Answer Belkovsky

Answer Belkovsky

“It is necessary to officially give Chechnya what it has long sought and actually gained, to be independent.
It's time to stop the bicentennial war for the North Caucasus,

which ultimately gave us nothing but blood and tears. ”

Political scientist Stanislav Belkovsky

This maxim is not an exclamation of a desperate alarmist who stuck his head in a noose. This is a replica of today's article by a respectable political scientist, published in one of the most popular Moscow newspapers. The unconstitutional idea is thrown into the mass consciousness. The taboos on separatist appeals have been lifted - the liberal press gladly relishes them. The time has come to talk with the miscreants, who, from century to century, strive to “pinch off” a part of its sovereign territory from Russia, to scatter landlords, to “grant independence” to one or the other on the Russian outskirts.

Let's start with the Belkovsky. Recently, the PR operator of Boris Berezovsky’s craziest ventures, repainted suddenly into a zealous Russian national democrat, Mr. Belkovsky is repelled by the loud murder of Yuri Budanov, literally saying: “In fact, Chechnya is not part of Russia and is not subordinate to the federal authorities. There are no Russian laws. But Chechen laws operate here in Moscow. ” And then follow examples of violent deaths and high-profile contract killings, on the basis of which, in the end, the conclusion is made: Chechnya must be separated.

So, to hide behind the death of Budanov, calling for the separation of Chechnya or the entire North Caucasus, as already stated by the ideological supporters of Belkovsky from the camp of “natsdems”, is an abomination and disgusting. What did Yuri Budanov fight for? For the Chechen Republic to be part of the Russian Federation. On this, any speculation around the name of the colonel used for ramming against the integrity of the country should be closed.

As for the Russian laws, which Mr. Belkovsky so cares about, I would like to know how he imagines their action in a separate Chechnya? Will Russian laws apply to the territory of an independent republic? Not. Will the levers of our influence on the processes taking place in separated Chechnya decrease or increase? The answer is unequivocal. So how can you, complaining about a whole heap of problems and threats emanating from a burning region, offer to completely withdraw it from our jurisdiction, which will lead to the loss of any opportunity to influence it, practice it, act in it?

This perverted logic, “We feel bad in Chechnya, so let's fence ourselves off from it, and it will be good for us at once” lies at the basis of literally all conversations “for secession of the Caucasus”, in which notorious Russophobes from the liberal camp and radical Nazis have recently found complete understanding who dreamed about the "Republic of Russia" within the borders of the XV century. It’s enough to think five minutes to understand an elementary thing: with the separation of the problem region, the problems themselves will not disappear - our ability to solve them from the inside, on our own territory, will disappear. The sovereign, legally disobeying Russia, recognized by the world community, favored by NATO, the Americans, the Turks, the Saudis, the North Caucasus land will not just turn into a “second Georgia” or a “second Kosovo” - it will become Hell in the underbelly of Russia, whose never-ending social and economic problems will be solved only in one way - at the expense of our southern lands.

Mr. Belkovsky mentions in his article on budget transfers to Chechnya. Calls them a "tribute to the winner." But he keeps quiet about the fact that in the event of war against secessionary Chechnya, budget expenditures will increase tenfold! Add to this the innumerable human resources that Russia will again have to pass through the meat grinder of war. As well as gigantic foreign policy losses: it’s one thing to establish constitutional order on one’s own territory, and quite another to fight a de jure independent state under the patronage of the most powerful powers.

Well, the fact that such a war is not for life, but for death will take place without fail, as clear as day. We already have the experience of Khasavyurt, after which the de facto free Ichkeria lived by looting the neighboring territories, and then carried out a full-scale invasion of Dagestan. In addition, the inexorable process logic proves that a separate impoverished republic, filled to the brim weaponspopulated by hundreds of thousands of warriors, experiencing, moreover, a kind of passionate uplift and "a sense of historical destiny", will certainly begin expansion into the surrounding lands - Krasnodar, Stavropol, Pyatigorsk ...

It will be a total war — exhausting, consuming innumerable resources — for what? What will Russia fight for? Only one answer is possible - to establish its dominance over the region. So one wonders, why give it away now, if tomorrow you have to conquer it again?

And this is only one of the arguments against the secession of North Caucasus territory. But it will be typed with a dozen! We list only the most important.

Chechnya is not uniform. The Kadyrov clan, which is in power, relies on the support of Moscow. It is the Kadyrovites who oppose the radical Islamism that is creeping into the republic in Chechnya. The Mujahideen consider Grozny as their worst enemy not even Moscow, but the Terrible. In the case of secession, the Kadyrovtsy and all the clans tied to Russia will be almost immediately slaughtered down to the babies — it suffices to recall the fate of Najibullah. This will certainly serve as an evil lesson for all other republics within the Russian Federation, whose authorities will firmly understand: Moscow is betraying its own. And when a delegation from the “warriors of Allah” will arrive to them soon with a proposal for “cooperation”, it will not be difficult to predict their step.

"Cooperation" will be simple - the large-scale spread of radical Islamism further into the depths of Russia. This is another direct consequence of the "dumping" of the North Caucasus. Tatarstan and Bashkiria will surely follow after the separated Chechnya, and this is death for the entire Russian Federation, the complete loss of the Urals, Siberia and the Far East, the shrinking of the life space of the Russians on the “loams of the Black Earth Region”, total poverty and enslavement by the strengthened neighbors.

The similar strengthening of the neighboring powers - first of all Turkey, entering NATO, and along with it and the whole West led by America - is the a priori consequence of any separation process in the Caucasus. Does Mr. Belkovsky want to produce a dozen “Georgia” near the borders of Russia? Is Mr. Belkovsky ready to send his sons to hold back all this colossus on our bare frontiers? Or will his children live by this time in London, next to Boris Abramych?

But perhaps the most bitter irony is that no “fence” built around the perimeter of the North Caucasus is able to save us from the rampant ethnic crime in Moscow, Tver, Penza, Omsk ... There are no mechanisms in the Russian Federation that allow us to deport natives North Caucasus - the citizens of Russia! - In their detachable, according to the plans of the separatists, enclaves. Such mechanisms can be introduced - but this will already be called Nazism. Is Mr. Belkovsky pushing us to this?

The general response to the criminal appeals of separatists of all stripes to “reset the North Caucasus” is as follows: with this step, Russia will only aggravate all those negative processes and tendencies that today threaten its existence. They can definitely be solved in the existing format of the state - but it will be absolutely impossible to solve in case of separation of problem territories.

And the last argument. If the problems of Chechnya and the entire North Caucasus are resolved, liberal “masters of life” will rush to power, becoming famous for their orgy in 90 and, like Belkovsky, talking about “sovereign Chechnya”, this will come out as absurd, inept and harmful for Russia. A strong power serving the interests of the country is able to cope with any government problems without any separatist rhetoric.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in