Maxim Momot. Russia as part of Chechnya?

Russia as part of Chechnya?
The next meeting of the Open Forum club

Maxim Momot

Publication date: February 18, 2004

Opening the discussion, Mark Urnov , President of the Expertise Foundation, outlined the current situation. In his opinion, “not just terrorist actions are taking place, this is a war on Russian territory ” . Moreover, the widely discussed question in the world about whether democracy will survive in such a war applies only to established democracies. The domestic expert community is more concerned about something else - whether democracy will be able to form in this situation.

Discussion of the problem began with an attempt to develop a formal definition of terrorism. Sergei Markedonov , head of the department of problems of interethnic relations at the Institute of Political and Military Analysis, warned the audience against the danger of confusing the concepts of terror and terrorism. Terrorism as a form of struggle for Chechen separatism did not appear immediately. First there was terror, that is, violence without political demands. Terrorism is Budenovsk , Kizlyar , Nord-Ost , where certain demands were put forward.

Sergei Markedonov noted an important pattern: military victory and military control over territory do not reduce terrorist attacks, but increase their scale, since the other side has no other means of struggle. For example, in uncontrolled Ichkeria in 1997-99 there were few terrorist attacks. Therefore, in the expert’s opinion, the announcement of a counter-terrorism operation in Chechnya was a mistake; war on separatism should have been clearly declared.

Another reason for the aggravation of the problem of terrorism in recent years was named by Alexander Konovalov , president of the Institute for Strategic Assessments and Analysis. In his opinion, a powerful factor restraining the ambitions of terrorists was the apparent omnipotence of America, which covered its allies around the world. However, the events of September 11 showed that America cannot guarantee the security of even lower Manhattan.

Alexander Konovalov proposes to focus the fight against terrorism on four key areas. Firstly, space. Terrorists live somewhere. As a rule, they find refuge in parts of sovereign states not controlled by the authorities. For example, in the Pankisi Gorge of Georgia, in a number of regions of the Philippines, Indonesia. Something needs to be done about this. Secondly, it is necessary to cut off financial flows, “terrorism must be bankrupted . ” Thirdly, make wider use of the capabilities of the intelligence network, without relying only on wiretapping, satellite surveillance, etc. Finally, there is a more general task - to tear the Islamists away from Islam. Ideology cannot be destroyed with a bomb - only with another ideology. The world of Islam, unlike the Western world, is a world of youth. It is difficult for her to realize herself within the existing system. We cannot allow a massive influx of personnel into terrorist networks. Radical Islamists today, in the expert’s opinion, pose the same danger to Islam that Hitler represented to German culture and the nation.

Alexey Malashenko , a member of the scientific council of the Moscow Carnegie Center, did not agree with his colleague’s opinion. “We will live in this terrorism, whether we like it or not ,” he said. Separating terrorists from Islam is a utopia; Islam is the most politicized religion, and terror is a continuation of politics. The Muslim world is in a sense united, it is a “system of communicating vessels . ”

“Terrorism, ” the expert continued, “ is a form of expression of an inferiority complex at various levels . ” The Islamic world is losing, it will never catch up with the West. If Putin kisses Basayev tomorrow, the terror will not stop. This public increasingly feels like it is part of the global jihad.

, president of the Effective Policy Foundation, argued with this position Gleb Pavlovsky . He considered development isolated from international structures to be more beneficial for domestic terrorism. The expert paid special attention to a well-known Russian phenomenon - accusing the authorities of organizing ongoing terrorist attacks. In the West, this is the lot of crazy people and the yellow press. Hence the restrictions imposed by our authorities on the activities of the press.

Another problem emphasized by Gleb Pavlovsky is the merging of Caucasian terror with ordinary criminal infrastructure. Using the example of the Nord-Ost tragedy, such a connection is clearly visible. The preservation of terrorism as a Caucasian phenomenon would be an achievement of the Russian special services. Pavlovsky sees the most effective way to fight in the current situation in the mobilization of the middle class, which in Russia, as elsewhere in the world, thinks nationally.

, president of the Center for Strategic Studies, considers its metaphysical nature to be an important feature of modern terrorism Andrei Piontkovsky . Terrorists increasingly do not put forward specific demands, but direct their attacks against the West in general.

