Let me object

In the article of the multivariate Viktor Sheinis, with whom I largely agree, I was cut by the words: "Crazy ideas about the independence of Chechnya." Where does this imperial arrogance come from, this desire to decide: which people have the right to national sovereignty, and which - no?! By the way, the Chechen state sovereignty is as many years as the sovereignty of the Russian Federation is eight. 102 years ago, in Basel, a young Austro-Hungarian journalist Theodore Herz uttered "crazy" words: "After half a century, a Jewish state will appear!" Not only the comparison of Chechens with the Palestinians, but also the most famous modern historian and ethnographer V. Toporov, who in 1996 proposed (in the magazine "Homeland"), his own scheme: Chechnya is the rebellious Judea of Vespasian and Titus, and the Russian Federation, the first Rome, prompted me to this historical analogy. The conclusion of the historian: the feds can win only by putting Chechens before the choice - either unconditional surrender and humiliation (but with the acquired national -cultural autonomy in the framework of the Russian state), or complete destruction. That is how, V. Toporov recalls, they entered in 70. e. The Romans surrounding Jerusalem, making the rebellious Judea (more precisely, its plain part) to submit to the empire. As long as, according to V. Toporov, the victory promises to Chechnya independence, and defeat - high independence within the framework of the “asymmetric” federation, it is impossible to count on success. Obviously, the developers of the plans of the New War took into account the Council of Toporov and went along the Roman path. To facilitate the moral and psychological perception of the most cruel measures by the Russian masses, the Chechens were completely deprived of the more or less acceptable option of departure, literally forcing them to fight to the last. The slogan of Russian ink, especially the radiant mob: "Chechnya should fall!" - This is a repetition of the spell of the Roman proletariat: "Jerusalem will be destroyed!" Chechens are really not Palestinians. Only a relatively small part of the Palestinians made a bet on the upholding of their independent state, but most of the people found themselves in the Arab world or in the framework of Israel, where the scope of their civil rights is incomparably higher than in the most democratic Arab state. The Chechens are literally pressed against the wall: they cannot almost leave the Russian wars almost without exception, as hundreds of thousands of Circassians left the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century. Chechens are not needed and hated for most of Russia - like Jews in the thirties in Germany. And our police officers have such a trained eye that you can do without a yellow star. We focus on the main ones - from the point of view of honest democrats of liberals - legal and humanitarian arguments against the recognition of Chechen sovereignty. The legal affiliation of Chechnya to the Russian Federation in December 1994 was the same fiction as the Russian Federation belonging to the USSR on the day of the abolition of the Belovezhsky agreement by the State Duma in March 1996. The Chechen Republic left the USSR and the RSFSR according to the same procedure, according to which, for example, Lithuania left the USSR in March 1991, the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR in August, and the RSFSR - in December 1991, namely: the president or parliament made the decision, and then, after - they conducted a referendum. In Chechnya, the referendum on independence did not retorted, only respecting the Khasavyurt delay with the determination of the status - then, recall, they promised to wait 5 years. The theoretical equality of the Union and Autonomous Republics established the Novoyogorevsky process. The Constituent process did not really take place (the Constituent Assembly was replaced by a constitutional meeting), and the fact that Shahrai or Filatov was included in the project of the new Constitution (the unconditional legitimacy of the reception of which raises a number of issues) a certain “Chechen Republic” (it had been to Ichkeria by that time for 15 months) - so this is their court business. Chechens were not very called for the constitutional meeting. To build the republics by rank - what can be Riga, you can’t be formidable - it means to manifest yourself as a true Lenin -Stalin. Or sovereignty gives only recognition to the "eight" and the UN General Assembly? The humanitarian position of non -recognition of the independence of Ichkeria is much more important. Life showed: remaining in semi -isolation, with a good statehood, the Chechen authorities cannot support the most necessary minimal standards for social security, legality and order. As, however, the good half of the countries on the globe. But something indomitably attracts the peoples to freedom, regardless of bruises and cones, stuffed on the corners of history. If we talk about the "Chechen aggression" against Dagestan, then the share of Maskhadov’s responsibility for the August raids is the same as the government of the Livan for the actions of the OOP militants in the 70s-the beginning of the 80s. And we will not forget that 5 years ago were organized and paid by the Russian authorities of the raids of mercenaries to Chechnya, the actual occupation of their north of the republic. Doesn't this resemble Basayev’s actions in Dagestan? And wasn't Basayev the shock force of Moscow against Tbilisi during the Abkhaz war? The Second Chechen War was actually programmed by the persistent and skillful propaganda of the hatred of the Russian media, even when there was no question of throwing the Basaevites to Dagestan and no houses were still mined by anyone. The calls for the fighter war with Chechnya (with the current peace treaty!), Until the requirements for the use of weapons of mass defeat, they filled the air and the pages of newspapers since May-June of this year. In the ranks of the champions of the “wars to the victorious end”, all the most not just dark, but the vile forces of modern Russia got up: present-offers, provocateurs, racist administrators and magazils intoxicated from the breed from the breed of informationllers. The not -known lesson of Afghanistan and the “first Chechnya” - you can’t break the people fighting for freedom - it will be viable in our country for a hundred years. But the price of such a development of events is not just the collapse of the unfinished Russian democracy and the collapse of the Federation (they can say - right to the thief and flour), but the establishment of the fierce Islamic -Bolshevik regime in the territories of the Caucasus abandoned by the federals. Is there a normal way out of this situation - a way out in the interests of people, and not ambitious bureaucratic clans? The liberals quite rightly insist on the unconditional priority of personality rights before various group interests: party, state, national. The national revival, like any type of radical movement, is almost always a grave intellectual and emotional intoxication of the masses and formal mockery of spiritual and cultural freedom. However, in some cases, National Security is dictated by the need for simple national survival. There is no force in the world that will force Chechens declared in Russia by the archire of the Motherland and Humanity to feel an integral part of our country. The Chechens will not dutifully live under the occupation: ostentatious humanitarian handouts will not be enough for a long time (as the southern smokers, Sakhalin and the “north” are not enough), and the highlanders do not forgive the murders, humiliations and reasons. I agree with V. Sheinis and many of its liberal like -minded people that Chechnya independently stable and democratic existence is beyond strength. The most useful would be its inclusion in a powerful and enlightened system of a higher order. There can be three such super -systems: Russia, the pan -Islamic community and, relatively speaking, humanity - in the person of its democratic avant -garde - OSCE. But over the past three years, the Russian Federation showed the complete inability to integrate Chechnya into itself, into the legal Russian economic, cultural and political life. And each salvo along Grozny, each stage of Caucasians from Moscow increases the distance between Russia and Ichkeria. The forces of pan -Islamism are able to “raise Chechnya” (this will be particularly a couple of Saudi billionaires), but at the cost of this will be the transformation of Ichkeria into anti -Israeli - the impact power of the anti -Westworth. Based on this, I assume that the “Kosovo decision” would be the best option, namely: a) for the sake of hypocrisy of modern international law, Chechnya is temporarily registered as part of the Russian Federation; b) international peacekeeping and police forces are introduced into the region; c) the UN and OSCE decisions in Chechnya are prescribed by the administration completely autonomous from the Kremlin; d) the republic provides all the necessary humanitarian and economic assistance, the local and international police are given the opportunity to eliminate terrorism and kidnepping; e) all refugees, all Russians squeezed out of Chechnya get the opportunity to return; f) in the year of 2005, elections are held in the Constituent Assembly and referendum on self-determination. Of course, the need to agree to the internationalization of the settlement of the conflict will be perceived by the Russian authorities as an unbearable humiliation (after all, their psychology is extremely infantile), but this option seems to be the most reasonable - the federal authorities can still conquer Chechnya, but they themselves will not equip it. And in a poor, occupied country, the rebel movement will inevitably interpret with banditry.

