Posted on 03/02/2006 3:29:45 AM PST by Hannah Senesh
It is extremely difficult for an honest observer to break through the closed doors that separate Chechnya from the rest of the world. Indeed, no one even knows how many civilian casualties there have been in 10 years of war.
According to estimates by non-governmental organizations, the figure is between 100,000 (that is, one civilian out of 10) and 300,000 (one out of four).
How many voters participated in the November 2005 elections? Between 60 percent and 80%, according to Russian authorities; around 20%, independent observers reckon. The blackout imposed on Chechnya prevents any precise assessment of the devastating effects of a ruthless conflict.
But censorship cannot completely hide the horror. Under the world's very eyes, a capital - Grozny, with 400,000 inhabitants - was razed for the first time since Hitler's 1944 punishment of Warsaw. Such inhumanity cannot plausibly be described as "anti-terrorism," as Russian President Vladimir Putin insists.
The Russian military leadership claims to be fighting against a party of 700-2,000 combatants. What would the reaction have been had the British government bombed Belfast - or the Spanish government Bilbao - on the pretext of quelling the IRA or the ETA?
Yet the world remains silent in the face of the looting of Grozny and other Chechen towns and villages. Are Chechen women, children and all Chechen civilians less entitled to respect than the rest of mankind? Are they still considered human? Nothing can excuse the seeming indifference displayed by our worldwide silence.
IN CHECHNYA our basic morality is at stake. Must the world accept the rape of girls kidnapped by the occupying forces or their militias? Should we tolerate the murder of children and the abduction of boys to be tortured, broken and sold back to their families, alive or dead?
What about "filtration" camps, or "human firewood"? What about the villages exterminated to set an example? A few NGOs and some brave Russian and Western reporters have witnessed countless crimes. So we cannot say, "We did not know."
Indeed, the fundamental principle of democracies and civilized states is at issue in Chechnya: civilians' right to life, including the protection of innocents, widows and orphans.
International agreements and the United Nations Charter are as binding in Chechnya as anywhere else. The right of nations to self-determination does not imply the right of rulers to dispose of their people.
The fight against terrorism is also at stake. Who has not yet realized that the Russian army is behaving like a group of pyromaniac firefighters, fanning the fires of terrorism through its behavior? After 10 years of largescale repression, the fire - far from going out - is spreading, crossing borders, setting Northern Caucasus ablaze and making combatants even more fierce. How much longer can we ignore the fact that, in raising the bogeyman of "Chechen terrorism," the Russian government is suppressing the liberties gained when the Soviet empire collapsed?
THE CHECHEN war both masks and motivates the reestablishment of centralized power in Russia - bringing the media back under state control, passing laws against NGOs and reinforcing the "vertical line of power" - leaving no institutions and authorities able to challenge or limit the Kremlin. War, it seems, is hiding a return to autocracy.
Sadly, wars in Chechnya have been going on for 300 years. They were savage colonial conflicts under the Czar and almost genocidal under Stalin, who deported the whole Chechen population, a third of which perished during transfer to the Gulag.
Because we reject colonial and exterminating ventures, because we love Russian culture and believe that Russia can bloom in a democratic future, and because we believe that terrorism - whether by stateless groups or state armies - should be condemned, we demand an end to the world's blackout on the Chechen issue. We must help Russia's authorities escape from the trap they set for themselves and into which they fell, putting not only Chechens and Russians, but the world at risk.
It would be tragic if, during the G8 summit scheduled for St. Petersburg, Russia, in June 2006, the Chechen issue were pushed to the side. This dreadful and endless war needs to be discussed openly if it is to end peacefully.
What better demonstrates the total hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy of much of what passes for Western society.
I see no major differences between the above mentioned and the likes of Egypt's Hosni Mubarak , Abdulla of S.A. , Musharraf ..etc all of whom are our "friends" !
Did you notice some rather key facts he left out, leaving a skewed propagandistic perspective?
Fact is, Russia completely pulled out of Chechnya for FOUR YEARS, leaving Chechnya to their own devices and defacto independence. They had their peace and their terroritory. It was their own actions that cost them both.
