From: MSN NicknameEagle_wng  (Original Message)    Sent: 10/5/2005 3:19 AM
The Chechen diary - 2
October, 4, 2005

( the Notes of the Observer)

We continue the publication "Chechen diary" of Andrey Novikov. The author - active participant of democratic movement in 80th, a member of group "Doverie" (trust). In 90th of the last century worked as the political analyst in "Literatunaja Gazeta" and a weekly journal "Vek". The unpublished notes turned into a book - a political diary of epoch of the first years of the Second Chechen war. The special attention is deserved by political forecasts of the author, the majority from which have eventually proved to be true.

*********

By the way, in film "Tired by the sun" there is such frame: in full silence the huge red cloth with Stalin's portrait falls on a field.

Now Putins image falls on the country in the same way.

Would be simplification to think, that in sacralisation of Putin only mass media is guilty. everything is much more difficult. Putin personifies for today's Russians what Joseph Stalin personified for citizens of country who has "defeated socialism" in 30th; It's what Bonapart is for French: RETURNING TO ARCHETYPE OF THE TRADITIONAL GOVERNOR. "New king" whom love just because of what he is, for being the reminder of the sacred and ineradicable PAST, "distorted" during innovative diversions of the history.

Everywhere, meeting with "man from the past", the nation kind of recognizes itself onse again, frequently not understanding the reasons of the delight. In it there is an element of religous rite. Something for an instant wakes up in consciousness of people, some kind of a patrimonial memory. If to think, the stage of "conservative revolution" was in all nominal revolutions. For "democratic" revolution in France the followed the stage "the king is dead, long life to king", revolutionary restoration of Napoleon. Destruction of autocracy was followed with creation of the same new communistic autocracy of Stalin. Everywhere utopia deduced in Tradition. Exception is made with conservative revolutions which nominally were restorative: such, as German, for example (though we shall recollect: and the hitlerite party was called socialistic).

Force of "conservative utopia" is great. But at the same time it is a lie. The history of Germany, anyway, shows, that in the name of "glorious past" crimes can be made not less, than in the name of "glorious future".

Certainly, in reference to today's Russia it is possible to speak about "conservative revolution" only conditionally. Putin conducts us not in heroic Middle Ages, as did Hitler, but in very flat "NEOSOVIETISM", flavoured only by plots from old sacred Russia. But we like even it. Returning in the past is as pleasant, as homecoming. When the person comes to native village, he is often ready to kiss the first comer. And people of Russia who today is ready to accept Putin, are not especially being interested, who he is and whence. The human content here is not important. The Role is important. A role playing the character.

He has already turned to his own country, and it is possible that after some time he may turn to his own surname: Putin - it sounds not worse, than Stalin.

I think, neosovietism is inevitable in a way .

It's not only that, after reforms and thawing weather inevitably follow restorations , "recoils", "freezes", "stabilisations" - call it anything. Other matteres here: neosovietism is the strengthening of CIVILIZED bases of life. It meens more cops, more officials, more "order", more solemn phrases, hand shakes and kisses - all this, let's recognize, elements of the CIVILIZATION, if under "civilization" we understand something dead, post-cultural.

In effect, what have we found out after nine years of reforms? That we are not capable to live without the Soviet holidays, without parades, without mere words, without navy fleet, army, FSB and many - many more things. It is an impasse to which reorganization has come. We did not manage to fuse the skeleton itself of Soviet civilization though it was possible to scrape off this regime from within, to remove the communistic stuffing and - to become it ourselfs. As a matter of fact, we privatized communism and have altered it in a kind of Joint-Stock Company "Vivat, Russia".

Resource of this civilization is very small. A maximum of ten years during which we kiss on parades a lot. Are in condition of war a lot. Bury many coffins. And the most awful, that in such country TO LIVE, in general, WILL BE POSSIBLE. Similarity of liberal freedoms will remain. Liberals will accept this system and will glorify it as glorified the of Brejnevs one. Then there will be a new reorganization - and, I suspect, as false, as a deadlock previous to it.

In general, as usualy. "Only the tomb will correct the humpbacked".

January, 18 2000, a capture of Grozny and Babitsky

The second Chechen war proceeded in mythology built specially for it. It should be seen. One of such myths - ostensible character of this war, ostensibly assisting to save soldier's lifes.

