Mass Graves, Football, Labor, and Prisons in Russia
By Sean at 20 July, 2008, 11:01 am
As regular readers can see, my blogging has been sparse over the last few weeks. I just finished a three week teaching blitz of a Western Civilization course at Santa Monica High School. The class was part of Santa Monica Community College’s dual enrollment program which allows high school students to take classes for college credit. The class was everyday, 8-11 a.m. I haven’t woken up so early since I worked in a stove factory over fifteen years ago.
Rushing through 500 years of history has never been so daunting. The class was enjoyable and the students remarkably bright. One thing that struck me about the high school is how it resembled a prison. I guess Gilles Deleuze was on to something when he wrote that modernity initiates,
The organization of vast spaces of enclosure. The individual never ceases passing from one closed environment to another, each having its own laws: first the family; then the school (“you are no longer in your family”); then the barracks (“you are no longer at school”); then the factory; from time to time the hospital; possibly the prison, the preeminent instance of the enclosed environment. It’s the prison that serves as the analogical model: at the sight of some laborers, the heroine of Rossellini’s Europa ‘51 could exclaim, “I thought I was seeing convicts.”
So teaching was the main reason why blogging has been sparse. It will continue to be so. On Thursday, I leave for Israel for two weeks. I’m hoping to do so research for a few articles on the Russian diaspora there. My big hope is to meet up with some Israeli neo-Nazis for an article for the newly relaunched eXile Online. (Yes, if you haven’t already heard, the eXile is back in virtual form. Mark has left Russia and word is the eXile is going to be less Russia focused. Look for its verbal assassins to set their sites on more victims.) If the Israeli Nazi thing doesn’t pan out, I’m sure my travels will present a number of other topics. So stay tuned.
Though I haven’t been keeping up with the Russian news as well as I normally do, there have been a number of interesting stories that have appeared. Some of them are directly Russia related, others are bit tangential.
First article to catch my notice was a report on the exhumation of a mass grave containing around 300 bodies in an asphalt plant in Chechnya. The grave was discovered in 2000 but wasn’t uncovered until now. The site dates to the Second Chechen War and according to the report “likely contains civilian victims of an attack by Russian forces.” The report of this mass grave follows the announcement a week earlier of another one found in Grozny containing an estimated 800 corpses.
Open Democracy has published several articles on Russia as part of their collaboration with Polit.ru. Football fans should check out Lyubov Borusyak’s “Russia, Football and Patriotism.” Granted connecting football to patriotism, or what I’d rather call nationalism, is not new. Sport is a uniting force and it is no surprise that in Russia’s so-called “age of stability” sport is making a national comeback. Russia now appears as a winning nation to many of its citizens, and this is only reinforced by the fact that its teams have some victories under their belts. But as Borusyak points out, its not just that Russian teams are winning. In fact, the ultimate crown often alludes them. This however doesn’t dampen the link between national enthusiasm and sport. Just the opposite actually. As she notes, “There are two kinds of patriotic rhetoric. On the one hand, our people are winning because Russia is ‘rising’. On the other, our people are losing because the whole world is against us. Until 2008,the second discourse predominated, as there were not many successes. But this year the situation changed.”
With much of the world reeling from capital’s cyclical curse of overproduction, speculation bubbles, or to put it more kindly, “market corrections,” it begs the question of Russia’s economic prognosis. Unlike the American economy, the Russian economy has not experienced shocks of similar magnitude. It’s banks aren’t collapsing, being bailed out or raided by the state. Corporate profits aren’t taking a hit. Announcements of layoffs, buyouts, and wage slashing aren’t ubiquitous. Like so often, American capitalists who love to spit on the state are the first to run to it for a handout. It all proves once again that its socialism for the rich and capitalism for everyone else. As Robert Borosage reminds us, Wall Street’s “losses are socialized; their profits are pocketed.”
This is not to say that Russia’s economy is all bread and circuses for the average Russian. Inflation is a particular bugaboo that is not just being fueled by high oil prices and general global inflation in commodities. Russian inflation more comes from the fact that, as Dmitri Travin notes, “millions of people, from oligarchs to cleaners really are benefiting from oil revenues.” Of course, the spread of petrodollars contains the seeds of its own destruction. Especially when you consider its effects on manufacturing. Travin writes,
From the point of view of manufacturing,this wealth is a terrible curse. An expensive ruble makes the goods we manufacture more expensive by comparison with imported goods. If the Central Bank does not stop the ruble from rising, many Russian producers will lose their competitive advantage and cease to exist. And along with them, many jobs will disappear. GDP will stop growing, and parts of the country will be plunged into crisis. In the long term, the Russian people’s unexpected wealth will turn into poverty.
What God giveth, God (might) taketh away. Again, the inevitability of overproduction is a real bitch to tame.
The losses of global economic crisis are not equal. There are winners and losers. Take General Motors, for example. GM executives plan to make some “difficult decisions” in regard to its American workforce. This includes, according to the New York Times, “a 20 percent reduction in payroll for salaried workers, elimination of health care for older white-collar retirees, and suspension of G.M.’s annual stock dividend of $1 a share.” GM, like most car companies, are reeling from the slide in the American market. No one wants their big gas guzzling SUVs and two-ton trucks anymore. As a result, GM plans to make $10 billion in cost cuts. And where will these cuts come from? Why labor and benefits of course.
At the same time GM is slashing labor costs in the United States, it’s looking to expand in Russia. GM is currently in negotiations to up its production in Russia, where its market share has increased by 2 percent over the last year. Given that Russia has a skilled, cheap workforce it’s ripe for exploitation. The average wage for a Russian autoworker is about $1000 a month with few, if any, benefits. An American autoworker makes an average of $5000 a month and that’s if you don’t include benefits. With GM sales rising coupled with the benefit of slashing labor costs, its no surprise that they and many other automakers can’t get to Russia fast enough.
Russian and American autoworkers know the score. Class war is heating up in both countries. In the States, auto union are fighting against the “two-tier wage system” which looks to slash staring wages by half. In Russia, autoworkers are increasingly understanding their labor power and are putting collective pressure on automakers. This pressure is expected to grow. As Aleksey Etmanov, the leader of a Ford auto union in St. Petersburg, said in a recent interview,
The creation of trade unions will increase. Even now there is simply a wave of new trade unions appearing. Today in our trade union there are approximately 1000 people, this is half of the workers of plant. In Taganrog the works manager hides in order not to obtain information about the creation of the trade union. Certainly, the pressure everywhere is being stepped up, and repression from the side of employers is increasing, they are sacking activists. Nowhere do the employers want to live according to the law (including Russia) but we are fighting back. In Toyota in the Petersburg area the manager, who, by the way, went there from “Ford”, is himself putting the workers in such conditions that we are confident, that very soon there will a trade union there too.
We are actively participating in the setting up of new trade unions in other factories of our industry, and we are developing inter-district unions of the Russian automobile industry, which, according to our plans, will be linked up as members of an organization covering all the car factories of the country, and we think we can do this towards the middle of next year. The Ford trade unionists are the most experienced elements in this association, and without us, probably the association would not have appeared. But all over the world the car workers trade unions are the strongest. The joint-combine committee draws nearer…
It is clear that the strength of the union is not only in the individual enterprise but is also in all the surrounding workplaces. Therefore we want to be combined with other trade unions, both with the Russian and in other countries. In particular, we closely collaborate with the international association of metalworkers. Now our interests can also be represented abroad. For example, when we struck, our American friends came to examine the headquarters of company “Ford” in Detroit…
I highly recommend reading all of Etmanov’s interview on In Defense of Marxism.
