Archivi tag: Chechnya

FREEDOM SOLD OR WAR BOUGHT? – REFLECTIONS BY APTI BATALOV (part 1)

Lascia un commento

I believe I am not mistaken when I say that one of the tragedies of the Chechen people originated on the day when Chechnya proclaimed itself an independent state. After choosing the first president, the Chechens naively believed that Russia would respect their choice. After all, Yeltsin said “take all the freedom you can swallow!” The Chechens did not know that “Swallowing freedom” they would regurgitate their blood.

The conquest of freedom

The Russians did not recognize the presidential elections held on October 27, 1991 in Chechnya. Rejecting any possibility of peaceful separation from Chechnya, the Kremlin has focused on the definitive solution of the Chechen “problem”. In planning actions against Chechen sovereignty, it was obvious that the Russian government would prioritize provocative and subversive activities, and this was evident from the growing activity of pro-Russian provocateurs on the territory of Chechnya. Funded and armed by Moscow, the leaders of the “anti-Dudaevites” began to form criminal groups under the cover of political slogans, calling themselves “opposition of the Dudaev regime”. In reality, the ideologues of this movement were full-time agents of the Russian special services and, following the instructions of the Lubyanka , they caused a civil war in the Chechens. Through these ” Mankurts ” [1], in the first half of the 90s of the twentieth century, Chechnya was transformed into a land of internal contrasts and social instability. Having already gained political independence from Moscow, many officials who held high positions in the state did what they could to discredit the idea of independence. With their actions they compromised the government, corrupted it, doing everything to make the Chechens repent of their choice. Every day, these people desecrated the idea of a free and sovereign state, and achieved many successes in this action, furthering the premises of the 1994/1996 Russo-Chechen War.

However, one detail had not been taken into consideration: the war imposed by the Kremlin would have ignited the genetic memory of the Chechens. All the people, with rare exceptions, took up arms and stood up to defend that choice. Evidently, after receiving the order to intensify their activities, the Russian special services agents began to increase their efforts to destabilize the political, economic and social situation throughout the Ichkeria territory. By sowing discord among the leaders of the state, creating an atmosphere of mutual distrust and enmity in the relations between yesterday’s comrades, the Russian mercenaries achieved the objectives set by Moscow. Instead of rallying around the president, in this hard and difficult time for the fate of the Chechen nation, and exercising their authority to defend and strengthen the authority of Ichkeria, the leaders of the country faced each other in the political arena with every sort of intrigue, against each other, using their credit only for speculative and populist purposes. After withdrawing troops from Ichkeria in 1996, the Russians invaded it with their agents. Terrible times came for Ichkeria, banditry assumed the proportions of a national catastrophe, kidnapping and the slave trade became the profession of a significant part of the former freedom fighters, lack of work and poverty swelled the ranks of criminals.

Heroes yesterday, enemies today

Thus there was no effective authority in Ichkeria. The comrades in arms of the President of yesterday, having had the opportunity to strengthen it, did not do so, but rather, having become politicians, they were the real antagonists of the President, doing everything to weaken his power. On every occasion, and under various pretexts, his authority was undermined: not a day passed without some “emergency” directed against the President. At that time I was convinced that these antagonists wanted to break Maskhadov psychologically. Imagine the state in which a person subjected to daily torture can be, every day more sophisticated and insidious. One fine day, the President collapsed… all this turmoil around the presidency drove the people to despair, their faith in authority and yesterday’s heroes disappeared. Social inequality, the absence of any guarantee of security, corrupt authorities at all levels, poverty and devastation: the Chechen people faced the 1999 war in these conditions … With an economic blockade, political and information isolation in place, the Chechen leadership he had no way of adequately preparing for Russian aggression.

The signs that the Russians were preparing a new war against Ichkeria appeared as early as February – March 1999. In February 1999, a demonstration of many thousands of people was held in support of the President’s policy in the city of Dzhokhar [formerly Grozny, NDR ]. The participants in the demonstration approved and supported in unison Maskhadov, the foreign and internal policy he pursued, and expressed the desire and willingness to take up arms to restore order in the country. Two or three Russian journalists were present at this gathering, being able to work without any restrictions. They assured me that the Russian media would report the demonstration, but not a single TV channel mentioned it. On the other hand, Russian public opinion began to be influenced by the idea that Maskhadov was a weak and indecisive person, that he had lost the support of the people, that power in Ichkeria was in the hands of the field commanders, that banditry and the slave trade flourished in Ichkeria. Obviously it would be wrong to deny these claims, which were partly true, but that the people did not support Maskhadov, or that he was weak, that was an absolute lie. The Chechen people had responded to the President’s appeal, and were willing to defend him. But the Russian media hid this fact from their audience. As for the field commanders, most of them obeyed without question the President and Commander the Chief of the Armed Forces.

But, as they say, no family is without monsters. On the occasion of the second anniversary of the signing of the Peace Treaty between Ichkeria and Russia on May 12 , 1997, well-organized celebrations were held in the city of Dzhokhar: events were held in the city center, horse races were held on the outskirts of the capital, with prizes in prize money, including “VAZ” 6 car models. It was a bright and festive day, during which the Ichkeria leadership showed all its desire for peace with Russia. Once again, Russian TV reporters worked on the event, as always without restrictions. And once again the media did not say a single word about the fact that similar celebrations were held in the city of Dzhokhar. All of this suggested that there would be no celebration the following year.

[1] Figuratively speaking, the word ” mankurt ” refers to people who have lost touch with their ethnic homeland , who have forgotten their kinship . For further information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mankurt

Исповедь несостоявшегося фермера, или как я потерял Родину (или она меня)

Lascia un commento

   

(Воспоминания Хамзата)

Дело было давно, однажды большая Родина (СССР) приказала всем перестроиться, я с удовольствием согласился и врoде бы с не пыльной и стабильной работы решил переключиться в фермеры. Я знал что это тяжелый и затратный труд но трудностей я не боялся, был задор, чувство собственника и желание работать на себя. Каких трудов и нервов стоило получить землю описывать не буду, уж лучше изложу чем все это закончилось. 1992 г. организовал фермерское  хозяйство закатал рукава и работа закипела. В течении первых двух лет удалось сколотить 2 трактора и весь набор прицепных и навесных сельхоз.агрегатов за исключением комбайна. Были случаи когда местному совхозу помогал техникой а совхоз  одалживал комбайн.

И вот наступил 1994 г а дело происходило в Чечне. Родина будучи недовольной тем что её часть решила “свалить” нагнала в республику столько брони и пушечного мяса, что дело запахло жареным, имя Родины было – Русская Армия. Под Родиной я также имею ввиду любого чиновника от сельской администрации до Главного Скрепохранителя а также любого кто носить униформу. Путаясь под ногами y воюющих сторон, руководствуясь поговоркой: Война войной а кушать надо!, под обстрелами вертолетных ракет мне удалось засеять озимые, весной умудрился посадить картофель и овощные.

А в то время земли совхозов успели зарасти бурьяном. Родина (армия) в поисках безопасного места для боевой позиции перед штурмом села Бамут обнаружила мое поле наиболее подходящим и безопасным, так как засеянное поле как бы гарантировало отсутствие мин (эх…надо было поставить).Узнав об этом я набрался смелости (а оказалось наглости) пошел к Родине чтобы взглянуть ей в глаза, прежде чем увидел глаза Родины моему взоры предстала удручающая картина, помимо солдатских окопов земля была изрыта огромными ямами для танков, БТРов и другой техники. Весь верхний плодоносный, гумусный слой земли вместе с урожаем ушел вниз а на поверхность была поднята желтая глина и мое поле скорее напоминала шахматную доску.

Потом я перевел свoй взгляд на Родину, вид у него был страшный, можно сказать отвратительный, Родина вся былa грязнaя и голоднaя онa нагло смотрелa мне в глаза и поедалa мой картофель, который откапывалa тут же у себя из под ног. Нa мой недоуменный вопрос: Что она (Родина) делает на моем поле? Ответила, что наводит конституционный порядок. -Hеужели для этого надо было уничтожать урожай? спросил я, лучше бы я не спрашивал, спасибо что живым отпустили, еле унес ноги.

Спустя некоторое время местная малая Родина (республиканский минсельхоз), предложила все эти убытки и упушенную выгоду запротоколировать и когда наступят лучшие времена большая Родина возместит. Так я и сделал, еще год ушел на восстановление земли чтобы можно было ее рaспахивать и обрабатывать. Более менее оправившись от железных объятий “Старшего Брата” я встретил второе пришествие Родины 1999 г. на этот paз Родина погубила мой урожай, не на поле брани, а будучи уже убранным, тo есть: наученный первой войной народ свалил по близлежащим республикам, а из-за отсутствия рынка сбыта, урожай мой пропал, проросшие лук пришлось выкинуть

Междувоенное время я вспомнил об актах погубленного урожая в первую войну которые чудом сохранились. С этими исками я пошел к Родине, мол так и так… Родина даже не поинтересовалась а правильно ли я калькулировал свои убытки не приписал ли я что-то лишнее, Родину (минсельхоз) прежде всего интересовало откачу ли я ей необходимый процент из той денежной компенсации, которую она окажет моему фермерскому хозяйству. Не договорившись с Родиной мы разошлись. Еще некоторое время ушло в надежде на что Родина когда ни будь меня заметит и будет кредитовать. Но львиную долю республиканского бюджета поедали правоОХРЕНЕТели, которые росли как на дрожжах и на каждом шагу как грибы после дождя. У меня окончательно опустились руки дa и здоровье тоже было уже не то.

Я возненавидел Родину, потом ненависть тихо перешла в презрение, единственное мое желание было, не видеть эту Родину в глаза. И покинуть eё – навсегда, но и возможности (материально) тоже не было. И вот однажды с этим мерзким чувством я последний раз пошел к Родине (минсельхоз) чтобы высказать ей все что думаю о ней и заодно попросить у нее денег чтобы… свалить. И каково же было мое удивление, когда Родина согласилась дать мне денег, ну разумеется за определенную мзду.

Родина сама придумала схему выдачи мне денег, Это была разовая помощь на посевную, от которой я должен “откатить”… 60%. Мы ударили по рукам я получил энную сумму, откатил соответствующую часть, взял семью под мышку и меня только и видели. Напоследок перед тем как шагнуть на трап свoего “философского пароходa” я обернулся назад чтобы последний раз взглянуть своими влажными глазами, в глаза Родине – на прощание. Даже моего прощального взгляда Родина не видела, ей было не до меня, она нервно подсчитывала свою долю”.

CHECHENS, SHOW THAT YOU ARE A UNITED NATION! – INTERVIEW WITH USMAN FERZAULI

Lascia un commento

(English Version)

Usman Ferzauli, former First Deputy Foreign Minister and Director of the Department of Foreign Intelligence, then Minister of Foreign Affairs and Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Kingdom of Denmark, in service until 2016, has agreed to answer some of our questions on the current situation of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria.

As a senior officer of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, you have gone through all stages of the republic’s history, from the most glorious to the most difficult. Today you support the cause of Chechnya from Europe. How is the management of Ichkeria experiencing this difficult and delicate moment?

