FIA president proposes changes to governing body
Questions of integrity
The most controversial proposal is one that dictates there "must not be anything in the record of the candidates standing for the election as members of the presidential list that calls into question their professional integrity".According to the document of proposed statutes, the reason for adding this is that such an eligibility criterion is currently absent from the FIA statutes and internal regulations.It says that this should be in the requirements for a presidential campaign "for the sake of consistency" because it already applies to candidates standing for a number of other FIA bodies, such as the F1 cost-cap committee, and audit and ethics committees.However, the list of presidential candidates and their teams, which are strictly defined, is monitored by the FIA's nominations committee.If it finds any ethical issues with a list, it would refer the matter to the FIA's ethics committee.Both bodies are controlled by the FIA president and his allies, following changes to the statutes made by Ben Sulayem last year.In combination with the FIA's code of ethics, this could appear targeted at Carlos Sainz, the rally legend who has already declared his interest in running for president in December.The code of ethics dictates that parties of the FIA "shall avoid any conflicts of interest and must disclose any situation that could lead to such a conflict".Sainz is the father of Ferrari Formula 1 driver Carlos Sainz, so it would in theory be easy for the ethics committee - should it be so minded - to declare that he has a conflict of interest that bars him from running for election.
Changes to senate composition
Ben Sulayem has also proposed changes to the nomination of members of the senate, the body that controls the FIA in combination with the president.The senate consists of 16 members, 12 of which are defined in the statutes as representatives of the president, his team and members of the two world councils, for sport and mobility and tourism.The final four are currently "proposed" by the president and "confirmed by" the other 12 members of the senate.Ben Sulayem is proposing that the president should "appoint" these final members, with no oversight from the other senate members.The reason given for proposing this change is to allow "more flexibility in having the expertise required for the many and varied topics it has to deal with and which may require an urgent decision".However, the FIA statutes already contain article 18.4, which appears to cover this. It allows the senate to "invite other members to join in the study of specific questions".One source close to the situation said this was "so clearly poorer governance that the boldness is surprising".Another said: "It's a convenient way of dressing up a way where 'I can potentially get rid of these people when it suits me.'"
Changes to ethics and other committees
Another change proposes that the four-year term of office of the members of the audit, ethics and nominations committees be brought into line with that of the president.Currently, the document states, these terms "do not necessarily start at the same time as that of the members of the presidential list".The reason given for this change is "to ensure consistency between terms of office and group these elections together".However, critics says that while this "seems efficient", it also gives "fewer options for dissent outside of a presidential cycle".Last year, Ben Sulayem sacked the heads of the audit and ethics committees after they were involved in investigations into him and his office.
Changes to world council
Ben Sulayem is also proposing to make a change to the composition of the world motorsport council, the organisation's legislative body.Current rules says that 21 of the 28 members must be of different nationalities.Ben Sulayem is proposing, in the interests of "flexibility", that there be "no more than two members of the same nationality among the seven vice-presidents and the 14 elected WMSC members".The document states this could deprive the FIA of "candidates from other backgrounds whose experience and qualities could also be beneficial to the WMSC in fulfilling its missions".A critic says this increases Ben Sulayem's ability to "stack the WMSC with the people he wants".
