DOCSLIB.ORG

Covering Conflict – Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media – ARTICLE 19, London, 2008 – Index Number: EUROPE/2008/05

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Covering Conflict – Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media – ARTICLE 19, London, 2008 – Index Number: EUROPE/2008/05 CO VERIN G CO N FLICT Reporting on Conflicts in the N orth Caucasus in the Russian M edia N M AY 2008 ARTICLE 19, 6-8 Am w ell Street, London EC1R 1U Q , U nited Kingdom Tel +44 20 7278 9292 · Fax +44 20 7278 7660 · info@ article19.org · http://w w w .article19.org ARTICLE 19 GLOBAL CAMPAIGN FOR FREE EXPRESSION Covering Conflict – Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media – ARTICLE 19, London, 2008 – Index Number: EUROPE/2008/05 i ARTICLE 19 GLOBAL CAMPAIGN FOR FREE EXPRESSION Covering Conflict Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media May 2008 © ARTICLE 19 ISBN 978-1-906586-01-0 Covering Conflict – Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media – ARTICLE 19, London, 2008 – Index Number: EUROPE/2008/05 i i ARTICLE 19 GLOBAL CAMPAIGN FOR FREE EXPRESSION Covering Conflict – Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media – ARTICLE 19, London, 2008 – Index Number: EUROPE/2008/05 ii i ARTICLE 19 GLOBAL CAMPAIGN FOR FREE EXPRESSION A CKN O W LED G EM EN TS This report was researched and written by the Europe Programme of ARTICLE 19. Chapter 6, on ‘International Standards of Freedom of Expression and Conflict Reporting’ was written by Toby Mendel, Director of ARTICLE 19’s Law Programme. Chapter 5, ‘Reporting Conflict: Media Monitoring Results’ was compiled by Natalia Mirimanova, independent conflict resolution and media consultant. The analysis of media monitoring data was carried out by Natalia Mirimanova and Luitgard Hammerer, (formerly) ARTICLE 19 Regional Representative - Europe, CIS. Monitoring of the Russian and North Caucasus media was undertaken by Islam Abakarov (Dagestan), Luiza Isaeva (Chechnya) and Alan Tskhurbaev (Ossetia). Additional research was carried out by Ekaterina Zatuliveter, Ana Natsvlishvili, Mark Wigginton and Devina Deshpande.The report was edited by Clare Fermont and Lina Nicolli. ARTICLE 19 would like to thank for the comments and information they provided: Grigory Shvedov, Caucasian Knot; Andrey Soldatov, Agentura.ru and Novaya Gazeta; Oleg Panfilov, Centre for Journalism in Extreme Situations; Galina Kozhevnikova, NGO ‘SOVA’; Alan Tskhurbaev, Institute for War and Peace Reporting; Oksana Chelysheva, Foundation to Support Tolerance; Musa Uradov, Kommersant; Oleg Kusov, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty; Valery Dzutsev, (formerly) Institute for War and Peace Reporting; Vyacheslav Izmailov, Novaya Gazeta; Timur Aliev, (formerly) Chechenskoe Obshchestvo; Ruslan Badalov, Chechen Committee for National Salvation; and independent North Caucasus experts Anna Sevortian and Anna Matveeva. ARTICLE 19 is grateful for the financial support towards this publication from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of ARTICLE 19 and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Covering Conflict – Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media – ARTICLE 19, London, 2008 – Index Number: EUROPE/2008/05 iv ARTICLE 19 GLOBAL CAMPAIGN FOR FREE EXPRESSION Covering Conflict – Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media – ARTICLE 19, London, 2008 – Index Number: EUROPE/2008/05 v ARTICLE 19 GLOBAL CAMPAIGN FOR FREE EXPRESSION TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements............................................................................................................. iv 1. Introduction......................................................................................................................1 1.1. Freedom of Expression in Russia .................................................................................2 1.2. An Atmosphere of Intolerance .....................................................................................4 2. Conflict and the Media in the North Caucasus ...............................................................6 2.1. Background .................................................................................................................6 2.1.1. The Soviet period..................................................................................................7 2.1.2. Post-Soviet conflicts in the North Caucasus ..........................................................8 2.2. The Media in the North Caucasus ..............................................................................13 3. Russian Legislation Affecting the Reporting of Conflict...............................................21 3.1. Constitutional Guarantees ..........................................................................................21 3.2. Incitement to Hatred ..................................................................................................21 3.3. The Extremism Law...................................................................................................22 4. The Russian Government’s Media Policy and Conflict Reporting...............................28 4.1. Application of Extremism and Incitement Legislation................................................28 4.2. Unofficial Regulations ...............................................................................................29 4.3. Reporting Conflict .....................................................................................................30 4.3.1. Chechnya and the Chechen Wars ........................................................................30 