I must say that today I am not an Ichkeria official on active duty . I believe that this status allows me to be more objective and free in the choice of terms to define the processes related to Ichkeria, without violating anyone’s rights or ambitions. I cannot speak on behalf of all Chechens, but I would insult the memory of my brothers in arms, who gave their lives for the sake of Ichkeria’s freedom, if I did not talk about what we all dreamed of and what we have dedicated our lives. Everyone is going through this difficult time in their own way. There are more than half a million Chechens outside of Ichkeria and Russia, and they are integrated into the social strata of their home countries. About three hundred thousand live in the territory of Russia proper. The remainder resides in Ichkeria. Our people have gone through a very difficult path, in the last 30 years we have faced 2 ethnic cleanups, which European politicians have called simply “… violation of human rights”. We have lost a quarter of the population during the wars and there is no family in Ichkeria that has not lost a loved one during this time. I mention these facts only because all this lives in us, in our children. And any information that mentions the word Ichkeria is a kind of detonator for all of us. Unfortunately, today I do not see a single national concept capable of developing mechanisms to get out of this difficult situation. Furthermore, it is not entirely ethical to try to change something in Ichkeria while sitting thousands of kilometers from the Homeland. Finally, I do not allow anyone to ask those Chechens living in Ichkeria today to engage in an open confrontation with the occupying authorities, because today Ichkeria is similar to Ukraine during the occupation by Nazi Germany. Ichkeria is governed by the dictatorship of the federal authorities. People are absolutely helpless. People have no right to be heard, to have their own opinion different from the official versions. The corruption is nationwide. This is the situation we are in …


A few days ago, the Ukrainian parliament recognized Ichkeria as a state illegally occupied by the Russian Federation and recognized the genocide committed by the Russians against the Chechens. How do you rate this event for Chechnya?

We are all happy with this step and we give an enthusiastic evaluation to these acts of the fraternal Ukrainian people. Thousands of our compatriots today fight together with the Ukrainians for a noble cause: against an aggressor who has no morals, pity, dignity. Undoubtedly, the recognition of Ichkeria as a temporarily occupied state and the establishment of a commission to investigate the genocide against our people are but the first glimpses of our people’s hopes for freedom and the consequent prosecution of military and political criminals. But this is a very tiring path, which will first of all require the unity of us Chechens, which unfortunately I do not see at the moment. The very concept of independence must go beyond the national framework with the involvement of international experts, support groups in the broad sense and, above all, an international administration set up for the transition period. Today the Chechens are divided globally and a peaceful solution to the problem of unification is, to put it mildly, very prosaic. Unfortunately, we still don’t find similar support from political leaders in European countries and North America and there are no clear signs that this will happen in the foreseeable future. But we are patient people, we have been waiting for 300 years, we will wait for more.

The forces demanding continuity with the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria today seem divided and sometimes even in conflict with each other, delegitimizing each other. What is the reason for this fragmentation?

This is a very sensitive issue. I am not an advocate of public whipping of my countrymen, no matter how much scoundrel they may be. Unfortunately, nothing is changing and they apparently haven’t learned from past mistakes. Somehow, the esteemed Vytautas Landsbergis, observing the disunity of the Chechens, said: “ My dear Chechens, well, show at least once that you are one united nation! “ The reason for the fragmentation of these groups (I cannot call them otherwise) are the sick ambitions of some and the very high presumption of others. We have already overcome this path of fragmentation in 1997, on the eve of the election of the President of the CRI and after, when the people who had to unite the people became a disaster for their own . nation . After the end of the first war, the lustration law was passed. But this law was not applied to domestic traitors and people who actively cooperated with the aggressor. Eventually, everything went back to anarchy. The same trend is observed today. Defectors, people who collaborated with the occupation regime and mere adventurers, as well as those who betrayed President Aslan Maskhadov, tempted by the conspiratorial ideas of controlling oil pipelines and uniting Chechnya and Dagestan, position themselves as the main “activists. of the liberation movement “.

How do the Chechen population at home and the diaspora in Europe perceive the litigation of various organizations defending the independence of Chechnya? And how credible are these organizations among the civilian population?

The feelings are very negative . The most interesting thing is that all these groups protect the interests of the group itself, which they arbitrarily declare to be the interests of the people of Ichkeria. As can be seen from publications and personal communication, there are conflicting statements. Someone renewed the ideas of the Caliphate with the establishment of Sharia law in Ichkeria immediately. Someone will go to war directly in the Chechen Republic and thus “free” Ichkeria from the invaders, with all the bloody consequences that will ensue. This is nothing but an illusion. There are also demands on the government of Ukraine to recognize Dagestan’s independence. We are not interested in Dagestan and we do not have the right to speak on behalf of the peoples of Dagestan, where 52 ethnic groups live and there is not a single dominant one. Throughout our history, we have not had a single beneficial idea from Dagestan, only conflicts, conflicts, wars, devastation and betrayal. Furthermore, the international community, primarily the European Union and the countries of North America, see Russia in the future as a united, stable and predictable country within its current borders. And our appeals for the recognition of the independence of Russian autonomies can be mistaken for attempts to divide Russia itself, and therefore we pour water on the mill of Russian propaganda. Yes, we are for the freedom of all peoples, but first of all we must not forget our national interests. Since our independence in principle also depends on the outside world, it is necessary to speak in a language that is acceptable and understandable to the world, leaving verbosity and rhetoric unacceptable to parlor adventurers.

Do you think it makes sense that the various institutional groups that call themselves “legitimate” come together as one and put aside their differences instead of acting independently? Or do you think there is someone among them worthy of leading others?

I am deeply convinced that Ichkeria should achieve independence without bloodshed, military confrontations and destructive wars. We’ve been through all of this before. One thing is quite clear to me, that without the consent of Russia, Ichkeria will not receive independence in that classic civilian form, as has happened before with the colonial territories. I am absolutely certain that no country in the world will announce a single sanction against Russia due to the violence and colonization of Ichkeria. We have seen all of this during two bloody wars. And in these matters, we need the political support of Ukraine and its partners. It is quite obvious that in matters of cooperation with Ichkeria, if this process continues, Ukraine needs a force that can be represented on behalf of the people of Ichkeria. And if all these groups really want freedom for their country, it is necessary to leave their ambitions alone and form a working group to carry this project forward .

At the moment, many young Chechens are fighting alongside the Ukrainian army, mainly on the Kherson front. It is clear that their battle is not only for the defense of Ukraine, but also for the restoration of Chechnya’s independence. If you could talk to each of them, what would you tell them?

With obvious envy, in the good sense of the word, I watch our boys participate in this war. It would be unethical to teach them something, because with their example they set an example and hope for all Chechens. For me, in principle, it does not matter what they are guided by. But to each, individually, I would give my hand and hug, as Chechen men do. We Chechens are laconic and don’t compliment each other, but I’m extremely proud to belong to the people they represent. Once again, they fully showed the whole world their nobility and the potential for courage in the fight against a common enemy. In my prayers I ask the Almighty to grant them health, good humor and long life in their free homeland.

How does the political fragmentation of the CRI affect those same soldiers fighting at the front under the Ichkeria banner?

At this stage, these guys are busy with their noble cause and, for objective reasons, don’t pay much attention to this issue. I know that there have been unsuccessful attempts by some groups to subjugate these battalions to themselves by luring them “under the banner of Ichkeria”. But the problem with the latter is that these guys since 2014, in one way or another, under the Ichkeria banner, position themselves as Ichkerians. At the same time, they are integrated into the structures of the Ukrainian armed forces, accept and carry out the tasks assigned to them by the command. Therefore, I doubt that at this stage they can be affected in any way beyond their functional responsibilities.

CECENI, MOSTRATE CHE SIETE UNA NAZIONE UNITA! – INTERVISTA AD USMAN FERZAULI

(Versione Italiana)

Usman Ferzauli, ex Primo Vice Ministro degli Esteri e Direttore del Dipartimento di Intelligence Estera, poi Ministro degli Affari Esteri ed Ambasciatore Straordinario e Plenipotenziario presso il Regno di Danimarca, in servizio fino al 2016, ha acconsentito a rispondere ad alcune nostre domande sulla situazione attuale della Repubblica Cecena di Ichkeria.

Come alto ufficiale della Repubblica cecena di Ichkeria, hai attraversato tutte le fasi della storia della repubblica, dalle più gloriose alle più difficili. Oggi sostieni la causa della Cecenia dall’Europa. Come sta vivendo questo momento difficile e delicato la dirigenza di Ichkeria?

Devo dire che oggi non sono un funzionario di Ichkeria in servizio attivo. Credo che questo status mi permetta di essere più obiettivo e libero nella scelta dei termini per definire i processi relativi all’Ichkeria, senza violare i diritti o le ambizioni di qualcuno. on posso parlare a nome di tutti i ceceni, ma insulterei la memoria dei miei fratelli d’armi, che hanno dato la vita per il bene della libertà di Ichkeria, se non parlassi di ciò che tutti abbiamo sognato e di ciò cui abbiamo dedicato le nostre vite. Ognuno sta attraversando questo momento difficile a modo suo. Ci sono più di mezzo milione di ceceni al di fuori di Ichkeria e della Russia, e sono integrati negli strati sociali dei loro paesi di residenza. Circa trecentomila vivono nel territorio della Russia vera e propria. Il resto risiede in Ichkeria. Il nostro popolo ha attraversato un percorso molto difficile, negli ultimi 30 anni abbiamo affrontato 2 pulizie etniche, che i politici europei hanno chiamato semplicemente “…violazione dei diritti umani”. Abbiamo perso un quarto della popolazione durante le guerre e non c’è famiglia a Ichkeria che non abbia perso la persona amata durante questo periodo. Cito questi fatti solo perché tutto questo vive in noi, nei nostri figli. E qualsiasi informazione che menzioni la parola Ichkeria è una specie di detonatore per tutti noi. Purtroppo non vedo oggi un unico concetto nazionale in grado di sviluppare meccanismi per uscire da questa difficile situazione. Inoltre, non è del tutto etico cercare di cambiare qualcosa a Ichkeria mentre si è seduti a migliaia di chilometri dalla Patria. Infine, non permetto a nessuno di chiedere a quei ceceni che oggi vivono a Ichkeria di avviare un confronto aperto con le autorità occupanti, perché oggi Ichkeria è simile all’Ucraina durante l’occupazione da parte della Germania nazista. In Ichkeria vige la dittatura delle autorità federali. Le persone sono assolutamente impotenti. Le persone non hanno il diritto di essere ascoltate, di avere la propria opinione diversa dalle versioni ufficiali. La corruzione è su scala nazionale. Questa è la situazione in cui ci troviamo…


Pochi giorni fa, il parlamento ucraino ha riconosciuto Ichkeria come uno stato occupato illegalmente dalla Federazione Russa e ha riconosciuto il genocidio commesso dai russi contro i ceceni. Come valuti questo evento per la Cecenia?

Siamo tutti contenti di questo passo e diamo una valutazione entusiasta a questi atti del fraterno popolo ucraino. Migliaia di nostri connazionali oggi combattono insieme agli ucraini per una nobile causa: contro un aggressore che non ha morale, pietà, dignità. Indubbiamente, il riconoscimento di Ichkeria come stato temporaneamente occupato e l’istituzione di una commissione che indaghi sul genocidio contro il nostro popolo non sono altro che i primi barlumi delle speranze del nostro popolo di ottenere la libertà e il conseguente perseguimento di criminali militari e politici. Ma questo è un percorso molto faticoso, che richiederà prima di tutto l’unità di noi ceceni, che purtroppo al momento non vedo. Il concetto stesso di indipendenza deve andare oltre il quadro nazionale con il coinvolgimento di esperti internazionali, gruppi di sostegno in senso lato e, soprattutto, di una amministrazione internazionale costituita per il periodo di transizione. Oggi i ceceni sono divisi a livello globale e una soluzione pacifica al problema dell’unificazione è, per usare un eufemismo, molto prosaica. Sfortunatamente, non troviamo ancora un sostegno simile da parte dei leader politici nei paesi europei e nel Nord America e non ci sono segnali chiari che ciò accadrà nel prossimo futuro . Ma siamo persone pazienti, stiamo aspettando da 300 anni, ne aspetteremo ancora.

Le forze che chiedono continuità con la Repubblica cecena di Ichkeria oggi sembrano divise e talvolta addirittura in conflitto tra loro, delegittimandosi a vicenda. Qual è il motivo di questa frammentazione?

