Abandoned fields and farms. Dead railway stations with rusty rails and metal corpses of trains. Ruined power stations. Decaying infrastructure. The most astonishing thing is that there are very few craters from explosions. It is not war which lead to this destruction - almost everything was destroyed by Chechens themselves. Here, in Chechya, style of life is mix of slaveowner republic and wild, destructive capitalism. Not so long ago people here worked in the fields and factories, celebrated May Day and studied at schools and universities. But everything has changed with destruction of USSR.

Schools, hospitals and cities are pillaged. But among ruins you can see luxirious private cottages, made from expensive materials. "Cottages" is probably the wrong word. "Palaces" fits them much better. And only fool thinks that money for these palaces was earned in legal way.

Greed blinded post-Soviet Chechens so much, that they are ready to destroy their own cities. Everything, that was built in 1995-1996 as part of Chechnya restoration program, was pillaged. Oil-processing infrastructure is destroyed. Instead, its equipment is used in hundreds of small illegal gas-producing plants, which infected 40% of Chechnya territory with pollution. This pollution now threatens other territories, including Kaspian sea.

Times of militant, bloodthursty clans returned to Chechnya. Brutal nationalists are ready to kill everyone, even the neighbours, only because they are not of their clan. Chechens live by slave-trading, drug-smuggling, prostitution and illegal, destructive gas-production. Everything else: farming, agriculture, powerplants, factories - is pillaged.

Civilization, which was brought to Chechnya, is destroyed. Chechens lost all ability and will for productive labor. All they now can and want is banditism.

If Russians stop war at Chechnya today, everything will be lost. Chechnya will once again turn into bandit and terrorist center of Caucasus.

Here's what I think.

Now, a question.

What do YOU think about Chechen problem?

Why American goverment support Chechen terrorists?

Why Europe refuses to extradict terrorist leaders like Zakayev?

In your opinion, what should do American goverment? Support Russia? Support Chechnya? Intervene in military way (if yes, on which side)?

As I understand it, Chechens just want their independence, correct? It seems to me the obvious course it to give it to them. Why not?
I don't see any potential for US military intervention. We don't have the resources for it, and I don't think it's our place to interfere.

Texas separatists wanted independance too, correct? Why not give it to them then? Correct me if I am wrong, but you SLAUGHTERED all Texas separatists instead of giving them independance.

Now, let me explain again why Russians should not give Chechens independance.

We already gave Chechens independance, after First Chechen War not so long ago. Guess what Chechens did? THEY INVADED RUSSIA (specifically - Dagestan Republic)!

Chechnya is nest of terrorism. Recent terrorist attacks in Moscow were executed by Chechens, funded and trained by fundamentalist regimes of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Oh, yes, I forgot, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are American allies! Seems that America ignores the fact that 9-11 was executed by Saudis, while Pakistan has Al-Queda bases on their territory.

As for American military intervention, the benefit of American occupation of Chechnya is quite big. First, it is way to control Kaspian Sector, which is very rich on oil. Second, it can be used as bridgehead for future invasion of Russia. Just look at the map.

http://www.prio.no/publications/reports/os...ap-caucasus.asp

Americans have already placed their forces in Georgia, right? Why? Answer is on the map. To move them in Chechnya when new crisis arrives.

The trick is that Chechen terrorists have bases on territory of Georgia! If Russia attacks them, Georgia and America will attack Russia.

Sounds like you're only telling one side of the story. The following article discusses both the role of the Russians and of Chechnya in shaping the environmental problems of the region.

Chechnya: War Worsens Environmental Woes







Brought to Chechnya by whom? The people of that region have been there for thousands of years living in an agricultural society, have they not?

It seems that the bandit economy is a product of war. What else does one do when the infrastructure damaged to such a degree?



Hmm...In 1944, nearly the entire Chechen population was exiled, and they were not allowed to return to their homes for 13 years. Governments do violent things no matter what side of the world they are on.

I understand why Russia does not want to give up Chechnya. It's a strategic location, particularly in regards to oil.

"Brought to Chechnya by whom? The people of that region have been there for thousands of years living in an agricultural society, have they not?"

