today
| ïîñëåäíèå íîâîñòè |
| 2023 |
| 2022 |
| 2021 |
| 2020 |
| 2019 |
| 2018 |
| 2017 |
| 2016 |
| 2015 |
| 2014 |
| 2013 |
| 2012 |
| 2011 |
| 2010 |
| 2009 |
| 2008 |
| 2007 |
| 2006 |
| 2005 |
| 2004 |
| 2003 |
| 2002 |
similar
| Ustinovskaya, Yekaterina |
| Óæå 22 ãîäà... |
| 24/10/24 13:38 more... |
| author Àíîíèì |
| Kurbatova, Christina |
|
Äåòêè Ìèëûå, õîðîøèå íàøè äåòêè!!! Òàê ïðîñòî íå äîëæíî áûòü, ýòî áîëüíî, ýòî íå÷åñòíî, ýòî óæàñíî. |
| 30/06/24 01:30 more... |
| author Îëüãà |
| Grishin, Alexey |
|
Ïàìÿòè Àëåêñåÿ Äìèòðèåâè÷à Ãðèøèíà Ñâåòëàÿ ïàìÿòü ïðåêðàñíîìó ÷åëîâåêó! Ìû ðàáîòàëè â ÃÌÏÑ, òîãäà îí áûë ìîëîäûì íà÷àëüíèêîì îòäåëà ìåòàëëîâ, ïîäàþùèì áîëü... |
| 14/11/23 18:27 more... |
| author Áîíäàðåâà Þëèÿ |
| Panteleev, Denis |
| Âîò óæå è 21 ãîä , à áóäòî êàê â÷åðà !!!! |
| 26/10/23 12:11 more... |
| author Èðèíà |
| Ustinovskaya, Yekaterina |
| Ïîìíèì. |
| 24/10/23 17:44 more... |
| author Àíîíèì |
| Methods of combating terrorism |
| Written by Òèõîí Äçÿäêî | ||||||||
| Âîñêðåñåíüå, 06 Ìàðò 2011 | ||||||||
 Radio station Echo of Moscow, broadcast of Cover-2Guest: Sergei Kovalev Moderator: Tikhon Dzyadko T. DZYADKO: In Moscow it is 7 minutes after 8 in the evening and I welcome anyone who is listening to radio station Echo if Moscow. Cover-2 is a program in which we talk about topics that major foreign weeklies put on their covers. As you well know, we have a project called Cover-1, which is on Mondays, and there we talk about topics that the Russian weeklies put on their covers, while on Sundays we meet here in the studio with our guests and discuss topics relevant to foreign weeklies. Today I will be talking about terrorism and ways to combat terrorism, topics that are no less relevant for Russia than they are for our neighbors, and in some ways, perhaps even more so. I will talk about it with my guest today, Sergei Kovalev, a human rights activist. Sergei Adamovich (Kovalev), good evening. S. KOVALEV: Good evening. T. DZYADKO: Allow me to remind everyone about how to reach us. We, of course, have video feed, two of them. First of, the usual way is our little web cam, but in addition to video from the ‘Echo’ website, you can watch our live stream on Setevizor, which allows you to monitor everything happening here in the studio with multiple camera angles, because there is more than one camera on, and, accordingly, this video can be viewed on iPhone, iPad, and the Google Android mobile platform. So, go to the website and choose that feed that is closest to you and that you find more interesting, and enjoy what is happening here in the studio. And also, of course, our telephone number for texts is up, so send your text messages to +7 985 970 45 45. You can also send in questions via the Internet and via Twitter, if you send the message to my account@vyzvon. That is everything I guess, so let us get to the point: methods of combating terrorism. I would like to start with a statement that was made, and Dmitry Medvedev made this statement while he was speaking at a conference called “Great reforms and the modernization of Russia.” It took place the other day and it dealt with the 150th anniversary of the abolition of serfdom. Dmitry Medvedev spoke at a kind of a keynote address, where he talked once again about freedom and, in particular, he said that the enemies of free development would continue to be intolerance, extremism, and their extreme manifestation, terrorism. This is my question to you, Sergei Adamovich. What do you think, as far as Russia is the most serious enemy to free development today terrorism? Or is this not the main enemy? S. KOVALEV: It is a major factor. It is a major problem for us and not only for us. This is quite true, and it is a global problem. This problem involves real politicians who are trying to develop some strategy and something they can do about it, but I think they will not be very successful, and it cannot be otherwise. I will talk about this later. I think that the problem of terrorism is not a major obstacle on our path to freedom. The main obstacle on our path to freedom is that, excuse me, our government is illegitimate, it understands that it is illegitimate, and wishes to remain that way. This is because this illegitimacy guarantees its stability and guarantees it a long duration, and that is how it is going to be. Here now we have a new definition for a presidential candidate: a successor. This is a shameful definition. So, we now have a successor, and our “duumvirate” is getting ready to decide on which of them is going to run, and they are not even shy about saying this out loud. Do you follow? That is the picture. T. DZYADKO: Look, as far as terrorism in general and a free society, how they are linked? Because