<nettime> Chechnya (2x)

["nettime's_digestive_system" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>]

1................"fran ilich" <zoe@telnor.net>
2................"Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net>



From: "fran ilich" <zoe@telnor.net>
To: <nettime-l@Desk.nl>
Subject: intersection: chechnya and women.
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 03:58:43 -0800


hi,

you might be interested in checking out this url, it has intresting
information on chechnyan women during the war.

nos vemos en el futuro.

ilich.
http://cinematik.com


--------------------||||||||||||||||--------------------------


From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net>
To: nettime-l@bbs.thing.net
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 17:05:04 -0500
Subject: What if...


What If...

In Chechenya, Russians combined the ugliest elements of two military
doctrines: of a superpower like the U.S. - the propensity to fight their
war >from the air and from the safe distance, and of a rogue state like
Republika Srpska - the heinous bent on not simply winning but on the
extermination of the purported enemy. As a large, resourceful and, still,
despite of all its economic ills, a very powerful country, a member of the
G8, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, Russia should be treated
to a higher standard than Republika Srpska.

The Chechen terrorism in Russia is deplorable, and the Russia has a right
to fight it. Nobody is denying Russia that right. The U.S. State Department
re-assured Russia several times on that matter. The Chechen terrorism in
Russia, however, is not different from what the IRA terrorism in the U.K.
was a ten years or so ago. Yet, the abuses of human rights, committed by
British authorities in Northern Ireland in pursuit of the fight against the
IRA terrorists, never went that far as to see R.U.C. randomly and
deliberately shoot at civilians, and the U.K. never carpet bombed Republic
of Ireland for offering safe haven to many an IRA member.

Aside of human concerns, it is not clear where the Russians think they are
going with their bombing campaign in Chechenya. To use the NATO vocabulary:
do they have clear and achievable military goals, and do they have ìexit
strategyî? Russia is a vast country. Chechen terrorists may already hide in
some far away corner, while Russian military is pounding their peaceful
neighbors and relatives. They can strike back at strategic targets in
Moscow later. What is Russian government going to tell its people if its
military manages to conquer and pacify Chechenya by killing hundreds of
thousands of civilians, yet do not eradicate Chechen terrorism?

Unless, of course, there is an agenda behind the ëfighting terrorismí
scheme. After all, why would Russian actions be immune from subjecting to
the conspiracy theory testing? Each U.S. action abroad is always thought to
have a hidden agenda. Nobody ever seriously bought the ìhumanitarian
bombingî doctrine. The Russians should be exposed to at least the same
scrutiny.

Recently, Russia asked Georgia, a former Soviet republic, one of the two in
Caucasus with Orthodox Christian dominance, to let its military pass
through to attack Chechenya from behind. Georgiaís president, Eduard
Shevarnadtze, former Gorbachevís foreign minister, said no to that. That
ìnoî was quickly rewarded with the Popeís visit. Or maybe the visit was a
way for the West to say to Russia: ìwe will not tolerate violating
Georgiaís sovereignty.î Shevarnadtze did the right thing. It is not clear
where the Russians are going with their campaign against Chechenya, and
more particularly, it is not clear whether they are going to win. And what
if they loose? Then theyíd consider Georgia as an accomplice in the Russian
attempt to conquer them and unleash terrorist actions against Georgia as
well. What would Georgia do then? Ask Russians for protection? Russians
would love nothing better than that - to keep their military presence in
and around the oil-rich Caucasian former Soviet republics. Shevarnadtze,
however is an old hand in Soviet political games...

What if Russia never intended to win the war against Chechenya? What if the
strategy was to create a permanent crisis spot in the Caucasus that would
make surrounding republics like Dagestan and Inghusetia, and states like
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbejdjan, rich with oil, beg for Russiaís
protection? What if the procrastinated bleeding of civilians in Grozny was
aimed to disgust the West, with hope that the Western threats with
sanctions can then be blamed for stopping the military campaign in
Chechenya short of winning, after injuring Chechens enough to embitter them
for the years to come, so they can ëprovideí a crisis spot Russia can
exploit for its profit?  The U.S. and Russia share their addiction to oil
and power, after all.

Ivo Skoric



#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net