#12 - JRL 8356 - JRL Home
RIA Novosti
September 7, 2004
TERRORISM IN SOUTHERN RUSSIA AND THE TERRORIST INTERNATIONAL
Alexander Sharavin, director, Institute of Political and Military Analysis

President George Bush recently said that terrorism could not be defeated, and, regrettably, he is right. Like any other form of crime, terrorism cannot be rooted out. But peace-loving humankind can seriously weaken it.

How can terrorism be combated? One approach is quite prevalent in Europe, especially among ordinary people. Spain provided an obvious example of this. It boils down to saving oneself by giving into any of the terrorists' demands. If we please them, they will leave us alone, the European public thinks.

This strikes me as strange, as Europe should remember its attempts "to appease the aggressor" in Munich in the late 1930s, which only served to unleash the aggressor. And today, France, which actively spoke up against the Iraqi war, has not saved itself. Like Hitler in his days, terrorism today does not need compromises: it is waging a war of extermination against civilisations. Consequently, we must fight to exterminate terrorism, even if a complete and final victory is impossible in this war.

In Russia, human rights activists call on the authorities to negotiate with "the rebels." They seem to have forgotten that such talks have been held more than once, back when there were more legitimate and competent men and a more practical subject for discussion in Chechnya. We even signed agreements. Did it help? Has the situation improved? No, the Chechen regime became completely criminal and invaded Dagestan.

We must admit that talks with terrorists cannot bring positive results, because talking is a human ability and we are not dealing with humans. This does not mean that we can use their methods in the fight against them. We cannot take hostages, send suicide bombers to kill innocent people, decapitate hostages and tape our "deeds." But all the methods we as human beings can use should be applied as harshly as possible.

To begin with, we must admit that there is an international terrorist network, though it may have more than one control centre. However, it is united by a common ideology, has related financial sources and structural foundations. Anonymity is one of its elements, and we must destroy it. All states and state entities that support terrorists in one form or another (or pander to them) must be punished. Here is a typical way to introduce "terrorism agents" to other countries. First, fundamentalist preachers are trained and dispatched to the country of attack. They come with money and a support group and gradually take the place of local mullahs, transforming mosques from religious centres into terrorist training camps.

In Russia, this practice is not restricted to the North Caucasus, as it has also been used in the Volga region. However, the secular authorities fear to interfere in this "religious affair." This is completely wrong. Believers are the citizens of their country and must respect its laws even in their houses of worship. The state must control compliance with law everywhere, especially when the security and the very existence of the state are at stake. In this sense, we should emulate the example of France, whose authorities demand compliance with its secular constitution.

Terrorist attacks in each particular country differ, depending on local specifics. Should I say that the terrorist forces are growing stronger in Russia? The recent terrorist attacks in Moscow, the downing of the two planes, and the tragedy in Beslan are irrefutable proof. Public support is a major criterion of the terrorists' success. In this sense, the situation is far from clear in the hotbed of "Russian terrorism," Chechnya. There are people who support terrorists there, but not all of them do so for ideological considerations. Some have relatives among the bandits, others have been intimidated, while still others sold out.

The terrorist movement has changed radically in the past few years. Initially, it developed under the slogans of "a fight for freedom" which attracted the local population. But gradually these goals were abandoned; at the same time, it became clear that everything that could be destroyed - production, education, healthcare, human and civil rights - was destroyed and the people were consistently pushed into degeneration. Consequently, the social support base of the bandits declined, as is proved by the growing number of mercenaries.

And now they are changing slogans, making the Chechen conflict an ideologically, financially and organisationally international problem. It is merging with the global war waged against the Euro-Atlantic civilisation. In other words, it is not the area but the quality of the conflict that is changing.

What should Russia do in this situation? Any attempts to cut off Chechnya and forget about its existence would be useless, as Chechnya would remind us about itself in this case. Everyone should see this after the failure of the Khasavyurt Agreements.

We must admit that there is no miraculous solution to the Chechen problem. It will take decades to normalise life there, several generations living in ordinary houses and children going to school and doing their homework while their parents work in their enterprises and offices, speaking Russian and travelling to other parts of their homeland, Russia, apart from the mountain village where they were born.

To attain this goal, we must apply comprehensive political, economic, social, cultural and other measures, as well as using force. So far, we cannot be certain that all the elderly in Chechnya get their pensions, that there are enough doctors and medicines in hospitals, and that compensation is paid to those whose houses were destroyed in the war - or that the use of force is properly organised.

What we must not do under any conditions is give concessions in the form of special privileges to the local leaders. There cannot be Chechen citizenship and sovereignty or exclusive rights to mineral revenues. For this will lead us in the opposite direction from the proclaimed goal - from the integration of Chechnya to its alienation.

The recent terrorist attacks in Moscow and North Ossetia reminded me of a specific element of the human psyche. A normal person cannot be constantly on the alert; the protective instinct must be allowed to rest. This is normal but, regrettably, we cannot relax now. Today, the struggle against terrorism cannot be the cause of the law enforcement and security services alone; everyone must have a personal "counter-terrorist centre."

As for the security services, they should not act as merely the executors of the tasks we set to them. They certainly have political functions; their leaders bear political responsibility and should resign in the event of failure, even if their personal guilt is not great. This is how they act in all democratic countries and this has a major political, and even symbolic, meaning.

This brings us to the international aspect of the problem. If there is "a terrorist international," the counter-terrorist coalition must advance from proclaiming its intentions to practical everyday actions. We must establish direct contacts between states, exchange experience and information, and, in case of need, launch direct interaction between their forces. We must preclude the use of double standards in politics when one bandit is branded a terrorist and another is praised as a freedom fighter for a small but proud nation and so cannot be extradited to the authorities of the country where he took hostages and blew up innocent civilians.

The point at issue today is the preservation of the global civilisation. Russia and the West can and must be allies in this war. This was proved 60 years ago, when they faced a similar foe.