GKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24621 posts, RR: 58 Posted (8 years 9 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1009 times:
With the events of yesterday, people saying that the two aircrashes were caused by terrorism - the events of the theatre in Russia a year or 2 ago, and the events in Czechnya (sp?), I was wondering whyso much terrorism occurs in Russia, do terrorists have something against the Russians, or is security not as tight over there as it is in other parts of the world.
Would like to hear your opinions.
When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
Planespotterx From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 986 times:
Its Chechen rebels that are the main cause of all the terrorism in russia, A few years ago a war broke out between the two countries, Chechnya wanted to be independent, whilst Russia wanted control.
Russia being a dominant force took over Chechnya, and the Chechen people obviously consider this to be a invasion, thus the only way to strike back (deep in the heart of Russia) is to use suicide bombers, car-bombs and now possible bombs on aircraft (possibly.)
The most "famous" siege Chechen Rebels have carried out was in the Moscow theatre 2 years ago (I think), where they held many hostage until armed SWAT Russian soldiers and police stormed the complex, unfortunately the gas they used and the way the hostages were positioned meant that meany of them died due to lack of oxygen.
So really Chechen rebels are a bit like the spanish version on ETA, wanting independence away from Russia, but the Russians consider the land to be thier "own", and so theres still sporadic areas where war is still continuing.
Whitehatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 985 times:
Think about Northern Ireland. There are several important parallels.
Chechnya is part of the Russian Federation, and a chunk of their people don't want to be. So it's like Northern Ireland and Britain, except that there's a dash of radical Islam thrown in to their particular mix.
Schoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 28 Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 3 days ago) and read 974 times:
"So really Chechen rebels are a bit like the spanish version on ETA, wanting independence away from Russia, but the Russians consider the land to be thier "own", and so theres still sporadic areas where war is still continuing.
Of course, the BIG difference is that the Spanish Central Government has never fought a major war against the entire Basque population, as is the case in Chechnya.
An estimated 150,000 people have died as a result of this war. When taking into consideration the total population of the Republic of Chechnya, aproximately 1 milion, people can assess for themselves just how effective fighting terrorism militarily really is.
Although the International Community has put some pressure on Putin to end the "dirty war" in Chechnya (torture of illegally detained civilians, the discovery of mass graves, etc.), after 9/11 Putin was granted all the international support needed to step up his own War on Terrorism, resulting in more abuses, unexplained desappaerances, abductions and state sponsored Terror against a civilian population.
Abu Ghraib was 'peanuts' compared to what the Russian Army has done and it still doing, against civilian Chechnians.
Call me naive, but perhaps the fact that Chechnya has oil has got something to do in this whole conflict.
L410Turbolet From Czech Republic, joined May 2004, 5394 posts, RR: 19 Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 3 days ago) and read 973 times:
Russian/Soviet foreign policy is defined by imperialism and expansionism for centuries. Their term of "near abroad", which they use as justification for any means of landgrab, makes them think it entitles them to mess with neighboring foreign countries either militarily or otherwise whenever they please. Note, that the USSR despite initially being an aggressor in WWII (half of Poland, Baltic countries, Finland) retained all its territorial gains and grabbed even more afterwards (East of Czechoslovakia, Romania)
They support any separatist movement in newly independent countries (Georgia), yet they prevent any other country they annexed first to declare independence (Chechnya).
The expansion was always followed by massive russification so Russians made up significant minority and such fact complicates the existence of i.e. Lithuania even today.
Basically, those who got away when the USSR was crippled were the lucky ones (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) and that's why they tried so hard to secure themself within NATO.
Zak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 3 days ago) and read 952 times:
"Of course, the BIG difference is that the Spanish Central Government has never fought a major war against the entire Basque population, as is the case in Chechnya."
i disagree here. euskal herria was independent from spain before franco took over spain and then invaded E.H. militarily. that move in 1937 was similar to what russia does now, after all at that point E.H. had only been independent for a year. this invasion has still not been undone, for one part because francos push for systematic eradication of basque culture and flooding with castillian people has been quite effective.
Horus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 62 Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 940 times:
Schoenorama, is correct in his analysis. Even though I view these attacks to be completely wrong, what many, if not most, of people forget, is that the Chechen population have sufferred considerably over the last decade or so, from Russian occupation, imprisonment, torture and mass punishment. Grozny (capitl of Chechnya) is nothing but rubble, and yet people have to continue to live and work there...its hell on earth.
Schoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 28 Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 925 times:
"i disagree here. euskal herria was independent from spain before franco took over spain and then invaded E.H. militarily. that move in 1937 was similar to what russia does now, after all at that point E.H. had only been independent for a year. this invasion has still not been undone, for one part because francos push for systematic eradication of basque culture and flooding with castillian people has been quite effective."
That's not (completely) true. Basque Country was not independent from Spain as you state, but was given self-government during the Spanish Civil War. It was also during this Civil War that the Basque city of Guernica was bombed by the German Luftwaffe to support the efforts of Franco. Since this really was 'a conflict within a conflict' with Basques fighting on both sides, one can't really say Spain has ever launched a major war on the Basque population as a whole, as you suggest.
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13342 posts, RR: 64 Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 885 times:
Back in the middle (and later) the Spanish king would come to Guernica to swear under the famous oak tree (there is a famous Basque song, Guernikako Arbola) to respect Basque independence and that he wouldn´t interfere in internal Basque matters, while on the other hand the Basque chiefs would swear to support the Spanish king. This was what made the attack on Guernica so important in Basque eyes. So for many years, up to Franco´s "Hispanismo", the relationship between Spain and the Basque country was based on equality.
Concerning the ETA and Herri Batasuna, besides independence, they´ve got additional ideas, like nationalising business and factories, which makes them unpopular with more conservative Basques, who rather vote for moderate nationalist parties. Another thing is that ETA doesn´t permit anybody to critise them (If you don´t join them to fight, you are a coward and a traitor, and cowards and traitors have to shut up), they tend to kill dissenters and behave generaly like fascists. (Zak, years ago I´ve had friends in Vitoria /Gasteiz and I actrually was once at a fair organised by Herri Batasuna (my friends brought me there). They introduced me to a guy, I later realised was probably an ETA terrorist.
L410Turbolet From Czech Republic, joined May 2004, 5394 posts, RR: 19 Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 846 times:
Nice try, Vitaly... Well, that's obiously a Russian version of the story. To use your example, Confederation did not have 9 centuries of independent existence outside of Russia and was not subject of forced "incorporation" into the US the way Chechnya was into Russia in 1st half of 19th century during Russian expansion into Caucasus, followed by ethnic cleansing and deporations under Stalin in 1950s.
Russophile From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 1 hour ago) and read 803 times:
L410Turbolet. Chechnya was not 'incorporated' into Russia, because there NEVER was a Chechen state to be incorporated. Just under their collective hatred of the Russians, is their collective hatred for each other. The Chechens may be a distinct ethnic group, but they most certainly never were a unified ethnic group, just as today they are not unified. Also, the deportations didn't occur in the 1950s. They occurred in 1944, at the height of the Great Patriotic War, which the Soviets were fighting against Nazi Germany. A war in which, instead of fighting against the Nazis, the Chechen people openly collaborated with the Nazis, which therefore led to their deportation, which lasted until 1957 (after the death of Stalin).
In 1991, Chechnya declared independence from the Russian Federation. A declaration which did not receive recognition from a single nation. Chechnya was left to its own devices until 1994, when Yeltsin sent in troops.
The reason for the sending of the troops? Chechnya under Dzhokhar Dudayev became a hotbed for banditry, kidnappings, murders, destabilisation -- basically the groundwork was being laid for a terrorist state. The number of people killed was not 150,000 (as quoted above), but in the range of 70,000-80,000, and this includes not only civilian losses, but also losses of Russian military, and the Chechen soldiers. And not all are at the hands of the Russians. 1/3 of the population became refugees, a lot going to Dagestan and Ingushetia.
In 1996 a ceasefire was agreed to and the Russian troops withdrew from the region. A big reason for the ceasefire, is that whilst Russian troops were meeting with tough resistance, the Russians refused to launch a full on offensive against Grozhny. In retrospect, if they did do this back in 96, the current war may never have happened.
As Dudayev was killed in 1995, Aslan Maskhadov took over the reigns of 'power' in Chechnya. Under Maskhadov, Islamic sharia law was implemented and enforced, although there was still no single authority in the region. Various Chechen factions continued to fight against each other, and this is the time that Al Qaeda made their big appearance in Chechnya. The region was turned into one big terrorist training camp.
And the Russians left them to their own devices.
In 1999, the Chechens were responsible for blowing up several apartment buildings in various cities in Russia. Even after this terrorism, the Russians still did not re-enter Chechnya.