4.3.2. Reporting of terrorist acts....................................................................................35 4.4. Direct and Indirect Pressure .......................................................................................37 4.4.1. Killing of journalists ...........................................................................................37 4.4.2. Disappearances and abductions ...........................................................................38 4.4.3. Arrest and detention ............................................................................................39 4.4.4. Closure of the Russian-Chechen Friendship Society............................................40 4.4.5. Harassment .........................................................................................................42 4.4.6. Censoring local voices ........................................................................................47 4.4.7. Interference with websites...................................................................................47 4.4.8. Other...................................................................................................................48 4.5. Comments..................................................................................................................48 5. Conflict Reporting: Media Monitoring Results.............................................................50 5.1. Methodology..............................................................................................................50 5.2. Results and Analysis..................................................................................................52 Covering Conflict – Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media – ARTICLE 19, London, 2008 – Index Number: EUROPE/2008/05 v i ARTICLE 19 GLOBAL CAMPAIGN FOR FREE EXPRESSION 5.2.1. Geography of news .............................................................................................52 5.2.2. Main findings......................................................................................................53 5.2.3. Sources ...............................................................................................................55 5.2.4. Framing the debate..............................................................................................58 5.2.5. Gender ................................................................................................................60 6. International Standards on Freedom of Expression and Reporting Conflict ..............62 6.1. International Guarantees of Freedom of Expression ...................................................62 6.1.1. The importance of freedom of expression............................................................62 6.1.2. Restrictions on freedom of expression.................................................................64 6.1.3. Derogation during a state of emergency ..............................................................68 7. Conclusions .....................................................................................................................70 8. Recommendations...........................................................................................................73 8.1. Recommendations to the Russian Authorities.............................................................73 8.1.1. Recommendations on Legislation........................................................................73 8.2. Recommendations to Russian and International Civil Society ....................................74 APPENDIX 1: Population, Land Area and Ethnic Composition of North Caucasus Republics and Territories ..................................................................................................76 APPENDIX 2: Media Monitoring Coding System............................................................78 Covering Conflict – Reporting on Conflicts in the North Caucasus in the Russian Media – ARTICLE 19, London, 2008 – Index Number: EUROPE/2008/05
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Public Contestation Practices in Russia in 2000–2020
    https://doi.org/10.18778/1427-9657.09.06 EASTERN REVIEW 2020, T. 9 Roman Savenkov https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1643-2444 Voronezh State University, Voronezh, Russia Department of Sociology and Political Science e-mail: [email protected] Public contestation practices in Russia in 2000–2020 Abstract. The article analyzes the influence exerted by the limitation of legal opportunities for public contestation in the 2000s on the scope of mobilization and the repertoire of public contestation practices. The term ‘public contestation’ is used to describe forms of individual and collective political activity focused on criticizing, denying and resisting the current government project, including by introducing alternative projects. The public contestation includes constructive actions of political actors not related to causing damage or disposing of political opponents. The paper is based on political and legal analysis and on some elements of event analysis. In the 2000s, the scale of public contestation on discursive and protest platforms was smaller than over the next decade, which did not create any needs for detailed regulation of such activities. At the same time, changes in political and legal opportunities in the electoral and party field were quite intense throughout 2000–2020. The most popular forms of public contestation were public events (in 2011–2018), as well as discursive activity on the Internet and in mass media (after 2018). During the above mentioned period, we see the biggest changes in legal opportunities in this field and increasing penalties for respective violations. The electoral field shows the pendulum dynamics: decreasing and increasing opportunities in 2000–2011 and 2012–2019, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Organisational Structure, Programme Production and Audience