Questa è una questione molto delicata. Non sono un sostenitore della fustigazione in nome pubblico dei miei connazionali, non importa quanto farabutti possano essere. Sfortunatamente, nulla sta cambiando e a quanto pare non hanno imparato dagli errori del passato. In qualche modo, lo stimato Vytautas Landsbergis, osservando la disunione dei ceceni, disse: “Miei cari ceceni, bene, mostrate almeno una volta che siete un’unica nazione unita!” Il motivo della frammentazione di questi gruppi (non posso chiamarli diversamente) sono le malate ambizioni di alcuni e l’altissima presunzione di altri. Abbiamo già superato questo percorso di frammentazione nel 1997, alla vigilia delle elezioni del Presidente della CRI e dopo, quando la gente che doveva unire il popolo divenne un disastro per la sua stessa nazione. Dopo la fine della prima guerra, fu approvata la legge sulla lustrazione. Ma questa legge non è stata applicata ai traditori nazionali e alle persone che hanno collaborato attivamente con l’aggressore. Alla fine, tutto è tornato all’anarchia. La stessa tendenza si osserva oggi. I disertori, le persone che hanno collaborato con il regime di occupazione ed i semplici avventurieri, così come coloro che hanno tradito il presidente Aslan Maskhadov, tentati dalle idee cospirative di controllare gli oleodotti e unire Cecenia e Daghestan, si posizionano come i principali “attivisti del movimento di liberazione”.

Come percepiscono la popolazione cecena in patria e la diaspora in Europa il contenzioso di varie organizzazioni che difendono l’indipendenza della Cecenia? E quanto sono credibili queste organizzazioni tra la popolazione civile?

Le percepiscono in modo molto negativo. La cosa più interessante è che tutti questi gruppi tutelano gli interessi del gruppo stesso, che dichiarano arbitrariamente essere interessi del popolo di Ichkeria. Come si vede dalle pubblicazioni e dalla comunicazione personale, ci sono dichiarazioni contrastanti. Qualcuno ha rinnovato le idee del Califfato con l’istituzione della legge della Sharia in Ichkeria immediatamente. Qualcuno andrà in guerra direttamente nella Repubblica Cecena e così “liberarà” Ichkeria dagli invasori, con tutte le sanguinose conseguenze che ne conseguiranno. Questa non è altro che un’illusione. Ci sono anche richieste al governo dell’Ucraina di riconoscere l’indipendenza del Daghestan. Non ci interessa il Daghestan e non abbiamo il diritto di parlare a nome dei popoli del Daghestan, dove vivono 52 gruppi etnici e non ce n’è uno solo dominante. Nel corso della nostra storia, non abbiamo avuto una sola idea benefica dal Daghestan, solo conflitti, conflitti, guerre, devastazioni e tradimenti. Inoltre, la comunità internazionale, in primis l’Unione Europea ei Paesi del Nord America, vedono la Russia nel futuro come un Paese unito, stabile e prevedibile entro i suoi attuali confini. E i nostri appelli al riconoscimento dell’indipendenza delle autonomie russe possono essere scambiati per tentativi di dividere la Russia stessa, e quindi versiamo acqua sul mulino della propaganda russa. Sì, siamo per la libertà di tutti i popoli, ma prima di tutto non dobbiamo dimenticare i nostri interessi nazionali. Poiché la nostra indipendenza in linea di principio dipende anche dal mondo esterno, è necessario parlare in una lingua che sia accettabile e comprensibile per il mondo, lasciando verbosità e retorica inaccettabile agli avventurieri da salotto.

Pensi che abbia senso che i vari gruppi istituzionali che si definiscono “legittimi” si uniscano come un’unica realtà e mettano da parte le loro differenze invece di agire in modo indipendente? O pensi che tra loro ci sia qualcuno degno di guidare gli altri?

Sono profondamente convinto che Ichkeria dovrebbe ottenere l’indipendenza senza spargimenti di sangue, scontri militari e guerre distruttive. Abbiamo già passato tutto questo. Una cosa è del tutto chiara per me, che senza il consenso della Russia, Ichkeria non riceverà l’indipendenza in quella classica forma civile, come è successo prima con i territori coloniali. Sono assolutamente certo che nessun Paese al mondo annuncerà una sola sanzione contro la Russia a causa della violenza e della colonizzazione di Ichkeria. Abbiamo visto tutto questo durante due sanguinose guerre. E in queste questioni, abbiamo bisogno del sostegno politico dell’Ucraina e dei suoi partner. È abbastanza ovvio che in materia di cooperazione con Ichkeria, se questo processo continua, l’Ucraina ha bisogno di una forza che possa essere rappresentata a nome del popolo di Ichkeria. E se tutti questi gruppi vogliono davvero la libertà per il loro paese, è necessario lasciare in pace le loro ambizioni e formare un gruppo di lavoro per portare avanti questo progetto.

Al momento, molti giovani ceceni stanno combattendo a fianco dell’esercito ucraino, principalmente sul fronte di Kherson. È chiaro che la loro battaglia non è solo per la difesa dell’Ucraina, ma anche per il ripristino dell’indipendenza della Cecenia. Se potessi parlare con ciascuno di loro, cosa diresti loro?

 Con palese invidia, nel buon senso della parola, osservo i nostri ragazzi partecipare a questa guerra. Non sarebbe etico insegnare loro qualcosa, perché con il loro esempio danno un esempio e una speranza a tutti i ceceni. Per me, in linea di principio, non importa da cosa sono guidati. Ma a ciascuno, individualmente, darei la mano e l’abbraccio, come fanno gli uomini ceceni. Noi ceceni siamo laconici e non ci complimentiamo a vicenda, ma sono estremamente orgoglioso di appartenere alle persone che loro rappresentano. Ancora una volta, hanno mostrato pienamente al mondo intero la loro nobiltà e il potenziale di coraggio nella lotta contro un nemico comune. Nelle mie preghiere chiedo all’Onnipotente di concedere loro salute, buon umore e lunga vita nella loro libera patria.

In che modo la frammentazione politica della CRI colpisce quegli stessi soldati che combattono al fronte sotto la bandiera di Ichkeria?

In questa fase, questi ragazzi sono impegnati con la loro nobile causa e, per ragioni oggettive, non prestano molta attenzione a questo problema. So che ci sono stati tentativi infruttuosi da parte di alcuni gruppi di soggiogare questi battaglioni a se stessi, attirandoli “sotto la bandiera di Ichkeria”. Ma il problema di quest’ultimo è che questi ragazzi dal 2014, in un modo o nell’altro, sotto la bandiera di Ichkeria, si posizionano come Ichkeriani. Allo stesso tempo, sono integrati nelle strutture delle forze armate ucraine, accettano e attuano i compiti loro assegnati dal comando. Pertanto, dubito che in questa fase possano essere influenzati in alcun modo al di là delle loro responsabilità funzionali.

Чеченцы, покажите, что вы сплочённая нация!
Интервью с Усманом Ферзаули

(русскоязычная версия)

Усман Ферзаули, бывший первый заместитель министра иностранных дел и директор Департамента внешней разведки, затем министр иностранных дел и Чрезвычайный и Полномочный Посол в Королевстве Дания, на службе до 2016 года, согласился ответить на некоторые наши вопросы о текущей ситуации. Чеченской Республики Ичкерия.

Вы как высокопоставленный офицер Чеченской Республики Ичкерия прошли все этапы истории республики, от самого славного до самого трудного. Сегодня вы поддерживаете дело Чечни из Европы. Как руководство Ичкерии переживает этот сложный и деликатный момент?

Должен сказать, что я сегодня не в руководстве Ичкерии. Считаю, что данный статус позволяет мне быть более объективным и свободным в выборе терминов определения процессов касающихся Ичкерии, не ущемляя чьих то прав или амбиций. Я так же не могу говорить от имени всех чеченцев, но я бы оскорбил память моих братьев по оружию, которые отдали свои жизни ради свободы Ичкерии, если бы не стал говорить о том, о чём мы все мечтали и чему посвятили свою жизнь. Это сложное время каждый переживает по-своему. За пределами Ичкерии и России более полумиллиона чеченцев и они интегрированы в социальных слоях стран проживания. Порядка триста тысяч проживают на территории собственно России. Ну и остальные в Ичкерии. Наш народ прошел очень трудный путь, буквально за последние 30 лет мы пережили 2 этнические чистки, которые европейские политики называли просто «..нарушением прав человека». Мы потеряли в процессе войн четверть населения, и нет в Ичкерии семьи, кто не потерял своего близкого человека именно в этот период. Я привожу эти факты только потому, что все это живёт в нас, в наших детях. И любая информация, где упоминается слово Ичкерия,  является для всех нас своего рода детонатором. К сожалению, я не вижу сегодня единой национальной концепции действий, способной выработать механизмы выхода из этой сложной ситуации. Более того, не совсем этично сидя за тысячи километров вдали от Родины, пытаться что-то изменить в Ичкерии. Я так же не допускаю, чтобы кто-либо требовал от тех чеченцев, которые проживают сегодня в Ичкерии, начал открытое противостояние с оккупационными властями, потому что сегодня Ичкерия подобна Украине во время оккупации нацистской Германией. В Ичкерии диктатура федеральных властей. Люди абсолютно бесправные. У людей нет прав быть услышанными, иметь собственное мнение отличное от официальных версий. Коррупция в национальном масштабе. Это та ситуация, в которой мы варимся…


Несколько дней назад украинский парламент признал Ичкерию государством, незаконно оккупированным Российской Федерацией, и признал геноцид, совершенный русскими в отношении чеченцев. Как вы оцениваете это событие для Чечни?

Мы все в восторге от этого шага и даём этим актам братского Украинского народа должную оценку. Тысячи наших земляков сегодня сражаются вместе с Украинцами за благородное дело – против агрессора, не имеющего ни морали, ни жалости, ни достоинства. Безусловно, признание Ичкерии временно оккупированным государством и совершения геноцида в отношении нашего народа есть не что иное, как первые проблески надежд нашего народа на обретение свободы и последующего привлечения к ответственности военно-политических преступников. Но это очень трудоёмкий путь, который потребует в первую очередь от нас, чеченцев, сплочённости, чего я, к сожалению, не вижу на данный момент. Сама концепция обретения независимости должна выйти за национальные рамки с вовлечением международных экспертов, группы поддержки в широком смысле и, самое главное, сформированная международная администрация на переходный период. Сегодня чеченцы разделены глобально, и мирное разрешение проблемы объединения, мягко говоря, весьма прозаичны. К сожалению, мы не находим всё ещё аналогичной поддержки политических лидеров в европейских странах и в Северной Америке и нет явных признаков того, что это произойдёт в ближайшей перспективе. Но мы люди терпеливые, мы ждали 300 лет, подождём ещё.

Силы, требующие преемственности с Чеченской Республикой Ичкерия, сегодня выглядят разрозненными, а иногда даже конфликтующими друг с другом, делегитимизирующими друг друга. В чем причина этой фрагментации?

Это очень деликатный вопрос. Я не сторонник публичной поимённой порки своих земляков, какими бы негодяями они ни были. К сожалению, ничего не меняется и видимо они не извлекли уроков из прошлых ошибок. Как-то многоуважаемый Витаутас Ландсбергис, наблюдая разрозненность чеченцев, сказал: Дорогие мои чеченцы, ну покажите хоть один раз, что вы единая сплочённая нация!                                                                                             

Причина фрагментации этих группировок (я их иначе не могу назвать) в больных амбициях одних, и чрезвычайно высокого самомнения других. Мы уже проходили этот путь фрагментации в 1997 году, накануне выборов Президента ЧРИ и после, когда люди, которые должны были объединить народ, стали бедствием для этого народа. После окончания первой войны был принят Закон о Люстрации. Но этот закон не был применён в отношении национальных предателей и людей, активно сотрудничавших с агрессором. В итоге всё вернулось в анархию. Сегодня наблюдается та же тенденция. Главными «активистами освободительного движения» позиционируют себя дезертиры, люди сотрудничавшие с оккупационным режимом и просто авантюристы, а также те, кто предал Президента Аслана Масхадова соблазнившись конспиративными идеями контроля нефтепроводов и объединения Чечни и Дагестана.   