In the article of the multivariate Viktor Sheinis, with whom I largely agree, I was cut by the words: "Crazy ideas about the independence of Chechnya." Where does this imperial arrogance come from, this desire to decide: which people have the right to national sovereignty, and which - no?! By the way, the Chechen state sovereignty is as many years as the sovereignty of the Russian Federation is eight. 102 years ago, in Basel, a young Austro-Hungarian journalist Theodore Herz uttered "crazy" words: "After half a century, a Jewish state will appear!" Not only the comparison of Chechens with the Palestinians, but also the most famous modern historian and ethnographer V. Toporov, who in 1996 proposed (in the magazine "Homeland"), his own scheme: Chechnya is the rebellious Judea of Vespasian and Titus, and the Russian Federation, the first Rome, prompted me to this historical analogy. The conclusion of the historian: the feds can win only by putting Chechens before the choice - either unconditional surrender and humiliation (but with the acquired national -cultural autonomy in the framework of the Russian state), or complete destruction. That is how, V. Toporov recalls, they entered in 70. e. The Romans surrounding Jerusalem, making the rebellious Judea (more precisely, its plain part) to submit to the empire. As long as, according to V. Toporov, the victory promises to Chechnya independence, and defeat - high independence within the framework of the “asymmetric” federation, it is impossible to count on success.