    OBSERVATOIRE EUROPÉEN DE L'AUDIOVISUEL EUROPEAN AUDIOVISUAL OBSERVATORY EUROPÄISCHE AUDIOVISUELLE INFORMATIONSSTELLE http://www.obs.coe.int TELEVISION IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE, PROGRAMME PRODUCTION AND AUDIENCE March 2006 This report was prepared by Internews Russia for the European Audiovisual Observatory based on sources current as of December 2005. Authors: Anna Kachkaeva Ilya Kiriya Grigory Libergal Edited by Manana Aslamazyan and Gillian McCormack Media Law Consultant: Andrei Richter The analyses expressed in this report are the authors’ own opinions and cannot in any way be considered as representing the point of view of the European Audiovisual Observatory, its members and the Council of Europe. CONTENT INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................6 1. INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK........................................................................................................13 1.1. LEGISLATION ....................................................................................................................................13 1.1.1. Key Media Legislation and Its Problems .......................................................................... 13 1.1.2. Advertising ....................................................................................................................... 22 1.1.3. Copyright and Related Rights .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Russia Chechnya
    Russia Chechnya Population: 1,200,000 (Source: United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in the Russian Federation, 2007, Inter-Agency Transitional Workplan for the North Caucasus. The population of Chechnya according to the 2002 Russian census was approximately 1,100,000.) Political Rights: 7 Civil Liberties: 7 Status: Not Free Overview: Deputy Prime Minister Ramzan Kadyrov was promoted to the Chechen premiership in March 2006 and continued to strengthen his hold on power in the republic. Critics like investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya, who was murdered in October, have claimed that Kadyrov and his security forces torture suspected rebels, many of whom disappear without a trace. Rebel violence declined as Kadyrov consolidated his position, and two important rebel leaders were killed during the year, but the larger region remained unstable. Chechnya, a small, partly mountainous North Caucasus republic, has a history of armed resistance to Russian rule dating to the czarist period. In February 1944, the Chechens were deported en masse to Kazakhstan after Soviet leader Joseph Stalin accused them of collaborating with Nazi German forces. Officially rehabilitated in 1957 and allowed to return to their homeland, they remained politically suspect and were excluded from the region’s administration. After winning election as Chechnya’s president in October 1991, former Soviet air force Major General Dzhokhar Dudayev proclaimed Chechnya’s independence. Moscow responded with an economic blockade. In 1994, Russia began assisting Chechens opposed to Dudayev, whose rule was marked by growing corruption and the rise of powerful clans and criminal gangs. Russian President Boris Yeltsin sent 40,000 troops into Chechnya by mid-December of that year and attacked the capital, Grozny.
    [Show full text]
  • (Stop a Douchebag) Vigilantes in Russia
    © Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research. 2019. 11(3):16–45 16 DOI: 10.25285/2078-1938-2019-11-3-16-45 EROES OR HOOLIGANS? HMEDIA PORTRAYAL OF STOPXAM (STOP A DOUCHEBAG) VIGILANTES IN RUSSIA Rashid Gabdulhakov Rashid Gabdulhakov, Department of Media and Communication, Erasmus University Rotterdam. Address for correspondence: Erasmus University Rotterdam, Postbus 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. [email protected]. The author expresses sincere gratitude to the informants for their contributions, as well as to peer reviewers and editors of this special issue for their valuable feed- back. This work was supported by the Dutch Research Council (NWO) project num- ber 276-45-004. Several state-supported digital vigilante groups emerged in Russia at the downturn of the pro-Kremlin youth group Nashi (Ours), when its former commissars formed issue- specific movements to counter perceived legal and moral offences through exposure of targets on social media. One of such groups is StopXam (Stop a Douchebag), specializ- ing in road-traffic and parking violations. StopXam participants confront the drivers and retaliate by placing stickers that read “I spit on everyone I drive where I want” on the targets’ windshields. The retaliation is often accompanied by verbal and physical fighting; the process is filmed, edited, and shared on YouTube, receiving millions of views. While digital media made such practices possible, traditional broadcasters maintain significance in rendering meaning to the phenomenon of vigilantism and in framing vigilantes, their targets, police, and other actors. As the existing literature on digital vigilantism is predominantly focused on digital media affordances, this article aims to address this gap through a qualitative analysis of traditional media coverage of StopXam.
