Putin should be asking himself, “Why do they hate us?”
In the Caucasus itself, the brutal policies of Putin and his local henchmen have managed to totally alienate most of those that had not already been killed or driven into exile, and have given a huge boost to the jihadists at the expense of the centuries-old moderate Sufi Islam of the region. His failure has come at a staggering cost. The region’s economy has essentially collapsed, with unemployment rates of up to 80 percent, complete dependency on Moscow subsidies for bare economic survival, and “total corruption” as the rule, according to the Kremlin itself.
More significant still for the long-term, a decade of Putin has achieved something that seventy years of Soviet Communist rule were unable to do: generate a nearly universal animus for Russia and the Russians among the locals. The result has been an ongoing mass exodus of ethnic Russians from the region bringing their share of the population from more than a quarter in the 1980s to less than 10 percent today. Indeed, places like Chechnia, Ingushetia, and Dagestan seem to be on their way to becoming Russian-free, except for the few in mixed marriages. Given this reality on the ground, it is difficult to imagine Moscow holding onto these territories except through an unsustainable military occupation.
And more subway bombings. He’s uncorked the Jihadi bottle.
Oh the irony of reading this on the NRO AND here burns! Burns I tell you!
Oh the irony of reading this on the NRO AND here burns!
Was this supposed to make sense? Because if so, it was a fail.
Funny Rand. For a guy who supported the Afghanistan invasion after 9/11, and using torture to extract confessions at Gitmo, you are judging the Russians awfully quickly.
The fact is after the Russians lost the first Chechen war and retreated their troops, the Chechens invaded neighboring Dagestan not long afterward in order to expand the Caucasus Emirate. There is no negotiation with these people. Only repression.
This cretinous article is based on an unspoken assumption: if Moscow’s policies were “softer” (or otherwise “better”), then surely Chechens would’ve been happily autonomous blah blah blah. But the practice is, Chechens were given a de-facto independence after the first war! Russian troops and government packed away and left for several years. We know how well that worked out: once they thought they were strong enough, they attempted to occupy Dagestan. The Putin’s policy was the result of understanding that the appeasement did not work out.
So, are you saying that there was never any possibility of separating out Chechnyan separatists from the Jihadis? Or what?
And if not, why are you defending Russia from behaving much worse than the US has?
I should add, there was never any prospect for a bloodless dissolution of the Soviet Empire…
Chechens were given a de-facto independence after the first war! Russian troops and government packed away and left for several years. We know how well that worked out: once they thought they were strong enough, they attempted to occupy Dagestan. The Putin’s policy was the result of understanding that the appeasement did not work out.
Actually, I should note that this is also a lesson that the world should have learned (though Israel did) from the Gaza experiment.
Funny Rand. For a guy who supported the Afghanistan invasion after 9/11, and using torture to extract confessions at Gitmo, you are judging the Russians awfully quickly.
How many decades is slow enough for you?
Well, Karl, this is the same time-scale that says that there was a “rush to war” in 2003, and that socialism hasn’t failed, it just really hasn’t been tried yet (as though 70 years of the USSR wasn’t quite enough time to judge).
So, are you saying that there was never any possibility of separating out Chechnyan separatists from the Jihadis? Or what?
I do not believe in fatalism. There was a possibility the situation could have been defused. In fact several. However all these passed before Putin came to power. He inherited a situation in which Chechnya was a de-facto independent nation, with a peace treaty signed with Russia by Yelstin, and a chaotic situation in which it was being controlled by a bunch of warlords with varying Islamic bent. Some of these warlords invaded Dagestan, and the citizens of Dagestan defended their homes bravely before the Federal Russian government managed to muster up enough forces to fight back.
I still think Putin is a dictator who uses nasty tactics like assassinations of political opponents to further his own goals. However I agree with the strategic decisions of defending Dagestan and invading Chechnya.
And if not, why are you defending Russia from behaving much worse than the US has?
I was in favor of the US invasion of Afghanistan. I would be in favor of Russian intervention in Chechnya for the same reason alone if that was the only factor.
The extra difference is that Chechnya used to be Russian territory. Yes, it is dominated by an ethnic minority, but last I remembered nations still have a right to preserve their territorial integrity. There are plenty of situations like this in Europe (e.g. Northern Ireland, Basque Country).
I question if Chechnya should be integrated back into the Russian Federation as an autonomous region, or as a nation. I would prefer it was as a nation. A shoddily made referendum on the constitution was done, but it was well less than ideal. The current Chechen leader is a git, but supposedly he was elected.
I question if Chechnya should be integrated back into the Russian Federation as an autonomous region, or as a nation. I would prefer it was as a nation.
You prefer it to be a colony or a puppet state? I’m a bit confused on which is your preference.
You prefer it to be a colony or a puppet state? I’m a bit confused on which is your preference.
In that case Iraq and Afghanistan are puppet states as well.
Iraq and Afghanistan are part of the US federation of states? So you think a trip to one of them just like a trip to Guam, without perhaps the fear of capsizing?
Was this supposed to make sense? Because if so, it was a fail.
Heh. Never mind. It’s still funny.
I think the analogy with Gaza is probably incomplete because Israel is not as much of a dictatorship as Russia is. IMHO Israeli government is insitutionally capable of implementing smarter solutions. The main lession here is that the appeasement and getting into denial do not work. However once that was realized, Putin could only step up the enforcement, and Israelis had more options. E.g. trying to get Fatah and Hamas kill each other until nobody is left standing, for example. I am not enough of an expert to evaluate various solutions wrt Gasa, but I know enough to see that the linked article is founded on entirely false assumptions.