The Russo-Chechen Conflict: Multilevel and Multimodal Transformation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Russo-Chechen Conflict: Multilevel and Multimodal Transformation By: Ali Askerov Askerov, A. (2014). The Russo-Chechen conflict: Multilevel and multimodal transformation. Global Journal of Peace Research and Praxis, 1(1), 66-82. Made available courtesy of UNCG University Libraries: http://libjournal.uncg.edu/prp/article/view/918 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Abstract: The Russo-Chechen conflict started in the early 1800s and continues today. It is one of the most intractable and long-lasting ethnopolitical conflicts in the world and is replete with violence and atrocities that have escalated and deescalated from time to time. In this paper several peace and conflict studies (PACS) theories are used to assess the conflict and link formal and informal peacemaking strategies to the Russo-Chechen conflict. It is argued that informal multilevel and multimodal diplomacy on different levels is necessary for transformation of this conflict. Keywords: Conflict transformation | peace | Chechnya | Russia Article: ***Note: Full text of article below Global Journal of Peace Research and Praxis Volume 1, Number 1 (2014), 66-82 The Russo-Chechen Conflict: Multilevel and Multimodal Transformation Ali Askerov University of North Carolina Greensboro The Russo-Chechen conflict started in the early 1800s and continues today. It is one of the most intractable and long-lasting ethnopolitical conflicts in the world and is replete with violence and atrocities that have escalated and deescalated from time to time. In this paper several peace and conflict studies (PACS) theories are used to assess the conflict and link formal and informal peacemaking strategies to the Russo-Chechen conflict. It is argued that informal multilevel and multimodal diplomacy on different levels is necessary for transformation of this conflict. Introduction and Ingush people were allowed to return to their homes in 1957. Upon the disintegration The eighteenth century Russian imperial of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Chechens policies of expansion towards the Caucasus declared their independence from the necessitated conquering the mountain people Russian Federation, thus renewing the of the Northern Caucasus including the Russian- Chechen conflict. Chechens. It appeared that Russia needed Johar Dudayev, the national leader of more than a century to take fragile control of Chechens, declared his nation’s the region. Initially, Russia faced strong independence from the Soviet Union in resistance and later a number of rebellions 1991. President Yeltsin of Russia hesitated of the mountain people, most of which it to take decisive measures against it. Instead, failed to subdue. It is hard to say that the he pursued a neglect policy in the region Russian Empire conquered Chechnya until 1994 when the first Chechen war entirely before Soviet rule, despite the started. This three-year period gave the popular belief that the people of the Chechen fighters an opportunity to stockpile Northern Caucasus were defeated by weaponry, most of which was purchased Russian troops in the mid nineteenth from the Russian military itself (Ganguly & century. The Chechen oblast was created in Taras, 1998). January 1922, and in 1936, the Chechen and The first Chechen war was between the Ingush regions were reunited in an well-organized Russian military institution autonomous oblast (Seely, 2001). On and the Chechen guerrillas. This fact February 23, 1944 the Chechen and Ingush brought about a situation in which making nations en masse were deported into exile on distinctions between combatants and non- the basis of a decree of the State Committee combatants has proved to be very difficult, for Defense of the Soviet Union. The pretext thus contributing to massive human rights was Chechens’ alleged collaboration with abuses (Cornell, 1999). The 1994-1996 war the Germans occupying the neighboring ended with the military victory of Chechnya regions (Lapidus, 1998). As part of the over the Russian Federation bringing about process the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous the Khasavyurt Peace Accord, which legally Soviet Socialist Republic (ASSR) ended the war. However, the peace appeared established in 1936 was abolished. After the to be very ephemeral and fragile, since war death of Josef Stalin in 1953, the Chechen restarted again in 1999. 66 67 Askerov high-level negotiations. The top leadership Designing a Conflict Transformation engages in negotiations to bring a change to System: Prospects for Peace the problem. Since the activities on all three levels take place at the same time, a web of Conflict Resolution Levels and a interdependent activities and people is Peacemaking Model created that is systemic in orientation, holding people and processes together To create a sustainable peace, the conflict (Lederach, 1998). transformation process should commence on The model (Figure 1) below depicts three different levels- top, middle, and conflict resolution circular. Arguably, while grassroots- at the same time (Lederach, dealing with the protracted conflicts, the 1998). Those levels can be identified in conflict resolution process may take place terms of the participating leaders who are by using a combination of all or some of the grassroots, middle range, and top leaders. informal conflict resolution strategies shown Lederach (1998) argues that work on all in the radial on different levels to increase these three levels is necessary to move productivity. The model presents eight toward the construction of a broad-based different strategies- peace education, approach to peace building. interfaith dialogue, interactive problem The grassroots leaders include local solving, forgiveness and reconciliation, leaders, leaders of indigenous NGOs, negotiating for mutual gain, empowerment, community developers, local health storytelling, and nonviolence- which may officials, and refugee camp officials among have an impact on one another thus others. Peace efforts made at the local level increasing the contribution to the process would assist the parties to learn how to more positively. respect each other’s cultural differences (Byrne, 1995), reduce prejudice of the other as well as empower people to deal with war traumas (Lederach, 1998). Even though Peace Education grassroots leaders may not have direct Interfaith access to the negotiation process, they enjoy Nonviolence Dialogue an enormous power the source of which is the local people (Pearson, 2001). Conflict Interactive Problem- Storytelling Resolution The middle-range leaders are ethnic and Process solving religious leaders, intellectuals, and humanitarian leaders. The place of the Forgiveness middle-range leaders in that web is also and Empowerment Reconciliation essential since they are recognized and Negotiations for Mutual respected people in the communities. They Gain may deal with many important problem- solving activities such as creating peace Figure 1. Conflict Resolution Radial commissions, training people in peace education, and organizing problem-solving All of these methods of conflict resolution workshops. work for informal environments, while The top leadership involves military, negotiating for mutual gain is for both economic, cultural, political, and religious formal and informal settings. I will discuss leaders with high visibility that focuses on Global Journal of Peace Research and Praxis Vol. 1, No. 1 2014 THE RUSSO-CHECHEN CONFLICT 68 them individually on a theoretical basis, and peace education must include engagement at apply to a case to see its applicability. multiple levels of government, education ministry, political party systems, labor Peacemaking through Peace Education unions, commercial enterprise, school and university, and family and community. Peace education aims at creating a commitment to peace in the human Implications for Chechnya consciousness (Harris & Morrison, 2003) and is a key element of conflict Promoting peace education programs in both transformation at any level, including ethnic Russia and Chechnya would bring about conflicts (Bekerman & McGlynn, 2007). positive contribution to peace in the region. Sustained education is considered necessary To enhance the effect of these programs for building peace but is not sufficient by they should be permanent and not limited to itself since it depends on the political, children alone. Since Russia is a economic, and social structure of change. multinational country, the importance of The concepts of peace and peace education adult learning is vital for peaceful and have to come down to the local level to respectful co-existence. Therefore, adult embrace all people (Galtung, 1983). education programs should not be limited to Nowadays, growing number of states Chechnya rather they should be nationwide. turn from violence to political diplomacy in The positive effect of transformative order to remove the hostility that has divided education for both children and adults would them (Johnson, 2007). Yet, political contribute to prejudice reduction, victim diplomacy alone is not able to recover from empowerment, equality awareness, the ruins of conflict in divided societies, mediation skills, and listening skills. If used where groups hold on to their perception of decisively, peace education can contribute to the other as the enemy by revering their own the peace between Russians and Chechens, chosen traumas and chosen glories (Volkan, and help form an effective tool to oppose the 1997). This type of perception is ongoing rise in