BALTIC STATES CONDEMN KILLING (Maskhadov)

The Jamestown Foundation ^ | March 16 , 2005

[Red6]

Russia killed the only moderate Chechen leader there was. He was not the Islamic radical type and was democratically elected a few years ago.

Russia is not in Chechnya to fight terrorism. Their end-state/goals are to prevent their state from breaking up even more. Russia undermined this guy when he was president. Instead of supporting him they did all they could to damage his credibility and even helped support his adversaries. In the end, the Russians ended up with a Chechnya that was out of control where they had to go in a second time. Today, Chechnya is a complete mess. There is no getting better either.

You can sell this as a success. But who do you talk to know? What moderate force is out there on the Chechen side with which you can negotiate or make an agreement where the Chechen side can be expected to abide too? You don’t.

The Russians under Yeltsin (Who probably was oblivious to the situation in part) undermined any possibility that this place can be semi stable in the near future. Had Russia backed off between the two wars and actually supported this government, you could have had a semi autonomous and stable republic today. But maybe this is what they didn’t want?

Red6

[Red6]

And we DO have many leaders in the Middle East who are moderates that we deal with. Some outright oppose us, but are level headed as is Sistani. He wants us out of Iraq ASAP. He opposes us, yet we negotiate and deal with him. He isn’t even really that moderate come to think of it.

Look at Adams (IRA), Libya today (Which we are normalizing relations with), Jordan, Saudi Arabia (Royal family)......

Historically this is nothing new. We were talking with the Germans throughout all of WWII. Despite our “unconditional surrender” statement of 1943, we still were talking to the NAZIs.

If you cut off the heads of the spokes person or the moderates then “what” are you left dealing with?

+++A Chechnya with no viable moderate leader who can rally popular support equates to chaos for a long time.+++ You get puppet governments which the Chechens reject, as has been the case. You’ll have fractured extremist groups who you can’t broker a deal with since no one can talk for the other. You end up with a mess.

There are moderate voices even in the Middle East, and if you don’t take advantage of them (Symbiotically) you end up with a much bigger headache.

Red6

[Valin]

Russia believes in fighting fire with fire.

Gioven that they've been trying to put this fire out now for 145 years now they might want to rethink their plan.

[struwwelpeter]

I think the Baltic states' attitude is more of a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" thingie. Awhile back the Chechnyan 'rebel' (terrorist) online site was hosted out of Lithuania (Lithuania to close Chechen separatists' website).

Anti-Russian feeling is high over there. The large Russian minority (in some cities a majority) is blatantly discriminated against, and the Russian language is forbidden in government, industry, and education. Sort of an intellectual ethnic cleansing called 'dezrusifikatsiya' (derussification) is going on in schools and universities, as literature and scientific journals in Russian are purged. War veterans who fought against the Soviets alongside and sometimes inside the Nazi army have been allowed to march in memorial parades, and the Baltic states pretty much try anything to tweak the bear.

Whether Maskhadov or anyone in the Chechnyan opposition could be considered a moderate, who knows? Sure, he was 'elected' head of Chechnya during its defacto independence in the 1990s, but it's debatable that he was had any real influence with the Jihadi dead-enders, and might have just been playing the West.

Either way, good riddance.

[Valin]

Whether Maskhadov or anyone in the Chechnyan opposition could be considered a moderate, who knows?

They're few and far between, the movement there has been hi-lacked by Wahhabists..OBL..and criminals.

[Grzegorz 246]

Exactly.

[Grzegorz 246]

So what should be done with Muslims ?

[jb6]

In Riga there is a street named Baseyov and another Mashkedov. Their hatred has corrupted their souls. Of course Riga had a government sponsored parade for the veterans of the 15th SS Latvian Division, Hitler groupies.