if we look at countries where this problem is also acute, these are countries with various levels in terms of freedom. S. KOVALEV: Completely different. T. DZYADKO: How directly are the two phenomena here, shall we say, interrelated? S. KOVALEV: I will allow myself to say the following. I think that the relationship between the systems of government, freedom, the legality of state, and terrorism is as follows: terrorism is one of the children of Realpolitik, and in politics we hold onto the art of the possible and do not wish to try and build a new global political paradigm, and so terrorism will remain one of the major enemies of a free society. T. DZYADKO: But simply… after all, we see that, for example, as far as a country that has a problem with terrorism that is similar to ours, Israel is an example of a fairly free society. S. KOVALEV: Yes. You know… Well, if you speak very seriously and about the most important, the major thing, Israel is not such a free country. Or America. Or Western civilization, in general. Israel, alas, is like us in something that it does. Well, no, of course, it is a much more free society than we have in Russia today, more so than in the former Soviet Union, but it is still not quite a free society, because, to a considerable degree, freedom in these countries is an imitation, just as it is here. Here we have elections. They are alternatives, and they are so proclaimed, but actually there are none. Fine. Here is an example for you, and we do not have to go very far to find an example of Western political philosophy. When I was a kid, I was very pleased to hear that the So how did they defend them? Tell me please: are universal values compatible with the So I ask you: were universal values really the goal of governmental policy, as stated? And how about the values that they are insisting on right now? Are they values, or it this merely a chant, a hypocritical incantation? I am inclined to think that they are nothing but an incantation. Here I gave you some examples. Refute them, please. T. DZYADKO: Look, let us return to what you were talking about earlier. You said that there is something that can be successful in the fight against terrorism in Russia today. S. KOVALEV: Yes. T. DZYADKO: What can this be, exactly? S. KOVALEV: For many countries, besides Israel, for example. I will digress for a moment. I can say about Israel the same thing that I said about the So, with regard to success in the fight against terrorism, Israel is one of the leading countries in this respect. The Americans are succeeding, as are the British. They have been able to prevent it. It seems that recently the Germans prevented some serious terrorist threats. All true. The success is there, and the world can only congratulate this success. This success has been solely due to the police measures. T. DZYADKO: Do you mean through intelligence activity and so on? S. KOVALEV: It is intelligence activity, and police protective measures such as inspection of baggage and all that and so on. These are necessary measures, and yet completely hopeless when it comes to any serious alteration of the global environment and a lessening of terrorism, a lessening of the threat. Police measures are absolutely hopeless. They can really do nothing. As a matter of fact, what are police measures? They are intelligence activities and all possible severe measures, including the threat of death against a potential terrorist. But today we mostly see suicide bombers, and they seek death and their own death does not frighten them. Police measures are very important, and they are absolutely necessary, but they do not solve the problem of terrorism, well, not in any serious, essential… T. DZYADKO: Is it at all possible? S. Kovalev: I think so. I think that there is only one alternative to police measures. Well, not an alternative, because police measures should be used anyway. In the fight against guerrillas or terrorists, which is the same thing, what is the key to success? Depriving them of their popular support, and that is it. Deprive them of resources, deprive them of the resources from which they derive future suicide bombers. Deprive them of moral support, and not just moral, but also material support. Nowadays they have stopped broadcasting those pictures, our television stations I mean, and, maybe overseas as well. First of all, whenever there has been an act of terrorism, on television we would see on the standard triumphant crowd out on the streets of major Muslim cities, shooting into the air and dancing and shouting various slogans and so on. This is support for terrorism. Then on the same screen on other programs we would see these talking heads in turbans, and they would be