Как чеченское население на родине и диаспора в Европе воспринимают сутяжничество различных организаций, защищающих независимость Чечни? И каким доверием пользуются эти организации среди гражданского населения?

Воспринимают очень негативно. Самое интересное в том, что все эти группировки несут в себе интересы собственно только самой группировки, которые декларируются ими произвольно якобы от имени народа Ичкерии. Как мы видим из публикаций и при личном общении, есть противоречивые декларации. Кто-то возобновил идеи Халифата с установлением немедленно законов Шариата в Ичкерии. Кто-то собирается идти воевать непосредственно в Чеченской Республике и таким образом «освободить» Ичкерию от оккупантов, со всеми вытекающими отсюда кровавыми последствиями. Это не более чем иллюзия. Есть так же призывы к Правительству Украины признать независимость Дагестана. Нам нет дела до Дагестана, и мы не имеем права говорить от имени народов Дагестана, где проживают 52 этнические группы, и нет ни одной доминирующей. За всю нашу историю мы не имели ни одной благотворной идеи от Дагестана, одни конфликты, распри, войны, разруху и предательство. Более того, международное сообщество, в первую очередь Европейский союз и страны Северной Америки видят Россию в перспективе единой в пределах своих нынешних границ, стабильной и предсказуемой страной. И наши призывы к признанию независимости российских автономий могут принять за попытки раскола самой России и таким образом мы льём воду на мельницу российской пропаганды. Да, мы за свободу всех народов, но нам в первую очередь нужно не забывать свои национальные интересы. Поскольку наша независимость в принципе зависит и от внешнего мира необходимо говорить на языке, который приемлем и который понятен миру, оставив словоблудие и неприемлемую риторику салонным авантюристам.

Считаете ли вы целесообразным, чтобы различные институциональные группы, определяющие себя как «законные», объединились в единую реальность и отложили в сторону свои разногласия, вместо того чтобы действовать независимо? Или ты считаешь, что среди них есть тот, кто достоин возглавить остальных?

Я глубоко убеждён в том, что Ичкерия должна получить независимость без кровопролития, военных столкновений и разрушительной войны. Мы всё это уже проходили. Мне совершенно понятно одно, что без согласия на то России Ичкерия не получит независимость в той классической цивилизованной форме, как это происходило ранее с колониальными территориями. Я совершенно уверен и в том, что ни одна страна в мире не объявит ни одной санкции  России из-за насилия и колонизации Ичкерии. Мы всё это видели в течение двух кровавых войн.  И в этих вопросах нам необходима политическая поддержка Украины и её партнёров.  Совершенно очевидно, что в вопросах сотрудничества с Ичкерией, если этот процесс будет иметь продолжение,  для Украины необходима сила, которая может быть представлена от имени народа Ичкерии. И если все эти группировки действительно желают свободы своей стране, необходимо оставить в покое свои амбиции и сформировать рабочую группу для продвижения этой работы.

На данный момент многие молодые чеченцы воюют на стороне украинской армии, в основном на Херсонском фронте. Понятно, что их битва ведется не только за защиту Украины, но и за восстановление независимости Чечни. Если бы вы могли поговорить с каждым из них, что бы вы им сказали?

Я с нескрываемой завистью, в хорошем смысле этого слова, наблюдаю за нашими парнями, участвующим на этой войне. Было бы не этично учить их чему-то, поскольку своим примером они дают пример и надежду всем чеченцам. Для меня в принципе неважно, чем они руководствуются. Но каждому в отдельности я подал бы свою руку и обнял, как это делают чеченские мужчины. Мы, чеченцы, немногословны и не делаем комплименты друг другу, но я чрезвычайно горд, что принадлежу к народу, который они представляют. Они ещё раз в полной мере показали всему миру своё благородство и  потенциал мужества в борьбе с общим врагом. В своих молитвах я прошу Всевышнего даровать им здоровья, бодрости духа и долгих лет жизни на своей свободной Родине.

Как политическая раздробленность ЧРИ сказывается на тех самых бойцах, сражающихся на фронте под знамёнами Ичкерии?

На данном этапе эти парни заняты своим благородным делом и в силу объективных причин они не уделяют этому вопросу много внимания. Я знаю, что были неудачные попытки некоторых группировок подчинить эти батальоны себе, заманив «под знамёна Ичкерии». Но проблема последних в том, что эти парни с 2014, так или иначе, под знамёнами Ичкерии, они и позиционируют себя как Ичкерийцы. При этом они интегрированы в структуры Вооруженных Сил Украины, принимают и реализуют задачи, поставленные перед ними командованием. Поэтому, я сомневаюсь в том, что на них можно оказать какое-то влияние, выходящее за рамки их функциональных обязанностей на данном этапе.

Zakatev scrive ai Radicali Italiani: sarete benvenuti come fratelli nella Cecenia libera!

Lascia un commento

A seguito del riconoscimento della Repubblica Cecena di Ichkeria da parte del Parlamento ucraino, il Primo Ministro Akhmed Zakayev si è rivolto ai Radicali Italiani per ringraziarli del loro sostegno. Nel Giugno scorso i Radicali avevano organizzato una visita a Roma per il Primo Ministro ceceno, durante la quale era stato ricevuto in via ufficiale dal Sottosegretario di Stato agli Esteri Benedetto della Vedova.

Ai nostri amici italiani di Radicali Italiani

A Silvja Manzi e Igor Boni

A Benedetto della Vedova e Riccardo Magi

18 ottobre 2022

Oggi il Parlamento ucraino ha riconosciuto la Repubblica Cecena di Ichkeria. Si tratta di un gesto molto più che formale: il popolo ucraino ha riconosciuto nella nostra battaglia la sua stessa battaglia, nelle nostre sofferenze le sue stesse sofferenze, nel nostro destino il suo stesso destino. Non potrà mai esserci libertà per nessuno, finché un solo popolo, e addirittura un solo uomo, dovrà subire la schiavitù.

Oggi gli Ucraini combattono per la loro indipendenza, così come i ceceni fanno ormai da ventidue lunghi anni. L’Europa, che prima non aveva capito l’importanza della nostra battaglia, oggi comincia a riconoscere che la guerra che oggi si combatte sulle sponde del Dnepr e nel Donbass è iniziato molti anni prima, quando la Russia ha preteso di piegare il nostro spirito spezzando i corpi dei nostri fratelli, dei nostri bambini, con i cingoli dei suoi carri armati.

In questo giorno così importante per la nostra nazione, che segna il primo, concreto passo verso la riconquista della nostra libertà dall’oppressione, rivolgo a voi, che in tutto questo avete creduto fin dall’inizio, il mio sentito ringraziamento per il sostegno che avete dato, e che continuate dare, alla nostra lotta. Spero che la purezza dei vostri ideali possa illuminare le coscienze di tutti gli uomini liberi.

Sarete benvenuti come fratelli nella Cecenia libera.

Akhmed Zakaev,

Primo Ministro della Repubblica Cecena di Ichkeria

ENGLISH VERSION

Following the recognition of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria by the Ukrainian Parliament, Prime Minister Akhmed Zakayev addressed the Italian Radicals to thank them for their support. Last June the Radicals had organized a visit to Rome for the Chechen Prime Minister, during which he was officially received by the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs Benedetto della Vedova.

To our Italian friends of Radicali Italiani

To Silvja Manzi and Igor Boni

To Benedetto della Vedova and Riccardo Magi

October 18, 2022

Today the Ukrainian Parliament recognized the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria. It is a much more than formal gesture: the Ukrainian people recognized their own battle in our battle, their own sufferings in our sufferings, their own destiny in our destiny. There can never be freedom for anyone, as long as a single people, and even a single man, has to suffer slavery.

Today the Ukrainians are fighting for their independence, just as the Chechens have been fighting for twenty-two long years now. Europe, which previously did not understand the importance of our battle, is now beginning to recognize that the war being fought today on the banks of the Dnieper and in the Donbass began many years earlier, when Russia tried to bend our spirit. breaking the bodies of our brothers, of our children, with the tracks of his tanks.

On this very important day for our nation, which marks the first concrete step towards regaining our freedom from oppression, I extend to you, who have believed in all this from the beginning, my heartfelt thanks for the support that you have given, and continue to dare, to our struggle. I hope that the purity of your ideals can enlighten the consciences of all free men.

You will be welcome as brothers in free Chechnya.

Akhmed Zakaev,

Prime Minister of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria

Ukraine has recognized the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria

7 commenti

The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine supported the draft resolution on the recognition of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria as temporarily occupied by the Russian Federation and on the condemnation of the genocide of the Chechen people. According to MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak, 287 people’s deputies voted in favor of the resolution. The document notes that the Verkhovna Rada takes into account the proclamation of November 25, 1990 by the National Congress of the Chechen People of the Declaration on State Sovereignty of Chechnya (Nokhchichoy), based on the exercise by the Chechen people of their right to self-determination , sanctioned by the Charter of the United Nations, as well as the proclamation of Ichkeria after the collapse of the USSR on March 12, 1992.

Below, the link to the resolution

https://itd.rada.gov.ua/billInfo/Bills/Card/40676











VERSIONE ITALIANA





IL PARLAMENTO UCRAINO HA RICONOSCIUTO LA REPUBBLICA CECENA DI ICHKERIA





La Verkhovna Rada dell’Ucraina ha sostenuto il progetto di risoluzione sul riconoscimento della Repubblica cecena di Ichkeria come temporaneamente occupata dalla Federazione russa e sulla condanna del genocidio del popolo ceceno. Secondo il deputato Yaroslav Zheleznyak, 287 deputati del popolo hanno votato a favore della risoluzione .





Il documento rileva che la Verkhovna Rada tiene conto della proclamazione del 25 novembre 1990 da parte del Congresso nazionale del popolo ceceno della dichiarazione sulla sovranità statale della Cecenia (Nokhchichoy), basata sull’esercizio da parte del popolo ceceno del proprio diritto a l’autodeterminazione, sancita dalla Carta delle Nazioni Unite, così come la proclamazione di Ichkeria dopo il crollo dell’URSS il 12 marzo 1992.










https://itd.rada.gov.ua/billInfo/Bills/Card/40676






	

	
	




	
	

			
	

		
THE GENERAL OF NAUR – MEMORIES OF APTI BATALOV (PART IV)

		

			 			Lascia un commento
						

	


		

		

Battle in Ilaskhan – Yurt





After leaving Argun, we moved to a wooded mountainous area in the Nozhai – Yurt district. Here we organized our base, well hidden in a gorge near the village of Shuani. On the afternoon of March 25, a messenger arrived at the base: we were ordered to go in force to the village of Novogrozny, today Oyskhara. When we arrived Maskhadov gave me a brief report on the situation: “The Russians have left Gudermes, and are moving in the direction of Novogrozny. They crushed our defenses. We have to delay them at least for a few hours, until we evacuate the hospital and the documents. I have no one else to send except your battalion. I ask you to detain the Russians as much as possible: there are many wounded in the hospital, if the Russians find them they will shoot them all. ” Then Maskhadov told me that on the eastern outskirts of Ilaskhan – Yurt a unit of militiamen from nearby was gathering and they would give us a hand.





There were few people with me, about thirty in all, because after the retreat from Argun many of the militiamen, cold and tired, had dispersed to the surrounding villages to recover their strength. We immediately set off towards Ilaskhan – Yurt and, having reached the goal, we reunited with 70 militia men. The Russians advanced on the wooded ridge overlooking the village, traveling in the direction of Novogrozny. We settled in positions previously equipped, and then later abandoned. Their conditions were not the best: due to the heavy rains of those days they were full of water, and we guarded the positions with mud up to our knees. We tried to drain them, but the water returned to fill them in a few hours, due to the damp soil.





