Chechnya In Crisis

By: Leroy A. Binns Ph.D.

Russia’s vulnerability a sequel to the collapse of the Soviet Union has been exposed through an ongoing confrontation with Chechnya. To its advantage the latter’s adeptness to embrace self-determination among Muslims within Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia and capitalize on frailty within a new democracy is attributed to comradeship with the neighboring Islamic community.

As Chechnya sought independence on historic and cultural grounds Russia resisted further disintegration that it perceived a threat to its territorial integrity and national security. Equal in value is the jurisdiction’s monetary significance to Moscow. The mountainous region is home to oil deposits, natural gas, limestone, gypsum, sulphur and other minerals. Moreover the location of a major oil refinery in Grozny and the passage of a main oil pipeline that transports the commodity from fields in Baku on the Caspian Sea and Chechnya to the Ukraine are vital to the national economy and the country’s international image.

With much at stake and limited prospect for a compromise Gronzy’s declaration of sovereignty provoked a Russian military response akin to the 1944 Stalinist purge of said locale in anticipation of an invasion from Nazi Germany. In the past decade such a tumultuous relationship has taken its toll on lives and infrastructure. Besides the infliction of unspeakable fatalities and causalities accountable for the extinction of the enclave’s president and icon of its revolution Dzhokhar Dudayev in 1995 the aftermath of the 1994 – 1996 eruption incited massive migration to the tune of 5000,000 refuges gave voice to Islamic radicalism, rendered the Chechen economy bankrupt and rallied world opinion against the Kremlin’s atrocities of forced disappearances, tortures and executions.

Notwithstanding a 1997 ceasefire an uncomfortable Chechnya rejected Moscow’s authority by electing Aslan Maskhadov, a rebel commander its president and in 1999 advanced its influence by lending military assistance to Islamic fundamentalists in nearby Dagestan. It has also been alleged that counter activities encompassed terrorist explosions throughout Russian cities the most noted of which are the demolition of a Moscow threatre in which over 100 perished and the capital’s subway tragedy of 2003 that claimed the lives of 40 passengers.

Yeltin’s retaliatory measures inclusive of the recapture of fragmented portions of Dagestan and the pulverization of Gronzy and its environs and Putin’s determination to stay the course have yielded mixed results. Such fortitude otherwise characterized by some observers as byproducts of political ambition produced a partisan presence through the installation of local officials the likes of Stanislav Llyasov and Akhmad Kadyrov and ultimately a 2003 referendum in which Chechnya abandoned claims to nationhood in exchange for a separatist status within the Russian republic. However, the level of success is questionable when evaluating the irrefutable destruction of humanity and property, fraudulent elections, the recent executions of President Kadyrov and senior members of his entourage, plus uncertainties surrounding the extent to which power will be transferred to the provincial authorities.

In the end a nexus of peace and prosperity is increasingly dependent on the Kremlin’s capability to meet the challenges of everyday life for the Chechen populace.