Finally, its not just Russian autoworkers who are organizing. So are Russian prisoners. ON July 6 over 100 former Russian political prisoners gathered for the First Congress of Political Prisoners in Moscow. The result was the formation of the Union of Prisoners, which in the words of Edward Limonov, “will gather, not only political prisoners, but will defend the rights of all prisoners and ex-prisoners.” Limonov also proposes the creation of A Day of Prisoners for September 14. He also plans on turning his National Bolshevik Party toward organizing prisoners. Limonov clearly knows his history. Prison is indeed a transformative revolutionary experience. Any bonafide Old Bolshevik did a stint in prison or exile. Prison hardened the Bolshevik soul and spirit. Apparently many of Limonov’s young charges are undergoing the same process. As Limonov says of Aleksei Makarov, who was recently released from prison. “Aleksei wasn’t yet 18 when he was arrested two years ago. He grew greatly in prison.”
If the Natsbol’s slogan is indeed “Yes, to death!” then nothing will harden that political will more than prison.
Russian prisons are of course nightmares. They always have been and continue to be so. For a run down on the conditions in prisons and the treatment of prisoners in Russia, I recommend checking out Robert Amsterdam’s excellent coverage of the issue. In particular, check out Grigory Pasko’s three part series “Life Behind Bars.”
Popularity: 6% [?]
Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
The comparison between Russian workers and American “workers” doesn’t make sense, which is implied by your own wage comparisons. In Russia there is still a large and significant proletariat. Not as large as in the third world, but still significant.
In the US there is virtually no proletariat. Even low wage “workers” in the US are still making more than the value of their labour, as they are paid off with profits exploited from the third-world. Their interests are aligned with the imperialists.
In other words, there is still a legitimate revolutionary force in Russia, but there hasn’t been one in the US for generations. The class structure of west is completely different.
I know it is a trope of post-Lenin Marxist analysis that capitalism in the core countries is kept afloat by superprofits extracted from the Third World, but I have yet to see a convincing argument that it is actually true.
Well, I wouldn’t necessarily call it post-Lenin, as Lenin did recognize this to some extent, hence his writings on Imperialism being the highest stage of capitalism. Even 100 years ago, he recognized the growing labour aristocracy in the west. (As opposed to Trotsky who thought the german army would rise up in the second world war and have a socialist revolution! And Trotsky who said it was impossible for the third world to have revolutions without the west to lead, which China and others proved false.)
But it’s even more obvious today. You just have to look at the wages people get in the west as compared to any third world peoples and the cheap products they can buy based on the exploitation of labour in the third world (not to mention natural resources.) So, does this give a clue as to where this wealth comes from? Remember, the west produces almost nothing now, with the economy being based on services and consumption. So, there’s no productive labour, yet everyone has money to live this decadent consumerist lifestyle?
Please do some research and basic class analysis. Maybe you might find the export of finance capital has something to do with it?
A few things in response to Vlad’s interesting comments.
1) the comparison between the wages of Russian and American workers was simply to suggest how companies like GM use economic crisis to shrink labor costs. The question is whether GM is actually losing or merely taking the opportunity of loss in one place to to transfer production to increase profit from another.
2) To suggest that there is no proletariat in the US because they don’t produce anything (i.e. commodities) is too rigid of a class analysis. The American working class produces services whether they be at Walmart or in a cubicle. Just because they are making more compensation in comparison to Russians doesn’t make them less of cogs in the system. Both exist in different conditions of production and consumption, but the exploitation of both, though different in degrees, are essential to the global system. Here I think the incorporating an idea of affective labor that Hardt and Negri posit is useful though I don’t agree with their idea that affective labor has moved from a position of quantity to quality. Capitalism despite the internet etc is still based on the production and consumption of industrial produced commodities. A documentary I watched last night on China called China Rising proved this to me more and more. Also I think Mike Davis’ Planet of Slums is convincing here too.
True the class structure in America and Russia are different but that is the result of capital being more mobile and labor being more fixed. Conditions for each working class are of their particular experience, history, culture, and struggle.
3) On the so-called “legitimate revolutionary” force. Isn’t it time we dispense with who of the exploited is more legitimate, especially since the all revolutions in the 20th century have been peasant revolutions?
4) I agree with Chris on the core/periphery analysis. It doesn’t work. With globalization you have the West in the East and the East in the West. Look at China or look at Russia. They are both “core” and “periphery” at the same time.
Hi Sean,
Thanks for the response.
1) I realize I was kind of grabbing on to a side point in your main article, but it seemed a good opportunity to jump in. I’ve been reading your blog for awhile and haven’t commented yet, so consider this a more general reply, if that’s okay. On this point, of course GM will try to increase profitability in what ever way that can, including moving production to other places, no debate there.
2) Because most people in the west (US) don’t produce things anymore, by itself, doesn’t necessarily mean there is no proletariat. You could have a paid servant class, for example, such as in Victorian England which would likely qualify. And, you’re right that white collar “workers” can still be cogs in the system.
But that’s different from being proletariat. The main point is that western employees, even at the poverty level, are generally receiving more than the value of their labour (assuming we’re still dealing with the labour theory of value described by Marx/Engels and expanded upon by Lenin.) A walmart employee, to use your example, is being paid more than an order of magnitude more than say, the average person in India. (And how can a store clerk in the west be anymore “productive” than one in the east, in case you were thinking of bringing up the theory of productive forces?)
Agreed that capitalism is still based on the production of commodities, but that is going on mostly in the third world. That makes the western “workers” a parasitic class. Their interests are aligned with the imperialists, objectively. That doesn’t mean that “leftists” in the west don’t try to get a more equal distribution of wealth from the rich, but that’s just the small thieves arguing with the big thief for a bigger cut, to put it one way.
A simple example is that polls have been done about opposition to the war in Iraq and there is a majority opposed. But when the question is asked, do you still oppose the war if gasoline prices will go up after withdrawal, then the support for ending the war switches to a minority (of course, whether that would really be the case is irrelevant, it shows their real interests.)
3) By “legitimate” I didn’t mean to imply one is more “deserving” or anything like that. I simply meant there *is* no revolutionary force in the west for the reason described above. People are paid off. Support for communism is practically non-existent in the west, and the tiny groups that supposedly support it are generally Trotskyisk and don’t really deal with the third world beyond occasional platitudes. If there ever is a revolution in the US, it will likely be a fascist one. (i.e. if the economy gets really bad, “let’s invade all the brown people countries and take *our* oil!”)
But, I agree, any future revolutions will likely from peasants in India, Africa or other third world countries. Their goal will be to defeat western imperialism.
4) I agree Russia and China are in the middle. There are imperlist elements to both Russia and China (just look what China is doing in Africa!) but they probably both still have a proletariat majority and are net-oppressed. That’s not to say things couldn’t change in the future.
To sum up my rather long post, I guess I could have just said, do western workers have “nothing to lose but their chains?” Obviously not, they have a great deal to lose, and they will fight to keep it, hence their class interests.
I need to be more succinct.
Wait a minute. Wait a minute.
You worked in a stove factory?
“This however doesn’t dampen the link between national enthusiasm and sport.”
Not to mention the Dima Bilan win in Eurovision, which proved that when push comes to shove, the old Warsaw and Soviet block will come together over really important things.
Like pop-music contests.
“Even low wage “workers” in the US are still making more than the value of their labour, as they are paid off with profits exploited from the third-world.”
In fact, that analysis is deeply flawed and shows a lack of understanding of basic accounting and the structure of American (or any other) business.
No company can afford to pay more then the value of their labor and remain in business, and most businesses in the US do not have their fingers involved in the “3rd world”. Large sectors of the US economy remain innovative and profitable without exploitation of 3rd world nations.
“Agreed that capitalism is still based on the production of commodities, but that is going on mostly in the third world.”
Sorry, this statement is just flat out wrong.
Capitalism in the US is not largely based on commodity manufacture. Non-good producing industries account for approximately 70% of total economic activity in the United States. Those services are profitable, many of them extremely so, on the basis of information and technology.