Chechens used the ceded land to launch repeated attacks on the Russian province of Daegestan, killing hundreds. The admitted plan was progressive piecemeal conquest of Russian terroritory, turning vast swaths into muslim states akin to the Taliban. Chechens elected for themselves a strict islamic government akin to the Taliban, one of the few places to have an embassy in Afghanistan when the Taliban ruled. During this time of peace, Chechnya also had an industry involving the kidnapping and ransom of Russians beyond a scale that many could conceive.
The author talks about the "bogeyman" of Chechen terrorism. Is that an apropriate word to use to describe mass murder of schoolchildren at Beslan, the Russian theatre mass murder, blowing up of apartment buildings, and downing of two civilian passenger planes?
Everyone knows the Russian army is a very blunt tool, the results are very sad, but it is the only tool they have. The Chechens had everything they wanted, but they forced the Russian's hand.
We Europeans share the same values about human rights, freedom and integrity with America and Israel. Those values are the basement of the western world. Since we see both countries on the same level than ourselves we tend to react fiercely if something is going wrong there. It is and would be for sure the same the opposite way.
Russia never really reached this status in our heads. There is absolutely no expectation that their current gouvernment ever would give a human being the same attention than we do. Therefore it is senseless to waste time with criticism on circumstances that can not be changed through words.
It has nothing to do with hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy to criticize obvious nuisances. The fact that someone is impressable of critisism is the proof that he has conscience. This is a precondition for belonging to the civilized world. America and Israel are among those nations were words can move something. This is a matter of fact they can be proud of.
What about Tibet or Western Sahara for that matter?
PING!
Exactly, and the quote from Sir Winston wraps it up in a nice neat package.
Defending AlQaeda linked Muslims who blow up schools "demonstrates the total hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy of much of what passes for Western society."
This has nothing to do with "values about human rights, freedom and integrity" and everything to do with the fact that the Chechen sepeartists are AlQaeda funded, AlQaeda trained, AlQaeda led terrorists.
How is it that the same conservatives who would normally say 'no quarter for terrorists and treasonists' come out in support of islamofascist terrorists in Chechnya?
'Defending AlQaeda linked Muslims who blow up schools "demonstrates the total hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy of much of what passes for Western society."'
1) Where exactly did I defend them or indeed say anything about the rights and wrongs of this conflict? My point was quite simple: if America and Israel had been accused of such acts, they would have been crucified by world public opinion.
2) Given you have now posed the question though, I do not believe that the answer to terrorism is genocide, and that's exactly what Russia has been engaged in. If I were to believe in that, then I'd have to support the destruction of much of Europe for collaborating in the Holocaust - and I most definitely do not. For much of its history Russia has engaged in state terrorism against the Jewish people. Do you think I should support her destruction?
3) Russia under that brutal ex-KGB thug Putin is probably the greatest threat to the Western world. It has been, inter alia: getting in the way of America defending herself in Iraq, arming Syria, providing nuclear capabilities to Iran, and legitimising Hamas.
To support genocide makes a person no different from those monsters who used to strip naked women and children and then machine-gun them into open pits, or Hitler, or Stalin, or Mao, or Islamofascists.
Calling Chechnya genocide is just AlQaeda's latest trick in trying to arouse sympathy for it's allies in Chechnya.
The folks who would call Chechnya genocide are the same who'd call iraq genocide. AlQaeda is counting on the west buying into this so they can setup a brand new Taliban regime in Chechnya when the UN forces the west to pull out of Chechnya, and give the Muslim terrorists there another state (same as they did in Kosovo).
As for your claim about Russia engaging in state terrorism against the Jewish people you may want to know that Lenin, part Jewish himself, was very Pro-Jewish and Anti-ethnic Russian. It wasn't until Stalin came on the scene that Jews were oppressed, and today Jews are in many prominant positions in Russia, and the Russian government has actively been returning Jewish properties which the Soviet government had stolen.
I forgot to add. Even ivory tower commandos like yourself might understand the reactions of Russian conscripts if you saw videos of your buddies heads being sawed off by Chechens.
Russia/CIS and China can commit genocide and we say nothing about it. We can't afford a war with nuclear powers.
I see you're defending Islamofacist terrorists again...
Good call Athos.