    [Show full text]
  • Censorship Among Russian Media Personalities and Reporters in the 2010S Elisabeth Schimpfossl the University of Liverpool Ilya Yablokov the University of Manchester
    COERCION OR CONFORMISM? CENSORSHIP AND SELF- CENSORSHIP AMONG RUSSIAN MEDIA PERSONALITIES AND REPORTERS IN THE 2010S ELISABETH SCHIMPFOSSL THE UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL ILYA YABLOKOV THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER Abstract: This article examines questions of censorship, self-censorship and conformism on Russia’s federal television networks during Putin’s third presidential term. It challenges the idea that the political views and images broadcast by federal television are imposed coercively upon reporters, presenters and anchors. Based on an analysis of interviews with famous media personalities as well as rank-and-file reporters, this article argues that media governance in contemporary Russia does not need to resort to coercive methods, or the exertion of self-censorship among its staff, to support government views. Quite the contrary: reporters enjoy relatively large leeway to develop their creativity, which is crucial for state-aligned television networks to keep audience ratings up. Those pundits, anchors and reporters who are involved in the direct promotion of Kremlin positions usually have consciously and deliberately chosen to do so. The more famous they are, the more they partake in the production of political discourses. Elisabeth Schimpfossl, Ph.D., teaches history at The University of Liverpool, 12 Abercromby Square, Liverpool, L69 7WZ, UK, email: [email protected]; Ilya Yablokov is a Ph.D. candidate in Russian and East European Studies, School of Arts, Languages and Cultures, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester,
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping Russian Census 2002
    CENSUS ATLAS OF RUSSIA: FERTILITY An NCEEER Working Paper by Timothy Heleniak American Geographical Society National Council for Eurasian and East European Research 1828 L Street NW Suite 1200 Washington, DC 20036 [email protected] http://www.nceeer.org/ TITLE VIII PROGRAM Project Information* Principal Investigator: Timothy Heleniak NCEEER Contract Number: 828-06 Date: August 29, 2014 Copyright Information Individual researchers retain the copyright on their work products derived from research funded through a contract or grant from the National Council for Eurasian and East European Research (NCEEER). However, the NCEEER and the United States Government have the right to duplicate and disseminate, in written and electronic form, reports submitted to NCEEER to fulfill Contract or Grant Agreements either (a) for NCEEER’s own internal use, or (b) for use by the United States Government, and as follows: (1) for further dissemination to domestic, international, and foreign governments, entities and/or individuals to serve official United States Government purposes or (2) for dissemination in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act or other law or policy of the United States Government granting the public access to documents held by the United States Government. Neither NCEEER nor the United States Government nor any recipient of this Report may use it for commercial sale. * The work leading to this report was supported in part by contract or grant funds provided by the National Council for Eurasian and East European Research, funds which were made available by the U.S. Department of State under Title VIII (The Soviet-East European Research and Training Act of 1983, as amended).