Your views are out-dated and flawed. You presume that the only thing of value is material goods, when information is the new profit center of developed nations.
On Thursday, I leave for Israel for two weeks.
Lose the beard first.
Like so often, American capitalists who love to spit on the state are the first to run to it for a handout.
Indeed. And it is indicative of the craven nature of politicians that the government almost always oblige in delivering the hand-out, which is probably why the capitalist come running for it in the first place. As a big fan of capitalism, I would rather see the government shut their doors and let these firms go bust.
As Robert Borosage reminds us, Wall Street’s “losses are socialized; their profits are pocketed.”
Ditto for farmers and a few thousand other special interest groups.
No one wants their big gas guzzling SUVs and two-ton trucks anymore. As a result, GM plans to make $10 billion in cost cuts. And where will these cuts come from? Why labor and benefits of course.
There are several reasons for GM’s woes, a main one being that thanks to the power of the Unions, the labour and benefits are way too high for the company to keep afloat. By comparison, Toyota is doing rather well in the US partly because its labour force is not much unionised and as such they can produce cars much more cheaply than GM can. I am not saying that cutting labour and benefit costs is the only way the company can stay afloat, but without doing so they will certainly sink. Labour unions are an important part in the workings of any industry, and in Russia they can probably do with being strenghtened. But as they demonstrated so effectviely in the UK in the 1970s, they are quite capable of being committing suicide.
Capitalism in the US is not largely based on commodity manufacture. Non-good producing industries account for approximately 70% of total economic activity in the United States. Those services are profitable, many of them extremely so, on the basis of information and technology.
Your views are out-dated and flawed. You presume that the only thing of value is material goods, when information is the new profit center of developed nations.
Spot on. The view that a country has to make stuff which you can drop on your foot in order to have a legitimate industry is – as you say – out-dated and flawed.
A walmart employee, to use your example, is being paid more than an order of magnitude more than say, the average person in India.
In absolute terms, yes. But does a store clerk in India spend any greater proportion of his monthly salary on housing and food than his American counterpart? Russians engineers on Sakhalin get paid less than British engineers in Manchester in absolute terms because of the differences in market rates in the two places. Russians can buy their home for $100,000. That would buy a Brit a 6-month lease on a car-parking space. Comparing absolute salaries between countries is pointless.
(And how can a store clerk in the west be anymore “productive” than one in the east, in case you were thinking of bringing up the theory of productive forces?)
You’ve obviously never been into a typical Russian store where 3 people do the same job as 1 Walmart employee.
You worked in a stove factory?
Yeah, from I think from 18 to 21 years old or so I worked in Dacor’s stove top plant as the guy that supplied parts to the production lines. Pretty much worker menial low wage jobs from 14 1/2 years old until I began graduate school–forklift driver, clerk in a dry cleaners, restaurant busboy and server, cashier.
Capitalism in the US is not largely based on commodity manufacture. Non-good producing industries account for approximately 70% of total economic activity in the United States. Those services are profitable, many of them extremely so, on the basis of information and technology.
I think we should move beyond talking about capitalism in the US or in any specific country. It’s a global interconnected system. For example, Walmart, as the #1 US employer with 1.1 million employees, is based on commodity production in China, even though its workers do service work.
Now true most American businesses don’t have direct connections with third world labor. I would argue that all have indirect connections. I’m sure every company buys supplies that were made in say China, whether it be a computer or a stapler. Nevertheless, this is why I think changing a theory of labor value to include services is paramount. Services in an of themselves are now products of labor just like any computer, toy, or any other “thing.” The question is whether services has qualitatively changed capitalism and labor as such. There are still disagreements on this.
“Please do some research and basic class analysis.”
Many people do this, and yet few people believe that core capitalist countries are kept afloat by Third World-derived superprofits. So, while it may be true, it is a minority opinion that few informed people believe and thus requires a strong argument.
In reply to W. Shedd and Tim Newman:
I think you misunderstood me. I completely agree that 70% or so of the US economy is not based on producing goods. In fact, that’s the point I made at the beginning. As I said, the US economy is based on services and consumption (i.e. retail.) That does indeed take up the majority of the economy.
I was using the term “value” with respect to the labour theory of value. I wasn’t making a judgement that someone doing IT, or someone cutting hair is any less valuable than someone who makes shoes or shirts. Of course not.
But in order for the US to have this wonderful information technology and service and retail economy, the commodities must first be taken care of, no? You need oil to run a lot of stuff, you still need shirts and shoes and electronics parts, etc. Agreed this is no longer made in the states to a large degree, but people still need these things. Without them, you couldn’t have people willing and able to be “consumers”. People first need the basics in life (food, shelter, etc.) before they could look to buy anything else.
So, how is it that the west is so rich that we don’t need to make this stuff, yet we still get it (cheaply!) and have enough money left for a consumerist society/economy?
Well, the productive labour is simply moved overseas (i.e. “outsourcing” or whatever you want to call it), we have large western companies extracting gold, oil, copper, silver, etc. Now resource nationalism has increased somewhat in recent years, but there’s still a lot of western companies extracting resources in third-world countries all around the world.
It is only because of this massive exploitation that the west is so rich. Where else does the money come from, and why else would western companies invest so much around the world? They aren’t doing it out of kindness!
As for companies paying more than the value of the labour, I’m talking about socially necessary labour in a global context. Various calculations can be done, but you’re probably looking at something like $4 an hour. Almost everyone in the west makes more than this. It’s easy for western companies to pay more than this because they make such massive profits because of the cheap overseas labour. So, yes they have to throw a bit extra to the employees in the west, but this is just a small percentage of their profits.
If you think that “Large sectors of the US economy remain innovative and profitable without exploitation of 3rd world nations”, then consider how profitable they would be if all goods had to be manufactured in the states, no cheap labour in China, India or South America. They are profitable precisely because they are leveraged on that exploitation, even if they don’t directly exploit themselves. That’s why it’s called a *system*.
It reminds me the old kid’s game – broken telephone. Do you know this game, Sean?
Now watch this.
This is from the “original”.
“Уже на второй день после обстрела среди искореженных автомобилей я узнала машину отца, но трупов на дороге не было. Их, как выяснилось потом, забрали военные”,— рассказала женщина.”
Next one – Reuters.
“the soldiers buried the corpses together with their vehicles and belongings in a big pit on the territory of the asphalt plant,”
Then other russia made their own short compilation
And finally you, Sean, started your Russian news from this story. Where the only word that left from actual events – “likely”.
I understand Reuters – they have to make a horror stories (they call them news). It’s their business.
I understand “другую россию” – but they are so different that nobody cares what they are saying. Have you noticed that this “other” http://www.theotherrussia.org/ doesn’t even bother to have Russian version?
But I thought you check the stories before placing them in your blog…
It’s two weeks old – and nothing except “likely”?
PS. This doesn’t mean everything is fine over there.
But “broken phone news” don’t help for sure.
“thus requires a strong argument.”
I’m afraid we’ll soon get it. And we won’t like it
if you need news – this is one
http://kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=914100
Who is KTO in Russia
“Aleksei wasn’t yet 18 when he was arrested two years ago. He grew greatly in prison.”
What a dick.
Stories about hundreds of “civilians” (in a partisan war, it’s sort of hard to distinguish between fighters and civilians) buried in pits are too lurid for me not to be skeptical about. The only way I will believe it is if the bodies are shown to be largely those of women, children, and/or old people. I have no problem accepting the existence of mass graves, which are pretty much par for the course in war — Europe is covered in them from WWI and II — but one specifically for civilians makes my bullshit detectot go off.
I suppose, however, it is possible that the bodies concerned are those of noncombatants who could not or refused to leave the city before the assault ans so were killed during the shelling.