Now weren't there two separate groups fighting the Russians in Chechnya, One seeking a democratic form of government and the other one Islamic? It was my impression that the Islamics didn't want the democratic gov't to succeed so they instigated the second war.
I am with you, the mass murder of schoolchildren at Beslan did it and I am fresh out of sympathy.
I am with you, the mass murder of schoolchildren at Beslan did it and I am fresh out of sympathy.
"At one time there were some fighting for independence, but that was a long time ago."
like back in the 1800s. Nearly all of the Chechnyan Muzzies now are terrorists, or terrorist sympathizers.
Muslims are unable to live in a civilized world. I don't care if every one of them is killed.
Don't forget the thousands of Russians and others who were driven out of the country by Chechnyan thugs after they were allowed to return to their land from Siberia after the fall of the USSR. They were sent to Siberia in the 1st place because they sided with the Nazis (as almost all the world's Muslims did during WWII).
Don't ever let your sympathy and compassion die for the innocent people who die in conflicts. It's good to understand why nations do and sometimes need to do the things they do, but lots of good individuals get caught up in the results. That doesn't necessarily mean that the national action was the wrong one, though.
Very well said ma'am.
They "left the area" did they?
And did they "leave" the Chechnya when Stalin was in power too?
By the way, ignore the Putophiles. If you follow Russia posts on Free Republic, you will notice that Vladimir Vladimirovich has done no wrong, can do no wrong and should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his love of humanity, democracy and the advancement of human rights.
And you're defending the collaborator of Hamas and Ahmadinejad again...
Hardly I am simply standing up for Secretary Rice position that Russia is an ally to us in the war on Terror.
This, apparently, is the way Putin has chosen to deal with Chechen terrorists (whom the Kremlin initially funded in Abkhazia anyway) now that he has destroyed Grozny and all major Chechen towns, turning them into some of the most miserable places on earth.
From the Daily Telegraph:
Chechnya's new leader: a boxer with his own army
By Adrian Blomfield in Grozny
(Filed: 06/03/2006)
The most feared man in Chechnya rolled his eyes and lolled in his seat. One of the visiting European officials' periodic speeches on human rights, this time delivered to the shattered province's new Moscow-backed parliament, was evidently boring him.
He may be only 29 and have at best a fleeting grasp on literacy, but Ramzan Kadyrov is Chechnya's uber-achiever.
A boxer of moderate proficiency, he is the owner of the testosterone-filled Ramzan Gym, the proud owner of a tiger cub and the head of his own paramilitary force.
At the weekend he also became Chechnya's prime minister.
Alhough his interests may be varied, activists say they do not include a regard for human rights.
As Alvaro Gil-Robles, the Council of Europe's outgoing human rights commissioner, completed his speech, Mr Kadyrov illustrated the validity of their charge.
He turned to Thomas Hammarberg, Mr Gil-Robles's Swedish successor. "You must come skiing in our mountains; they're much nicer than the Swiss Alps," he said, apparently confusing the two countries.
Activist groups are appalled that he has become prime minister, claiming that he is responsible for many of the worst atrocities that still plague Chechnya.
"This will bring nothing good to Chechnya except lawlessness, more lawlessness and more chaos," said Svetlana Gannushkina of the rights group Memorial.
But the appointment is no surprise. Mr Kadyrov is central to Kremlin plans to pacify Chechnya even if, as critics maintain, this means giving legitimacy to gangster politics.
Unmonitored and largely dubious elections have established a pliant administration that was run by Mr Kadyrov's father Akhmad before he was killed by a bomb in 2004.
Since then, Ramzan Kadyrov has been the main power in Chechnya and is expected to become president when he turns 30 this year, the required legal age to assume the post.
His total control was exemplified on Saturday when parliament unanimously confirmed his appointment.
He said his main priority would be to end the thousands of "disappearances" that have tormented Chechnya since 2000. But human rights groups blame 70 per cent of the disappearances on his militia, the Kadyrovsky.
The militia is said to run torture chambers and carry out extra-judicial executions.
Mr Kadyrov's appointment has drawn little international condemnation. Chechnya has become an uncomfortable subject in the West, partly because of the Islamic tinge the rebels have assumed and partly because governments are less inclined to antagonise a Russia that is emerging as an energy superpower.
