Posted on 10/25/2002, 4:06:00 PM by dead
The tentacles of international terrorism may well have reached Moscow with heavily armed Chechen rebels holding hundreds of civilians hostage inside a suburban theatre, as the Russian President Vladimir Putin was quick to assert. But while al-Qaeda operatives are believed to have recently lent their support to the Muslim separatists responsible for the Moscow assault, the Chechens' cause is nationhood, not "jihad". As such, Wednesday's attack - kilometres from the Kremlin - resoundingly mocks President Putin's claim of a decisive military victory in Chechnya, an oil-rich Muslim enclave which has resisted Russian rule since the tsars' time. For the global "war on terrorism", the Moscow hostage crisis highlights the sobering reality that no security operation alone can shut terrorist networks down.
One of the most serious global security problems post-September 11 is the existence of numerous localised conflicts which may find their expression in terrible acts of violence, emboldened by terrorists attacks elsewhere. The potential for tragedy at the Moscow theatre is high. The rebels have strapped explosives to their bodies and proclaimed their readiness to die if Russian troops are not withdrawn from Chechnya. Hundreds of Russian civilians have died in terrorist attacks blamed on Chechnyan rebels since independence was proclaimed in 1991, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. A brief period of de facto self-government was marked by gang violence and kidnappings. The actions of the rebels in Moscow have been condemned around the world. But, as a spokesman for the European Union pointed out, the fate of the hostages is inextricably linked to Russia's failure to find a political solution for Chechnya.
President Putin came to power promising to end the protracted Chechen conflict and quickly committed 80,000 Russian troops. The Russians literally fought their way in, hectare by hectare, eventually emptying and razing the capital, Grozny. Thirty thousand Chechens died; hundreds of thousands were forced from their homes. Western governments and human rights organisations documented mass executions, torture, rape, and widespread looting of homes by Russian troops. Mr Putin installed a pro-Moscow administration in January last year. The only success Putin could claim, however, was to have contained the chaos and bloodshed to within Chechnya's distant borders. Containment has now failed.
The US-led "war on terrorism" offered Mr Putin a respite from international pressure over ongoing human rights abuses inside Chechnya. A more immediate threat was identified in the al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, and Washington wanted unprecedented permission to stage US forces out of Tajikistan, and four other former Soviet republics in Central Asia. In exchange, the US acknowledged Russia's own "terrorist threat" in Chechnya and fell silent over human rights. But it is those same abuses which have driven more and more civilians to the Chechen rebels' side. To deny al-Qaeda and the like sanctuary in the remote Chechen mountains, a more durable peace must be sought - one which offers the Chechen people participation, not repression.
the Chechens' cause is nationhood, not "jihad".
Bullsh|t! They’re letting the Muslims leave and talking about the upcoming murder of hundreds of "infidels."
More "can't we just learn to love the terrorists" crapola from the blinkered world of leftist journalism - this time Aussie-style.
The US administration can put the squeeze on Saudia Arabia, Kuwait etc. to cut off their funding for the rebels too if not more...
If Putin has any sense, he will find out who the terrorist are and get their families. If the terrorists start killing hostages, the family members get executed. It's not legal, but it will work. There are several cases of Chechen civilians being kidnapped by Chechen criminals and being release when the family of those kidnapped have got hold of the criminals' relatives.
I also assume that all the radio frequencies have been jammed so that the explosives can't be detonated remotely (a la N. Ireland).
VRN
BUt their objective has been the same for 170 or so years, since the Russian Tsar grabbed that land, which had never theretofre been Russian. Chechen resistance since then was amazing and heroic. Nothing stopped them, not even when KGB burned some of them alive.
If they gained independence, I suspect we would see Taliban-like government. That, however is after the fact: their objective is independence.
Suits the US "powers that be" for the "poor Chechen freedom fighters" to keep up their mayhem in that part of the world -- US controls Europe's oil supply, and want to keep it that way. Can't have that pesky Russian pipeline messing that up! Especially as we built Bondsteel right on top of the proposed pipeline from the Caspian which will run to the Albanian port of Flores.
Russian perspective is to (1) stop Chechen terrorism (their culture has always been essentially a terrorist one, with a tradition of kidnapping for ransom going way back, for example)and (2) secure that pipeline route.
The Confederacy's cause was nationhood.
What's going on in Russia is a civil war. Plenty of countries have been conqered and absorbed into another country. 170 years is ancient history as far as this type of thing goes (a lot of countries are no where near 170 years old.)
Neither of us may like it, but the fact is raw power has been the main factor in determining countries boundrys throughout most of world history.
What makes continuing occupation of Chechnya so legal, Mr. Voronin?
Reminds me of the song you used to have during WWII, wtih the words, "We won't give up even an inch of our land." THe problem with the Russian Empire, whether under commnists or the tsars, was that "our land" meant POland, Chechnya and the Caucus, Crimea, later Angola and Chile.
What business did Russia ever had being Chechnya?
Nah, we'd see the same type of "government" they had 1995-1999, the same type of "government" as the KLA terrorist narco-mafia in Kosovo, only worse.
Maybe you should go join up with these "heroic freedom fighters" you admire so much. When they imprison you in a pit in the ground and demand a big bucks ransom from your family, you might start to change your opinion of them.
Why not pull up the stakes and leave? Than land has never been Russian and has never been Christian. It was annexed out of greed. Return it to their owners. If they violate your borders after that, then deal with it without mercy if necessary.
More business than the US has being in Korea, Turkey, Japan, Cuba, former Yugoslavia, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,Afghanistan....
If Yemen were located say, where Ontario is, and the folks there refused to stay in their own country and were terrorising New England and neighbouring Canadian provinces, don't you think the US would go in there and "pacify" them?
See, there you give yourself away: the word "principle" has not visited your mind; you only understand taking sides with someone.
There is no question that these people are fearless, even your own author, Lermontov, has noted that. It is also well known that they have consistently resisted Russian occupation --- perhaps more than any other in the Trans-Caucus colony --- ooops, I meant province --- of the Russian Empire.
Now, is there any principle you can offer or are you motivated purely by the particular rights of Mother Russia to foreign lands?
I expected it to come out fully, and it did. You do have particular rights to other people's lands. "We won't give up an inch of our native foreign land."
Are you an American citizen? I am just curious? DO you even know what ideals of this country are? Never mind ideals --- do you even know what law is?
Or, are you as your Tsar Peter who spend quite some time abrad, learning shipbuiling. He has learned that alright but remained completely oblivious to the notion of freedom and human decency that were so evident in everything around him.
Thank you for writing. Enjoy your stay.
I do have principle. You're the one "taking sides" and getting all romantic over those people. Russia has a right to secure borders and regional stability. The Chechens are not a stable bunch of people, to put it mildly. If Russia could build some impentrable wall around Chechnya so that those thugs could NEVER get out to perpetrate violence on their neighbours, I suspect they would do so, and let them have their miserable little country.
Sorry, the history of violence of the Chechens is against you -- and them.
Speaking of "historical rights" maybe we should give the US back to the Native Americans, huh?
PS: They're no more "heroic" than any other violent criminal. Apparently you think it's "heroic" to hold unarmed civilians and shoot women, like they're doing right now. Again, you love their "cause" so much, why don't you go join up with them? I'm sure they wouldn't mind taking on another hostage.
Oddly, the Red Chinese are doing the same thing.
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.