Chrisius my dear,
This grave in fact contains the corpses of civilains who were given the opportunity to flee the city through a ‘green corridor’. Halfway, they got shelled.
Lets not dispute the facts, but spin them. What would you like to hear?
(1) Is this is a sign of a chechen ‘ottepel’, the first of more to come, because (a) Kadyrov is a begnin ruler (b) Kadyrov aims to cultivate public anger against Russian overlords.
(2) Is this just more proof of Russian crimes against humanity. Another reason why peacemissions in Georgian breakaway republics have to be terminated pronto and replaced by responsible NATO troops.
In the name of spin all possible
So, some artillery division missed or was given incorrect targeting information? That’s plausible.
Back to the superprofits thing. I think this is to a large extent an attempt to “save the phenomena” move to explain the lack of collapse and/or revolution in the core capitalist countries. As I have said before, Marxism has a lot of explanatory power but little predictive power. (Now that I think about it, this is probably because Marx’s philosophy of past history and his prediction of history-to-come are based on different theories.) The revolution and crisis predicted by Marx have not occurred, so to preserve the predictive aspect of his thought some mechanism for why that is must be found, and that mechanism is Third-World exploitation.
“(1) Is this is a sign of a chechen ‘ottepel’, the first of more to come, because (a) Kadyrov is a begnin ruler (b) Kadyrov aims to cultivate public anger against Russian overlords.”
It’s only a matter of time until the Western media start to present Kadyrov in precisely this way, you know.
“It’s only a matter of time until the Western media start to present Kadyrov in precisely this way, you know.”
Mad Maximus,you’re too much of a cynicist, even for a Roman.
I hereby propose a bet: As Kadyrov becomes increasing independent of the Kremlin, his portrayal in the Westerm media will consistently improve. If for some reason he decides to take his many and go back into the mountains, he will instantly be crowned with Heroic Chechen Freedom-Fighter status.
PS. Romans are not cynical; we believe in the eternal and holy values of Imperator and Patria.
Russians tended not to bury in mass graves in Chechen War I – civilians killed in the cities and villages would have been buried by relatives or neighbours. Also there is no chance the bodies are of Chechen fighters – captured rebels got sent to Mozdok for a ‘chat’ usually. And as well as that the Russians were never able to kill more than a few rebels at a time anyway.
”This grave in fact contains the corpses of civilains who were given the opportunity to flee the city through a ‘green corridor’. Halfway, they got shelled.”
This sounds entirely plausible; either that or a fighter bomber levelled apartment buildings that somehow still had people in them
”So, some artillery division missed or was given incorrect targeting information? That’s plausible”
It does sound like dodgy co-ordinates, to be honest, and wouldnt have been the first time it happened. It is pretty sad though.
”(2) Is this just more proof of Russian crimes against humanity”
You’ll find the Brits tend not to level whole villages in Afghanistan, or kill a few hundred civilians with Tornadoes. Either (a) the Russians are feckless or (b) they cant use GPS.
“You’ll find the Brits tend not to level whole villages in Afghanistan, or kill a few hundred civilians with Tornadoes. Either (a) the Russians are feckless or (b) they cant use GPS.”
The Brits aren’t doing urban warfare in Afghanistan against entrenched positions. The seige of Grozny is more comparable to the seige of Berlin that to anything in Afghanistan.
“And as well as that the Russians were never able to kill more than a few rebels at a time anyway.”
They killed hundreds and hundreds in Grozny.
”The Brits aren’t doing urban warfare in Afghanistan against entrenched positions. The seige of Grozny is more comparable to the seige of Berlin that to anything in Afghanistan.”
So this excuses killing thousands of civilians, especially now that modern targetting equipment is available?(or maybe somebody sold it…darn!) And the Brits have had to fight in loads of small towns and villages in Helmand. Grozny, I’ll grant you, is much bigger, but the principle is not that dissimilar. Try NOT to kill civilians, and maybe you wont. Maybe clearing ALL the civilians out, before the bombers go in, might help? Oh sorry, maybe the rebels well escape too…so, just kill everyone! Ura! That works!
”They killed hundreds and hundreds in Grozny.”
They did, over a period of 10 months, never in a single battle, not even the first loss of Grozny to the Russians in early 1995. The Chechens did not engage in pitched battles with the Russians.
Sorry, meant to add to the last paragraph ”except in August 1996 when they routed the Russians in Grozny”.
C’mon Ger, you know as well as I do that civilians were told to get out of Grozny. Of course not everybody did or could go, but it’s not as if they were targeted on purpose, any more than the large numbers of dead Germans were targeted on purpose (except that in the case of Germany, civilians actually were targeted on pupose, so that doesn’t work). A comparable situation today would be the US army going into Fallujah, which you know did kill a rather large number of civilians, and for the same reason.
I’m not really all that clear on this, but I’m pretty sure that the second battle of Grozny pretty much was a pitched battle with very high mujaheedin casualties. IIRC Khattab’s Afghan Arabs caused a big scandal because they ran away before the battle.
”I’m not really all that clear on this, but I’m pretty sure that the second battle of Grozny pretty much was a pitched battle with very high mujaheedin casualties. IIRC Khattab’s Afghan Arabs caused a big scandal because they ran away before the battle.”
I dont have the first clue about Chechen War II. But I have no doubt the Russians had their act together 2nd time around.
”C’mon Ger, you know as well as I do that civilians were told to get out of Grozny”
I know in fairness. I’m like a cunt today cos I cant get a mass spectrometer to work, and everyone, even the Russian armed forces, are on the receiving end:-)
“especially now that modern targetting equipment is available?”
Ger, you mean friendly US Patriot that shot down British Tornado?…
Well, I have no intention to discuss military aspects of what and why happened there. We are are not at military blog.
My point was different.
There was some “news” about someone saying something. Then Reuters altered it …just a little to add some horror for the story. Like “the soldiers buried the corpses together with their vehicles”.
Then English other russia published their version.
And finally Sean brought this “news” here as a fact.
This is how “news” becomes “fact” as now someone else (db?) might quote Sean as a reliable source.
But TWO WEEKS already passed since “discovery” and what? Nothing on youtube? In the blogs? What about Politkovskay who were able to find out secret zindans at secret Russian bases but hasn’t checked this grave that had been known since 2000?
Definitely there is the pile of “human rights” bullshit.
And it doesn’t matter whose pile is bigger – one of “human right fighters” or of Russian authorities (including those in Chechnya). It’s bullshit anyway. And in many case it’s almost impossible to dig out the real facts – they are so deep under “human rights” shit. I know this from personal experience.
PS. As I said – I’m not going to discuss military aspects of what might have happened. And I think it was very likely that civil convoy was shelled.
”It’s bullshit anyway. And in many case it’s almost impossible to dig out the real facts – they are so deep under “human rights” shit. I know this from personal experience.”
Thats all very well, ivanov.
Doesnt explain away the discovery one little bit though….
”And I think it was very likely that civil convoy was shelled.”
That does seem likely.
А вот с этого места нельзя ли поподробнее?
What “discovery”? If you ask me to measure the value of Nurdi Nukhazhiyev’s words – he’ll get 1 out of 100 from me. Maybe one and a half as most.
Very likely.
But you know what? If a single corps found – investigation starts automatically. Even in Russia. No need to “appeal” to prosecutor general. Unless your point is to generate “news”.
I would appreciate if you post the link to youtube or any other source. Two weeks are enough to provide photos of buried vehicles…
”But you know what? If a single corps found – investigation starts automatically. Even in Russia.”
I would think that there would be such an investigation in any civilised country ivanov.
“I would think that there would be such an investigation in any civilised country ivanov.”
I suggest you read a little more about the history of the Vietnam War.
