How Russian Special Forces Ended the Seige in Moscow

BBC News ^ | Oct. 26, 2002 | BBC News

[FairOpinion]

How special forces ended siege

Special Forces moved in before dawn

The swift and bloody end to the Moscow theatre siege came when Russian authorities realised time was running out for the hostages, and there was no option but to act quickly.

Tensions inside and outside the building had risen in the early hours of Saturday morning.

At around 0230 local time (2330GMT Friday), gunfire was heard inside the theatre. The Chechen rebels, it emerged, had executed two hostages and shot and wounded two others.

Some hostages panicked and rose against their captors in a desperate attempt to escape.

The situation deteriorated. An hour later, a large explosion and shots were heard. Then, after a two-hour lull, came more explosions and automatic weapons fire.

No alternative

Amid the confusion, and without consulting President Vladimir Putin, Special Forces officers took the decision to end the standoff, which by then was entering its third day.

A black van sped towards the building, while a squad of around 30 masked and heavily armed Russian elite Spetsnaz troops were seen moving into position.

Using explosives to blow a hole in the wall of the theatre, they pumped in sleeping gas with the aim of subduing the rebels.

This however, created more panic in the auditorium.

In desperation, one female hostage used a mobile phone to tell radio station Ekho Moskvy: "They are gassing us. All the people are sitting in the hall. We really beg not to be gassed. We hope it will not be like Kursk."

Troops poured into the auditorium - some reportedly from the basement, where they had been preparing an assault for days - and a fierce gun battle erupted.

At least 50 rebels were killed in the onslaught, including leader Movsar Barayev, and women wearing explosives-packed belts.

Desperate escape

Under fire from their remaining captors, some hostages desperately tried to flee the chaos.

Five women were seen running from the building and bundled away by waiting emergency workers.

Shortly after 0700, a handful of surviving rebels surrendered and were seen being led away with their hands behind their backs by grim-faced Russian troops.

The freed hostages then started to leave the building en masse, most looking confused, shaken and frightened.

Explosives teams quickly moved in to defuse the large number of explosive devices the rebels had placed around the building.

But as the firing died down, the grim toll of the operation became apparent, with dozens of injured hostages - and bodies - brought out.

A fleet of ambulances ferried hundreds of injured people, many suffering from gas poisoning, to hospital.

Russian television broadcast images of the devastated auditorium strewn with bodies, discarded guns, explosives belts and other debris.

Deputy Interior Minister Vladimir Vasilyev told reporters that most of the Chechen rebels were dead, while security officials confirmed that none of the gunmen escaped.

The hostage death toll was revised to 67 and then at least 90, far higher than initially thought, but Mr Vasilyev reflected the cost of inaction could have been even greater.

"We succeeded in preventing mass deaths and the collapse of the building which we had been threatened with. The decision was correct and timely," he told reporters.

[FairOpinion]

I think, while everyone is sorry about the loss of life of the hostages, but storming the theater was the only possible decision, otherwise the suicide terrorists would have killed everyone.

What amazes me, that some headlines scream: "90 Hostages Killed in Moscow Siege" (Washington Post), "death toll rises", etc, instead of "Hostages freed, some casualties"

It's almost like the liberal media objects to the rescue. What would have they preferred to have happen, that Putin agree to the terrorists' demands? That would just spur more terrorism, because it works. Or that the terrorists kill all the hostages?

[Vidalia]

Agreed, why not just put the obviouis up front, that the bastards were killed and let it be known that this is the end of any assholes who want to attempt this crap...?

[Cicero]

It's too soon to say how many of the hostages may have been killed before the rescuers went in, but it sounds as it they did the right thing.

It could have been a lot worse.

As for the liberal media, they are completely muddle-headed, living in some kind of dream world.

[FreePaul]

It's almost like the liberal media objects to the rescue.

No. It's certain that the liberal media and liberals everywhere object to the rescue. They wanted a negotiated agreement which would give the terrorists what they want. That's their attitude in this country's fight against terrorism also.

[Bogey78O]

Sounds like most of the hostages died when they panicked and tried to fight back. Odds are it wasn't friendly fire that did them in.

[bvw]

Many lives saved ... a good outcome.

[Bogey78O]

Headline should read: "Chechen Slaughter Halted by Russian Spec Ops: 90 Dead"

[gorebegone]

"The Chechen rebels,.."

should read, " The islamist terrorist homicide bombers from chechen..."

