Awkward situation with editor several month after submission: advice I am observing from some distance the following situation.
Two young mathematicians -- call them A and B -- submitted a paper to a quite strong journal and indicated a much senior colleague C as a possible handling editor. The corresponding author of the paper is A. Several month later C writes to B alone and hints that (s)he might decline the handling because of a conflict of interests. After some astonished requirements from B, C states plainly that the reason is the pending review for the same journal (s)he is awaiting from B. Since, in C's opinion, B is working too slowly on the review, (s)he, C, can't conceive how (s)he will be hurrying the reviewers of B's (and A's!) paper. In C's opinion, this constitutes the conflict of interests.
I have several questions about this situation.

(Definition) Is the trivial fact that C got annoyed by B not corresponding to C's expectations (B gets of course no money for reviewing) sufficient to constitute a conflict of interests?
(Strategy) What are A&amp;B's options concerning their paper? It is pretty clear that B will now finish the review of this not-particularly-nice-to-review (unnecessary long, very heavy, very  technical, not that exciting results) paper for C as the first priority. But will this save their own submission to this journal? C most probably has good memory; (s)he can decline the publication anyway. Would it be better to withdraw the paper right away?
(Ethics) Some details in C's behavior are suspicious. Why didn't (s)he claim the conflict of interests immediately when (s)he got the paper of A&amp;B on the table? At that point, B has been already reviewing the paper for C. Why is C writing only to B? To me, it looks like C is blackmailing B: now C gets from B what (the review) and when (quickly) (s)he wants and frees themselves from all work concerning A&amp;B's paper. This way, C is &quot;punishing&quot; B (and btw A who has nothing to do with this review) for not standing to C's expectations by prohibiting the publication of their really nice result in a really good journal. Am I too paranoid here? Should  A&amp;B write to editor-in-chief?
No, agreeing to peer review a paper for an editor would never cause the editor to have a conflict of interest.  A conflict of interest would only occur if the author somehow incentivized the editor to make a decision on a paper.  B providing (or failing to provide) a peer review is not an incentive to an editor, and it is unrelated to the decision on the paper written by A and B.

If C declines to handle the paper, some other editor will handle it.  This likely has no effect on you.  Probably it is best to do nothing for now.  I suggest that you not request C as handling editor in the future since they seem unprofessional.

If C were to directly violate the journal's policies, you might complain to the editor in chief, but it does not appear that has happened.  Don't complain now.


If C said &quot;I will not handle your paper because you did not complete your peer review&quot; then no, you are not being paranoid.  If C said &quot;You should not complain that your paper has not been handled because you did not complete your peer review&quot; then you are being paranoid.