    [Show full text]
  • The 2002 Russian Census and the Future of the Russian Population
    The 2002 Russian Census and the Future of the Russian Population PONARS Policy Memo 319 Dmitry Gorenburg The CNA Corporation November 2003 Throughout the 1990s, Russian and Western demographers competed over who could produce the gloomiest forecast of Russian population trends for the coming decades. Highly respected demographers argued that the population of the Russian Federation would drop from a high of 148 million in 1992 to 100–105 million by 2025. These forecasts were based on statistics produced by the State Statistics Committee of the Russian Federation (Goskomstat), which showed that the Russian population was declining steadily due to an increase in the death rate and a simultaneous decrease in the birth rate. The panic began in the early 1990s, when in one year the death rate increased by 20 percent while the birth rate dropped by 15 percent. Overall, from 1991 to 1994 the death rate for men increased from 14.6 per thousand to 21.8 per thousand. (The increase for women was smaller.) As it turned out, most of the increase in the death rate was the result of an increase in deaths due to alcoholism that had been deferred because of the Soviet government’s anti-alcohol campaign in the mid-1980s. As this effect abated in the mid-1990s, life expectancy and the death rate recovered and long-term population estimates were to some extent revised upward. By 1998, the male death rate had dropped to 17.2 per thousand. Nevertheless, forecasts of significant long-term Russian population decline persisted based on Goskomstat data that showed that the country’s population was dropping by about half a million people annually.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Museums Visit More Than 80 Million Visitors, 1/3 of Who Are Visitors Under 18
    Moscow 4 There are more than 3000 museums (and about 72 000 museum workers) in Russian Moscow region 92 Federation, not including school and company museums. Every year Russian museums visit more than 80 million visitors, 1/3 of who are visitors under 18 There are about 650 individual and institutional members in ICOM Russia. During two last St. Petersburg 117 years ICOM Russia membership was rapidly increasing more than 20% (or about 100 new members) a year Northwestern region 160 You will find the information aboutICOM Russia members in this book. All members (individual and institutional) are divided in two big groups – Museums which are institutional members of ICOM or are represented by individual members and Organizations. All the museums in this book are distributed by regional principle. Organizations are structured in profile groups Central region 192 Volga river region 224 Many thanks to all the museums who offered their help and assistance in the making of this collection South of Russia 258 Special thanks to Urals 270 Museum creation and consulting Culture heritage security in Russia with 3M(tm)Novec(tm)1230 Siberia and Far East 284 © ICOM Russia, 2012 Organizations 322 © K. Novokhatko, A. Gnedovsky, N. Kazantseva, O. Guzewska – compiling, translation, editing, 2012 [email protected] www.icom.org.ru © Leo Tolstoy museum-estate “Yasnaya Polyana”, design, 2012 Moscow MOSCOW A. N. SCRiAbiN MEMORiAl Capital of Russia. Major political, economic, cultural, scientific, religious, financial, educational, and transportation center of Russia and the continent MUSEUM Highlights: First reference to Moscow dates from 1147 when Moscow was already a pretty big town.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia's 'Golden Bridge' Is Crumbling
    Conflict Studies Research Centre Russi an Series 06/39 Defence Academy of the United Kingdom Russia’s ‘Golden Bridge’ is Crumbling: Demographic Crisis in the Russian Federation Dr Steven J Main Key Points * Russia’s current demographic crisis – with an annual loss of hundreds of thousands of people – is the most severe ever recorded in its peacetime history. If left unchecked, it could have disastrous results for the long-term viability of the state. Whilst there may be no imminent danger of a “yellow peril” in the Russian Far East or Siberia, there is a threat from a growing and locally influential non-Russian ethnic population. * The reasons for the current crisis are many and varied – some are traditional Russian vices like smoking and drinking. * Poverty is a distinct element in both contracting disease and ability to ameliorate its consequences. * Russia is on the verge of an AIDS catastrophe. * There are no “quick-fix” solutions: money may be of some help – for instance, in improving the country’s ailing health system – but is unlikely to stimulate people to have more children. * However, it is also possible that part of the reasons for the current crisis are more deeply rooted than simply in the events of the past 15 years, and reversing the decline may need to involve a significant change in the political and cultural environment. 06/39 Russia’s ‘Golden Bridge’ is Crumbling: Demographic Crisis in the Russian Federation Dr Steven J Main In April 2005, the Chairman of the Federation Council, Sergei Mironov, was interviewed by the newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta about the current demographic crisis facing the Russian Federation.