Soon our presence was noticed by the Russians, who began bombing our trenches from their high positions. Using mortars and field artillery. In that bombing we suffered the wounding of three or four men. However , they did not proceed to an attack, allowing us to hold them back for many more hours. Having left in a hurry, we had brought neither food nor water with us: we spent the next night hungry and cold in our damp trenches, under constant enemy bombardment. We were so starved that, when we managed to get our hands on a heifer the next day, we ate its almost raw meat, but not before getting permission from a local clergyman.












March 29 , the first Russian patrol reached our trenches. We managed to repel the assault: the enemy lost two men and retreated quickly. From the uniforms and weapons found in the possession of the fallen Russians, we understood that we had a paratrooper unit in front of us. As soon as the Russians were back in their trenches the artillery began a pounding bombardment on our positions with mortars and 120 mm artillery, causing many injuries among our units. After a long preparatory bombardment, the infantry moved on to the attack, and we began the unhooking maneuvers: some of us took the wounded away, others retreated into the woods, or returned to their homes. Only five of us remained in position: Vakha from Chishka, Khavazhi from Naurskaya, Yusup from Alpatovo, Mammad from Naursk station and myself. When we finally managed to get away we were exhausted: I came out with chronic pneumonia, which would accompany me in the years to follow.





Combined Regiment Naursk





In April, if memory serves me well, on April 2, as he said, the head of the main headquarters of the armed forces of the CRI, General Maskhadov, came to my base. The Chief of Staff briefly introduced me to the latest events and changes on the lines of contact between us and the Russians: it was clear from his words that our situation was not good. Consequently he asked me to become subordinate to the commander of the Nozhai- Yurta leadership, Magomed Khambiev. The same day I went to Nozhai-Yurt, where I met the new commander. He assigned the battalion’s area of responsibility to a location not far from the village of Zamai-Yurt, southwest of this village. Once deployed, we dug trenches and equipped shooting points for the machine gun. Here at the base, we, in our Naur battalion, were joined by groups of militias from Gudermes and the Shelkovsky district, for a total of 200 people. As a result, our battalion became the “Combined Naur Regiment”. I was confirmed by Maskhadov himself as commander of this new unit.





The Regiment held the assigned position until the early days of 1995, fighting a war of position against Russian forces. These faced us mainly with artillery, throwing a hail of mortar rounds at us, and increasing the dose with incursions of combat helicopters MI – 42 and MI – 18. During this phase we mourned the death of one of us, Dzhamleila of Naurskaya , and the wounding of ten men. Finally, in the first days of June , we received the order to switch to guerrilla warfare.























VERSIONE ITALIANA





IL GENERALE DI NAUR – MEMORIE DI APTI BATALOV (PARTE 4)





Battaglia ad Ilaskhan – Yurt





Dopo aver lasciato Argun, ci trasferimmo in una zona montuosa coperta di boschi, nel distretto di Nozhai – Yurt. Qui organizzammo la nostra base, ben nascosta in una gola vicino al villaggio di Shuani. Nel pomeriggio del 25 Marzo giunse alla base un messaggero: ci era ordinato di dirigerci in forze al villaggio di Novogrozny, oggi Oyskhara. Quando arrivammo Maskhadov mi fece un breve rapporto sulla situazione: “I russi hanno lasciato Gudermes, e si stanno muovendo in direzione di Novogrozny. Hanno schiacciato le nostre difese. Dobbiamo ritardarli almeno per qualche ora, finchè non evacuiamo l’ospedale ed i documenti. Non ho nessun altro da inviare, tranne il tuo battaglione. Ti chiedo di trattenere i russi il più possibile: ci sono molti feriti nell’ospedale, se i russi li trovano li fucileranno tutti.” Poi Maskhadov mi disse che alla periferia orientale di Ilaskhan – Yurt si stava radunando un reparto di miliziani provenienti dalle vicinanze, i quali ci avrebbero dato man forte.





Insieme a me c’erano poche persone, una trentina in tutto, perché dopo la ritirata da Argun molti dei miliziani, infreddoliti e stanchi, si erano dispersi nei villaggi circostanti per recuperare le forze. Ci mettemmo subito in marcia verso Ilaskhan  – Yurt e, raggiunto l’obiettivo, ci ricongiungemmo con 70 uomini della milizia. I russi avanzavano sulla cresta boscosa che dominava il villaggio, viaggiando in direzione di Novogrozny. Ci sistemammo in posizioni precedentemente attrezzate, e poi successivamente abbandonate. Le loro condizioni non erano delle migliori: a causa delle forti piogge di quei giorni erano piene d’acqua, e presidiavamo le posizioni con il fango fino alle ginocchia. Cercavamo di drenarle, ma l’acqua tornava a riempirle in poche ore, a causa del terreno umido.





Ben presto la nostra presenza fu notata dai russi, i quali iniziarono a bombardare le nostre trincee dalle loro posizioni elevate. Usando mortai ed artiglieria da campagna. In quel bombardamento patimmo il ferimento di tre o quattro uomini. Tuttavia non procedettero ad un attacco, permettendoci di trattenerli ancora per molte ore. Essendo partiti in fretta e furia, non avevamo portato con noi né cibo né acqua: trascorremmo la notte successiva affamati ed infreddoliti nelle nostre trincee umide, sotto il costante bombardamento nemico. Eravamo così provati dalla fame che, quando il giorno dopo riuscimmo a mettere le mani su una giovenca, ne mangiammo la carne quasi cruda, ma non prima di aver avuto il permesso da un religioso locale.





A mezzogiorno del 29 Marzo la prima pattuglia russa raggiunse le nostre trincee. Riuscimmo a respingere l’assalto: il nemico perse due uomini e si ritirò velocemente. Dalle divise e dalle armi trovate in possesso dei russi caduti capimmo di avere davanti un reparto di paracadutisti.  Non appena i russi furono rientrati nelle loro trincee l’artiglieria iniziò un bombardamento martellante sulle nostre posizioni con mortai ed artiglieria da 120 mm, provocando molti ferimenti tra le nostre unità. Dopo un lungo bombardamento preparatorio, la fanteria passò all’attacco, e noi iniziammo le manovre di sganciamento: alcuni di noi portarono via i feriti, altri si ritirarono tra i boschi, o tornarono alle loro case. In posizione rimanemmo soltanto in cinque: Vakha da Chishka, Khavazhi da Naurskaya, Yusup da Alpatovo, Mammad dalla stazione di Naursk ed io. Quando finalmente riuscimmo ad allontanarci eravamo esausti: io ne uscii con una polmonite cronica, che mi avrebbe accompagnato negli anni a seguire.












Reggimento Combinato Naursk





Ad aprile, se la memoria mi serve bene, il due aprile, come ha detto, il capo del quartier generale principale delle forze armate della CRI, il generale Maskhadov, è venuto alla mia base. Il capo di stato maggiore mi ha brevemente presentato gli ultimi eventi e i cambiamenti sulle linee di contatto tra noi e i russi: era chiaro dalle sue parole che la  nostra situazione non era buona. Di conseguenza mi chiese di diventare subordinato al comandante di la direzione Nozhai-Yurta,  Magomed Khambiev. Lo stesso giorno mi recai a Nozhai-Yurt, dove incontrai il nuovo comandante. Egli assegnò l’area di responsabilità del battaglione ad una posizione non lontana dal villaggio di Zamai-Yurt, a sud-ovest di questo villaggio. Una volta schierati, abbiamo scavato trincee e attrezzato punti di tiro per la mitragliatrice. Qui alla base, noi, nel nostro battaglione Naur, siamo stati raggiunti da gruppi di milizie di Gudermes e del distretto di Shelkovsky, per un totale di 200 persone. Di conseguenza, il nostro battaglione divenne il “Reggimento Combinato Naur”. Fui confermato dallo stesso Maskhadov comandante di questa nuova unità.





Il Reggimento tenne la posizione assegnata fino ai primi di giorni del 1995, combattendo una guerra di posizione contro le forze russe. Queste ci affrontavano principalmente con l’artiglieria, lanciandoci contro una grandine di colpi di mortaio, e rincarando la dose con incursioni di elicotteri da combattimento MI – 42 e MI – 18. Durante questa fase piangemmo la morte di uno di noi, Dzhamleila di Naurskaya, ed il ferimento di dieci uomini. Nei primi giorni di Giugno, infine, ricevemmo l’ordine di passare alla guerra partigiana.

	

	
	




	
	

			
	

		
THE GENERAL OF NAUR: MEMORIES OF APTI BATALOV (Part III)

		

			 			Lascia un commento
						

	


		

		






Defending Grozny





When the federal forces reached Grozny, my men and I were in Gudermes, where we had quartered to form an organized unit made up entirely of men from the Naur District . On January 4th , a runner sent by Maskhadov was placed in our command post. He gave me the order to converge on our capital with all the men at my disposal. Once in the city, I met a young volunteer, who made himself available to organize our group and put it in coordination with the other fighting units. It is called Turpal Ali Atgeriev. In conversation with him, I learned that he had taken part in the war in Abkhazia and that he had some fighting experience. There was not a single war veteran among us, starting with me: I was in desperate need of someone with combat experience. For this I asked Atgiriev to become my deputy, and he accepted my proposal. Since he didn’t have a weapon, I handed him an RPK-74 machine gun. Someone criticized my decision, accusing me of having appointed a stranger as my deputy. I was not interested in this gossip and intrigue, I was worried about only one thing itself: saving lives and at the same time beating the enemy.





We were deployed in defense of the Pedagogical Institute. A regiment of Russian marines had targeted the building: if this had been taken, it would have been possible to easily reach Maskhadov’s headquarters, which was literally fifty meters from our position, under the Presidential Palace. The Russians tried to break through our defenses almost every day, until January 19 , 1994, but without success. In these attacks they lost many soldiers, whose corpses remained in the middle of the road, in no man’s land, prey to stray dogs. We tried to remove them, to save their bodies, but without a respite we could not have prevented them from being eaten. Several times, during the fighting, our command and the Russian one reached an agreement for a 48-hour truce, precisely to clean the streets of the corpses of Russian soldiers. During these truces we talked to the Russian patrols stationed on the side streets. I remember one of these conversations with a Russian captain, to whom I had thrown a pack of cigarettes: Guys he said, quit, you will not win, because you are not fighting the police, but the army. His voice was not arrogant, he was a simple Russian peasant. That battle was also difficult because to supply our armories we had to capture weapons and ammunition from the Russians. In every disabled armored transport vehicle we found a heap of weapons, cartridges and grenades, which we looted. Later the Russians became more careful, and we didn’t find much in their means. On the other hand, their vehicles were stuffed with all sorts of carpets, dishes and other goods looted from the population.












January 19 , when it became clear that the defense of the Pedagogical Institute would no longer slow down the fall of the Presidential Palace, we withdrew. I was ordered to organize the defense of the Trampark area , and we occupied positions on Novya Street Buachidze . Trampark changed hands several times, and there were fierce battles until February 7th . Right in via Novya Buachidze suffered a shock from a tank bullet which, entering the window of the room where I was with some of my men, hit two of them in full, killing them. This shock still undermines my health. Finally, on the evening of February 7 , a messenger from Maskhadov handed me a note in which I was ordered to leave the position, join Basayev in Chernorechie and leave the city. I should have assumed the defense in the parking area in Via 8 Marzo, where the departments were concentrating to prepare for the exit from the city. Once there we counted all those present: also considering the staff of the Headquarters, we were 320 men. Obviously some departments were not present: detached units fought in other areas of the city, and besides them there were the so-called “Indians”, armed gangs who did not obey anyone, they fought when it was favorable gold and along the way they plundered everything that they could find. When Maskhadov lined up us in the square, he told us that our descendants would be proud of us, that the victory would be ours, that we were leaving Grozny only to return one day. The night between 7 and 8 Fenbbraio we left the capital.





