SPECIAL FORCES KILLED 165 PEOPLE, “TERRORISTS”, THREE

118 dead hostages and 50 killed “terrorists”, such is, according to latest reports, the death toll of the storm of the theatre center on Melnikov Street, in Dubrovka neighborhood. 168 deaths altogether. Of them, three were killed by Barayev’s gunmen, 165 by Russian special forces. Up to 150 people are still unaccounted for, nothing is known about them.

As for hostage deaths, all of them died from the effects of the poisonous gas pumped into the building by special forces. Medical staff of the 13th municipal hospital on Velozavodskaya Street said that among hostages under their care there were no wounded, only people suffering from breathing problems caused by the poisonous substance. A commanding officer of a group of diggers that had been helping special forces to check underground communications told me that there was no evidence of slaughter in the building, but an artificial lung ventilation had to be done to hostages.
Amidst these reports all this talk about high professionalism of special forces in this rescue operation looks very strange. Civilians who had been taken hostage by Chechen shakhids (kamikaze) had in fact died not from the hands of Chechen terrorists but from Russian special forces. The number of deaths is still growing, people continue to die in hospitals. And what’s more nobody knows what could be the long-term effects of the poisonous substance since the Russian authorities do not reveal which type of gas had been used.


WHEN WITNESSES ARE TO BE GOT AWAY
The poisonous gas did not tell “terrorists” from hostages. It rendered comatose absolutely everyone (representatives of Russia’s power structures used the term “fell asleep”). Apparently Barayev’s men did not have time to open fire, otherwise there would have been people with gun wounds among the hostages. What, in this case, had prevented special forces to capture the enemy alive? To handcuff them and to incapacitate them by electroshock or any other means which the security services have in abundance. The answer is obvious: the “terrorists” were killed deliberately while they were in a helpless, comatose state. Many of them right in their seats. It’s unlikely that they were shot dead when the auditorium was full of people. They were killed in cold blood later when all the hostages were taken out of the building. Why?

There could be two theories. Here is the first. Special forces had performed the role of judges and a butcher, which could not have been done without approval from above. As the death penalty is not used in Russia today (until a jury system is established in all regions of the country), any other punishment would be thought by the Russian authorities to be too light. Using the press, deputy interior minister Vladimir Vasilyev urged the Chechen shakhids to surrender, promising them life in return. But any talk about a court judgement is nothing but nonsense. First because no death penalties are delivered now in Russia, and, second, Vasilyev is not a judicial authority. So the only thing possible was the killing during arrest, which is a crime in itself. It looks as if being certain of the immunity for the killing of “terrorists” in the Moscow theatre, Vasilyev just spilled the beans. The situation was tense and dangerous, nobody prepared speeches in advance and the deputy interior minister just uttered what he had already known and practiced.

The second theory. The “terrorists” had been killed in order to get rid of witnesses that could have told in court some things which could have been undesirable for the Russian authorities. On the first day of this tragedy several Chechen leaders staying in Western Europe shared with me their suspicions that the theatre siege might have been another conspiracy by those political forces in Moscow that don’t like timid moves toward peaceful negotiations having been made by the both sides in the recent months. There are many arguments in favor of this theory. Here is a propaganda aspect: The Chechens are being portrayed to the world as a nation of terrorists, while Putin as a true fighter against terrorism. And quite efficient, that should upgrade his declining rating.

Could such a huge operation of smuggling weapons and explosives into Moscow and the following siege have escaped the eye of the security services? Sure, huge money could lull the vigilance, but the patronage of the security service would have been even more helpful and valuable. Certainly, such “terrorists” must not have been left alive so they could not have discredited later Kremlin hawks.


UNDER THE GUISE OF ANTI-TERRORIST FIGHT
The dream of the military and Cheka men to turn the country into some sort of field camp could be most easily realized under conditions close to the war-like ones. The war is a good excuse for restricting civic liberties. On the first day of the Moscow theatre siege police began rounding-up Chechens, taking them off from the trains, air planes and confining them to police stations … for just being a Chechen.

On the next day after the siege the Russian ministry for the press ordered the closure of the website of “Echo of Moscow” radio station for publishing an “interview with terrorists”. “Moskovia” television company (the third channel) was also banned from air for violating the anti-terrorist legislation. Soon afterwards these bans were lifted, leaving, however, no doubts about what goals do the Russian officials pursue.


WAS THERE ANY ALTERNATIVE?

The mournful look of deputy interior minister Vladimir Vasiliyev betrays his sense of pride. It seems to say, we handled the hostage crisis with small losses, and there had been no other alternative to the storm of the theatre. Commentators that are reviewing the situation are trying to find out whether there was some other way to stop this ordeal. All of them appear to be unanimous that there was no other option. I wonder why nobody would have said that the simplest and the most correct way to end this drama would have been accepting Movsar Barayev’s conditions. To wit, to stop murderous “clean-up” operations in Chechnya, to withdraw Russian troops from Chechnya and grant Chechnya independence. However, these conditions should have been met long before they had been put forward. That would have the only fair and humane solution to the problem. That would have saved the lives of more than one hundred hostages, as well as thousands of victims of the terror imposed by Russia on Chechnya. But what are the lives of common people for the government in comparison with its great-power ambitions? President Putin is quite satisfied with the outcome of the operation — Russia has not been brought to its knees, it has not been humiliated. As if there could be some bigger humiliation for Russia than this prolonged war no-win war of great Russia with small Chechnya.