It wasn't until Chechens crossed the border into Dagestan and carried out terrorist activities there, in the name of helping their Islamic brothers in that Republic to install an Islamic regime, that Yeltsin sent in the troops, which gives us the current war.
There are 3 main groups within Chechnya.
1) Those who support Mashkadov and his Islamic state. This also includes those groups which are against Maskhadov, but also support an Islamic state of sorts
2) Those who would support an independent, peaceful Chechnya, but not the Islamist state that those in group 1 want
3) Those who want to remain a part of the Russian Federation.
There are large numbers in all 3 groups, but those in group 2 do not have much say in Chechnya today, and they have those in group 1 to blame for that.
If there is one issue which is stopping peace from happening in Chechnya, this is it.
Eduard Shevardnadze, then President of Georgia, did nothing about the problem of the Pankisi Gorge being used as terrorist bases. Well, actually he did. He allowed them to use the area and also allowed the Ichkerian (what the Chechens call their 'independent' country) 'government' to raise funds by maintaining an office in Tbilisi. It wasn't until the Americans saw terrorism on their own shores in 2001, that Shevardnadze was subjected to intense pressure by the Americans (and Russians) to close the offices down -- at stake was the $1 billion in "aid" that Georgia was receiving from the Americans. Officially, the Chechens no longer have representation in Georgia, but unofficially, of course they do.
Now that Shevardnadze is gone, and the President with the American accent (Saakashvili) is in power, still nothing is being done.
It is high time that the Russians bit the bullet and sent troops in numbers into the Pankisi and sort the problem out for once and for all.
L410Turbolet From Czech Republic, joined May 2004, 5394 posts, RR: 19 Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months ago) and read 791 times:
After decades of Lenin/Stalin's blessings like famine, collectivization, GULAGs, NKVD terror, etc. it's no wonder the Chechens felt zero loyalty towards the USSR, the same way Baltic countries did and it's no surprise they welcomed the Germans as lesser evil as i.e Estonians, Ukrainians, Latvians.
In my opinion the way war was waged by Russia not against "bandits" but as total war against the population as a whole contributed tremendously towards making Chechnya an Islamic terrorism hotbed, with mujahedeens from all over the Gulf/Middle East arriving there to have shot at the "infidels". Same way Serb aggressive dreams of Great Serbia made Bosnia training ground for the same creatures in the 1990s and threw the whole fmr. Yugoslavia 20 years backwards. And looks like the history of creating Islamic terrorism repeats itself in Iraq as we speak.
I completely agree that Chechens lost any moral justification for their cause /with those bombings of apartment buildings/the theatre siege/metro/ and apparently airliner bombings will be on list as well. Quite surprising in the context of Chechen terrorism is the fact that Russia is siding with Palestine and its terrorists. There's no excuse for Chechens but always ready to show full support of equally merciless terrorists in Israel...
The thing I don't fully understand is why it was worth for Jelzin/Putin to waste so much money and so many lives in Chechnya? Why didn't they just kiss 'em goodbye, let 'em go have their medieval sharia state and just seal the border? If Russia got relatively easily over losing all those fmr. Soviet Central Asian "istans" Kazakhstan (and that's one hell of a huge country), Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, etc. why so much effort to contain small "chunks" like Abkhazia, Chechnya and the like. Large Russian minorities? Oil? Historical geopolitical significance of Caucasus?
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15990 posts, RR: 59 Reply 17, posted (8 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 768 times:
After decades of Lenin/Stalin's blessings like famine, collectivization, GULAGs, NKVD terror, etc. it's no wonder the Chechens felt zero loyalty towards the USSR
In my opinion the way war was waged by Russia not against "bandits" but as total war against the population as a whole contributed tremendously towards making Chechnya an Islamic terrorism hotbed,
Exactly! Well said! Russia is finally getting a taste of its own medicine from an ethnic group it terrorized in the past. All Russia has to do to end this is to allow a plebiscite in Chechnya and let them vote to leave Russia if they so desire. Until that time, Chechnya has no alternative but to resort to terrorism.
Chechnya is part of the Russian Federation, and a chunk of their people don't want to be.
So let them vote to leave if they want. That's what democracy and freedom is all about.
So it's like Northern Ireland and Britain,
Chechnya is NOTHING like Northern Ireland. The majority of N Ireland wish to remain British. The majority of Chechnyans wish to separate. The N Irish have full democraty: Chechnyans have none.
It is high time that the Russians bit the bullet and sent troops in numbers into the Pankisi and sort the problem out for once and for all.
No, the Russians should allow a free election in Chechnya and let them separate.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.