[jb6]

Moderate you say? Read and learn.:

Death of a Terrorist

The Moscow Times ^ | Tuesday, March 15, 2005 | Robert Bruce Ware

Posted on 03/15/2005 11:27:49 AM PST by jb6

Whatever Chechen rebel leader Aslan Maskhadov may have been in 1995 or 1997, he was a terrorist on the day he died. As compared to a monster like Chechen commander Shamil Basayev, Maskhadov might have been described as a "moderate" up to 1998. In January 1997, he became the first and last legitimately elected president of Chechnya. However, his incapacity to cope with pressures endemic to Chechen society led to his drift toward radicalism beginning in the latter part of that year.

In 1999, he disbanded the Chechen parliament and abolished the same Chechen constitution that legitimized his presidency, replacing it with a legal code similar to that of Sudan. Under the ensuing sharia rule, there were public executions, amputations and punishments of offenses including adultery and homosexuality. Some of those punished were pregnant women and children. Later that year, Maskhadov did not repudiate Basayev's invasion of Dagestan, let alone assist the Dagestanis in resisting it. He then declined President Vladimir Putin's requests to extradite Basayev, to close his al-Qaida-connected training camps and to renounce terrorism -- essentially the same three requests that President George W. Bush made to the Taliban in autumn 2001.

In summer 2002, Maskhadov stated publicly that all Chechen fighters were directly under his control and warned of an upcoming campaign to wage war on Russian territory. That October, the leaders of the Dubrovka hostage atrocity clearly stated in three separate press interviews that they were acting under Maskhadov's direction. He failed to condemn the attack while it was in progress.

On June 22, 2004, bands of terrorists from Chechnya killed approximately 100 people in neighboring Ingushetia. About 60 of these fatalities were police officials. About 40 were civilians, some of whom were hacked to death. The terrorists took approximately 20 hostages. The raids had no military targets. A few weeks later, Maskhadov publicly claimed responsibility for the Ingushetia raids.

When Osama bin Laden killed police officials and civilians in the World Trade Center, there were no Western analysts who failed to call him a terrorist. When Timothy McVeigh killed law enforcement officials and civilians in an Oklahoma City blast in 1993, no Americans failed to label him a terrorist. Why do people insist that Maskhadov is anything but a terrorist after he claimed responsibility for the slaughter of police officials and civilians in Ingushetia? It is revealing that the people who claim most loudly to care about the suffering of Chechen civilians seem to care nothing at all about the suffering of Ingush civilians. The same might be said about Dagestanis, since Maskhadov claimed to control the terrorists that have killed more than 50 of Dagestan's politicians and law enforcement officers in the last three years. Why is it that Western journalists and observers seem to care about the suffering of only those North Caucasus people who are fighting the Russians?

It is true that Maskhadov was a symbol of all that was legitimate and worthy in Chechen aspirations for independence. Unfortunately, he was no more than a symbol. Perhaps because he was unworthy of his cause or because his cause itself was unworthy, he quickly proved unable to lead a semi-independent Chechnya and was himself led into radicalism.

Because of his symbolic appeal, Maskhadov retained the sympathy of as much as 30 percent of the Chechen population. Yet he was also widely blamed by Chechens for their problems. Had they been given the chance to do so, it is unlikely that more than 10 percent would have supported him in last year's presidential election. In any case, many Chechens had sworn vendettas against Maskhadov, so that he surely would have died soon after attempting to resume any sort of public life.

Thus, Maskhadov had no more than symbolic value to the Chechen resistance. He controlled no more than a few people around him, and some days he barely controlled his own bodyguards. He was not the moderate ballast to radicals like Basayev, as some have suggested. On the contrary, after 1997 Maskhadov devoted much of his energy to preserving the illusion that he maintained some sort of control over Basayev and other Islamists. Negotiations with Maskhadov would have had no effect upon Basayev or other radical leaders.

Hence, Maskhadov's death will have only three consequences for Basayev. First, without his political front man, Basayev will suffer further reductions in external funding, by which, however, he will be undeterred. Second, Basayev's own demise will become more present in his mind. Basayev does not fear death, but the narcissism of his personal mythology is a significant part of his psychology. Third, Basayev may proclaim that one of his upcoming atrocities is vengeance for the martyred Maskhadov, even though Basayev has spent the last eight years undermining him.

