I am currently reading this article, and the first passage says,
Such is its devilish complexity, Brexit is often portrayed as a game of 3-D chess, understandable only to the grandest of grand masters. This is how best to understand the series of seismic but impenetrable battles being waged between Prime Minister Boris Johnson's government and his opponents in Westminster this week: battles that are not primarily about what they claim—whether for this motion or that amendment—but rather part of a much larger but simpler game in which each side is trying to ensure that it is not outmaneuvered by the other in a way that will make victory or defeat inevitable. The problem is that, in Brexit, the two sides have thus far been evenly matched and always able to extend the game to avoid a conclusion. ...
I kind very obscurely understand this passage, but I am unable to understand especially the bold part. Can someone help me to analyze this part, in such a ways disecting section by section so that I can understand? ( For instance, what are battles that are nor primarily about what they claim?? )
And what is the "relationship" with the line whether for this motion or that amendment ( Is "for this motion or that amendment" a kind of "this A and that B"? )
Thank you in advance.