Election timing
The proposals also bring forward the deadline for candidates to declare their teams for the presidential election, from 21 days prior to the election to 49 days.The reason given is that the current time limit "leaves the nominations committee with very little time to check the eligibility of the 11 candidates (for a presidential team) proposed in a given list".Critics say it could give the president longer to have the nominations committee look at reasons to bar candidates and members of their team.Candidates are required by FIA rules to submit their chosen president of the senate, deputy presidents for sport and mobility and seven vice-presidents for sport from all the FIA's regions.All positions must be filled before a campaign for a candidate to be allowed into the election.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, makes first public appearance since Israel war
Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has made his first public appearance since the outbreak of his country's recent 12-day war with Israel, taking part in a religious ceremony in Tehran, state media reported. The octogenarian leader was shown in a video broadcast by state television greeting people and being cheered at a mosque on Saturday as worshippers marked the anniversary of the martyrdom of Imam Hussein, an important date for Shia Muslims. Khamenei, 86, can be seen on stage dressed in black as the crowd before him, fists in the air, chants, 'The blood in our veins for our leader!' State TV said the clip was filmed at central Tehran's Imam Khomeini Mosque, named for the founder of the Islamic republic. Khamenei, in power since 1989, spoke last week in a pre-recorded video, but had not been seen in public since before Israel initiated the conflict with a wave of surprise airstrikes on 13 June. His last public appearance was two days before that, when he met members of parliament. Israel's bombing campaign followed a decades-long shadow war with Iran, and was aimed at preventing it from developing a nuclear weapon – an ambition Tehran has consistently denied. The strikes killed more than 900 people in Iran, its judiciary has said, while retaliatory Iranian missile barrages aimed at Israeli cities killed at least 28 people there, according to official figures. After the US attacked three nuclear facilities as part of the Iran-Israel war, Donald Trump claimed the strikes had 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear capabilities. But last week the UN nuclear watchdog chief said Iran could produce enriched uranium 'in a matter of months'. Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the US broadcaster CBS News the strikes on three Iranian sites had clearly caused severe but 'not total' damage. He said: 'Frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there. 'They [Iran] can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that … Iran has the capacities there: industrial and technological capacities.' His view was echoed in a preliminary US intelligence assessment that found that the bombings set back Iran's nuclear programme by just a matter of months. Speaking to Reuters, one source estimated that the programme could be restarted in one to two months. With Agence France-Presse
BBC News
5 hours ago
- BBC News
How Trump is using the 'Madman Theory' to try to change the world
Asked last month whether he was planning to join Israel in attacking Iran, US President Donald Trump said "I may do it. I may not do it. Nobody knows what I'm going to do".He let the world believe he had agreed a two-week pause to allow Iran to resume negotiations. And then he bombed anyway.A pattern is emerging: The most predictable thing about Trump is his unpredictability. He changes his mind. He contradicts himself. He is inconsistent."[Trump] has put together a highly centralised policy-making operation, arguably the most centralised, at least in the area of foreign policy, since Richard Nixon," says Peter Trubowitz, professor of international relations at the London School of Economics. "And that makes policy decisions more dependent on Trump's character, his preferences, his temperament." Trump has put this to political use; he has made his own unpredictability a key strategic and political asset. He has elevated unpredictability to the status of a doctrine. And now the personality trait he brought to the White House is driving foreign and security policy. It is changing the shape of the scientists call this the Madman Theory, in which a world leader seeks to persuade his adversary that he is temperamentally capable of anything, to extract concessions. Used successfully it can be a form of coercion and Trump believes it is paying dividends, getting the US's allies where he wants them. But is it an approach that can work against enemies? And could its flaw be that rather than being a sleight of hand designed to fool adversaries, it is in fact based on well established and clearly documented character traits, with the effect that his behaviour becomes easier to predict? Attacks, insults and embraces Trump began his second presidency by embracing Russian President Vladimir Putin and attacking America's allies. He insulted Canada by saying it should become the 51st state of the US. He said he was prepared to consider using military force to annex Greenland, an autonomous territory of America's ally Denmark. And he said the US should retake