explaining about what a humane religion Islam is and how wonderful it is, and that Islam requires you to share with the poor and how during a feast you would kill a bull or a ram and you had to give more than half of it to the needy. Great! Only, you know, why are they telling you and me all this? It is not me, and I hope, not you who are supporters of a war with Islam. We want to be friends with Muslims, just as with everyone else, right? So I do not need persuading. Those guys need to go out into the street where they are all dancing and shooting and cheering and explain: “Our Muslim Brothers, our brothers in faith, you are not serving Allah. You are serving Satan.” And good luck waiting for that to happen. By the way, there are these people, I have heard that in some Israeli cities where they have large Arab populations, not in Jerusalem, but I think it is in Nazareth or somewhere. There are these activists, community activists, mostly Jews but also Arabs, Palestinians, who are trying to take these sharply divided and opposing communities and in some way get them to interact and understand each other. These people should be given the Nobel Peace Prize, not Yasser Arafat. All these bandits have gotten the prize, but not these people. That is the point. As a matter of fact, what is modern Muslim society? Well, it seems to feel that the current world order is a challenge to it. It feels, well, defeated, and that it should have to leave. T. DZYADKO: Does it seem that the reasons for the terror problem that we see today, are they based on religious issues? Is it a question of two different cultures, or not? S. KOVALEV: No, it is not. I am absolutely convinced that it is not. You know, I am not a religious scholar and, moreover, not an Islamic scholar, but still, I tried to read the Koran. Among other things, in the Koran there is nothing along the lines of a call to carry out terrorism. T. DZYADKO: Certainly not. S. KOVALEV: And that liar and murderer Ramzan Kadyrov was lying when he answered a question for ‘Novaya Gazeta’ in an interview. He was asked: “Did you order killings?” “Yes, I ordered them.” “You aren’t worried?” “No, it was Allah, not me,” Ramzan Kadyrov responded. The Prophet called on him to kill Wahhabis. When the Prophet Mohammed was alive, there were no Wahhabis in existence, so he could not call on anyone to kill people he never knew, but I must say that the Prophet Mohammed did not call on anyone to kill anyone, actually. This can seen from reading the Koran. You waste your time if you look through the Koran trying to find calls for jihad, as we now know it. How do we understand this in the Western world? Jihad — what is it? It is a holy war against infidels who must all be destroyed because they are not Muslims. There is nothing like that, and the relevant verses are much easier to understand as a call to war against ones own sins, or, anyway, and a call to defend. T. DZYADKO: Then we come to the issue of education. S. KOVALEV: Here we come to this problem. Forgive me, listeners, I have had negative experiences with my close friends who are Muslims, and I have heard enough accusations. But, nonetheless, here is what I think, and so I will say it. I think that Islam is certainly overdue a Reformation. Here is why: the Koran, which is sacred to every Muslim, and, by the way, an overwhelming majority of Muslim priests, mullahs, in our Muslim North Caucasus, for example, they read it without any understanding, since they do not know Arabic. They simply read, well, some pointless text. The Koran is poetic, and like much of poetry it is very vague, so a lot depends on interpretation, and, unfortunately, the structure of Islam as a faith is such that it opens up a lot to interpretation. Do you think that But what is an ayatollah? An ayatollah is a man who is allowed to recite Koranic verses and do interpretation of the faith that carries the force of law. So these are the interpretations that Bin Laden refers to when he advises his terrorists. T. DZYADKO: Well, yes, and we know that this is also the problem, for example, in the North Caucasus. S. KOVALEV: Yes, in the North Caucasus. T. DZYADKO: Which is that there a whole lot of them interpreting and teaching it in their own way. S. KOVALEV: By the way, take note that the North Caucasus type of Islam, including Chechen Islam, is a quite young type. It was very tolerant and had many schools with different trends. One of the schools is the Kunta Hajji. But who was Kunta Hajji? For a time he was the predecessor of Tolstoy and Gandhi. Here there was an Islamic cleric in Chechnya, a man who before Tolstoy and Gandhi proclaimed nonviolence in the struggle against evil. Before the war in Chechnya this school enjoyed