Obviously, the developers of the plans of the New War took into account the Council of Toporov and went along the Roman path. To facilitate the moral and psychological perception of the most cruel measures by the Russian masses, the Chechens were completely deprived of the more or less acceptable option of departure, literally forcing them to fight to the last. The slogan of Russian ink, especially the radiant mob: "Chechnya should fall!" - This is a repetition of the spell of the Roman proletariat: "Jerusalem will be destroyed!"

Chechens are really not Palestinians. Only a relatively small part of the Palestinians made a bet on the upholding of their independent state, but most of the people found themselves in the Arab world or in the framework of Israel, where the scope of their civil rights is incomparably higher than in the most democratic Arab state. The Chechens are literally pressed against the wall: they cannot almost leave the Russian wars almost without exception, as hundreds of thousands of Circassians left the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century. Chechens are not needed and hated for most of Russia - like Jews in the thirties in Germany. And our police officers have such a trained eye that you can do without a yellow star.

We focus on the main ones - from the point of view of honest democrats of liberals - legal and humanitarian arguments against the recognition of Chechen sovereignty. The legal affiliation of Chechnya to the Russian Federation in December 1994 was the same fiction as the Russian Federation belonging to the USSR on the day of the abolition of the Belovezhsky agreement by the State Duma in March 1996. The Chechen Republic left the USSR and the RSFSR according to the same procedure, according to which, for example, Lithuania left the USSR in March 1991, the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR in August, and the RSFSR - in December 1991, namely: the president or parliament made the decision, and then, after - they conducted a referendum. In Chechnya, the referendum on independence did not retorted, only respecting the Khasavyurt delay with the determination of the status - then, recall, they promised to wait 5 years.

The theoretical equality of the Union and Autonomous Republics established the Novoyogorevsky process. The Constituent process did not really take place (the Constituent Assembly was replaced by a constitutional meeting), and the fact that Shahrai or Filatov was included in the project of the new Constitution (the unconditional legitimacy of the reception of which raises a number of issues) a certain “Chechen Republic” (it had been to Ichkeria by that time for 15 months) - so this is their court business. Chechens were not very called for the constitutional meeting. To build the republics by rank - what can be Riga, you can’t be formidable - it means to manifest yourself as a true Lenin -Stalin. Or sovereignty gives only recognition to the "eight" and the UN General Assembly?

The humanitarian position of non -recognition of the independence of Ichkeria is much more important. Life showed: remaining in semi -isolation, with a good statehood, the Chechen authorities cannot support the most necessary minimal standards for social security, legality and order. As, however, the good half of the countries on the globe. But something indomitably attracts the peoples to freedom, regardless of bruises and cones, stuffed on the corners of history.