It is not the factor. Even barbarians have some sort of farming. "Agricultural society" of Chechnya was initiating bandit raids on neighbourhood territories for AGES. Just read some sources of that period. I can remember old lyric of Russian Empire era: "zloi Chechen polzyot na bereg, tochit svoi kinzhal".

"It seems that the bandit economy is a product of war. What else does one do when the infrastructure damaged to such a degree?"

Nobody targeted industrial zones or powerplants, Chechens THEMSELVES pillaged them. During Soviet era, Chechnya was had prospering farming. Now, Chechens STOPPED any farming. That is definetely not a product of war, because basic farming do not require complex infrastructure.

OK, even if the reason is damaged infrastructure, tell me WHY all infrastructure, rebuilt by Russians in Chechnya, was pillaged again - even in peaceful regions?

"In 1944, nearly the entire Chechen population was exiled, and they were not allowed to return to their homes for 13 years. Governments do violent things no matter what side of the world they are on."

Did you forget WHAT ACTIONS forced Stalin to exile Chechens? Chechens supported Nazis! Not all of them, of course, but you can't make omlette without breaking some eggs. Chechens that were loyal to Soviet Union, were allowed to serve in Red Army. They received many medals, that is fact.

Well, that is only my point.

They have agriculture, religion, their own language and customs. That sounds like a form of civilization to me, and I am aware that their culture is clan-based with some tendencies towards violence. Centuries of repeling foreign invaders has a tendency to have that effect on a culture. The point I'm trying to make is that you make it sound as if Russia came in and saved the Chechens from themselves with the great Russian technology, but obviously, they didn't want to be saved, particularly if it meant submitting to Russian rule.



Moscow means to take Chechnya at any cost





Do you have a source that shows that it was? Everything that I have come across says that the Russians have been rebuilding the Chechen infrastructure, but mismanagment by the Russian authorities has caused the process to be slow.

I'm willing to listen, but I honestly can't find any evidence of what you are saying. Your assistance would be helpful.



No. I didn't forget, but ethnic cleansing seems a bit harsh, doesn't it? Nearly the entire population of Chechnya was exiled. Were they all traitors? What caused them to side with the Nazis? These are questions that need to be answered.

Don't get me wrong Engineer Kimov. I don't approve of the terrorist actions of the Chechans either, but your initial post is one sided, and there is never really a good guy and a bad guy in a war. It takes two to tango.

May I ask you this...Did the pillaging occur during the three years of independence, or after the Russian reoccupation?
American troop strength in Georgia is virtually nonexistant. The purpose of the US military in that area has been training the Georgian police in how to nab terrorists (since the spring of 2002).

"They have agriculture, religion, their own language and customs. That sounds like a form of civilization to me, and I am aware that their culture is clan-based with some tendencies towards violence. Centuries of repeling foreign invaders has a tendency to have that effect on a culture."

I am not talking of violence, I am talking about banditism: attacking, robbing and enslaving neighbourhood nations. That lasted for centuries.

This ended after Chechnya joined Russian Empire, but I have to admit that Russians were very violent towards Chechens in this conquest. And even when they joined, Chechens still didn't have equal rights with Russians.

So, I do NOT have moral right to judge pre-Soviet Chechens. But during Soviet era, Chechens were treated as equals. Chechnya received large dotations from Soviet budget, and benefited much from being part of Soviet Union.

Maybe one of reasons of why many (not all, and not even a majority) Chechens want to separate themselves from Russia - Chechens think that they will benefit more from funding of Islam fundamentalist from abroad than from Moscow dotations.

"The government loosely defined military targets as homes, bridges, hospitals, TV stations, broadcast towers and radar facilities."

That is a great lie, based on misinterpretation of words. If there is no civilians in "home" ("hospital", "school", place any word here), and this "home" is turned into fortress by terrorists, it is no longer "home", but "fortress". A 100% justified military target. But of course, there is collaterial damage too.

"Do you have a source that shows that it was?"

I've been to Grozny twice. Also, I've read recent reports from Chechnya by famous journalist and writer Kucherenko. I can give you link, if you can read Russian.

"Everything that I have come across says that the Russians have been rebuilding the Chechen infrastructure, but mismanagment by the Russian authorities has caused the process to be slow."