Seriously Ger, I think you have a highly sanitized idea of how Western countries fight war — the US in Vietnam or for that matter in Iraq (on a much smaller scale, given it is a smaller conflict), the French in Algeria. I think you also underestimate the extent to which militaries protect their own — for instance, look at My Lai. I may be wrong about this, but as far as I know no NATO personnel have been prosecuted for deaths of civilians in the bombing of Belgrade, or for that matter of the Chinese Embassy (I guess NATO’s GPS must have failed on that day).
The BBC did an excellent audio documentary on My Lai in April. I think it will show exactly how “civilized” the US military was in Vietnam. Notice how the documentary says that the information in it couldn’t be aired in the US.
I’ll never understand the rhetorical move that when Russia is shown to engage in acts of sheer violence, the acts of the West or the US are immediately referenced as if the latter justifies the former. Isn’t it enough to say that both are equally murderous bastards? To point to the brutality of one doesn’t mean a condoning the brutality of the other.
“I’ll never understand the rhetorical move that when Russia is shown to engage in acts of sheer violence, the acts of the West or the US are immediately referenced as if the latter justifies the former. Isn’t it enough to say that both are equally murderous bastards?”
Because of the “Brits wouldn’t do things like that!” comments.
Seriously, I don’t think either are murderous bastards, of which the world contains few. Sometimes wars happen, and sometimes they are necessary (though the only case of the US being in a war that was in any sense necessary since WWII is Afghanistan). Sometimes those are counterinsurgency wars, in which lots of civilian deaths are inevitable. This does not mean that every counterinsurgency war is a mistake. We live in a fallen world.
ivanov,
As far as I know, they excavated the site but didn’t find much.
That’s not what I asked, though. You wrote, and I quote, “Then Reuters altered it …just a little to add some horror for the story.” So the question is: what are talking about? You cannot be serious, can you?
I just assumed that we didn’t place Russia to the list of “civilized” countries
”Seriously Ger, I think you have a highly sanitized idea of how Western countries fight war — the US in Vietnam or for that matter in Iraq (on a much smaller scale, given it is a smaller conflict), the French in Algeria. I think you also underestimate the extent to which militaries protect their own — for instance, look at My Lai”
Chris I have no doubt that western nations have and still do misbehave and fuck up. But what happened in Chechen War I was systemic, endemic, utter brutality and incompetence not seen in Europe since 1945. Its just not good enough from a country like Russia. And with all due respect, arent we in the realms now of ‘whataboutery’? I thought this thread was about corpses found in Grozny, not Mai Lai. Mai Lai is old news. And I made no attempt to justify any western mass murder episodes.
”Because of the “Brits wouldn’t do things like that!” comments.”
Smirk all you want – the Brits had major law and order/terrorism issues in Northern Ireland that were brought by the IRA to the British mainland and the Brits never resorted to levelling cities. I believe totally the Brits would handle such troubles in Chechnya a million times better than the Russians, and coming from an Irishman that is saying something.
”Belgrade, or for that matter of the Chinese Embassy (I guess NATO’s GPS must have failed on that day).”
In which case can we say Russia had GPS failures for almost two years, from Dec 1994-August 1996?
”I just assumed that we didn’t place Russia to the list of “civilized” countries”
your own words ivanov
You cannot be serious, can you? there must be
300 bodies plus tens of cars according to Nurdi Nukhazhiyev!!!
Compare yourself.
“”Уже на второй день после обстрела среди искореженных автомобилей я узнала машину отца, но трупов на дороге не было. Их, как выяснилось потом, забрали военные”,— рассказала женщина.”
“the soldiers buried the corpses together with their vehicles”
So some woman told something to Nurdi who told something to Kommersant’s Муса Мурадов. As Kommersant already was punished for “wrong quoting” they are very careful about every word. But Reuters doesn’t have to – at least when they generate “news” about Russia. So why not bury vehicles and corpses together? No big deal but the story looks much, much better…
But as I said the sad thing is that Sean placed this “news” as “First article to catch my notice”….
PS. legal notice – I do believe that convoy was shelled. But I don’t trust a single word that comes from Nurdi’s mouth. From this respect Reuters has better score – around 15 (out of 100). Why? because I investigated the Beslan case and know very well what happened and what was told (by Reuters as well).
No doubt American troops committed massacres in Vietnam. We also know, though, that when those things became known a huge outcry followed from American themselves. Lt. Calley was convicted by a court martial because of his My Lai deeds and those American soldiers that risked their lives to stop the massacre eventually received military awards for their actions. The carnage of Grozny cannot be compared with Fallujah. The Fallujah operation, as brutal and destructive as it was, was considerably more discriminate and much less clumsy than the Grozny one. As screwed up some of the things the US military have done in Iraq and Afghanistan, the recent record of the Russian Army is much worse. I’m not saying that with glee. I’m not happy about it.
Exactly! The only problem – no corpses yet after more than two week….
By saying “not seen in Europe since 1945″ did you mean Drezden?
Ger, я тебе сейчас один умный вещь скажу. Тока ты не абижайся! Если бы у бабушки был х..й, она была бы дедушкой.
You just don’t have an idea what you are comparing. Apples and onion?
“Lt. Calley was convicted by a court martial because of his My Lai deeds ”
Calley was apparently the only guilty guy.
He was a scapegoat. And what was his punishment?:
Ultimately, Calley served only three and a half years of house arrest in his quarters at Fort Benning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Calley
The reason there was great outcry in the US and none in Russia is because the Vietnam War was based on obvious bullshit, whereas the danger from Chechnya was obvious.
“Smirk all you want – the Brits had major law and order/terrorism issues in Northern Ireland that were brought by the IRA to the British mainland and the Brits never resorted to levelling cities.”
Belfast was never occupied by thousands of IRA militants equipped with tanks. The IRA also, as far as I know, never actually ethnically cleansed non-Irish from Belfast, nor forced the Irish to believe in an Arab version of Shariah law, nor had any plans to conquer large sections of Britain.
“not seen in Europe since 1945.”
That may be because there have been almost no wars in Europe since 1945.
Oh crap, I just wrote a long, smart-assed and incredibly brilliant
post that Sean’s spam filter seems to have caught.
These are two different quotes from two different people, neither of whom is called Reuters. What’s your point again?
I think it is a very interesting and telling fact, that after 70+ years of Communist dictatorship in Russia, the Labor Union movement is just beginning to get organized.
I freed a comment from Chris and one from Vlad. See above.
”You just don’t have an idea what you are comparing. Apples and onion?”
ivanov the comparison was not situations, it was attitude. That the Brits are perhaps a million times more professional than the Russians in such operations is for me beyond doubt. The Brits are proper soldiers, not half-arsed, underfed conscripts led by incompetent, corrupt officers. And you talking about apples and onions is a bit rich, considering the meandering nonsense you’ve written over at the Shame on Russia thread in response to a few simple pokes from db.
”Belfast was never occupied by thousands of IRA militants equipped with tanks.”
First of all Belfast would have had perhaps 2-5,000 active Provisional IRA operatives right through the troubles, hardened, seasoned boys with plenty of places to hide. This doesnt include many hundreds -if not thousands more guys ‘ready to answer the call’. Plus, add into the mix the fact that from day 1 the Russians paid no heed to destruction caused, whereas the Brits at least adhered to some standard of decency, and I would go as far as saying Russia had an EASIER time in dealing with Chechnya than the Brits had with the IRA (not forgetting the INLA, the Real IRA, and numerous other Loyalist and Nationalist splinter groups) in Belfast. And your tank statement is frankly nonsense. The Chechens never bothered capturing tanks and at any one time had only a few in use, in the countryside as de facto artillery. The Chechens used to call them ‘Moving Coffins’, especially after the New Years Eve Massacre in Grozny. The Chechens had nothing but disdain for tanks.