    [Show full text]
  • Lavic-Eurasian Esearch Enter News
    Annual Newsletter of the Slavic-Eurasian Research Center, Hokkaido University LAVIC-EURASIAN ESEARCH NO. 27 ENTER NEWS March 2021 2020 Summer International Symposium “Northeast Asia: Pitfalls and Prospects, Past and Present” On July 2–3, 2020, the Slav- ic-Eurasian Research Center held its international summer sympo- sium on “Northeast Asia: Pitfalls and Prospects, Past and Present.” As a response to COVID-19, the event was held online over Zoom, rather than in person. The first half of the symposium, sessions 1 and 2, were devoted to providing a platform for researchers associ- ated with the NIHU Area Studies Project for Northeast Asia (NoA- SRC) to discuss their findings Zoom symposium outgoing with researchers from overseas, while the latter half, sessions 3 and 4, was turned over to debate among the members of David Wolff’s JSPS project on “Multi-Archival Analysis of Critical Junctures in Post-war Northeast Asia.” With the strategic concerns of the United States and China shifting south, to the In- do-Pacific, the focus of Sessions 1 and 2 was on bringing novel perspectives and shining new light on Northeast Asia as a regional ideal, one which has not been institutionalized in the aftermath of the Cold War. Session 1, on “Bottlenecks to Regional Cooperation,” was divided into two parts. The first of these debated the hard bottleneck of contested sovereignty, and the soft bottleneck represented by the ‘politics of distrust’ in Japan and Korea, which not only poisons international relations between the two countries but also is at the root of many social problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining the Role of Local Authorities in Managing and Propagating Cultural Heritage
    Defining the Role of Local Authorities in Managing and Propagating Cultural Heritage Symposium Proceedings Book ICLAFI SYMPOSIUM AND ANNUAL MEETING 2019 22-24 October 2019 Gaziantep, Turkey ICLAFI SYMPOSIUM AND ANNUAL MEETING 2019 GAZIANTEP, TURKEY Gaziantep Metropolitan Municipality Cultural Publications—37 DEFINING THE ROLE OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN MANAGING AND PROPAGATING CULTURAL HERITAGE International Symposium October 22-24, 2019 Symposium Proceedings Book ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues, ICOMOS Turkey National Committee, Gaziantep Metropolitan Municipality ICOMOS TR Organising Team: Tamer GÖK, Yasemin SARIKAYA LEVENT, Meltem UÇAR Compiled by Yasemin SARIKAYA LEVENT ISBN: 978-605-80940-6-2 The responsibilities of proceedings and images belong to authors. All the printing rights are reserved. Copyright © 2020 ICLAFI Symposium and Annual Meeting 2019 is supported and hosted by Gaziantep Metropolitan Mu- nicipality. The proceedings book is published by Gazikültür A.Ş. Cover Image: “The Gypsy Girl Mosaic” from the Ancient City of Zeugma (Photo by Nevit Dilmen) ICLAFI SYMPOSIUM AND ANNUAL MEETING 2019 GAZIANTEP, TURKEY Dear participants, distinguished members of ICLAFI, We happily welcome you in Gaziantep at the 2019 Symposium and Annual Meeting of the International Scientific Committee on Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues established under the International Council of Monuments and Sites. Gaziantep has been home to various civilizations throughout the his- tory. Gaziantep region is a place where important civilizations such as Hittite, Roman, Seljuk and Ottoman have lived and left their traces. The uncovered cultural assets in Rumkale, Yesemek, Zeugma, Karkamış and Dülük reveal the historical background of the region and constitute important documents of human history.
    [Show full text]
  • War Against Terrorism and the Conflict in Chechnya: a Case for Distinction
    The War Against Terrorism and the Conflict in Chechnya: A Case for Distinction SVANTE E. CORNELL More than any other conflict, Chechnya epitomizes the old saying that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." Since the first Chechen war began in 1994, the Russian government has portrayed the war as one against ban- dits and Islamic fundamentalists. After the attacks of September 11, 2001, the label changed-now Chechens are referred to simply as "terrorists." Western states have for the most part thus far refrained from accepting the Russian position at face value, seeing the conflict primarily as an ethnic war. While recognizing Russia's territorial integrity, Western and Islamic states see the Chechen rebels as more or less legitimate representatives of the Chechen people, considering that the current Chechen president, Asian Maskhadov, was elected in elections deemed free and fair by international observers in 1997. Moreover, the international commu- nity has condemned the Russian military's massive human rights violations in the prosecution of the war. That said, during the course of the second war, which began in October 1999 and rages to this day, there has been an increasing concern with regard to the radicalization of parts of the Chechen resistance movement and its links to extremist Islamic groups in the Middle East. The attacks of September 11 introduced a new paradigm into world politics, and Chechnya has since been one of the regions most affected by the increased focus on terrorism. Indeed, it did not take long after 9/11 for the Russian government to draw comparisons between the terrorist attacks on the United States and the situa- tion in Chechnya.
    [Show full text]