparov who defeated Anatoly 4 of the 5 Championship matches they played. Garry ultimately retired from competitive chess in 2005.

Now turned politician Kasparov is one of the strong hopes against Vladimir Putin, and for Democracy in present day Russia. The decline of Russia continues today and is a nation on the brink, now back sliding to old and failed ways. Life expectancy and population figures are currently in severe and drastic freefall. We should hope and pray that Kasparov succeeds and can apply a Ruy Lopez or Sicilian Defense like leadership to reinvigorate a nation in dire need of a powerful White King.

This narrative is not just about chess but includes history of the Evil Empire -- Pres. Reagan's spot on term -- its despicable record of planned annihilation of its own citizens and the interaction between chess and geopolitics. I found the book brilliantly written, moving, with interesting stories and anecdotes and a finely crafted read.

[Lynn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Daniel Johnson presents a well-researched account of the role chess played before, during and after the Cold War. Johnson is very pointed in his condemnation of Soviet communism and his analysis of how chess played a role in its downfall presents a side that few have considered before or even since. According to Johnson, chess was vitally important for Soviet propaganda and culture. When challengers like Samuel Rheshevsky and Bobby Fischer appeared to challenge Soviet hegemony, the Soviet chess establishment spared no effort or considered no tactic too low to thwart the threat. When Garry Kasparov, himself at one time a member of the Communist Party, decided to step outside the system in his successful challenge to Anatoly Karpov, it dovetailed with the eventual overthrow of the Soviets in the 1980s and 90s.

This book does not require much more than rudimentary knowledge of chess to understand. Johnson does an excellent job of explaining the nuances and personalities of the game to the non-expert. Recommended for those interested in history and politics as well as chess.

[Liz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing. Ironically, I never thought I would enjoy a book about chess whilst being an amateur player, but the way Johnson weaves the history of chess, dating back from the latter parts of the 19th century to the end of the cold war is genius. Learning about how the Soviets adopted chess into their culture, to how the match between Fischer and Spassky foreshadowed how the West was to triumph over the Soviets was fascinating.

Besides, it's a great read! It held my attention and reading about the chess matches was enthralling, I felt like I was taken back in time and was watching the matches myself. The way Johnson writes cannot be faulted, he certainly knows how to grasp a reader's attention.

For those like me who don't know much about chess, don't let it hinder you from reading this book. If you enjoy History and Politics and want to read and know more about the cold war from a different perspective, then this book is definitely for you. I certainly enjoyed it!

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book can be appreciated even by non chess-lovers. The narrative covers history of chess under the backdrop of the Cold War. I was especially interested in the history of chess in the USSR and how the Soviets became a global powerhouse in the game, starting right after the Russian revolution. Besides the Fischer-Spassky 1972 match, the book provided extremely interesting context behind the legendary Karpov-Korchnoi matches in 1978 and 1981.

[Efrain · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book gives a whole lot of information on why chess was the primary weapon during the cold war. So far ive quoted it about 5 times for my exhibition and it ranges everywhere from religion to the dfuedal system centuries ago. The only thing that is a bother is the fact that it fails to go in chronological order which was a pain for me when i did research on for my exhibition.

[Cypress Butane · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very well written and organized, great job of proving out the argument, and a ton of great details along the way. My favorite part of the book was the discussion of artificial intelligence machines made to play chess incidentally touched on while discussing how well funded high technology proved to be a big part of the undoing of the communist ideology.

[Micaela Cederlund · Rating 3 out of 5]

I honestly thought I'd picked up a book about the history of the cold war with parallels to chess, but it didn't take long until I realized, it was a book about chess. I don't mind though. It was very educational. Really motivates you to play.

[Liviu · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant account of chess as part of the history of the 20th century, especially in its Soviet incarnation and the Cold War era.

[Scott Martin · Rating 3 out of 5]

(3.5 stars) This work looks at chess through the prism of the Cold War. It starts with the history of chess, noting how it took off in Russia, where it did not originate, and how this game came to be so much a part of the nation, even if it didn't seem to fit the people or the government. It also follows the development of the game in the West up through the 20th century. Once World War I is over, and the USSR rises, chess finds itself another forum where the Soviets looks to show the power of communism and their struggle against the evils of the West. The West would respond in kind. Thus, the Cold War saw any major chess match-ups as representative of the existential struggle between communism and capitalism.

The Soviets put together a powerful system to create many a world champion, but yet, they could not conquer all. The rise of Bobby Fischer and his classic chess matches did much to bring notoriety to the game and proved one of many areas where the facade of the Soviet system found itself punctured. Yet, chess would also serve as the hotbed for dissent within the USSR, with that theme carrying over to Kasperov, who emerged as one of the top critics of Vladimir Putin.

Overall, a decent read about the history of chess and the Cold War. Sometimes, especially when talking about the long grand master matches, Johnson can get a little technical, but still, it does offer some context. Maybe not the definitive work on chess or the Cold War, but one that a reader should gain some understand and background knowledge about the game, especially during that time.

[Duchessa · Rating 2 out of 5]

The saving grace of this text is that it mentions by exact name a lot of works by Soviet chess players, making it a decent resource for finding some primary documents that don't come up immediately on googling a name like "Botvinnik" or "Karpov". Beside from this though, it's a pretty brief history that's dragged down by some of the Birchiest writing about the USSR I've read in a long time. I can't imagine how you can write about a sport which Russia has such an important place in when you're unable to resist the temptation to remind the reader how terrible and despotic the dirty reds are, again, and again, and again.

[Kaden Carr · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book deserves praise for its interesting concept and Johnson certainly has a great depth of knowledge about the history of chess. The issue is I find it reads quite like a textbook, and while that may be what some are looking for, it doesn’t fit my taste and doesn’t seem to be what was intended. Some sections tend to veer off the core of the discussion, while others lack much of the narrative storytelling that other similar history books manage to bring to life.

4/5 purely on history, 3/5 due to the readers experience.

[Jonathon McKenney · Rating 3 out of 5]

Overly critical and biased towards the Americans (particular favourite was “the soviets were good at only two things: war and chess”). Interesting parts were the story of how computer chess was created, and the significance thereof. The ending was a little excessive and dragged on. If it had stayed on topic, and avoided such excessive claims, it would be a star higher and a hundred pages shorter

[Paulo Sunao Shintate Jr · Rating 4 out of 5]

4,0 de 5 estrelas Um livro bom sobre a história do Xadrez, mas muito se fala do regime russo.

Achei fantástica a narrativa: o autor sabe e escreve bem.
Ao final, temos extensa bibliografia e índice remissivo, incluindo dos jogadores.
Só não gostei muito da parte de política, houver um foco demasiado nisso e buscava um livro sobre a história do Xadrez.

[Murilo Costa · Rating 4 out of 5]

O livro é exageradamente partidário e maniqueísta quando trata do contexto da guerra fria. Não que o autor não possa dar sua opinião, mas ela não precisa estar em toda página. E, mais do que isso, as colocações poderiam ser discretas ou menos simplistas do que chamar a União Soviética de "Império do Mal" e falar do comunismo como "o fim da civilização".
Mesmo assim, é possível relevar isso e se ater ao xadrez e a seus personagens e histórias incríveis. Nisso o livro é muito rico.

[Steven Raszewski · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good book on chess and the Cold War.