The Naursk Battalion





It was after the retreat from Grozny that my unit, still an amalgam of more or less organized groups, began to become a real tactical unit. This same process was also taking place in the other units that had formed spontaneously at the beginning of the war. Moreover, in the Chechen resistance there were no military units and formations in the classical sense of the term: “battalions”, “regiments” and “fronts” were symbolic terms that did not correspond to a battle order in the classical sense. For example, what was called the “Argun Regiment” was an association of several groups, often poorly armed, made up of a variable number of people, each of which replied to its own commander. The members of these units, all volunteers, could leave at any time, there was no precise chain of command.





Our team spirit had already been forged in the battles we had fought together, and which unfortunately had forced us to count the first fallen. The first of our men to die for the defense of Chechnya was Beshir Turluev , who fell at the Ishcherskaya Checkpoint in December 1994. Since then, other young Chechens had sacrificed their lives for their homeland. Among those who remained alive, and who fought more assiduously with me, a group of “veterans” began to form, who by character or competence acquired the role of “informal officers”. Thus, for example, a 4th year student of a medical institute, whose name was Ruslan, became the head of the medical unit, while Sheikh Khavazhi , from the village of Naurskaya , became the head of logistics. The latter was in charge of keeping in touch with the Naur region , from which the supplies for our unit came. The inhabitants collected the food intended for our livelihood and delivered it to us via a KAMAZ truck, driven by Umar, from the village of Savelieva, and his companion Alkhazur . Sometimes money was also collected, usually a small amount, which was scrupulously recorded and distributed among the men. For the needs of the battalion, for the entire period of the 1994-1996 war, I, from the central command, did not receive more than 3 thousand dollars.












Defending Argun





After we had withdrawn from Grozny, Maskhadov ordered us to fall back on Argun, to help defend the city. We quartered ourselves in the city hospital, now empty and unused. The commander of the stronghold was Khunkarpasha Israpilov, and the commander of the largest unit, the so-called “Combined Regiment”, was Aslambek Ismailov. We were deployed in the sector of the so-called “Indian village”, a front of about 350 meters along the Argun River. On our left were the so-called “Black Wolves”, characterized by wearing very dark jeans. On the other side were Alaudi ‘s men Khamzatov , guard posts on the main bridge over the Argun. In front of us was a Russian paratrooper unit. We learned that we were facing special forces from a Russian soldier whom we captured when, with his squad, he attempted a reconnaissance close to our lines. At that juncture, as soon as the other side learned that their group had been identified and attacked, the Moscow artillery launched a massive bombing on our positions, during which two of our militiamen fell: Daud, coming from the village of Kalinovsky and Rizvan , from Naurskaya . To scare us, the Russians played Vladimir Vysotsky ‘s “Hunting for Wolves” at very high volume . We responded with “Freedom or Death”. The supply of the militias in the city of Argun, as well as in Grozny, was very scarce, there was a severe shortage of ammunition, there was a catastrophic lack of machine gun cartridges, RPG-7 grenade launcher shells and only dressing bandages they were more or less in abundance among the drugs.





On the morning of March 20, the Russians began testing our defenses along the entire line of contact, simulating a force attack from our side. In reality, the main attack took place, surprisingly, at the Moskovsky state farm . We did not expect the enemy to break in from that side, and after a fierce battle during which we lost many men (including the commander of the Melkhu – Khe militia , whose name was Isa and a brave, young Lithuanian named Nicholas) we had to leave the city, to retreat to the wooded region of Nozhai – Yurt. In the defense of Argun, Abuezid , from the village of Naurskaya , Umar, Mekenskaya , Muslim, Nikolaevskaya also fell , while another ten of us were wounded. We left Argun in the night between 21st and 22nd March 1995.

	

	
	




	
	

			
	

		
IL TRADIMENTO CHE NON CI FU – L’OPERAZIONE “SCHAMIL” (I Parte)

		

			 			Lascia un commento
						

	


		

		






Quando, nel Febbraio del 1944, Stalin decretò la deportazione di massa dei Ceceni in Asia centrale, egli motivò la terribile “punizione” con la supposta collaborazione dei Ceceni con le forze armate germaniche. Tale collaborazione sarebbe avvenuta, secondo la versione ufficiale, nel corso del 1942, in concomitanza con un’azione di intelligence e sabotaggio compiuta dalla Wehrmacht, chiamata in codice “Operazione Schamil”. Il marchio dell’infamia, gettato su tutti i ceceni dalla teoria del “tradimento”, avrebbe condizionato l’esistenza di un intero popolo il quale, ridotto a paria nel consesso delle nazioni che abitavano l’impero sovietico, fu costretto ad accettare una frustrante discriminazione sociale, economica e politica. Questa condizione fu uno tra i detonatori del desiderio di rivalsa che pervase i ceceni alla fine degli anni ’80, e alimentò quel desiderio di libertà che poi si concretizzò con l’indipendenza nel 1991.





Oggi in Russia si è accettata l’idea che la deportazione del 1944 fu un crimine terribile. Eppure rimane ben radicata dell’opinione pubblica l’idea che questo tradimento dei ceceni si sarebbe realmente consumato, e che pertanto vi sia una “colpa” ancestrale che i Vaynakh dovrebbero “espiare” di fronte alla madrepatria. Tralasciando il fatto che molti ceceni non considerano affatto la Russia la loro casa, e che quindi non si sentirebbero affatto dei “traditori” di una patria che non riconoscono, il fatto è che questa “colpa” non è affatto certa. Anzi, è piuttosto chiaro, dalle evidenze storiche, che la maggior parte dei ceceni combattè con onore nelle file dell’Armata Rossa, e che la popolazione civile non solidarizzò con i tedeschi più di quanto non lo fecero le altre nazioni sottoposte al giogo di Stalin.





Recentemente Pieter Van Huis, ricercatore dell’Università di Leida, nei Paesi Bassi, ha pubblicato una tesi dal titolo Banditi di montagna e fuorilegge della foresta. Ceceni e Ingusce sotto il dominio sovietico nel 1918-1944. Lo studioso dedica un capitolo proprio alla celebre “Operazione Schamil”: attingendo alle fonti documentali disponibili presso gli archivi della Wehmacht e dell’NKVD, ha saputo ricostruire la genesi e lo svolgimento di questa azione. Riepiloghiamo in sintesi quanto è emerso dagli studi di Van Huis, a loro volta riportati da Anastasia Kirilenko sul sito del Nodo Caucasico: https://www.kavkaz-uzel.eu/












I RAPPORTI LANGE





Le prime fonti cui fa riferimento Van Huis sono tre rapporti operativi, due firmati dal Tenente Maggiore Erhard Lange ed uno dal volontario osseto Boris Tsagolov. Tutte e tre le fonti, sebbene differenti nello stile, concordano sul fatto che l’operazione fu un sostanziale fallimento principalmente a causa della pronta reazione delle unità dell’NKVD, le quali procedettero a punire i residenti che davano ospitalità al nemico bruciando le loro case, o applicando punizioni collettive alle comunità che non si opposero attivamente al suo passaggio. Tutti e tre i rapporti, in ogni caso, concordano sul fatto che ad eccezione di alcune bande di irregolari, peraltro già attive prima dell’invasione, non fornirono un supporto sufficiente al buon esito dell’operazione.





Il primo di questi rapporti fu inviato da Ehrard Lange il 5 Gennaio 1943. In esso si riepiloga che l’Operazione Schamil ebbe inizio il 25 Agosto 1942, quando un aereo della Luftwaffe decollato da Armavir paracadutò 11 tedeschi e 19 volontari caucasici nei pressi di Chishki e di Dachu – Barzoi, a circa 30 kilometri da Grozny. Il cielo era sgombro, e la luce della luna illuminò fin da subito i paracadutisti, i quali furono presi di mira dal nemico. La maggior parte delle armi e dell’equipaggiamento fu quindi frettolosamente abbandonato, e ci vollero alcuni giorni prima che il gruppo potesse ricompattarsi, non prima di aver accertato alcune perdite e diserzioni. Il gruppo, ridotto a 22 uomini, tentò di racimolare qualche arma da fuoco sequestrandola agli abitanti dei villaggi vicini, mentre tentava di guadagnare un rifugio sicuro. Tuttavia, essendo stati notati fin dal loro arrivo, gli uomini del commando divennero da subito oggetto di una spietata caccia da parte dell’NKVD, che giunse a mobilitare addirittura 2.000 effettivi per stanarli. Lange tentò quindi di prendere contatto con i ribelli locali, arroccati sulle montagne, cercando di riunirli in un’unica banda organizzata, e di aggiungere a questa massa critica un contingente di 400 ribelli georgiani. Il piano, tuttavia, non riuscì a causa del fatto che il 24 Settembre 1942 l’NKVD intercettò Lange, costringendolo ad aprirsi una via di fuga con la forza. I sopravvissuti raggiunsero Kharsenoy, ma qui furono nuovamente intercettati e costretti a combattere. Dopo aver perduto altri uomini, Lange decise di abortire la missione. Dopo aver abbandonato le divise ed indossato abiti civili, riuscì a spacciare i resti del suo gruppo (cinque tedeschi e quattro caucasici) per una banda di banditi Cabardini, finché non riuscì ad ottenere la collaborazione di alcuni residenti locali, i quali accettarono di aiutarlo a patto i membri della banda fossero divisi e distribuiti secondo le loro volontà. Non potendo fare altro, Lange acconsentì. Lui e i suoi uomini rimasero nascosti fino al 9 Dicembre successivo, quando appresero che l’armata rossa aveva intercettato e distrutto la maggior parte dei ribelli operanti in Cecenia. Il giorno successivo Lange raccolse i suoi, e li portò oltre la linea del fronte. Rientrato alla base, l’ufficiale compilò una memoria nella quale indicò una lista di nomi di “103 persone assolutamente affidabili, che potrebbero fungere da guide”.





Successivamente, il 23 Aprile 1943, Lange depositò un secondo rapporto, nel quale specificava maggiormente lo scopo della sua missione: mettere in atto operazioni militari per ostacolare la ritirata nemica lungo la direttrice Grozny – Botlikh. Il compito, si specificava, non era stato portato a termine a causa del fatto che la maggior parte delle armi era andato perduto durante l’atterraggio, ma anche per via della scarsa collaborazione dei residenti locali. Secondo questo rapporto, una volta constatata la dispersione del “Gruppo Lange”, il comando tedesco aveva inviato una seconda unità, chiamata “Gruppo Rekert” a cercare di recuperare i dispersi. Questo secondo drappello, tuttavia, era stato sbaragliato ed i suoi componenti risultavano scomparsi. Rispetto al suo rapporto con i civili, Lange precisa che il gruppo era nelle mani della popolazione civile e correva quotidianamente il rischio di un tradimento da parte loro, e che soltanto dopo lunghe discussioni il commando riuscì a liberarsi da questa tutela. Infine, il resoconto specificava anche l’obiettivo secondario seguito da Lange una volta che quello principale (il sabotaggio) si rivelò irraggiungibile: Verificare la veridicità dei rapporti al Fuhrer secondo i quali ceceni e ingusci sarebbero particolarmente coraggiosi nella lotta contro i bolscevichi e, nel caso, fornire loro supporto logistico ed armi per proseguire la guerriglia. Per raggiungere questo secondo obiettivo Lang avrebbe dovuto passare alcune settimane in Cecenia, confidando nello spirito di ospitalità dei residenti locali. Egli sapeva che per un ceceno l’ospitalità è sacra. Nel rapporto riferisce, infatti: le regole locali sull’ospitalità richiedono di proteggere la vita di un ospite anche a costo della propria. Consci di questo, i tedeschi non risparmiarono ai ceceni veri e propri ricatti morali, minacciando di far sapere a tutti del disonore gettato sulla famiglia e sul Teip da persone che non accettavano di ospitarli e di collaborare con loro.












