Replies

Mr.Smirnov

1) I never said it was invaded and conquered 400 years ago.
Russia conquered Caucasia in XVIII and XIX century, Chcechens too, among other, more ancient nations like Georgians or Armenians. Nevertheless it tried to enslave Caucasian nations even back in the XVI century starting with conquer of Kazan in 1552 by Ivan the Terrible.

2) As you probably could expect most of the Chechens will turn to radical islamists after the only moderate leader has been killed. Knowing all that whom do you want to discuss the future of this country with? Basayev? Peace? What peace? There will be no peace - because you're riding this land as if it was your own. And it is not yours, I am sorry to say. I don't know whether we have the same proverb but here in Poland we say "kto sieje wiatr ten zbiera burze" ("you reap what you sow"). Do you truly believe that Putin would harness his imperialist tendencies to grant any country on Earth independence of their own? The way they really want? Look at Ukraine's most recent example. Poisonings, killings and spies like in Borgia's dynasty time. True democracy and freedom lover your leader is.

Conquered Georgia? You must be kidding. Have you ever heard about Kars treaty, signed in 1819? Have you ever known that it was Georgia who came first to Russia, not the otherwise? Can you imagine independent Armenia in 19th century? It was mighty Ottoman Empire which was about to wipe out Armenians altoghether and it was a protection of Russian Empire that saved them from Turks. (As well as Bulgarians, by the way).
Have you ever looked at the map and checked where Kazan is and where Caucasus is? Ther are nearly 900 km away from each other. A huge distance by 16th century standards. How come that conquering Kazan helped conquering Caucasus? By the way, conquering Kazan saved Moscow from never ending raids by Tatar khans. So, it was a matter of survival.
Do I need to mention, that not even 60 years after conquering Kazan, your enlightened ancestors marched over to conquer us? How does the fit into your liberal picture?
Frankly speaking, you historical insights lack the sense of historical and geographical context. It looks like what social planners teach in schools. Very black and white, fudged to serve a political purpose.
If you do not mind, that "moderate rebel islamist" theme is a bit groundless. Back in 1999, when Chechens raided Dagestan, Maskhadov was alive and kicking, as well was in charge of Chechnya. He did not prevent Chechnya from sliding into radical Islamism and trying to forcefully impose it on its neighbours. Simply cannot understand how it could prevented it again if he were alive today.
IMHO, your historical insights lack the sense of historical relativity and geographical context. As to the "poisonings" and "imperialistic ambitions", unless it proved by concrete facts, not emotions, I see little reason to discuss it. (As well, as such vague and fuzzy definitions like "true democracy").
However, I absolutely agree that the current Russian government has a very amateurish and awkward foreign policy. But I humbly remind you that Ukrainan elections are not the subject of this discussion.