German expert on the Caucasus from the Berlin ‘Science and Politics” Foundation, Professor Hoeve Halbach, shared his view of the ongoing processes in the South and North Caucasus with a VK correspondent. The last part of the interview is devoted to problems of the North Caucasus and connection of processes in the North and South Caucasus.
- Mr. Halbach, what can you say about the situation in the North Caucasus and its influence on the South Caucasus?
- Often the connection between geopolitical processes in the North and South Caucasus is not considered. International conferences in the South Caucasus were held separately from international conferences on Chechnya and the North Caucasus in general. A fresh view is necessary here. First of all, the North Caucasus includes not only Chechnya. Chechnya is not a center of violence anymore, it has moved to Dagestan and partially to Kabardino-Balkaria and Karachay-Cherkessia. In the long term it could be Sochi, as in 2014 it will become an attractive target for militants.
On the other hand, meeting points of conflict environments in the North and South Caucasus are becoming clearer. For example, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are meeting points: the connection between South Ossetia and North Ossetia, Abkhazia is oriented towards the North Caucasian space. One more meeting point is the Pankisi Gorge at the border between Georgia and Chechnya. I think none of these points should be forgotten. The president of Georgia is developing a North Caucasus policy. Tbilisi wants to influence events in the North Caucasus.
- Can Tbilisi really influence the situation in the North Caucasus?
Georgia actively supports Circassian movement. A conference was organized in Tbilisi with the help of James Town. It was the first conference devoted to the historic past, the genocide of the Circassians. This conference was echoed in the USA. The Georgian parliament was first to name colonial policy of Russia toward Cercessian people “genocide” like parliaments of many countries recognize genocide of Armenians by Turkey in 1915. This issue is highly politicized, and it is a part of Georgian policy to Russia. Nevertheless, connection between South and North Caucasus is relevant. After 2008 Georgia is counting on regional policy. For example, it stated on confederation with Azerbaijan, visa free regime with Iran and North Caucasus republics.
- At the same time, in Russia there are some opinions improving anti-Russian attitude in the North Caucasus. I mean popular motto “Stop feeding the Caucasus!”
- The North Caucasus is a challenge for Russia itself. That’s why Georgia counts for this relevant problem of Russia, as Russia doesn’t cope with the situation in the region. On the one hand Russia wants to be the major force in the South Caucasus, and the war between Russia and Georgia confirmed it, as well as active diplomatic efforts in the sphere of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement. On the other hand, Russia loses influence in its North Caucasus republics. Even great investment doesn’t make the region calmer. That is why position of Russia in the Caucasus is ambiguous.
- You’ve mentioned that Chechnya is no longer the center of violence on the North Caucasus. Do you believe the ‘Chechen model’ is working?
- No, I don’t. I just meant that Chechnya is no longer a site of military actions, as it was a few years ago. And it is not on the top of the list as far as acts of terror and shootouts with police are concerned. But you can’t call Chechnya a peaceful place and its government – a civilized one. From the European point of view Kadyrov is not a democratic leader, he is a despotic ruler. So this ‘Chechen model’ is dubious at best. But you can’t deny that there are some positive changes there. On the other hand there is some evidence that under Kadyrov’s rule Chechnya is slipping away from Moscow’s control, and is more independent than in the times of separatist Dudayev. According to polls, the public in Russia deems the North Caucasus to be something like a separate state. And right-radical slogans ‘Enough of feeding Caucasus!” gains wide support. The nature of anti-terrorist measures on the Caucasus also raises some questions. For example, when they try to fight terrorism with… tourism and build resorts in dangerous zones. I don’t think that anyone apart from extreme-lovers would go there.
- So how should one fight terrorism?
- It’s hard to tell. Nor the 'security group', nor Presidential Envoy Khloponin’s strategy were able to pacify the region. Police there is criminalized and terrorizes the residents at least as much as the actual terrorists. The influence of Islam has also increased. So I don’t believe that the ‘strong hand’ or Khloponin’s civilizing program will give any positive effects any time soon.
Orkhan Sattarov, exclusively to VK