Because of his iconic status, Maskhadov's death was necessary for the stabilization of the North Caucasus, but it is far from sufficient. In all but his iconic status, Maskhadov will be quickly replaced, as Basayev would be. In order to begin stabilizing the North Caucasus, the Kremlin first must support human rights and genuine democratic procedures throughout the region, beginning with the upcoming Chechen parliamentary elections. Instead of consolidating corruption, the Kremlin, secondly, must strive to reduce it. Finally, Russian officials must stimulate dramatic and widespread economic development. Otherwise, poverty, unemployment, corruption and despair will continue to nourish radicalism, alienation and instability in the region. Westerners who claim to care about the peoples of the North Caucasus should put their money where their mouths are by offering tangible assistance to stimulate economic development in this region.

Robert Bruce Ware is an associate professor at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville who has published extensively on Dagestan and Chechnya. He contributed this comment to The Moscow Times

[jb6]

bump my article post.

[jb6]

Why don't you open your borders to them, let them settle and live peacefully with you. Maybe you can teach the Netherlands how to be tolerant.

[struwwelpeter]

Good summary concerning Maskhadov, though more sympathetic than I'd have been ;-)

BTW: I've read articles where Polish border patrols have been denying 'Chechnyan-looking' Russian and Belarus citizens transit on the trains. It looks like they get it.

[jb6]

They get it but they're still offerring the terrorists moral comfort, out of their "Christian" hatred of all things Russian. Funny thing, they screw the Russians, the Russians refuse to sell them oil and then they scream like socialists (and they are, er actually communists) that they are being terrorized by Russian gas (twinself's own hysteric words) and that they have a RIGHT to be sold gas. If I was the Russians, I'd seriously be looking into building a new pipeline through the North Sea, around Poland. Watch their 19.5% unemployment, heavily deficit laiden (got to keep the mass unemployed proles happy and not reaching for pitchforks) deal with the loss of transport tariffs. Offer it as a cheaper alternative to the Germans if they help build the pipeline.

The best part, these "Poles", there are 4 in particular, will absolutely never swear loyalty to a Free, Democratic, Independent, Sovereign Poland because their loyalty lies with the EU.

Asking them to swear to Poland is like sunlight to these vampires of the EU. Rather funny to watch them squirm, though their strategy now is to abandon the thread. You should try it some time, works like a charm.

[struwwelpeter]

One reason for the endearing emnity of the former Soviet states:

Soviet tankers learned to drive on the bones of the dead
Noviy Vestnik ^ | June 2nd, 2004 | Serygey Tereshchenko

Last Monday two new memorials appeared simulaneously at the Spasskiy cemetary. One was placed by the Karaganda (Kazakhstan) city government, the other by the government of Lithuania.

Our people put up a marker at Spasskiy to remember all who faced repression on Kazakhstan's soil. The authors of this work were Murat Kalkabaev and Vladimir Trotsenko, who worked on the project and argued for space at the cemetary for a year and a half. Finally it was decided that the marker would not be placed alongside the other memorials, but a bit to the front. Such a composition resulted in a better visual impression than just a straight line of stone markers. So that the memorial complex gave a more unified appearance, Trotsenko decided to take down the iron fence around the cemetary. Well-known architect Aleksandr Titarev, however, was decidedly against such a move.

"It was I, in my day, who thought up the cemetary complex at Spassky," he reported to members of the architectural council at the time. "I know the place very well. The iron fence shouldn't be taken down from the cemetary under any circumstances. Otherwise people will set horses and sheep out to graze among the graves."

But Vladimir Trotsenko knew how to insist on his way, and the fence was taken down. True, it was not removed everywhere - only from the sides of the main entrance. After all the organizational problems were solved, the sign itself was made in about two days in a local metal-working factory.