Really, mistakes of previous military campaign are taken into account. Is amplified the aircraft and artillery work (that, however, is difficult to understand, how such "uninhabited" technologies guaranty life of the peacefull population about what tirelessly talk the central channels. It is clear, that the more torn bombs and shells, the more chance to get under them for the peacefull population).

Do you, dear readers, remember as in the winter 95-th is exact , "uninhabited", bombed Grozny, and Sergey Kovalev who was there, spoke: yes, from this bombings population becomes less and less.

But we shall leave in the side the humanitarian aspect. The main question consists in, whether it will be possible to apply on all extent of war similar "uninhabited" way. Almost all territory of the Chechen Republic (including separate mountain areas) was taken under control by "federals". All cities and almost all villages were captured. And what? The enemy was sprayed. With small sorties it continued to strike impacts on federal armies. In June of 95-th has followed Budenovsk, in September - attempt of murder of commander Romanov, then Kizljar, Pervomaisk and the set of other smaller diversive attacks to cope with which "federals" could not, down to notorious capture of Grozny in August of 96-th after which war has stopped.

Now not everyone remembers, how in March of 96-th (ambassador Kizljara, after Pervomaisk!) "federals" already tried to lead "Putin" war. Insurgents as now it is accepted to speak, were accepted "simply to destroy". Russian soldiers were raged, commandment said to them: do that you want, if only insurgents will be destroyed. And what? It is accepted to count, that Yeltsin then has stopped this "Powerfull War": in April the plan of "peacefull regulation" has followed.

Actually not all was so. The Russian armies simply could not finish the war. If they might make it, they would make it.

Today Putin, in effect, repeats that "powerfull war" of March of 96-th. There is absolutely nothing new: all this already tried to do once. Not everyone remembers that in Afghanistan too was a "powerfull war" - before the withdrawal of the Soviet armies in 1987-1989. Tried to "kill the beast" too; in difference, by the way, from the Chechen Republic, there nobody "betrayed", but all the same was necessary to remove armies.

Obviously, such feature of wars is, that the army, having strategic advantage above the seized territory, at the same time may not realize such advantage fully. War passes in "molecular condition": the amount of divisions and the dumped bombs has no value here. To win the enemy, the "war of special forces" is necessary, wich demands long time.

In 95-96 the Russian army has lost such "war of special forces" (and not "informative" - as now it is accepted to speak). Not only the army machine, but also internal armies and "OMONs" appeared unable to cope with groups of insurgents. Recollect, how in August night of 96-th Maskhadovs fighters took Grozny. Also compare it to storm of Grozny by the Russian armies in a new year's eve in 94 on 95-th. And excuse me, what has Lebed, with his "betrayal" to do here? It is simple two ways to be at war. In one case - frontal storm, tanks, the aircraft which is not leaving a stone on a stone. In the second - mojaheds as streamlets, with isolated groups flood city and squeeze out, by the law of Archimed, the Russian blockhouses.

In one case - local diversive operations. In the second - bombardments.

Let's recognize: Chechens have won that war. Have won with their tactics, and Lebed's "betrayal" has no value any more (by the way, it was Lebed who offered to create instead of scale operations "wolfhound commands" and "hunters" on border with the Chechen Republic to "secure Russia from bandits", that is the unique way to be at war in such conditions).

Now - bombs are exploding again, the Russian generals take cities and villages, Russian propagation carries victorious reports, not understanding, that it is not a war yet.

If the general of Shamens is going in such "noncontact way" be at war during it all, he is severely mistaken. If Putin considers, that, having thrown bombs on the Chechen cities, he will win war, he simply is a fool.

The present war will come latter, when you'll destroy there everything, and all territory will be "yours": then Chechens will start to kill you like in 95-96.

The second stage of war, no doubt, will demand the big human losses. i"War in white gloves" will fail. If you give every soldier an aviation bomb, he, you see, will not fight with it anyway. It will be long terrible war for years which Russia wll be unable to conduct . Therefore Putin, having untwisted the presidential campaign with the help of bombs, having "Won" this meaningless stage of war, soon will hand over the Chechen Republic. One more Hasavurt will be signed. The Russian armies will leave the Chechen Republic the same way they have left in 96-th, having left after themselves mountains of corpses and a beaten brick.

This will be the price of "war in white gloves", started by our president.

(Continuation follows)

Andrey Novikov, independent analyst, for Chechenpress, 04.10.05.

http://chechenpress.co.uk/english/news/2005/10/04/02.shtml