ownership and control of the Panama 5 of the Nato charter commits each member to come to the defence of all others. Trump threw America's commitment to that into doubt. "I think Article 5 is on life support" declared Ben Wallace, Britain's former defence secretary. Conservative Attorney General Dominic Grieve said: "For now the trans-Atlantic alliance is over."A series of leaked text messages revealed the culture of contempt in Trump's White House for European allies. "I fully share your loathing of European freeloaders," US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth told his colleagues, adding "PATHETIC". In Munich earlier this year, Trump's Vice-President JD Vance said the US would no longer be the guarantor of European appeared to turn the page on 80 years of trans-Atlantic solidarity. "What Trump has done is raise serious doubts and questions about the credibility of America's international commitments," says Prof Trubowitz."Whatever understanding those countries [in Europe] have with the United States, on security, on economic or other matters, they're now subject to negotiation at a moment's notice."My sense is that most people in Trump's orbit think that unpredictability is a good thing, because it allows Donald Trump to leverage America's clout for maximum gain… "This is one of of his takeaways from negotiating in the world of real estate."Trump's approach paid dividends. Only four months ago, Sir Keir Starmer told the House of Commons that Britain would increase defence and security spending from 2.3% of GDP to 2.5%. Last month, at a Nato summit, that had increased to 5%, a huge increase, now matched by every other member of the Alliance. The predictability of unpredictability Trump is not the first American president to deploy an Unpredictability Doctrine. In 1968, when US President Richard Nixon was trying to end the war in Vietnam, he found the North Vietnamese enemy intractable."At one point Nixon said to his National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, 'you ought to tell the North Vietnamese negotiators that Nixon's crazy and you don't know what he's going to do, so you better come to an agreement before things get really crazy'," says Michael Desch, professor of international relations at Notre Dame University. "That's the madman theory." Julie Norman, professor of politics at University College London, agrees that there is now an Unpredictability Doctrine. "It's very hard to know what's coming from day to day," she argues. "And that has always been Trump's approach."Trump successfully harnessed his reputation for volatility to change the trans-Atlantic defence relationship. And apparently to keep Trump on side, some European leaders have flattered and fawned. Last month's Nato summit in The Hague was an exercise in obsequious courtship. Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte had earlier sent President Trump (or "Dear Donald") a text message, which Trump leaked. "Congratulations and thank you for your decisive action in Iran, it was truly extraordinary," he wrote. On the forthcoming announcement that all Nato members had agreed to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP, he continued: "You will achieve something NO president in decades could get done." Anthony Scaramucci, who previously served as Trump's communications director in his first term, said: "Mr Rutte, he's trying to embarrass you, sir. He's literally sitting on Air Force One laughing at you."And this may prove to be the weakness at the heart of Trump's Unpredictability Doctrine: their actions may be based on the idea that Trump craves adulation. Or that he seeks short-term wins, favouring them over long and complicated that is the case and their assumption is correct, then it limits Trump's ability to perform sleights of hand to fool adversaries - rather, he has well established and clearly documented character traits that they have become aware of. The adversaries impervious to charm and threats Then there is the question of whether an Unpredictability Doctrine or the Madman Theory can work on President Volodymyr Zelensky, an ally who was given a dressing down by Trump and Vance in the Oval Office, later agreed to grant the US lucrative rights to exploit Ukrainian mineral resources. Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, apparently remains impervious to Trump's charms and threats alike. On Thursday, following a telephone call, Trump said he was "disappointed" that Putin was not ready to end the war against Ukraine. And Iran? Trump promised his base that he would end American involvement in Middle Eastern "forever wars". His decision to strike Iran's nuclear facilities was perhaps the most unpredictable policy choice of his second term so far. The question is whether it will have the desired former British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, has argued that it will do precisely the opposite: it will make Iran more, not less likely, to seek to acquire nuclear Desch agrees. "I think it's now highly likely that Iran will make the decision to pursue a nuclear weapon," he says. "So I wouldn't be surprised if they lie low and do everything they can to complete the full fuel cycle and conduct a [nuclear] test."I think the lesson of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi is not lost on other dictators facing the US and potential regime change... "So the Iranians will desperately