The memorial to the Lithuanias who died at the Spasskiy concentraton camp was a bit simpler. A place for a memorial stone had been decided upon long ago. While the marker was sculpted by an artist in Lithuania, Karaganda had only to help with the installation. For the memorial's opening ceremony an entire delegation from Lithuania arrived. Heading it was Lithuanian secretary of labor and social services, Violeta Muruskayte, and Lithuanian Ambassador Romualdas Visokavichus. During the ceremony, it was stated that it was Lithuania that had brought the entire Spasskiy memorial complex into existance.

"From 1953 to 1954, I did a term in the camps here," recalled former steppe camp prisoner Antanos Seykalis. "In those days Lithuania was actively resisting the Soviet occupation, and in practically every school there was an underground organization. Ours was discovered... and so I showed up in Kazakhstan. Even now I cannot forget the horrors of day to day life in the camps. The prison uprising in Kengira, near Zhezkazgan. How they brutally put it down with the help of tanks. So many died back then. In 1990, I - with the help of comrades from the public organization of former political prisoners - once again came to Karaganda. We wanted to see in what condition was the prison cemetary in Spasskiy. And in horror we discovered that there wasn't a cemetary! On it's place was a tank training ground. Soviet tankers learned to drive on the bones of the dead! Under the guise of tourists, we went into this field and placed the first Catholic cross. After a few years they told me that the Kazakhstani government had closed the tank training area and built in its place a memorial complex."

Alongside the Lithuanians' memorial stone in Spasskiy today are markers dedicated to Germans, French, Italians, Japanese, Finns, Poles, Rumanians, Ukrainians, and Armenians. Soon Russia will dedicate a marker, though the Russian memorial will not be in the collective row, but a bit to the side.

Serygey Tereshchenko

[jb6]

The Soviets were soulless animals, no doubt about it.

[Red6]

There are three major leaders there. He is the most moderate of them. He was elected. He had popular support which eroded between the two wars because the Russians were doing all they could to discredit him, to include running a press/media/ Information Operation campaign.

"In 1999, he disbanded the Chechen parliament and abolished the same Chechen constitution that legitimized his presidency" You say. Wow! What garbage!

The Russians attacked Chechnya again in 1999. What you are writing is straight from the politburos approved talking points! It's asinine. It’s not just some twisted interpretation to favor one sides view, but rather a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. Taking things out of context, leaving out critical aspects you try to paint a one sided and inaccurate picture. I won’t even continue dissecting the article. It’s not worth my time. The writer discredits himself by the second paragraph. When smearing and spinning, at least do it subtly! Let me ask you this. Do you think our government would be in session as foreign tanks roll over our capital? The Chechens were being ATTACKED for crying out loud! I don’t know if I should laugh or cry? It’s sad that you follow this train of thought and a US college professor is either a complete ideologue or near retarded.

In defense of his death and the Russians operation one must state that it was probably not intended for him to die.

Chechnya is a complete mess. You hear little because the foreign media is restricted entry and Russian media is completely under government control again. Today you have a crime ridden mafia state with Russian Army involvement. But that’s OK since there is some resemblance of stability produced by those on the take but in the Russians back pocket.

After 9-11 everyone out there labeled their opposition as “terrorist”. China did so with Tibet as well! I can give you Chinese arguments for this if you want? This is borderline silly.

Many of those in the Iraqi government TODAY oppose us. Some in the German government fought us in WWII! Helmut Schmitt was a fighter pilot (Former German chancellor ME109). Even Israel negotiates and works through intermediaries and with moderates in the hope of bringing peace someday. The Russians do not EVER want Chechnya to be autonomous. Their methods are very different than ours. They have no exit plan and are not sincere in their attempts to build a government in Chechnya. Therefore, they will continue to fight a war that they have fought for something like 200(?) years now. This little stunt they just pulled off is something which will help keep this war going on indefinitely. See it as a victory if you want. In reality, you have limited your options for a real solution. A end of conflict is now further away.

Red6