”The IRA also, as far as I know, never actually ethnically cleansed non-Irish from Belfast, nor forced the Irish to believe in an Arab version of Shariah law, nor had any plans to conquer large sections of Britain.”
By definition all this would make things easier for the Russians (except for the last bit, which is a load of Russian government propoganda). The Brits faced a far more complex situation in NI, and not only that, had far more restraints on their activities than the Russians had in Grozny. The Brits (and the Irish) certainly had their moments in The Troubles, but all came out of it with far, far more credit than the Russians did in Chechnya.
”That may be because there have been almost no wars in Europe since 1945.”
There was a fairly big one in the Balkans from 1991-1995
But that aside, referencing 1945 is just showing the last time comparable brutality was witnessed in Europe was during a WORLD WAR, not an, ahem ’security operation’.
”As screwed up some of the things the US military have done in Iraq and Afghanistan, the recent record of the Russian Army is much worse. I’m not saying that with glee. I’m not happy about it.”
And I just like to add none of my pot-shots are at ordinary Russians – though they did vote in the clowns who made such a butcher’s shop of Chechnya.
Reuters is not the name of the humans right fighter, db. He is not a human at all. I thought you know that.
Reuters was “quoting” Nurdi. They are smart-asses – “we just repeat what others are saying”. They know that NOT A SINGLE reader would check Nurdi’s real words. Except few crazy guys here…
This is the original
http://www.chechenombudsman.ru/info/news.php?id=148
At least I couldn’t find his words about buried vehicles.
But internet already full of this “news”.
That’s why my question was for SEAN – if he knows the old game “испорченный телефон”?
PS. Nurdi’s description of events – bullshit. But military aspects are out of this blog coverage.
http://www.ombudsman.gov.ru/dad_2008/dad07/dad839/02.doc
“Все погибшие были беженцами, пытавшимися бежать в другой район страны, спасаясь от перестрелок, – заявил Нурди Нухажиев. – Весь транспорт в колонне передвигался с белыми флагами, поэтому войска не должны были стрелять. Как только колонна поднялась на холм, федеральные силы открыли огонь. После полного уничтожения группы солдаты похоронили трупы вместе с их транспортом около крупного асфальтового завода”.
“By definition all this would make things easier for the Russians (except for the last bit, which is a load of Russian government propoganda).”
Ummm, uniting the world’s Muslims under the banner of the Caliphate is kind of central to Khattab and Basaev and Umarov’s ideology. Why do you think they attacked Dagestan, out of Chechen nationalism? No, they did it to “liberate” the Dagestani Muslims.
“But that aside, referencing 1945 is just showing the last time comparable brutality was witnessed in Europe was during a WORLD WAR, not an, ahem ’security operation’.”
What it says is the last time there was a war in Europe, there was a war.
”Ummm, uniting the world’s Muslims under the banner of the Caliphate is kind of central to Khattab and Basaev and Umarov’s ideology. Why do you think they attacked Dagestan, out of Chechen nationalism? No, they did it to “liberate” the Dagestani Muslims.”
A few hundred wankers with AK-47s and grenade launchers is not an invasion. Its a few hundred wankers with AK-47s and grenade launchers. Thats all. Not exactly the Mongol Hordes getting ready to put the Yoke on Russia again is it? The exaggeration of the 1999 situation is a myth right up there with Bush’s nonsense about Iraq.
”What it says is the last time there was a war in Europe, there was a war.”
And? There hasnt been comparable brutality or destruction on the European continent since 1945. And 1994-1996 was supposed to be a ‘clean up’ operation? WTF? The Russians make the Americans even looked restrained!
db, you are reapeating kavkaz-uzel bullshit, not Nurdi.
http://www.kavkaz-uzel.ru 2.7.2008
незачот!
2008-07-16
Комментарий Уполномоченного по правам человека в ЧР Нурди Нухажиева по поводу публикации Информационного центра «Кавказский узел»
…Пользуясь случаем, хочу еще раз обратить внимание на то, что в средствах массовой информации нашей страны со спокойной душой, можно публиковать откровенную ложь с полной уверенностью, что за это ничего не будет…
А распространенная «Кавказским узлом» информация выдумана в тиши кабинета за пределами Чеченской Республики.
http://www.chechenombudsman.ru/info/news.php?id=158
Nurdi and kavkaz-usel “like” each other very much
Well… the whole story is a good example of how news are made
Даешь свободу слова!
Sean, you wrote:
“I’ll never understand the rhetorical move that when Russia is shown to engage in acts of sheer violence, the acts of the West or the US are immediately referenced as if the latter justifies the former. Isn’t it enough to say that both are equally murderous bastards? To point to the brutality of one doesn’t mean a condoning the brutality of the other.”
I agree with your “meta” point. It is silly to justify evil by saying that others do it too. On the other hand, there is no argument that as far as armies are concerned, the Russian army is indeed more brutal and less accountable than either the American or UK armies. The Russian army is also less effective. This, of course, does not justify American or British brutality.
No ivanov, just helping you with your googling. So again, what’s your point?
Seriously Ger, I think you have a highly sanitized idea of how Western countries fight war — the US in Vietnam or for that matter in Iraq (on a much smaller scale, given it is a smaller conflict), the French in Algeria.
The US army in Iraq is very, very different from the US army in Vietnam. Vietnam was 40 years ago, believe it or not the US army has changed rather a lot since then. I know people who have been fighting in Iraq, and the lengths to which the coalition forces go to avoid civilian casualties is unprecedented in the history of warfare. This is in no small part due to the atrocities committed in Vietnam.
As it happens, I am very good friends who did two tours of Chechnya with the Russian paras. And one of my best friends has just won the DSO for his actions on a 12-month tour of Afghanistan. Comparing what they tell me about their experiences, the one major difference is that the Brit never had to worry about units of British soldiers opening fire on him because he’d stumbled into them making a major arms or drug deal with the enemy.
My point is that Nurdi didn’t say about buried vehicles. It was Reuters that said that he had said. And then Sean repeated this.
And I’m not surprised with Reuters at all. But I think Sean should take more care when “quoting” such sources like “another russia” and their 300 corpses.
db.
You can claim that kavkaz-uzel and reuters are much more realibale sources that Nurdi’s site as http://www.chechenombudsman.ru is hosted in Moscow. OMG! It might be FSB behind …
PS. My point was not pointed at you but at Sean btw.
Ger,
As I’m not expert in North Ireland wars could you remind me how often IRA seized hostages in hospitals, theaters or schools. How many British convoys were trapped and attacked, how many British choppers were shot down with Stingers etc….
Then we’ll continue to compare your apples with our onions
“A few hundred wankers with AK-47s and grenade launchers is not an invasion. Its a few hundred wankers with AK-47s and grenade launchers. Thats all. Not exactly the Mongol Hordes getting ready to put the Yoke on Russia again is it? The exaggeration of the 1999 situation is a myth right up there with Bush’s nonsense about Iraq.”
OK, “invasion” is hyperbole (although if you were one of the 35,000 Dagestani IDPs, or any of the Dagestanis who fought off the “invaders” with hunting rifles and shotguns you might not agree). However, the “liberation” of the Muslim areas of Russia, as well as the entire Muslim world, is intrinsic to the brand of radical Islam adhered to by, among others, Khattab, Basaev, Umarov, and Bin Laden. It is not something that the Russian government made up. I suggest that having a large base of people in your country, largely foreigners from the Middle East, devoted to the goal of wrenching large areas of territory away from you and establishing Taliban-style law is a Bad Thing.
Now, you might argue that their goal is unlikely to be realized, given that 95% or so of Russia’s Muslims are not interested in this, and you would be right. However, they don’t know that, and they are going to act on tne belief that they can, creating a lot of problems and bloodshed in the process, especially if you happen to live in a place like Dagestan, or, in fact, in Chechnya, which was in a state of Sufi-Wahabbi civil war in 1999. Oddly enough, for some reason the people most in favor of Chechen War II were none other than the Dagestanis. They’re the ones that have to live next to the Taliban equivalent, not you or me.