feel the need for the ultimate deterrent and they'll look at Saddam and Gaddafi as the negative examples and Kim Jong Un of North Korea as the positive example." One of the likely scenarios is the consolidation of the Islamic Republic, according to Mohsen Milani, a professor of politics at the University of South Florida and author of Iran's Rise and Rivalry with the US in the Middle East. "In 1980, when Saddam Hussein attacked Iran his aim was the collapse of the Islamic Republic," he says. "The exact opposite happened. "That was the Israeli and American calculation too... That if we get rid of the top guys, Iran is going to surrender quickly or the whole system is going to collapse." A loss of trust in negotiations? Looking ahead, unpredictability may not work on foes, but it is unclear whether the recent shifts it has yielded among allies can be possible, this is a process built largely on impulse. And there may be a worry that the US could be seen as an unreliable broker."People won't want to do business with the US if they don't trust the US in negotiations, if they're not sure the US will stand by them in defence and security issues," argues Prof Norman. "So the isolation that many in the MAGA world seek is, I think, going to backfire."German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for one has said Europe now needs to become operationally independent of the US."The importance of the chancellor's comment is that it's a recognition that US strategic priorities are changing," says Prof Trubowitz. "They're not going to snap back to the way they were before Trump took office. "So yes, Europe is going to have to get more operationally independent." This would require European nations to develop a much bigger European defence industry, to acquire kit and capabilities that currently only the US has, argues Prof Desch. For example, the Europeans have some sophisticated global intelligence capability, he says, but a lot of it is provided by the US."Europe, if it had to go it alone, would also require a significant increase in its independent armaments production capability," he continues. "Manpower would also be an issue. Western Europe would have to look to Poland to see the level of manpower they would need."All of which will take years to build up. So, have the Europeans really been spooked by Trump's unpredictability, into making the most dramatic change to the security architecture of the western world since the end of the Cold War?"It has contributed," says Prof Trubowitz. "But more fundamentally, Trump has uncorked something… Politics in the United States has changed. Priorities have changed. To the MAGA coalition, China is a bigger problem than Russia. That's maybe not true for the Europeans."And according to Prof Milani, Trump is trying to consolidate American power in the global order."It's very unlikely that he's going to change the order that was established after World War Two. He wants to consolidate America's position in that order because China is challenging America's position in that order."But this all means that the defence and security imperatives faced by the US and Europe are European allies may be satisfied that through flattery and real policy shifts, they have kept Trump broadly onside; he did, after all, reaffirm his commitment to Article 5 at the most recent Nato summit. But the unpredictability means this cannot be guaranteed - and they have seemed to accept that they can no longer complacently rely on the US to honour its historic commitment to their in that sense, even if the unpredictability doctrine comes from a combination of conscious choice and Trump's very real character traits, it is working, on some at image credit: Getty Images BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
David Lammy to pledge £94.5 million aid package in support of Syria's new government in first trip by UK minister for 14 years
Foreign Secretary David Lammy flew to Damascus yesterday to pledge a £94.5 million package in support of Syria 's new government. It was the first visit by a British minister to the war-ravaged country in 14 years and signalled the re-establishment of formal diplomatic relations. The funds will provide urgent humanitarian aid to Syria and support the country's longer-term recovery through the development of areas such as education, the Government said. 'There is renewed hope for the Syrian people,' Mr Lammy said. 'It is in our interests to support the new government to deliver their commitment to build a stable, more secure and prosperous future for all Syrians.' The West has been slowly resetting its approach to Syria since insurgent forces – led by the Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham – ousted Bashar al-Assad as president in December following more than 13 years of war. Mr Lammy's visit came days after US President Donald Trump signed an executive order terminating a sanctions program on the country. Britain also eased its sanctions in March, unfreezing the assets of Syria's central bank as well 23 other entities. A stable Syria will 'reduce the risk of irregular migration', ensure chemical weapons are destroyed and tackle the threat of terrorism, the Foreign Secretary said after meeting Syrian counterpart Asaad Hassan al-Shaibani and president Ahmed al-Sharaa. Mr Lammy is also due to travel to Kuwait, where he is expected to announce a new partnership with the Gulf monarchy.
