Paul
Goble
Staunton, June 10 – Having long
viewed clans in the North Caucasus republics as “a powerful stabilizing factor”
and the basis of “authoritarian power ‘in the localities,’” Moscow now views
them as a threat because their corruption and close ties with the criminal
world is “harming the image of the federal authorities,” according to a
Memorial analyst.
Ekaterina Sokryanskaya of the
Memorial Human Rights Center argues that this shift in opinion at the center
rather than concern about upcoming elections explains the recent arrest of two
Daghestani officials, Said Amirov, the mayor of Makhachkala, and Nurmagomed
Shikkhmagomedov, the head of the Tabasaran district (newizv.ru/society/2013-06-10/183758-ekspert-pravozashitnogo-centra-memorial-ekaterina-sokirjanskaja.html).
The
North Caucasus expert points out that Amirov was someone on whom Moscow had
long felt it could rely because “he would not go against the will of the
Kremlin knowing the possible consequences” for himself if he did. Consequently,
she argues, his arrest represents “the beginning of a large scale campaign
against corruption and the criminal world” in the region.
Despite
her own objection to the use of the word “clan” to describe “groups united
economically, politically and socially and having close ties with the band
formations, Sokryanskaya says, that it has become “all the same a historical
term” and thus will continue to be used.
“In Daghestan,”
she says, “there has existed what is in essence a neo-colonial system of administration
which for many years the federal authorities tried ‘not to touch.’ But now the
situation has changed, and [in the judgment of officials at the center] the
clans have begun to interfere” with what the Kremlin wants to achieve.
That is because “the clans have ceased to be a
stabilizing force.” Until recently,
North Caucasus clans were quite useful to the supreme power in Moscow, the
Memorial analyst says. Such small groups
of people “controlled practically all spheres of life,” “stabilizing” the
situation, and guaranteeing that there would not be “any meetings, protests
actions or other manifestations of free thought.”
From
the point of view of Moscow, she continues, “it is simply to agree with such
leading groups and not burden oneself by dealing with the people.”
“But
now,” Sokryanskaya argues “the groups have finally combined with the criminal
world, dirtied themselves with corruption, and openly violate the laws,”
actions that have the effect of hurting Moscow’s image and driving more and
more people in the region into the ranks of the radical Islamists.
Moscow
has begun this campaign in Daghestan because the problems in this regard are
most severe there. Corruption there is
so bad that “an individual in such a society is deeply unhappy and does not
believe in justice,” a major reason why “many Daghestanis are becoming radical
Islamists and joining bandit groups.”
Until
relatively recently, Daghestan was not characterized by radical Islamism,
Sokryanskaya continues. Most Daghestanis
are Sufis, but “the fundamentalists of Wahhabis appeared in large numbers in
the region in the 1990s when many young people begin to travel for instruction
to countries with other Islamic traditions.”
When
Makhachkala perceived this trend as a threat, she notes, it prohibited
fundamentalist Islam. As a result, the fundamentalists went “underground.” But now, the situation has deteriorated so
far that “one can speak about a great intensification of radical Islamist ideas
in society” as a whole.
In
large part, Sokryanskaya says, that is because many people in Daghestan “see in
Wahhabism a key to the resolution of the basic problems of Daghestani society,”
including not least of all the corruption of officials, particularly those in
places like the Tabasaran district whose head has just been arrested.
At
the end of her interview, the Memorial expert was asked by “Novyye izvestiya”
about other related topic: the increasing number of female suicide bombers in
Daghestan, a phenomenon Makhachkala officials have explained as the result of the
use of drugs by bandit leaders.
“I
assure you,” Sokryanskaya says, “that the majority of women take this step
completely voluntarily. Despite its traditionalism, Daghestan is hardly a
society of oppressed women. Many girls now, when they come into conflict with
their families, by their own desire leave home and join radical groups.”
“The
reason for that is again a feeling of the lack of any other way out,” she
concludes. “Such women want to die more than you and I want to live!” One would like to hope, Sokryanskaya adds,
that the “campaign now being launched against the clans will help overcome such
radical attitudes.”
No comments:
Post a Comment