Local "Russian" authorities are formed mostly from Chechens themselves. Chechens serve in militsia (police) and even in occupation army. One Russian colonel, comrade of mine, told me that at least third of Russian military, present in Chechnya, are Muslims. Soon, there will be President elections in Chechnya, and Chechnya will get its own legitimate leader. Even though I think it is bad idea and parlamentary republic is better choice for clan-oriented society.

"No. I didn't forget, but ethnic cleansing seems a bit harsh, doesn't it?"

Hitler waged TOTAL WAR on us, aimed on extermination of Slavs and their brotherhood nations. Ethnic cleansings were justified. By the way, didn't Americans do they same? When war with Japan started, Americans sent all American Japaneese to concentration camps. Am I correct?

"Nearly the entire population of Chechnya was exiled. Were they all traitors?"

Of course not. That's why they were exiled, not exterminated.

"What caused them to side with the Nazis?"

Firstly, they wanted more religious freedom. Secondly, some of them wanted more freedom of banditism.

Well, that's what I think.

"May I ask you this...Did the pillaging occur during the three years of independence, or after the Russian reoccupation?"

During years of independance. Now, Russian army tries to prevent pillaging and other illegal activities.

"American troop strength in Georgia is virtually nonexistant."

Troop presence does not matter in modern conflicts. Control over airports and bridges does matter. Look at the map again.

http://www.prio.no/publications/reports/os...ap-caucasus.asp

American forces are still stationed in Turkey, besides, Turkey itself is ally of America (and ages-old enemy of Russia). NATO forces are ready to enter Georgia on command. And after Georgia, they will move to Chechnya.

Kimov - DON'T double post. If you were the last person to post & want to add more, edit your last post (after 12 hours, go ahead & make a new one if you have more info. to add; your edit window will be closed)

Here is a link of troops and their strengths throughout numerous locations overseas. Turkey strength is very low, at about 50 percent of what it was during the mid 90s. Forces have been reduced in that country, in spite of our activity in the Gulf. Those aren't the actions of a country with active plans for aggressive occupation towards Chechnya.

military installations overseas

An interesting link, Mrs Pigpen, thanks for that.

I have to admit I do not know a lot about internal Russian problems, all I know is from what I see on the news.

In the UK, reports on Chechnya seem to be biased more towards the Chechen side of the arguement, Of course, this has the effect of making me feel more sympathetic to their side, which is always the problem with the media.

From reading through this thread, I would have to ask why exactly Checnhya shouldn't be allowed some kind of election for devolution of power. I understand there are numerous peoples fighting for independence within Russia (isnt there a Siberian independence group?), and I can understand that it is a problem. Is public opinion in Chechnya strongly in favour of independence or is it 50-50?

Of course it is a difficult situation. the same could be said for those fighting for independence in Catalunya, or Tibet, or Northern Ireland. There is no quick fix. My instinct would to get Chechen opinion. If they mostly want to stay as part of Russia, then thats what should happen. If terrorists remain, all you can do is try to fight them back.

I see no need for military interventions from other nations, unless of course Russians/Chechens are commiting war crimes. But I do think the UN should be involved. Despite all the feelings about the UN and its inability to be decisive enough, I think its great

Allowing Chechnya independence would be exactly like the US allowing Ohio to succede- it is a traditional and proper part of the soviet Union- and has no traditional homeland of it's own nor is it a stand apart nationality for the most part, they are ethnic slavs similar to many in the caucas region. There is very little difference really between the chechnyans in Russia and the montana freemen or michigan militia- except for size and success LOL

There is a very, very large muslim population in Russia, and it is not neccesarily in just areas with "stan" on the end- my wifes region of Tartastan (hey, that is a "stan" state! ) has Russian orthodox and Muslims living side by side in peace since the creation of the russian empire with the taking of Kazan by Ivan the terrible. Checnya has been part of the Russian empire since Ivan the terrible, nearly a thousand plus years ago! (though it was also part of the original russian empire of Vladimir of Rus, where we get the name "Russian")

So, as with almost everthing in Russia, and some of the point Engineer Kimov (Izvene' Tovarisch if I did mistake your point)- the entire reason for the "Checnnyan revolution" is th hope of making more money from world wide muslim interests than they can get from monied interests in Russia.