A friend of mine who is a specialist on the North Caucasus (married to a Dagestani woman) is fond of noting that people act like the players in this drama were solely Moscow and Grozny, as if nobody lived around Chechnya living in daily fear of being kidnapped and having their fingers caught off or their already impoverished region becoming further unliveable and terrorized. He also claims, and I believe him, that when he was in Dagestan in 1999 everybody he talked to said that all Chechens in Chechnya, without exception, were involved in the kidnap industry, which is quite likely not far from the truth given that it was the basis of the economy. I started becoming increasingly unsympathetic to the Ichkerians/Taliban (same thing, really) when I started talking to people who had actually been victimized by them, such as the Uzbek waitress who had seen the IMU cut a woman’s throat or my ex-girlfriend, who is from Nalchik and had grenades thrown around her neighborhood. These people are not nearly as tolerant and enlightenment as you.
I wonder how long it would take Ger Clancy to live in a state of terror before he demanded something be done.
Personally, I would want it done pretty quick.
“As I’m not expert in North Ireland wars could you remind me how often IRA seized hostages in hospitals, theaters or schools. How many British convoys were trapped and attacked, how many British choppers were shot down with Stingers etc….
Then we’ll continue to compare your apples with our onions”
Yeah, it kind of reminds me of a conversation I had once with a Brit (a good friend of mine actually) who actually asserted that the trauma of the Blitz was on the same level as that of the Seige of Leningrad.
“Comparing what they tell me about their experiences, the one major difference is that the Brit never had to worry about units of British soldiers opening fire on him because he’d stumbled into them making a major arms or drug deal with the enemy.”
Oh sure. This is largely the product of shit pay and shit morale, which is the product of shit funding for the military brought about by the 1990s economic collapse. Of course, however, increasing funding for the military to rational levels regularly gets denounced as “a resurgence of Russian militarism.”
“The US army in Iraq is very, very different from the US army in Vietnam. Vietnam was 40 years ago, believe it or not the US army has changed rather a lot since then. I know people who have been fighting in Iraq, and the lengths to which the coalition forces go to avoid civilian casualties is unprecedented in the history of warfare. This is in no small part due to the atrocities committed in Vietnam.”
No, I believe it. However, I cannot say it has “taken” until the US military is actually in another Vietnam-level situation, and Iraq is not even close (e.g., Iraqi insurgents have neither the foreign backing, nor the popular support, nor the discipline and unity of the North Vietnamese. They’re closer to gang members than they are to an partisan army.).
“This is largely the product of shit pay and shit morale, which is the product of shit funding for the military brought about by the 1990s economic collapse.”
Chris, it definitely predated the 1990s. I served as a US Army infantryman in the 1980s (I became a US citizen during my time as a soldier.) A couple of years after my enlistment ended I was in the USSR. I became friends and talked to several Russians who recently served in the Soviet Army. In talking to them I was shocked to realized by how badly trained Soviet infantryman and pogranichniki were. Most of them fired their weapons a couple of times and no more than a few rounds at that. Most of them did not experience field maneuvers and war games. They did harvest potatoes during their time as soldiers, though. I don’t doubt that the training of Soviet elite forces was quite different, but being a former regular infantryman I was comparing apples with apples. So I can attest with total confindence that at least in the 1980s a US infantryman was vastly better trained than his Soviet counterpart.
(By the way, I did try to become a paratrooper (airborne), but my term of enlistment was not long enough to make it worth for them. Ironically, I parachuted before and after serving in the US Army, but not while I was in it.)
However, the “liberation” of the Muslim areas of Russia, as well as the entire Muslim world, is intrinsic to the brand of radical Islam adhered to by, among others, Khattab, Basaev, Umarov, and Bin Laden.em>
Chechnya forming part of some grand foreign plan to liberate Muslim lands is massively, massively overblown, most likely for the purpose of justifying the Russians’ handling of the region in the first place. From what the Islamic lunatics on the Middle East forums told me, few foreign Muslims took any interest in Chechnya until well after the first Chechen War, and only were able to get involved once Russia had made sure that the Chechens were isolated and desperate enough to accept help from anyone.
Sorry, I fucked up the italics.
It is only because of this massive exploitation that the west is so rich. Where else does the money come from, and why else would western companies invest so much around the world? They aren’t doing it out of kindness!
No, they are doing it to make money. But a western company paying for a license to develop a hydrocarbon block in a developing country and paying taxes on production to the government does not necessarily, nor even usually, amount to exploitation.
Of course, however, increasing funding for the military to rational levels regularly gets denounced as “a resurgence of Russian militarism.”
Bollocks. Find me one article written by anyone anywhere who labels the improvement of Russian soldiers’ pay and conditions as “a resurgence of Russian militarism”.
”Ger,
As I’m not expert in North Ireland wars could you remind me how often IRA seized hostages in hospitals, theaters or schools. How many British convoys were trapped and attacked, how many British choppers were shot down with Stingers etc….
Then we’ll continue to compare your apples with our onions”
Convoys – plenty of British convoys were attacked in NI, with hundreds of deaths. Ever heard of South Armagh?
Choppers – again the Brits must have lost upwards of 20 in NI. And everything else too -Saracens, armoured cars, you name it, the IRA blew ‘em up.
Hospitals – one hospital was taken over by Basaeyev in 1995. Atrocious, yes. Endemic? No. Rationale for levelling cities? No.
Theaters -again, this happened once, in Moscow, in 2002, and a long way from Grozny and after the large part of the fighting in the war had ended. How it excuses using fighter bombers to level cities, BEFORE the theatre siege, is beyond me. And the Brits had plenty of problems with the IRA blowing up parts of London. Did that force them to resort to fighter bombers? No.
Schools – again atrocious, but happened once and again after Grozny had been levelled, not before.
So your point is what, exactly, ivanov?
The Brits had a situation just as compex to deal with as the Russians had, and, unlike the Russians, hadnt a free palate to blow up anything that moved.
”I suggest that having a large base of people in your country, largely foreigners from the Middle East, devoted to the goal of wrenching large areas of territory away from you and establishing Taliban-style law is a Bad Thing.”
That would be all very well, except, again, rather than thousands of rebels, it was a few hundred wankers with AKs and grenade launchers. This does not constitute an invasion force, and Russia blew this whole incident totally out of proportion – it was simply a reason given for the invasion. The fact that Dagestanis took out there rifles at the Kremlin’s call proves notgng either – the Dagestanis would love any opportunity to have a pot-shot at Chechens (with good reason, admittedly). But again this does not proves that anything near what the Kremlin were saying could have happened. Frankly, it was propoganda used to justify the inavsions. Iraq 2003, anyone?
”These people are not nearly as tolerant and enlightenment as you.”
Who said I was tolerant and enlightened? Let them retract that scurillous statement immediately!
“From what the Islamic lunatics on the Middle East forums told me, few foreign Muslims took any interest in Chechnya until well after the first Chechen War, and only were able to get involved once Russia had made sure that the Chechens were isolated and desperate enough to accept help from anyone.”
Sure. I’m talking about the Second Chechen War, which was a quite different animal. By the time that happened, the Salafists had practically taken the place over.
“Bollocks. Find me one article written by anyone anywhere who labels the improvement of Russian soldiers’ pay and conditions as “a resurgence of Russian militarism”.”
They won’t phrase it that way. It will rather be, “we see Russia’s heightened militarism in its in increased military budget.” I have had “liberals” in Russia say this very thing to me.
“So I can attest with total confindence that at least in the 1980s a US infantryman was vastly better trained than his Soviet counterpart.”
