Willy Deneumostier
General Secretary



Rochefort December 12, 1998


Mister vice-president,
European Armsport Federation
Mister Capla,

I have received your letter that an irregular EAF meeting has changed the location of the European
Championships for 1999. I would inform you that the Belgium Federation has been designated in two European congress meetings - 97 and 98 - to be host of the 9th edition of the European's championship seniors, juniors, and disabled in 1999. This decision has been taking at the unanimous vote of the countries present at those congresses. The illegal decision made in Cairo is unacceptable and disrespectful of the statutes in the EAF constitution. I remember you that we have entered into a contract with the EAF executive committee and we make enforced the conditions of this contract. I think you must throwing away the actual president, general-secretary and two members of the elected executive committee to apply this Cairo decision. I am going to inform the Hungarian's federation that the decision taken in Cairo is null and void for the W.A.F. and E.A.F. executive committees.

By this unacceptable decision without value for a lot of countries, you put two friend's federation (Belgium and Hungary) in a very bad position. You create a deep breaking between the E.A.F. unit members. I think that some people work to do this breaking because E.A.F. was the strongest continental federation and it was very disturbed for some one. When I read your two letters to Mister O'Leary (22 may 1998) and to Mister Das (28 may 98) in answer, I was thinking that you were a man respectful of the EAF'S constitution and defender of our unit. Unfortunately, I see it's not the case. I see that you make the game of mister O'Leary and Das that they try to «divide and rule». It's a pity for the armsport. You don't care about democrat's decision that are made by the majority in an official EAF congress - Remember Lithuania

Since some months, it appears that we have a big conflict between some people of the executive committee of the W.A.F.(Mister O'Leary, Baran Das, Shead, Roy, and Akhmedshin). When we intend the acts who are reproached by Mister Shead, Roy and Akhmedshin to Mister Das and O'Leary, they talk about conspiracy, manipulation, corruption Violations of the W.A.F. constitution, non-application of executive committee's decision, decisions taken without the executive committees agreement. It is terrible accusation and I think that they don't tell that kind of things without proof. Mister Das and O'Leary are supposing to protect the W.A.F. against that kind of things.

When we are living in that kind of situation/business, we must find the best solution for the members and not for the people involved. Not the unilateral position of two men in the heart of the conflict- I must say at the source of the conflict- This conflict must be submitted to all the National Federation Presidents with the two points of view and let the two parties prove their good faith and their allegations. After one valuation of the two parties by all the National Presidents, they must giving their opinions and take, in a general assembly, a decision concerning this concern at the majority of the opinions of the presidents. This manner shall be the real manner to close it in a democratic assembly with all the opinions of the WAF members. Unfortunately, two persons take a unilateral decision without explanations or their own explanations of their part of the conflict.

I remember when you said this year: " W.A.F. and E.A.F. are not one or two persons but all the federations that they represents". In your letters, you talk about democracy but I don't understand very well your action and your position. I saw four members of six - majority isn't it - of the elected executive committee of the W.A.F. and four of seven - majority again - of the elected committee of the E.A.F. at the World congress in Canada. This site had being designed by the executive committee in World congress in INDIA 97. What about the opinion of the democratically majority elected? Did they all make a mistake? I think and I remark that when you are not agreed with Mister Das, and O'Leary, you are expelled of the W.A.F. The democracy is the possibility to not agree with some one or something and to can say it free. But in this case, when you say something against them, you are expelled! ! ! Is it democracy? Do you think that we can advance in that kind of situation? When I intend everybody said, «our goal is the GASIF and Olympic recognition» I think that we are not on the good way. Perhaps a utopia and some one try to make us believe that and to rest in place and they conserve the advantage of their position.

But anyway, in this fighting, the only losers are the armwrestlers. I think we don't know really the real reasons of this conflict. We are not well informed of the real problems. A lot of peoples make a very good job for armsports but they don't care about that kind of conflict. It's why they don't want to take a firm position. They just want to make armwrestling with all the countries. At this moment, we have two positions and the losers are the armwrestlers again. They are loosing the possibilities to compete with the All Worlds' armwrestlers and for me, it is the most important thing for them at all. What are we doing right now to bringing back a real unity between the W.A.F. AND E.A.F. members? ? ?

Belgium President

Waf and Eaf Members

Deneumostier Willy

GENERAL SECRETARY OF WAF ad interim until 2000.



ARMWRESTLING.COM- Dave Devoto (707) 537-7373

WEBMASTER- Gary Roberts (760) 468- 5459
No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or
incorporated in any information retrieval system without
written permission of the Publisher