[maxter]

Yes and did you hear Alan Colmes talking with Ollie North asking him about the hostages, something about the Russians saying if the terrorists would let all the hostages go, they could walk away. Ollie told Alan that it is okay to say anything, just get the hostages free, then do what you need to do (and that did not include negotiation). Alan goes on to say something like, you mean a doublecross? Ollie states how can you doublecross terrorists? Is Alan really this dense? Totally unbelieveable that some really think you can negotiate with these people. This kind of thinking is very scary indeed.

[cadillac cowboy]

You got that right !!

[PokeyJoe]

That's because Alan Combs is an idiot.

[yarddog]

When I first heard that the Chechens had a large number of terrorists and a lot of explosives, I couldn't think of any way the Russians could rescue more than a handful.

The fact that most made it says a lot for them.

[Andy from Beaverton]

I'm disgusted by the media's use of phrase Chechyn rebels. Using the term rebel implies defiance. The Chechyns are not defiant, they are Islamic separatist who see no difference between killing Russians and killing sheep. Once the first Chechyn war ended in 1996, the Chechyns were allowed self rule. In June of 1995, Chechyn gunmen took 2,000 Russian hostages at a hospital near Chechnya leaving more than 100 dead. In January of 1996, Chechyn militants seized 3,000 Russian hostages at another hospital that left at least 78 dead in week-long fight. In 1999 thousands of Chechyn Muslim fundamentalists, whose aim was to merge Dagestan with neighboring Chechnya in a single Islamic state, invaded Dagestan. Russia soon came to the defense of Dagestan and later went to war against Chechnya after two apartments in Moscow were bombed by Chechyns leaving over 300 Russians dead. In October of 2000, Jaish Mohammed (Mohammed's Army) took responsibility of the bombing of the USS Cole. This is a Islamic terrorist group operating out of Chechnya and Dagestan. I don't have any sympathies for these Islamic separatist. There are good Chechyns who do not want war, but these so called rebels have the same agenda as Osama bin Laden, they want all of the non-Muslims dead.

[Alquiviades]

something about the Russians saying if the terrorists would let all the hostages go, they could walk away.
Actually, this is plainly wrong. Another thing was said: that if the terrorist let hostages go, that life is guaranteed to them, nothing else. Now see, how many of the animals survived.

[Restorer]

Who was responsible for the apartment bombings had never been fully established. There is some evidence that at least some of the bombings were carried out by KGB forces to justify further action against the Chechens.

That the Chechens might be bad people does not mean that all those who fight against them are good people. Remember WWII.

[JZoback]

Is Alan really this dense?

Yes, he must be. I have watched H&C for as long as I can remember.

Every single night I get the same answer.

Yes.

There must be no other answer. If it happened once in a while, I would think he just made a mistake. Yes, he is as stupid as he makes myself.

I think the problem is when Clinton was President, he spent a large amount of his time defending him. Now that Clinton is gone. The real mental midget that Alan Colmes is has been exposed.

[anymouse]

Some hostages panicked and rose against their captors in a desperate attempt to escape.

How do you say, "Let's roll" in Russian?

D@mn leftist limy reporters can't bear to admit that regular civilians are capable of defending themselves from evil preditors like these Chechen terrorists. They have to paint them as "panicked" and "desperate."

I say these brave Russian citizens deserve medals. I suspect Russian President Putin and the members of the Duma will agree.

[monday]

". There is some evidence that at least some of the bombings were carried out by KGB forces to justify further action against the Chechens. "

The truth is no one knows for sure. What you say is what the Chechens and their liberal supporters claim of course. Are you Chechen or a liberal supporter?

[TheLion]

Wonder why Fox doesn't just drop the pretense and get rid of the liberal creeps. Be nice to have all conservative comments.

[Lizard_King]

Still sounds like a clusterf*** to me. Why?

1. The Russians need to be able to exert force decisively against Chechnyan targets to be able to deal with extensions of their terrorism. They have failed to do that, therefore this is what they reap.

2. They should have gone in on day 1, or at most when the first set of killings occurred (after nightfall). You are dealing with psychos who intend to die at the end (hence the dynamite vests).

3. A nation cannot be held hostage over 700 people. Sad but true. I wish they had ended this farce at once.

The Spetsnaz did what they could, but they are hampered by their govt's lily-livered stance against Islamic terrorism. Maybe now Putin will wake the hell up.