Se ottenere l’ospitalità dei ceceni sembrava piuttosto facile, molto più difficile risultò garantirsi la loro alleanza nel costituire un movimento di resistenza antisovietica. Sempre citando Lange:  I residenti locali non sono interessati a nulla, tranne che al destino del loro villaggio, nel quale vorrebbero vivere come contadini liberi. Essi non hanno alcun rispetto per il tempo, per lo spazio, né per il rispetto degli accordi presi. […] Tutto questo crea pessimi requisiti per una rivolta. Citando un evento accaduto al Gruppo Reckert, Lange ricorda che dopo aver ricevuto le armi, gli uomini sono tornati in fretta ai loro villaggi. A conclusione del suo rapporto, Lange consigliava di non investire uomini e mezzi in questa operazione, giacchè la popolazione locale non avrebbe combattuto per la Germania, ma al massimo per liberarsi delle fattorie collettive e riappropriarsi della terra.





ENGLISH VERSION






THE BETRAYAL THAT DID NOT HAPPEN –  OPERATION “SCHAMIL”  (Part I)





When, in February 1944, Stalin decreed the mass deportation of the Chechens to Central Asia, he motivated the terrible "punishment" with the alleged collaboration of the Chechens with the Germanic armed forces. According to the official version, this collaboration took place during 1942, in conjunction with an intelligence and sabotage action carried out by the Wehrmacht, codenamed "Operation Schamil". The stigma thrown on all Chechens by the theory of "betrayal", would have conditioned the existence of an entire people who, reduced to pariah in the assembly of nations that inhabited the Soviet empire, was forced to accept a frustrating social, economic and political discrimination. This condition was one of the detonators of the desire for revenge that pervaded the Chechens in the late 1980s, and fueled that desire for freedom which then materialized with independence in 1991.

Today in Russia it is accepted that the 1944 deportation was a terrible crime. Yet public opinion remains firmly rooted in the idea that this betrayal of the Chechens would actually be consummated, and that therefore there is an ancestral "guilt" that the Vaynakhs should "atone" in the face of the motherland. Leaving aside the fact that many Chechens do not consider Russia their home at all, and therefore would not at all feel like "traitors" to a homeland they do not recognize, the fact is that this "fault" is by no means certain. Indeed, it is quite clear from the historical evidence that most Chechens fought with honor in the ranks of the Red Army, and that the civilian population did not sympathize with the Germans any more than did other nations under Stalin's yoke. .

Pieter Van Huis, a researcher at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, recently published a thesis entitled Mountain Bandits and Forest Outlaws. Chechens and Ingush under Soviet rule in 1918-1944. The scholar dedicates a chapter to the famous "Operation Schamil": drawing on the documentary sources available in the Wehmacht and NKVD archives, he was able to reconstruct the genesis and development of this action. We summarize in summary what emerged from the studies of Van Huis, in turn reported by Anastasia Kirilenko on the Caucasian Node website: https://www.kavkaz-uzel.eu/





THE LANGE REPORTS

The first sources to which Van Huis refers are three operational reports, two signed by Lieutenant Major Erhard Lange and one by the Ossetian volunteer Boris Tsagolov. All three sources, although different in style, agree that the operation was a substantial failure mainly due to the prompt reaction of the NKVD units, which proceeded to punish the residents who housed the enemy by burning their homes. , or by applying collective punishment to communities that did not actively oppose its passage. All three reports, in any case, agree that with the exception of some bands of illegal immigrants, which were already active before the invasion, they did not provide sufficient support for the success of the operation.





The first of these reports was sent by Ehrard Lange on January 5, 1943. It summarizes that Operation Schamil began on August 25, 1942, when a Luftwaffe plane taken off from Armavir parachuted 11 Germans and 19 Caucasian volunteers near Chishki. and Dachu - Barzoi, about 30 kilometers from Grozny. The sky was clear, and the light of the moon immediately illuminated the paratroopers, who were targeted by the enemy. Most of the weapons and equipment were therefore hastily abandoned, and it took a few days before the group could regroup, not before having ascertained some losses and desertions. The group, reduced to 22 men, attempted to scrape together some firearms by seizing them from nearby villagers, while trying to gain a safe haven. However, having been noticed since their arrival, the men of the commando immediately became the object of a merciless hunt by the NKVD, which even mobilized 2,000 troops to track them down. Lange then attempted to make contact with the local rebels, perched in the mountains, trying to unite them in a single organized band, and to add a contingent of 400 Georgian rebels to this critical mass. The plan, however, failed due to the fact that on September 24, 1942, the NKVD intercepted Lange, forcing him to forcibly open an escape route. The survivors reached Kharsenoy, but here they were again intercepted and forced to fight. After losing other men, Lange decided to abort the mission. After abandoning his uniforms and wearing civilian clothes, he managed to pass off the remains of his group (five Germans and four Caucasians) as a band of Cabardini bandits, until he succeeded in obtaining the collaboration of some local residents, who agreed to help him provided the members of the gang were divided and distributed according to their will. Unable to do anything else, Lange agreed. He and his men remained in hiding until the following December 9, when they learned that the Red Army had intercepted and destroyed most of the rebels operating in Chechnya. The next day Lange gathered his own, and carried them over the front line. Returning to the base, the officer compiled a memo in which he indicated a list of names of "103 absolutely reliable people, who could serve as guides".





Subsequently, on April 23, 1943, Lange filed a second report, in which he further specified the purpose of his mission: to carry out military operations to obstruct the enemy retreat along the Grozny - Botlikh route. The task, it was specified, had not been completed due to the fact that most of the weapons had been lost during landing, but also due to the lack of cooperation from local residents. According to this report, once the dispersion of the "Lange Group" was ascertained, the German command had sent a second unit, called the "Rekert Group" to try to recover the missing. This second squad, however, had been defeated and its members had disappeared. With respect to his relationship with civilians, Lange specifies that the group was in the hands of the civilian population and daily ran the risk of betrayal on their part, and that only after long discussions did the commandos manage to free themselves from this protection. Finally, the report also specified the secondary objective followed by Lange once the main one (sabotage) proved unattainable: Verifying the veracity of the reports to the Fuhrer according to which Chechens and Ingush are particularly courageous in the fight against the Bolsheviks and, in the case, provide them with logistical support and weapons to continue the guerrilla warfare. To achieve this second goal, Lang would have had to spend a few weeks in Chechnya, trusting in the spirit of hospitality of the local residents. He knew that hospitality is sacred to a Chechen. In fact, in the report he reports: the local rules on hospitality require you to protect the life of a guest even at the cost of your own. Aware of this, the Germans did not spare the Chechens real moral blackmail, threatening to let everyone know of the dishonor thrown on the family and on the Teip by people who did not accept to host them and to collaborate with them.





While obtaining the hospitality of the Chechens seemed easy enough, it was much more difficult to secure their alliance in forming an anti-Soviet resistance movement. Again quoting Lange: Local residents are not interested in anything except the fate of their village, in which they would like to live as free farmers. They have no respect for time, space, or compliance with the agreements made. […] All this creates bad conditions for a riot. Citing an event that happened to the Reckert Group, Lange recalls that after receiving the weapons, the men quickly returned to their villages. At the end of his report, Lange advised not to invest men and means in this operation, since the local population would not fight for Germany, but at most to get rid of the collective farms and regain possession of the land.

	

	
	




	
	

			
	

		
MEMOIRS OF A CHECHEN FARMER

		

			 			Lascia un commento
						

	


		

		

Story of Khamzat





I was born in 1959. From 1989 to 1992 I was a public figure and I participated in the socio-political life of our Achkhoy -Martan district of the Chechen Republic. At the first democratic elections of perestroika, I was elected representative in the municipality of the village of Achkhoy – Martan and helped to carry out an agrarian reform, thanks to which the first private farms in the district appeared, with the acquisition of owned land. I participated in the presidential and parliamentary elections of 27 October 1991 as a member of the district electoral commission, for the elections of the first President, Dudaev, and of the first independent parliament, in 1997 I was a member of the electoral committee of Aslan Maskhadov. From 1992 to 2002, I continued my social and political work, and organized my farm. In April 2004 I emigrated to Poland, from November 2004 to today I live in a small French town in the Vendée department.





The 90s, for me, were the happiest time of my life. At that time I was younger. But that’s not it. It was the sense of freedom that pervaded everyone.





The origins





Between the end of 1988 and the beginning of 1989 the Komsomol Secretary for the Achkhoy – Martan District, Ruslan Ezerkhanov , began to oppose the then First District Secretary of the CPSU, Ruslan Bazgiev , exploiting the Glasnost and the recognized freedom of speech. from Gorbachev’s Perestroika. At the time, the District Committee, headed by Bazgiev, was the local governing body. Due to his pressure, Ezerkhanov was removed from his post, so he began to mobilize people against the district authorities. I immediately joined him, and together we formed a movement called the Popular Front. We wanted to implement Perestroika in our territory. At that moment I met Ruslan Kutaev, who participated in political life at the national level and supported us in every possible way.





The Popular Front arose spontaneously in many cities of Chechnya, and Bisultanov was only its best-known figure. He was a participant in the Kavkaz association, whose organizers were Zelimkhan Yandarbiev, Movladi Ugudov, Lecha Umkhaev, Yusup Elmurzaev and others, and whose purpose was to steer Chechnya in the right direction. It was they who gave a name to the informal movement that was developing in the country, calling it the Popular Front for assistance to Perestroijka. After some time Bisultanov was expelled from this group, constituting the Popular Front (devoid of other attributes) and began holding demonstrations in Gudermes, against the construction of a biochemical plant for the production of lysine, an enzyme that serves to grow the muscle mass of cows. As it later became known, he had been introduced into the movement with the sole purpose of promoting the appointment of Zavgaev as First Secretary of the Regional Party Committee, and then of directing the movement of the masses in his direction. To do this, he needed to weaken the position of Yandarbiev and his comrades in the struggle, not giving them the opportunity to influence the course of the processes taking place in the Republic.





After the abolition of article 6 of the USSR Constitution “On the leadership role of the CPSU”, instructions for the transfer of powers to representative councils elected by regular elections were sent to the District Committee. We had those instructions from a member of the Committee, who secretly sympathized with us. We began to study these directives as we prepared for the elections of local deputies. On February 15 , 1990, we started demonstrating against the First Secretary, Bazgiev . At that time the leadership of our movement, in Achkhoy – Martan, had passed from Ezerkhanov to Shepa Gadaev, future deputy of the republic. I had known Gadaev for many years already. He had helped me when, in 1984, due to a conflict with the manager of the hospital where I worked, I was illegally fired. Gadaev was a lawyer, and with his help I was able to return to work, remaining there for more than ten years. He was a brilliant man, very competent, who was not afraid to confront power. Perhaps that is why, unfortunately, in 1996 he was kidnapped and killed. Most likely his opposition to Bazgiev has something to do with it, but at the time the investigation was never carried out, and the culprit of his murder was never found.





Land reform





Let’s go back to 1990. The gathering we organized lasted seven and a half days, and in the end Zavgaev removed Bazgiev. At the next party meeting, Shepa Gadaev was elected in his place. We had achieved our first victory. Thus, we continued the preparation for the elections for the District Council, and the Village Council, and in the elections we managed to conquer many positions, assigning them to people loyal to our movement. Among these was also: I was one of the 30 members of the Village Council. Me and a colleague we were the promoters of the creation of an alternate commission for the implementation of the agrarian reform in our village.