Thus Mr Gil-Robles and his UN counterpart, Louise Arbour, were in Panglossian mood during their fortnight of visits to Chechnya.
Both played down criticism of government-sponsored abuses, while pouring effusive praise on reconstruction efforts, although critics say most of the money for such projects has been stolen.
"There is no noise of guns," said Mr Gil-Robles. "The war in Chechnya has almost ended. There are elements of economic revival, people are returning."
But Grozny, which suffered the worst devastation of any European city since the bombing of Dresden, is still largely rubble with 80 per cent unemployment.
Though not an ally in the war in Iraq, however.
I am more inclined to Cheney's attitude on Russia, and signs are that Rice is beginning to see things that way too.
With regard to Russia Rice is more educated, more informed, and has a history of knowledge. I'm more prone to her evaluation.
I agree.
Are there Wahabbi-backed Islamic revolutionaries in Chechnya, as part of the independence movement there? I believe so. Does that justify what Russia has done in Chechnya? I don't think so.
Pox on all of them.
Putin is a communist, and communists can do anything they want under world opinion.
The chechens are muslim terrorists trained and financially supported by al qaeda, and who have killed American soldiers throughout the middle east.
Not all chechens are like that, though. The Al Queida types corrupted the Chechen rebel movement, just like they did with the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan.
The Russians are still complicant in the destruction of Chechnya, though.
The Chechen rebel movement was islamic to begin with, Chechens are muslims. Further the Chechens who didn't want war left Chechnya in droves and moved to other parts of Russia.
The movement Al Qaeda 'corrupted' was already a movement in favor of super opressive Taliban style state independant of Russia.
There were pro-American chechnyan rebels before Al Queida and the Russians killed them off.
Pro-American Muslims. Ha!
The Chechen rebels were Muslims, I grant you. Most of them Sufis, who are regarded as heretics by the Wahabists and Salafists who turned an oppurtunistic blind eye.
I assume you differentiate between Hamid Karzai and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.
There are such things as moderate Muslims. I don't think you can damn the rebels from the outset, no matter how ghastly they have become now. That still does not justify the total annihilation of Grozny and other towns.
Basayev and his ilk are unspeakable scum. But I am not sure that the Kremlin is worthy of plaudits either. I imagine also that Ramzan Kadyrov will come back to bite them.
After all, just what is Russia's client regime doing in Chechnya? Banning alcohol and gambling, legitimizing polygamy and moving towards the reintroduction of Sharia hardly seems like a recipe for success -- although it does seem to fit in with Putin's myopic, pragmatic and ultimately deeply sinister approach in Chechnya.
"3) Russia under that brutal ex-KGB thug Putin is probably the greatest threat to the Western world. It has been, inter alia: getting in the way of America defending herself in Iraq, arming Syria, providing nuclear capabilities to Iran, and legitimising Hamas. "
Worth repeating!
"There were pro-American chechnyan rebels before Al Queida and the Russians killed them off."
WHAT?!?!!? Names? (And don't say Dudaev or Yandarbiev, because you'd be wrong) Sources? That's as assinine as those who claim OBL was a CIA-paid rebel during the Soviet-Afghan War. The Chechens have NEVER been pro-American. Some have been pro-Russian and turned, others have been pro-islamist and turned. But one thing they've never been is pro-American. They might have made some noises in that direction but that was short-lived - when they realized they'd get no support (read: $$$$$) from Uncle Sam, they quickly changed their tune. BTW, you do realize Chechens have been responsible for American deaths?
And btw, the "pro-American chechen rebels" claim is one that was made by Russian hardliners. Surely you are not touting their claims as fact?
"Further the Chechens who didn't want war left Chechnya in droves and moved to other parts of Russia. "
Where a lot of them quickly took up the criminal life - in Moscow the most powerful mafia is Chechen, in Tver, same thing.
Kosovo treatment for Russia?
Indeed, Hitler was more European than Russia.
There is absolutely no expectation that their current government ever would give a human being the same attention than we do.
Russia abolished serfdom about the same time US abolished slavery (peacefully)
To punish Russia if Russia follows her own interests.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.