Chechnya, in the expert’s opinion, is an example of the Palestinianization of the conflict, where the Russian authorities, with their short-sighted policies, turned most of the population against themselves, thereby creating a “reservoir of new living bombs . ” In this regard, Andrei Piontkovsky criticized Vladimir Putin’s speech after the terrorist attack in the Moscow metro - the part where the president talks about the impossibility of negotiating with terrorists. After all, they don’t put forward any demands now. “No one has written to the Colonel for a long time ,” Mr. Piontkovsky sneers.

The expert suggested a possible way to resolve the conflict in Chechnya. It consists of reaching an agreement with the separatists, who should become allies of the Russian authorities in destroying the infrastructure of terror. The political wing of the resistance does not put forward demands for independence, therefore, a compromise can be reached.

The radical solution to the issue chosen by the country's leadership, according to Andrei Piontkovsky, will lead nowhere. Go till the end? “We have already reached all ends... We have already begun the fight for Chechnya as part of Russia, we are turning into Russia as part of Chechnya , ” he concluded.

, drew the attention of those present to the danger of nuclear terrorism Alexander Nikitin , first vice-president of the Russian Association of Political Science . The complexity of manufacturing a device with radioactive filling, according to him, is exaggerated. The main obstacle for terrorists is the acquisition of nuclear material. However, it is also, apparently, relative. The destruction of such materials currently stored on the territory of the Russian Federation could be accelerated five times. There is no political solution, since a lot of people are employed in the industry, and no one dares to leave them without work soon.

The discussion then switched back to the topic of the Caucasian conflict. “Why was it necessary to pay such a price for Kadyrov to be in Chechnya instead of Maskhadov?” asked those present Nikolai Petrov , head of the Center for Political Geographical Research, . “ This is a major failure of the president, which must be discussed before the elections . ” Mr. Petrov qualified what was happening in Russia as “electoral terrorism ,” which especially intensified after the 1999 terrorist attacks completely dropped the price of human life.

stood up for the Russian intelligence services, about which the forum participants spoke generally negatively Vyacheslav Nikonov , president of the Politika Foundation, . “We don’t have any other special services, and for the money they are paid, there won’t be any ,” he said. In his opinion, among other things, it is necessary to compile computer databases for all Russian citizens and toughen penalties for terrorist activities.

, candidate for President of the Russian Federation, co-chair of the Federal Political Council of the Union of Right Forces , took a different tone The speech of Irina Khakamada . “In the first Chechen campaign there was no talk of any terrorism, ” she recalled. “ We ourselves drove Chechen separatism into international terrorism, we ourselves brought it to our streets . ” The reason was the belief that the repressive regime could put an end to terror.

Following Andrei Piontkovsky, Irina Khakamada called for a separation between terrorism and Chechen separatists. The latter could become allies of the Russian authorities in the fight against the former. At the initial stage of the settlement, direct presidential rule can be introduced in Chechnya, and then negotiations can begin. This option was proposed by the Chechen diaspora. The country's leadership chose a different strategy - to localize everything in the republic itself, so that bandits would fight bandits. Did not work out. A similar view on the problem was expressed by Lev Ponomarev , a member of the Russian National Committee “For ending the war and establishing peace in the Chechen Republic,” and Valentin Gefter , General Director of the Institute of Human Rights.

Sergei Markov , director of the Institute of Political Studies, joining in this case the opinion of Alexei Malashenko, considered that terrorism was impossible to defeat. “Terrorism is a systemic phenomenon of our civilization, a disease, not an exception, but a norm ,” he noted.

The expert identified six key features of our civilization that make the problem of terrorism intractable. Firstly, these are complex systems: the Internet, etc. Complex systems are more vulnerable, and since they will only become more complex, one should not expect the situation to change for the better. Secondly, means of communication. It is also impossible to completely protect them. Thirdly, the manipulation of consciousness, which has reached its heights in the information society. It will also not disappear and will remain in the arsenal of terrorists.

Nothing can be done about living bombs either. Moreover, it will soon become possible to use ordinary people, “processed” in a special way, to carry out terrorist attacks. Further: it is not poverty, but injustice in the distribution of goods, undisguised inequality of opportunity that pushes people to attempts to radically restructure the world. It is unlikely that the situation will change in the foreseeable future. Finally, the spiritual crisis that has gripped society, postmodernist confusion, and the lack of guidelines have a negative impact on the state of affairs, and it is not yet possible to minimize this impact.