If we talk about the "Chechen aggression" against Dagestan, then the share of Maskhadov’s responsibility for the August raids is the same as the government of the Livan for the actions of the OOP militants in the 70s-the beginning of the 80s. And we will not forget that 5 years ago were organized and paid by the Russian authorities of the raids of mercenaries to Chechnya, the actual occupation of their north of the republic. Doesn't this resemble Basayev’s actions in Dagestan? And wasn't Basayev the shock force of Moscow against Tbilisi during the Abkhaz war?

The Second Chechen War was actually programmed by the persistent and skillful propaganda of the hatred of the Russian media, even when there was no question of throwing the Basaevites to Dagestan and no houses were still mined by anyone. The calls for the fighter war with Chechnya (with the current peace treaty!), Until the requirements for the use of weapons of mass defeat, they filled the air and the pages of newspapers since May-June of this year. In the ranks of the champions of the “wars to the victorious end”, all the most not just dark, but the vile forces of modern Russia got up: present-offers, provocateurs, racist administrators and magazils intoxicated from the breed from the breed of informationllers. The not -known lesson of Afghanistan and the “first Chechnya” - you can’t break the people fighting for freedom - it will be viable in our country for a hundred years. But the price of such a development of events is not just the collapse of the unfinished Russian democracy and the collapse of the Federation (they can say - right to the thief and flour), but the establishment of the fierce Islamic -Bolshevik regime in the territories of the Caucasus abandoned by the federals.

Is there a normal way out of this situation - a way out in the interests of people, and not ambitious bureaucratic clans? The liberals quite rightly insist on the unconditional priority of personality rights before various group interests: party, state, national. The national revival, like any type of radical movement, is almost always a grave intellectual and emotional intoxication of the masses and formal mockery of spiritual and cultural freedom. However, in some cases, National Security is dictated by the need for simple national survival.

There is no force in the world that will force Chechens declared in Russia by the archire of the Motherland and Humanity to feel an integral part of our country. The Chechens will not dutifully live under the occupation: ostentatious humanitarian handouts will not be enough for a long time (as the southern smokers, Sakhalin and the “north” are not enough), and the highlanders do not forgive the murders, humiliations and reasons.

I agree with V. Sheinis and many of its liberal like -minded people that Chechnya independently stable and democratic existence is beyond strength. The most useful would be its inclusion in a powerful and enlightened system of a higher order. There can be three such super -systems: Russia, the pan -Islamic community and, relatively speaking, humanity - in the person of its democratic avant -garde - OSCE. But over the past three years, the Russian Federation showed the complete inability to integrate Chechnya into itself, into the legal Russian economic, cultural and political life. And each salvo along Grozny, each stage of Caucasians from Moscow increases the distance between Russia and Ichkeria. The forces of pan -Islamism are able to “raise Chechnya” (this will be particularly a couple of Saudi billionaires), but at the cost of this will be the transformation of Ichkeria into anti -Israeli - the impact power of the anti -Westworth.

Based on this, I assume that the “Kosovo decision” would be the best option, namely: a) for the sake of hypocrisy of modern international law, Chechnya is temporarily registered as part of the Russian Federation; б) в регион вводятся международные миротворческие и полицейские силы; в) решениями ООН и ОБСЕ в Чечне назначается полностью автономная от Кремля администрация; г) республике оказывается вся необходимая гуманитарная и экономическая помощь, местной и международной полиции предоставляется возможность ликвидировать терроризм и киднеппинг; д) все беженцы, все выдавленные из Чечни русские получают возможность возвратиться; е) в году этак 2005-м проводятся выборы в Учредительное собрание и референдум о самоопределении.

Разумеется, необходимость согласиться на интернационализацию урегулирования конфликта будет воспринята российскими властями как невыносимое унижение (ведь их психология предельно инфантильна), но такой вариант представляется самым разумным - федеральные власти еще могут завоевать Чечню, но сами ее не обустроят. И в нищей, оккупированной стране повстанческое движение будет неизбежно переплетаться с бандитизмом.