great respect there, and still does. But now it has gone completely to Wahhabism. By the way, there is Wahhabism that is not Wahhabism. T. DZYADKO: Let us now take a break for the news on radio Echo of Moscow, after which we will return to the studio. Let me remind you that the program is Cover-2 and Sergei Kovalev is here today talking about methods of combating terrorism. NEWS T. DZYADKO: It is 33 minutes after 8 pm and, once again, good evening. Here at the microphone is Tikhon Dzyadko on the program Cover-2, and I am here in the studio today with human rights activist Sergei Kovalev as we talk about methods of combating terrorism. Let me quickly remind you of our communications. You can send your questions and opinions via text message to +7 985 970 45 45. You can also send messages to our website and via Twitter, if you send messages, sent them to account@vyzvon. As always, there is our video feed, 2 two of them. Our site has a video feed. The picture is transmitted through our web camera, in addition to the usual feed from this site that you can also view at Setevizor. This allows you to monitor what is happening here in the studio with multiple camera angles, since we have a couple of cameras here. Video can be viewed on iPhone, iPad and mobile devices such as Google Android. Go to echo.msk.ru and send your texts to +7 985 970 45 45. Sergei Adamovich (Kovalev), if the situation is as you just described, what should be done? For example, if we are talking about Russia, what can be done about the problems of understanding, the problems of interpretation that lead to very serious consequences? Can we somehow reduce these? S. KOVALEV: Reduce these among disaffected Muslims in the North Caucasus? Well, you know, down there the field of action for our government is very wide, and I think that this part of the task can be accomplished relatively quickly and productively, more so than the task of educating a semiliterate Muslim population that has been deceived by all these interpreters (of the Koran), all these ayatollahs and other aggressors. It is much easier. The first thing to do, we must stop the arbitrariness of the police and military. Civilians should not suffer when security forces combat terrorists and bandit gangs. In Dagestan, for example, I knew from the short time that I was in Dagestan, I was fairly convinced that in a huge number of cases when people were being killed, they were civilians who were getting killed and then being passed off as militants. It is very simple. In Ingushetia this was right up until our current president, to give him his due. But this sort of thing is not rare. How what about these disappearances that have not stopped altogether? And how you feel about the death of Natasha Estemirova? Who killed her? Did militants from the Vvedensky region kill her? No, certainly not. So here is Oleg’s trial. Now he is already a criminal, this Oleg Petrovich Orlov. I quoted something for you earlier, and I have dozens of these, direct quotes from Ramzan Kadyrov. Here it has become quite the paradox, and our first task is to eliminate such paradoxes. This paradox is as follows: both sides claim the same thing. T. DZYADKO: What? S. KOVALEV: Oleg Petrovich Orlov, with indignation, anger, and disgust, said: “He’s a murderer.” It is absolutely clear, and he clearly states this, that he does not suspect that Ramzan Akhmatovich (Kadyrov) personally shot Natalia Estemirova. He even suggests that Kadyrov perhaps never even ordered his staff to do it, but he repeatedly said: “Yes, he’s a murderer.” What does he mean by this? He clearly means something. He means that Kadyrov has created a regime in which political assassinations are not only possible, but thrive. And how did Kadyrov object? Kadyrov proudly said: “Yes, I’m a murderer, and I’m proud of it.” Well, he did not exactly say these words, but I cited and I can cite other quotes in which he simply and explicitly recognizes murders that he has organized, and he has stated: “My hands are bloody, but it is the blood of bad people.” Yes? And he says he will not allow Chechen civilians or their children or other relatives to live here in this land, on Chechen soil, if they are suspected of belonging to the militants. So give up their He said: “The prosecutor’s office is for minor matters, but all those people who were not even implicitly aware of the murder of my father, I have already settled the score with them: none of them is alive.” And so on. And he said plainly: “We won’t detain — we will kill on the spot.” Yes? Here there was the situation during the trial. What country is he the president of? Well, let us take, for example, France, because in real federations the regional governors are elected, not