At that time the Soviet central government had already passed three laws: the “Land Code of Russia”, the “Peasants and Agriculture Law” and the “Land Reform Law”, all of which went in the direction of restoring private property. of the land, but the domination of the bureaucracy and the party slowed down all initiatives, and blocked reforms. Yeltsin, in Moscow, had issued a resolution on the imposition of land reform, allowing the District Committees to set up farms by allocating up to 10% of the arable land of the Sovkhozes and Kholkhozes to private companies. The Land Commission we set up immediately appealed to this right, requisitioning 150 hectares of arable land from one Sockhoz and another 64 (later increased to 75) from another, and set up private farms on these land. Even today, 15 of the farms built on the smaller land are still fully operational. The others, unfortunately, closed due to various reasons. I, too, set up my own private farm on land alienated from the Commission. Then I formed a consortium of farms, called “Commonwealth”, leading it until 2004. I am convinced that it was also thanks to the consortium that these farms managed to survive. The assignment of the lands was made on the basis of the applications submitted by the citizens who intended to work on it. One of these questions was asked by my father, and when the privatization of the land began, he too got his piece of land. As far as I know, the land allocation was not affected by corruption. Of course, the head of the process, Mitrishchev, gave land to three of his brothers, favoring them, even if none of the three managed to build solid companies. But in general, farmers got their land without having to pay bribes. The agrarian reform continued even after independence, because the Parliament, once elected, published a law identical in all respects to the Russian one (only the title changed: from “Russia” to “Chechnya”), however limiting the size maximum of the land that can be sold by each state-owned company to 50 hectares. State funds were also allocated to finance the start-up of agricultural activities: 10% of the budget allocated to the Ministry of Agriculture was donated to the Association of Republican Farmers, which assigned funds to new agricultural enterprises. These funds were not very large, and generally ran out by spring.





Between 1992 and 1994 I tried to set up a thriving farm. In two and a half years I put together a whole set of agricultural tools and machinery, including two tractors and a truck. I was the most successful farmer at that time, in Achkhoy – Martan. All the company’s products were brought to the markets of Grozny and Vladikavkaz. I took care of it personally, with my truck: I sold the products at the market or along the road, to the residents.





As time passed, land reform began to get bogged down. For the government, the issue was not considered a priority, as it was first necessary to obtain official recognition from the independent state. Local authorities were not interested in losing their power, and few attempts by deputies (including Shepa Gadaev ) to revive the privatization of land. The same agricultural reform was repeatedly contested.





From Committees to Prefects





When Dudaev became President and Parliament was elected, a very special situation developed in the Republic. District Committees hostile to Dudaev’s leadership began to sabotage the work of the new administration. On the contrary, the village administrations strongly supported the new course. There was, in essence, an intermediate level of administration that prevented the transmission of orders from the central government to the territory. For this reason, in one of our Popular Front meetings, we proposed to dissolve the District Committees and abolish that intermediate level, putting local administrations directly in contact with the Grozny government. Shepa Gadaev , who in the meantime had been elected deputy, was the promoter of this initiative in Parliament. Dudaev intervened, abolishing the District Committees and introducing the figure of the Prefect by presidential nomination. In our District the President appointed Alvi Khatuev , a former party official. He had been First Secretary of the Komsomol in our district, then he had run a small milk processing plant in the village of Valerik . In that capacity, he had made himself known and named Prefect. Khatuev never found a common language with local administrations, because there was no law that identified precisely what his rights and duties were. Parliament had not passed any, perhaps due to the inconsistency between the position of the president and the parliament in matters of strengthening district power structures. And in the subsequent elections for the village administration, Khatuev ran Mayor of Achkhoy – Martan and was elected.












ПЕРЕВОД НА РУССКИЙ ЯЗЫК





ВОСПОМИНАНИЯ ЧЕЧЕНСКОГО ФЕРМЕРА





История Хамзата





Я родился в 1959 году. С 1989 по 1992 год был общественным деятелем и участвовал в общественно-политической жизни нашего Ачхой – Мартановского района Чеченской Республики. На первых демократических выборах перестройки я был избран представителем в муниципалитете села Ачхой – Мартан и помог провести аграрную реформу, благодаря которой появились первые частные хозяйства в районе, с приобретением земли в собственность. Участвовал в президентских и парламентских выборах 27 октября 1991 года в качестве члена окружной избирательной комиссии, в выборах первого Президента Дудаева и первого независимого парламента, в 1997 году был членом избирательной комиссии Аслана Масхадов. С 1992 по 2002 год я продолжал свою общественную и политическую деятельность, организовал свое хозяйство. В апреле 2004 г. я эмигрировала в Польшу, с ноября 2004 г. по сегодняшний день живу в маленьком французском городке в департаменте Вандея.





90-е годы для меня были самым счастливым временем в моей жизни. В то время я был моложе. Но это не так. Это было чувство свободы, которое пронизывало всех.





Истоки





В период с конца 1988 по начало 1989 года секретарь ВЛКСМ Ачхой – Мартановского района Руслан Езерханов начал противодействовать тогдашнему первому районному секретарю КПСС Руслану Базгиеву , эксплуатируя гласность и признанную свободу слова. от горбачевской перестройки. В то время местным органом управления был райком во главе с Базгиевым . Из-за его давления Эзерханова сняли с поста, поэтому он начал мобилизовывать людей против районных властей. Я сразу же присоединился к нему, и вместе мы сформировали движение под названием «Народный фронт». Мы хотели осуществить перестройку на нашей территории. В тот момент я познакомился с Русланом Кутаевым , который участвовал в политической жизни на национальном уровне и всячески поддерживал нас.





Народный фронт возник стихийно во многих городах Чечни, и Бисултанов был лишь самой известной его фигурой. Он был участником объединения «Кавказ», организаторами которого были Зелимхан Яндарбиев, Мовлади Угудов, Леча Умхаев, Юсуп Эльмурзаев и другие и целью которого было направить Чечню в нужное русло. Именно они дали название развивавшемуся в стране неформальному движению, назвав его Народным фронтом содействия Перестройке . Через некоторое время Бисултанов был исключен из этой группы, составившей Народный фронт (лишенный других атрибутов) и начал проводить демонстрации в Гудермесе, против строительства биохимического завода по производству лизина, фермента, служащего для роста мышечной массы коровы. Как потом стало известно, он был введен в движение с единственной целью способствовать назначению Завгаева первым секретарем обкома партии, а затем направить движение масс в его сторону. Для этого ему нужно было ослабить позиции Яндарбиева и его товарищей по борьбе, не дав им возможности влиять на ход процессов, происходящих в республике.





После отмены статьи 6 Конституции СССР «О руководящей роли КПСС» в райком было направлено указание о передаче полномочий представительным советам, избираемым на очередных выборах. Мы получили такие указания от члена Комитета, который тайно симпатизировал нам. Мы начали изучать эти директивы, готовясь к выборам местных депутатов. 15 февраля 1990 года мы начали демонстрацию против первого секретаря Базгиева . В то время руководство нашим движением в Ачхой – Мартане перешло от Езерханова к Шепе . Гадаев , будущий депутат республики. Я знал Гадаева уже много лет. Он помог мне, когда в 1984 году из-за конфликта с заведующей больницей, где я работал, меня незаконно уволили. Гадаев был юристом, и с его помощью я смог вернуться к работе, оставаясь там более десяти лет. Это был блестящий человек, очень грамотный, не боявшийся противостоять власти. Возможно, поэтому, к сожалению, в 1996 году его похитили и убили. Скорее всего, тут как-то связано его противодействие Базгиеву , но в то время следствие так и не было проведено, а виновник его убийства так и не был найден.





Земельная реформа





Вернемся в 1990 год. Организованная нами сходка длилась семь с половиной дней, и в итоге Завгаев снял Базгиева . На очередном партийном собрании Шепа На его место был избран Гадаев . Мы одержали первую победу. Таким образом, мы продолжили подготовку к выборам в районный совет, в сельсовет, и на выборах нам удалось отвоевать многие должности, закрепив за ними лояльных нашему движению людей. Среди них было и: Я был одним из 30 членов сельсовета. Мы с коллегой были инициаторами создания альтернативной комиссии по проведению аграрной реформы в нашем селе.





В то время советское центральное правительство уже приняло три закона: «Земельный кодекс России», «Закон о крестьянах и сельском хозяйстве» и «Закон о земельной реформе», все из которых шли в направлении восстановления частной собственности. земли, но господство бюрократии и партии тормозило все инициативы и блокировало реформы. Ельцин в Москве издал постановление о проведении земельной реформы, разрешающее райкомам создавать фермы путем выделения до 10% пахотных земель совхозов и колхозов частным компаниям. Земельная комиссия, которую мы создали, тут же апеллировала к этому праву, реквизировав 150 га пашни у одного совхоза и еще 64 (впоследствии увеличенных до 75) га у другого, и устроив на этих землях частные хозяйства . Даже сегодня 15 ферм, построенных на меньшей земле, все еще полностью функционируют. Остальные, к сожалению, закрылись по разным причинам. Я тоже завел свое личное хозяйство на земле, отчужденной от Комиссии. Затем я сформировал консорциум ферм под названием «Содружество», руководил им до 2004 года. Я убежден, что в том числе благодаря консорциуму эти фермы смогли выжить. Назначение земель производилось на основании заявлений, поданных гражданами, намеревавшимися на них работать. Один из таких вопросов задал мой отец, и когда началась приватизация земли, он тоже получил свой участок. Насколько мне известно, при отводе земли коррупция не затронула. Разумеется, руководитель процесса Митрищев отдал землю трем своим братьям, благоволя к ним, даже если ни одному из троих не удалось построить солидные компании. Но в целом крестьяне получали землю без взяток. Аграрная реформа продолжалась и после обретения независимости, потому что парламент, будучи избранным, издал закон, идентичный во всех отношениях российскому (изменено только название: с «России» на «Чечня»), однако ограничив максимальный размер земли что может быть продано каждой госкомпании до 50 га. Государственные средства были также выделены для финансирования начала сельскохозяйственной деятельности: 10% бюджета, выделенного Министерству сельского хозяйства, было передано Ассоциации республиканских фермеров, которая выделила средства для новых сельскохозяйственных предприятий. Эти средства были не очень велики и обычно заканчивались к весне.





Между 1992 и 1994 годами я пытался создать процветающую ферму. За два с половиной года я собрал целый набор сельскохозяйственных орудий и техники, включая два трактора и грузовик. Я был самым успешным фермером в то время, в Ачхой – Мартане . Вся продукция компании была выведена на рынки Грозного и Владикавказа. Я об этом заботился лично, на своем грузовике: продавал продукты на рынке или по дороге, жителям.





Со временем земельная реформа захлебнулась. Для правительства вопрос не считался первоочередным, так как сначала нужно было получить официальное признание со стороны независимого государства. Местные власти не были заинтересованы в потере своей власти, и немногочисленные попытки депутатов (в том числе Шепы Гадаев ) возродить приватизацию земли. Та же аграрная реформа неоднократно оспаривалась.





От комитетов к префектам





Когда Дудаев стал президентом и был избран парламент, в республике сложилась совершенно особая ситуация. Райкомы, враждебные дудаевскому руководству, стали саботировать работу новой администрации. Наоборот, сельские администрации решительно поддержали новый курс. Был, по сути, промежуточный уровень управления, препятствовавший передаче приказов от центральной власти на территорию. Поэтому на одном из собраний Народного фронта мы предложили распустить районные комитеты и упразднить этот промежуточный уровень, поставив местные администрации в непосредственный контакт с грозненским правительством. Шепа Гадаев , который тем временем был избран депутатом, был инициатором этой инициативы в парламенте. Вмешался Дудаев, упразднивший райкомы и введший фигуру префекта по выдвижению президентом. В нашем округе президент назначил Алви Хатуев , бывший партийный деятель. Он был первым секретарем комсомола в нашем районе, потом руководил небольшим молокоперерабатывающим заводом в деревне Валерик . В этом качестве он заявил о себе и был назначен префектом. Хатуев так и не нашел общего языка с местными администрациями, потому что не было закона, который точно определял бы его права и обязанности. Парламент так и не принял, возможно, из-за несогласованности позиций президента и парламента в вопросах усиления районных властных структур. А на последующих выборах в айыл окмоту Хатуев баллотировался на пост главы айыл окмоту Валерика и был избран.