Dagestan: the religious policy vector

By Vestnik Kavkaza

This Saturday consultations on candidates for the head position of Dagestan between parliamentary parties and representatives of the Russian presidential administration should be completed. Makhachkala was first to reject direct elections for the head of the region. The head of the multinational republic will be elected by the parliament of Dagestan among its members. The parties which have factions should present their candidates to the President of Russia, and Vladimir Putin will choose three of them and present them to the parliament. Yesterday three candidates were presented to President at the session of the Political Board of Patriots of Russia – the chairman of the republican office of the party Eduard Khidirov, the head of the Audit Chamber of Dagestan Malik Bagliyev, and the acting head of the republic Ramazan Abdulatipov. Experts think that the latter will win the elections on September 8th.

Speaking about Abdulatipov’s policy, the head of the International Crisis Group's Russian Office, Yekaterina Sokiryanskaya, noted: “As you know Magamedsalam (Magomedov, the former head of Dagestan) began facilitating a dialogue between Sufis and Salafis, which encouraged overcoming a long inter-religious conflict in Dagestan. The commission on adaptation of militants was established – it has been the only peaceful mechanism in Dagestan in recent times. This commission was heavily and fairly criticized; but nevertheless, the mechanism existed, worked, it could be developed and improved. So, a specific Dagestani model of struggling against extremism and terrorism was formed; it was based on realization that the presence of fundamentalist Islam in the North Caucasus is unavoidable. And the number of such religious people is growing. They shouldn’t be repressed for going to the “wrong” mosques – they should be integrated into social life. The Dagestani model competes with the Chechen one, which requires a strict attitude, elimination of any signs of fundamentalism and killing of militants, i.e. a much more severe and uncompromising path.

When Abdulatipov came to office, the religious policy and the struggle against extremism radically changed. There is no Dagestani model any more. Now Chechen approaches are being implemented, and many people in the republic connect this with Abdulatipov’s visit to Grozny. The peaceful dialogue between Sufis and Salafis was stopped after the murder of Sheikh Said Effendi of Chirkeysk. This tragic event crossed many achievements of previous years. There are no attempts to recover the dialogue.”

However, a member of the Council of the Human Rights Center “Memorial,” the head of the program “Hot Points”, Oleg Orlov, thinks that the peacemaking talks stopped because of the terrorists: “Under Magomedsalam, when real talks began, when something positive began to happen, immediately terrorist attacks were committed. The murder of Said Chirkeysky stopped the peacemaking process, and it was under Magomedsalam. On the other hand, we, human rights organizations, feared then that the provocation which the terrorists undertook would make the authorities take severe measures, we urged the authorities to resist the terrorists’ provocations. The authorities must seriously think about stability, future development and must not call their bluff, acting thoughtlessly. And even though the peacemaking process almost stopped in that period, the authorities didn’t take the worst steps we were afraid of. At the moment the republican leadership is beginning to “buy” terrorist provocations; and we see that the recent terrorist attack on a policemen makes Mr. Abdulatipov speak about establishing voluntary patrols.”

“The idea of voluntary patrols is a very dangerous step, which can lead to losing control over the situation,” Yekaterina Sokiryanskaya is sure. “Dagestan has plenty of force structures today. If the Interior Ministry is put in order, it will cope with patrolling the streets. But if semi-criminal groups are established and armed, a part of religious communities is incited against others, a religious community is isolated, it will be a path to the abyss. The population should be involved in resisting extremism, but not in providing security. Today we live not in the 1990s or even the 2000s. There are a lot of religious young people. You cannot suppress everybody, but you can drive them to the forests easily.”

The majority of experts believe that forceful methods could worsen the situation, and it is important for Dagestan to return to a dialogue in all spheres. “It is important to show that a dialogue is important in general. A dialogue can give real results,” Konstantin Kazenin, senior scientist of the Heydar Economic Policy Institute, says. “The source of conflicts in Dagestan is land. Sometimes I hear that the whole farming part of lowland Dagestan is a big land conflict. Perhaps it is an exaggeration, but there are many conflict points. If they show that a dialogue is possible in this sphere, it would be a nice method for those who deal with the land problem.”