Also, you must realize, that the Chechnyan Muslims are not radical and zealous Muslims as in the middle east, but much more lip service Islam, similar to Christianity in the US for the majority of US poeple that calls themselves Christian (you know, church twice a year, easter and Xmas or something)- and much more interested in exporting mercenaries and thier own brand of Mafia.

You must also realize that most of Russia is controled to some degree by a local or regional mafia, and no business is done without this mafia to some degree. The chechnyans have simply not have the success of the other Russian city-state mafias in running things , and therefore, has been more desperate in thier means.

And Engineer Kimov is right- several republics were given autonomy, either total or confederate style, and Chechnya almost immediately invaded Dagestan, the reason for thier autonomy being removed. Tartastan was also removed from autonomy due to largescale corruption and discrimination against the majority ethnic Russians by the minority but rich ethnic Tartarish. This was starting to lead to Bosnia style ethnic violence, so was pout back into the federal system, and is now one of the most successful of the Russian republics by many indicators.

OK, I agree that Turkey don't hold as much forces as it had. But there are STILL forces there, and it makes me nervous. Think of it: Pentagon said they are going to relocate some forces from Western Europe, but do they relocate them more close to real enemies? No, most forces will be placed in new NATO states, which are close to Russia.

And Turkish authorities still support Islamic radicals in Russia. Turks SAY they want piece of our land. Whether they are supported by Americans or not, is not that important.

Also, why USA is planning to increase military presence in Baltic States? Baltic States do not border any hot spots, they are not even close. BUT they border Russia.

Americans are building large military air force coordination center in Baltic. AGAINST WHOM???

I can suggest a solution: placing S-200 BOTH in Kaliningrad Oblast and Belorussia will close air corridor to Baltic States and cut Baltic nations from air support (the range of S-200 fits to do that).

Well, that's my quick opinion, and I can be wrong. I need some time to check the numbers.

I don't see how ethnic cleansing can ever be justified...not by the Russians and not by the Americans. The Chechen people were treated horribly, herded into cattle cars, and shipped off to Siberia and Kazakhstan where a large portion of them died of disease and starvation.



As I understand it, Chechans are Sufists, a very different and more peaceful sect of Islam, but have been somewhat influenced recently by more violent sects due to a large influx of Wahabis into that area.

That seems to be one of the main problems. There are foreign influences with their own agendas at work within Chechnya. Terrorism is a problem, and like the situation between Israel and Palestine, the moderate voices aren't as strong as the extremists.

NATO is primarily a defensive alliance, and since the Baltic states joined, the United States and NATO are required to make plans to defend them. Collective defense is a core NATO function, and it must consider the military requirements for a potential defense of the region.

I don’t understand the reasoning behind including the Baltics into the alliance at this early date, and I believe this will have a destabilizing impact overall. The effect (IMO) will be decreased security for Russia, the Baltics, and NATO… the opposite of NATO's intended goal. I’m not very familiar with the state of affairs in that region though. I am probably missing something important, but I certainly understand your concerns there.

Chechnya? My Goodness, what a godforsaken mess that place is.

Kind of makes Iraq look like a walk in the park.

IMHO I think that Chechnya is the model for future intervention in the ungovernable regions of the developing world. Places like Afghanistan, the Pashtun areas of Pakistan, portions of Columbia, all the places with no real centralized state authority and no chance of developing one. I believe Chechnya is the harbinger of the coming chaos in other places just like it.

Places that if not in total chaos, are run by competing gangs-or a single dominant gang, ie. the Taliban, that is a government in name only, and more likely a criminal or terrorist enterprise. Places that will always be threats to regional or global security. I sometimes wonder if Russia would have been happy to have given Chechnya its independence, with the debacle of the first war with the Chechens that came after the breakup of the Soviet Union. If it was the Chechens bombing apartment blocks in Moscow, then I understand why the Russians had to go back into that rat's nest. There was no real alternative, since Russia's security would always be compromised by having the Chechen terrorist state running amok like it was. But the ruthlessness of Russia's occupation is another thing altogether.

Russia has turned Chechnya into a free fire zone, depopulating it, and making it uninhabitable through its violence and by the oppression its inhabitants. Recent US actions in southern Afghanistan against "the Taliban" remind me of the Chechen model.