It is a conscript army. I wouldn’t want to serve in it either then or now. However, I think few people would argue that no serious deterioration took in the 1990s.
You have yet to produce any evidence to support this point.
db
Have you read his official statement?
As he DID NOT TALK to Reuters in person – this was their only source. But most likely they just repeated their “sources in Russia”.
I prefer to deal with facts not sources. Whether they are Reuters or ORT, gazeta Pravda or NY Times.
Kolya is right.
And Bundesver is also a conscript army, Chris
Yes, the training, food and uniform were better. But this became irrelevant in the battle zone very soon (actually – after you get are under fire for the first time). But this is off our topic.
But you were right about “Russian militarizm”
When Tu-95 bombers have re-started their training and patrolling flights over North Atlantic – there was outcry in mASS media about Russian bears. But this was just 1/20 of Soviet REGULAR activity over there.
No. Gazeta Pravda didn’t provide such detailed description of events over there. It was just two pages newspaper and busy with the reports about records in soviet space and agriculture programs
But let’s look at stats.
Only 165 in 27 years. And only 2 “insurgents”. These are your apples?
Wow!
Total 5 choppers…
Ger! Russian army performance is not the best sample to follow. But please don’t compare your apples with our onions anyway.
IRA members were (and are) idiots but white european type of idiots with some fucking “ideas” in their heads.
Basayev & others – they are not humans from your and my point of view at all.
PS. Also please remember WHO supports these “freedom fighters”. Закаев – does this name tell you anything?
No ivanov, Reuters say those quotes come from “a conference on missing persons organised by Chechnya’s local government.” Try again.
Air carrier Nimitz as seen from Tu-95
http://vif2ne.ru/nvk/forum/files/Forger/(080718092413)_Nimitc1.jpg
This seemingly insolvable conundrum could be solved if, like, Nurdi was the source at the conference.
No, by “source” ivanov meant this press-release.
db.
Looks like only you and Reuters knows about conference where Nurdi Nukahzhiev said that words. So – sorry.
What I don’t undertsnad – is your position.
So you are ready to take any word about Russian affairs from Reuters as the final truth, aren’t you?
And you found my remarks that on Russian blog it’s better to use original sources as silly one?
This is Chechen government version
There is no need to repeat “broken phone” information. There are more than enough bullshit in the “original” itself
2 km are a little bit too long range even for always-drunk, not-trained Russian snipers, you know…
And killing 300 people with artillery is not that simple, unless “targets” stay close and don’t move.
So the real story was twisted – little by little – and Reuters was one of the twisting force (well they are kids compare to BBC).
PS. Sean. Could you edit the link in your first post? I mean it’s up to you what news are important. But at least Nurdi Nukhazhiev can generate “horror stories” by himself (in Russian though).
You have yet to produce any evidence to support this assertion.
To my:
“So I can attest with total confindence that at least in the 1980s a US infantryman was vastly better trained than his Soviet counterpart.”
Chris wrote:
“It is a conscript army. I wouldn’t want to serve in it either then or now. However, I think few people would argue that no serious deterioration took in the 1990s.”
Chris, you are right that the Russian armed forces deteriorated considerably in the 1990s. The thing is, though, that it’s quality was already quite low by the last years of Brezhnev. Indeed it was a conscript army, but it was also a conscript army in the 1950s and 1960s when it’s training and fighting quality was considerably higher than in the late 70s and later (despite the fighting in Afghanistan). Interesting, from what I recall reading, the notorious “dedovschina” problem started to become really bad in the 70s and later.
Talking of war games and the mighty British army, here is an awesome clip from the 1950s:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojXak45VRd0
“it was a conscript army, but it was also a conscript army in the 1950s and 1960s when it’s training and fighting quality was considerably higher than in the late 70s and later (despite the fighting in Afghanistan).”
That’s really quite interesting. Any ideas as to why? Just complacency? Dimming memories of WWII?
“…I think few people would argue that no serious deterioration took in the 1990s.”
I, for one, am getting extremely tired of you always bringing up the 90-s, as if it was the worst time in Russia ever.
The events of the 90-s were a Good Thing. Collapse of the USSR was a Very Good Thing. Times were hard, but the Tidings were Good. Soviet Union had to go. What bad things you know about the 90-s was not a sudden ‘deterioration’, it was all the problems that were suppressed and festered inside the USSR, uncovered and made open for all to see. Like a huge boil on the face of humanity burst open and all the garbage oozing out.
You talk about ‘deterioration’ of Soviet Army in Chechnya. Do you think ‘dedovschina’ is product of the 90-s? Do you think Soviet Army morale in Afghanistan was better? Do you think they didn’t rape and slaughter civilian population? Do you think they didn’t trade munitions for local hash? Do you think they didn’t do that in Germany (1945), Hungary (1956) and Chechoslovakia (1968)?
“I, for one, am getting extremely tired of you always bringing up the 90-s, as if it was the worst time in Russia ever.”
I don’t really care much what you think, since 1) you’re a dogmatic asshole and 2) not very bright.
Thank you kindly for those links, Sean.
For those interested in further GULag history, George Mason University just launched an impressive online exhibit:
http://gulaghistory.org/
Chris, I wrote:
“it was a conscript army, but it was also a conscript army in the 1950s and 1960s when it’s training and fighting quality was considerably higher than in the late 70s and later (despite the fighting in Afghanistan).”
And you asked:
“That’s really quite interesting. Any ideas as to why? Just complacency? Dimming memories of WWII?”
I don’t really know why. Part of the general zastoi trend, I guess. It’s not unprecedented, though. The quality of armies can change quite rapidly. The Prussian army of Frederick the Great was feared by all of Europe, but less than twenty years after his death it was a different story. During a battle one of Napoleon’s general requested reinforcements, his note famously said something like, “after all, I’m fighting Russians, not Prussians.” And then sixty years later the German army easily defeated France and was the best in Europe. Or compare the fighting spirit and determination of the French army during WWI with the French army of WWII (only 22 years later). In the Russian case, the 18th Century infantry of Rumyantsev and Suvorov were well known for long rapid marches and quickly attacking enemy right from the march. As a result they surprised and defeated several larger forces–not only Turkish but also of other European forces. This contrasts sharply, however, with the ponderously moving Russian infantry of later generations.
“Or compare the fighting spirit and determination of the French army during WWI with the French army of WWII (only 22 years later).”
Or compare the Russian Army in the same wars.
I think the simple explanation is that the Army performance is determined by the political unity of the Nation.
France was united in WWI and determined to fight to the end. While there was no indication of a serious political crisis in France at the onset of WWII, the country basically fell apart and split into two camps very quickly: one side made peace with the Nazis and another went to fight to the end (from overseas).
We know how great the political crisis was in Russia in 1917. The result was that Bolshevik gov’t capitulated to the Germans, while the White Army remained loyal to the Entente. Performance of Soviet and Russian armies in Afghanistan and Chechnya were typical for the time of political crisis.
You can sit in your trench as long as you wish
They won’t phrase it that way. It will rather be, “we see Russia’s heightened militarism in its in increased military budget.” I have had “liberals” in Russia say this very thing to me.
They won’t phrase it that way because they suspect – probably with ample reason – that the lion’s share of the increased military budget is not going to be spent improving the pay and conditions of its soliders.
Tim. I don’t want to disappoint you but this is the case – they pay and conditions are improving greatly…
Tim. I don’t want to disappoint you but this is the case – they pay and conditions are improving greatly…
Which explains why fewer and fewer young men are avoiding national service, eh?
Pay and conditions for the professional soldiers may have improved a bit, but for the conscripted national servicemen they are still shockingly poor.
I believe there is a program to phase out the army conscription in Russia. Last year the term of service was reduced to 1.5 years, next year it will be reduced to 1 year and soon the conscription is supposed to become the thing of the past. We’ll see.