selected by the central government. Fine. We will argue using France as an analogy. Imagine that Sarkozy had appointed the governor of a certain French province, okay? Meanwhile, it turns out that this governor has been suspected and accused, that there is a trial in which the opposing party claims that this governor had organized a system of governance in his province that led to political assassinations. What do you think Sarkozy would do? I assure you that, at least until the end of the trial, Sarkozy never renew that man’s appointment. So what does Dmitry Anatolievich Medvedev do? Medvedev, who speaks so beautifully about freedom? What does he do? He reappoints Kadyrov. Perhaps he is certain of how the trial will turn out. I also believe, and I know, that there will be a conviction, but that is another issue, an issue about which your mother wrote a book. Do we have a justice system? Do you follow? This is a question about our justice system, but if this were a normal court, how could he know in advance that Orlov’s charges would be deemed only slander? But what if Orlov had were proven correct? And what if there were a special, well, a private ruling about the need to investigate the actions of Ramzan Kadyrov as head of the Chechen Republic? T. DZYADKO: Okay. Look, Sergei Adamovich, if we can return to what you were talking about earlier. You said that one of the main reasons is this history with all these special operations being carried out by the security forces. That is, this S. KOVALEV: We broke off while talking about Wahhabism. As a matter of fact, real Wahhabism is not an extreme branch. Real Wahhabism is a completely peaceful Islamic movement. It has its own peculiarities: it is a pretty strict return to fundamentals laid down in the Koran. But it is quite peaceful. The Wahhabism that has now blossomed in the North Caucasus, this is monstrous and allows fatwas on hostage taking and so on, and allows all sorts of banditry and terrorism. This is a distortion of Wahhabism. So where did it come from? There was nothing of the sort in the North Caucasus before the Chechen war of T. DZYADKO: Which government policies? What exactly? S. KOVALEV: With the But what can you expect? Here, people who do not speak Arabic and have no way of even reading of the foundations of their faith, so some semiliterate types like these So, these kinds of people are talking, these extremists, are talking and they say that Allah is calling on them, that he permits and encourages terrorism, and he calls on them to struggle using any and all means. What can you expect? T. DZYADKO: Okay. Let me remind our listeners that we have Sergei Kovalev in the studio. We started out talking about the main issues. You talked about government policies regarding use of force and special operations. Here our listeners our asking, they have sent questions: “As far as a reason for what we are witnessing in the North Caucasus today, how important and serious is the S. KOVALEV: Well, you know, these are problems that need to be solved, and not just in the North Caucasus. In the North Caucasus and, alas, not only in the North Caucasus, but in the Caucasus in general, things are mostly done, well, using methods that I would call corruption. It is a tradition left over from the Soviet times, only now it has intensified. Certainly, these problems need to be solved, but will this necessarily be a successful weapon in the fight against terrorism? I doubt it. In addition to unemployment and social injustices, which, of course, outrage the public, there are other things. There is that very same freedom that our current president speaks of so beautifully. I assure you, there is also craving for freedom in the North Caucasus. It is not the most characteristic feature of people in the North Caucasus. They are, as a rule, physically brave, though not cavaliers when it comes to civic courage. Nevertheless, there is civic courage, and, alas, it is paradoxical and shocking that this also leads to methods such as terrorism, because the not very literate population is having their heads filled with these interpretations of Islam. This is why I say that, if there ever should appear in Islam a collective opinion by a literate, educated religious authority, this would be a step forward. But, alas, Islam is arranged differently. There are no ecumenical councils. There is no, if you like, hierarchical religious structures, and there is this complete freedom to interpret everything to mean anything, and complete ignorance on the part of the population. There needs to be an Islamic authority that speaks to its flock. T. DZYADKO: But in this situation, what can the government do? And what should the government do? S. KOVALEV: What can and what must the government do? Encourage it. You know, encourage it, so to speak, do not be afraid of cultural religious influences. After all, what is said without the sanction of authorities is suspicious and should be, well, doubted. You as a reporter probably know this better than I. But I am talking about us, and it is not just about us. That is, as a matter of fact, I think… I will repeat once again one simple thing. Certainly, all police measures are necessary and, of course, they should improve. But you certainly must understand in advance that they will never win the victory over terrorism. The victory will only be when the “black widows” no longer appear, and they stop coming by to pick up their suicide bomber belts. When cultural Islam at last opposes the influence of religious fundamentalists (there will be victory). The government can do a lot in this regard, or try to do it, to spend some money to organize, to find people who can talk about this. Do you follow me? But what does the government do? It fears. Well, our government, and I do not know what is going on in America with their system for combating terrorism. At least, I do not know in detail, anyway. But what is our government doing? It is increasing the harshness in this area. In the words of our top political leaders, we have repeatedly heard: “p--- on them in the outhouse” (a famous Putin line about killing terrorists anywhere and everywhere — ed), and various other statements. And (the government) is afraid. It is afraid of free thought and afraid of normal debate. Do you follow? But look at how things stand in the case of massive terrorist attacks in Russia. This is a disgrace! T. DZYADKO: What exactly? S. KOVALEV: There has been just one “Never under any circumstances negotiate with terrorists.” So, how can you not do this? You know, the Budennovsk case, it just sticks out from all of the rest. By the way, note that besides the large number of casualties among the hostages that occurred during that So, the whole time the hospital was cordoned off by Russian troops, the hostages were only killed by our commandos’ bullets and grenades and shells. Nothing else. Just imagine if the assault had continued. They certainly would have taken the hospital. I think that Basayev was a very experienced fighter, and his squad had some very well trained soldiers. They would have suffered losses, but they probably would have slipped through the ring, and there would have been an immeasurably greater number of hostages killed. T. DZYADKO: Well, yes. Like what we saw in Beslan, for example. S. KOVALEV: Yes, of course. In Beslan, by the way, who said that in Beslan the assault, the real tragedy, started after blasts carried out by terrorists? There is a very good reason to believe that this was not so. What started it was the assault by the security forces. The armed residents of North Ossetia who came there and tried to surround the school did this not to prevent the terrorists, but to prevent an assault. Do you follow so far? And much about what went on in Beslan makes you realize that our security forces launched the assault, and no one denies this. The investigation was never completed, just as no one investigated who ordered the same with respect to gas at T. DZYADKO: But as far as… We have a few minutes left before the end. As far as the fight against terrorism, in your opinion: are transparency and openness good weapons? S. KOVALEV: Well, what are they? These are, rather, not a weapons, but conditions for the use of the ideological weapons that I was talking about. We must demonstrate honesty and we must demonstrate that our main values in anti-terrorism are the lives of the hostages. We must show that we are ready to talk with the terrorists. This does not mean fulfilling their demands immediately. I think that here it may be a deception, but one that is observed in international practice. It is, nevertheless, the main value: people’s lives, not some distorted view of national prestige. T. DZYADKO: Unfortunately, our time has come to an end. I remind you that today on Cover-2 we were talking about methods to combat terrorism in the world, and in Russia to a greater extent, and we were talking about this with Sergei Kovalev, one of our S. Kovalev: Thank you. T. DZYADKO: The program Cover-2 will end on this and we will meet again in exactly one week at the same time in the same studio. My name is Tikhon Dzyadko. Have a good weekend and be happy. Listen (49:24): Views: 4513 |
Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6 |
||||||||
Be first to comment this article
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
| 2006 - 2024 © Ìåìîðèàë ïîãèáøèõ â Íîðä-Îñòå. Êíèãà ïàìÿòè |
|
|
|
|
|