Even the hostages felt with the case of “terrorists”. One of the hostages phoned to the editorial office of the online newspaper “Utro.ru”. Here is a transcript of the conversation: “People in the auditorium are in despair. People are saying, “think about us”. The terrorists are doing us no harm. They are only demanding that Russia begin withdrawal of its troops, at least, begin, then they will begin release the hostages. It will be good enough for them if Maskhadov or Basayev phone them (they appear to have some communication link) and tell that the troops began to withdraw. Why our government does not do anything? And all this stir by the press about the problems with water and food, this is all trifling matter. When you are a hostage, these things don’t matter. We are pleading for civilians to do something, to come onto the streets to urge the government to take care of us. That demand does not come from the terrorists. That is the demand of all those sitting in the auditorium. People should march to the White House with these demands.”

The claim that there was no other alternative to the storm is a trump-card of Russia’s power structures. They keep saying that otherwise the “terrorists” would have blown up the building and the number of deaths would have been much bigger. But this argument turns out to have some weak point. The mystery gas did not have an instant effect on those inside the building, to which testifies a call of an “Echo of Moscow” employee from the theatre to her office. She said that some gas was pumped into the building, then she passed her mobile phone to a woman sitting next to her, whose account of the events was the same. It suggests that the Chechens had time to detonate their explosive devices, which they had not. Why? Either they did have no intention to blow up the building, resorting to mere threats; or, most likely, the explosives they had were not real but mock explosives. Probably, that was why special forces had killed all the “terrorists”, so that they would not have disclosed the truth about their operation and shamed the security services for taking fake threats for real.


BETRAYED CHECHNYA,
or on the good of inverted commas

Has anyone ever saw terrorists who demanded not a ransom, release of imprisoned associates, or a safe passage to the faraway countries but the end of a war? Terror for the sake of peace. There was only one precedent of this kind, Shamil Basayev’s raid on the town of Budenovsk. Judging by the form, these are acts of terror, but per se, the sacrifice for the sake of peace. But one is only free to sacrifice his own life, not the lives of others. Because of that any hostage-taking of civilians for the sake of political or military goals is entirely unjustifiable. But to brand these hostage-takers terrorists would also be a strained statement. These so called terrorists are driven-to-despair people who seek peace for their country, wishing nothing for themselves. Having taking hostages, they urged Russian citizens to voice protest against the war in Chechnya. Absolutely unusual terrorism.

For many years the Chechen people have been sacrificing themselves for the freedom and independence of their country. Now the tables have been turned. Today Russian citizens — that have elected president the man, who could easily sacrifice others’ lives and would without hesitation “waste in the John” everyone who dare to disagree with him — are beginning to pay a price for the Russian policy of expansion.

For many a year Russian troops have been deliberately killing Chechens — Chechen males on the battlefield, women, elderly and children, in towns and villages. The drama similar to the tragedy in Moscow has been going in Chechnya for long years but nobody seems to pay any attention to it. Because Grozny is not Moscow, and it looks as if the lives of Chechens, in the eyes of the public, are worth much less that the lives of Muscovites. The Committee of Soldiers’ Mothers is shedding crocodile tears over “our boys”, Russian soldiers engaged in atrocities in the Caucasus, but do not grieve for Chechen boys of the same age upholding their independence.
Policy makers keep talking about strategic interests and the need to maintain the integrity of the Russian state. Western democracies choose to overlook the genocide in Chechnya for the illusion of good relations with Russia. It turned out that Chechnya has been betrayed by everyone, except a few public groups and individual intellectuals somewhere in Poland or France.

It was naive to think that such situation would have continued for ever, and that distraught Chechens would never have resorted to force and terrorist methods. I wonder what one must have done to all these Chechens that they had stopped to value not only others’ lives but their own as well? What personal tragedy had forced those Chechen women and girls to strap explosives to their waists and to go for certain death in the Moscow theatre? To label a person a “terrorist” is much easier than to understand the roots of terrorism. It requires a serious effort for which no one has a slightest wish. Because the answer would be a “guilty verdict” for Russia.


WHAT NEXT?

On the day when the siege of the Moscow theatre on Melnikov Street ended, a Moscow—Serpukhov passenger bus was stopped half-way by police. A police officer who burst into the passenger compartment bluntly asked whether there were any people from the Caucasus? As there were none, the bus was allowed to proceed further. Such scenes are now a common feature of everyday life in Moscow.

Power structures are feigning vigilance and being on high alert. But the real goal of this game is not hunting for criminals but increasing the influence of their agencies. The greater the influence, the bigger salaries and more freedom for themselves, but less freedom for others. That is the main goal of faking a war on terrorism.

Ideological censors that have been keeping quiet in the last decade are ready to launch a crackdown on the free press and to shut down the most independent of them. Top police officials are urging people to be tolerant toward some “temporary inconveniences” — that is how they call unlawful police methods — for the welfare of all people and for the success of the fight against terrorism. Most servile of the cultural and political elite are echoing them and are ready to adopt views which would mostly please the top authorities.

Russia’s television channel TVS shows its viewers a Soviet-time film about the Civil War, with good Bolsheviks and evil “counter-revolutionary” forces, while ORT television channel proudly tells its audience about a successful terrorist act by Cheka against the first president of Chechnya, Dzhokhar Dudayev. The Russian public has been called upon to unity, servility and whistle-blowing.

Have the Russian authorities learnt anything from the hostage crisis in Moscow? Rather “no” than “yes”. Because none of the high and mighty speak about the end of the war in Chechnya. That means that things will go on as before. The Chechen terror will befall Russia as the Russian terror has struck upon Chechnya. The only way to stop this process is to resolve the Chechen conflict politically. But this solution is not on Russia’s agenda today.