The attack on Nalchik in Kabardino-Balkaria is yet another sign of the deteriorating situation in the North Caucasus. While this is the first high-profile attack by Basayev's Chechen fighters and their allies since Beslan, this is unfortunately just the latest indication of the waning Russian control in the region. For some time now, there have been nearly as many clashes between Russian forces and Chechen fighters in Dagestan and Ingushetia as there are inside Chechnya proper and Basayev's followers now consist of large numbers of Dagestani and Ingush Muslims in addition to actual Chechens and Arab al-Qaeda fighters. With the death of Aslan Maskhadov at the hands of Russian forces, the chances for a negotiated peace in the Caucasus is now virtually nil and Maskhadov's successor Abdul-Khalim Sadulayev is little more than a puppet for Basayev, Doku Umarov, and his Arab al-Qaeda backers Abu Hafs al-Urduni and Abu Omar al-Saif, both of whom have called for attacks on US troops in Iraq.
Gateway Pundit has done a pretty good job of rounding up the information on the Nalchik attacks, though it seems that the FSB source that originally claimed that Basayev and Umarov had been killed is now retracting the claims. My own experience with reading Russian media coverage of the Chechen conflict is that it is heavily censored and that it now appears that the Russians are unlikely to acknowledge just how badly they were hurt until they have a better opportunity to assess the situation, particularly how a force as large as 300 fighters according to some reports were able to hit Nalchik without them getting any prior warning about it, for instance.
As for Yarmuk, the Basayev-aligned group that appears to have carried out the attacks, Andrew McGregor has the closest thing to a profile that I've been able to find on the group courtesy of the Jamestown Foundation:
Both the KBR and the neighboring Karachai–Cherkessian Republic (KCR) have supplied a steady source of fighters to the conflict in Chechnya. Many began their careers in the Islamic Peacekeeping Army that invaded Dagestan in 1999. While Chechens are routinely blamed for all bombings and other terrorist acts, it is the Turkic-speaking Karachays and Balkars that have actually been prosecuted for these incidents. An example is the 1999 apartment block bombings in Moscow and Volgodonsk, where blame was laid on Chechnya but all the individuals actually charged for these acts hail from Karachaevo-Cherkessia or Kabardino-Balkaria.... Jamaats (Islamic communities) began to emerge in the KCR and KBR in 1996 as a reaction to the opening of the former Soviet Republics to the outside world of Islam. With the established structures of "official Islam" held in distrust, a younger generation began to seek connections with "true Islam", which to many meant adoption of Salafist beliefs current in the Arabian heartland of the faith but foreign to the North Caucasus. Some jamaats are entirely peaceful, while others have felt the lure of the message of jihad and adopted armed revolt. The Yarmuk Jamaat is of the latter type, having been formed in 2002 from Balkar followers of Chechen warlord Ruslan Gelayev in the Pankisi Gorge.
Other young Muslims have turned to the leadership of the self-described Emir of Muslims of Kabardino-Balkaria, Musa Mukhozhev. Mukhozhev's Salafist Islam has experienced a sudden growth in popularity as many young people abandon the region's traditional Sufi beliefs. Russia's new Interior Minister, Rashid Nurgaliyev (himself a Tatar Muslim) has disparaged the republic as a breeding-ground for foreign-supported "Wahhabism."
... In August 2004, the Yarmuk Jamaat announced the beginning of military operations in the KBR. [4] The statement rejected terrorism, calling it the preferred method of Russian security services: "We are not fighting against women or children, like Russian invaders are doing in Ichkeria (Chechnya). We are not blowing up sleeping people, like (the) FSB of the Russian Federation does." (The last sentence refers to alleged FSB responsibility for the 1999 apartment bombings). The author expresses anger at the Russian forces, but focuses on the divisive corruption of the "mafia clans" that lead the republic: "These mere apologies for rulers, who sold themselves to the invaders, have made drug addiction, prostitution, poverty, crime, depravity, drunkenness and unemployment prosper in our Republic."
A January 21 statement is the most detailed exposition of Yarmuk's aims. [6] It begins with a summary of historic injustices suffered by the Muslims of the Northwest Caucasus at Russian hands while maintaining that Shari'a law has been the legitimate legal code in the region since 1807. The authors avoid reference to radical Islamic thought, preferring to establish the orthodoxy of their movement by citing the Hanafite legal code (one of the four accepted schools of Sunni Islamic law) as justification for beginning a "defensive [and hence obligatory] jihad." Emphasizing personal reasoning and exercise of judgment, the Hanafite code differs greatly from the rigid and inflexible terms of the Hanbalite legal school followed in Saudi Arabia. The Hanafite interpretation is traditional in the Caucasus, and is a touchstone in the author's appeal to historic resentment of Russian rule.
The Yarmuk statements are an unusual blend of Islamic militancy and local concerns (extending even to the scandalous behavior of a local pop singer). They describe an indigenous movement that derives its purpose from regional and traditional interpretations of Islam rather than imported "Wahhabism". Indeed, foreign solutions to the problems of the KBR are explicitly rejected – Western democracy is deemed to practice a double standard in its dealings with the Russian Federation, while there is "nothing but betrayal to be expected from the fattened womanlike ‘sheikhs' of the East."
The Yarmuk manifestoes call for political change through moral revolution. Even the Russians are warned that their rule in the North Caucasus is crippling them, "morally and physically". The KBR's large Orthodox minority and tiny Jewish community are both offered the protection of dhimmi status under Shari'a law. [7] The statements were probably the work of Yarmuk leader Muslim Atayev and his associate Ilyas Bichukayev, both graduates of the University of Nalchik. The two were both killed in a day-long gun battle in Nalchik on January 27.
According to Russian accounts, Yarmuk is now led by Astimirov Anzor and Ilyas Gorchkhanov, who were previously wanted in connection with an earlier attack on the regional branch of the Federal Drug Control Service in Nalchik. The reference to Yarmuk as non-Wahhabi (Russian insistence to the contrary) is somewhat curious, as Gelayev himself was a Wahhabi (abeit of a more moderate variety than Basayev) and he certainly fell in with the Wahhabi-controlled Chechen enclave in Georgia's Pankisi Gorge prior to his death at the hands of the Russian military. Whatever the status of Yarmuk's religious orientation, there seems to be little doubt as to their ties to Basayev:
... Though Maskhadov may have ordered the creation of these new fronts, it is the remarkably well-traveled Basayev who has demonstrated operational control. Basayev spent six weeks in KBR in 2003, narrowly escaping capture in a firefight at Baksan.
The Jamestown Foundation's descriptions of the restrictions on Islam in Kabardino-Balkaria and a healthy dose of local corruption also gives one some idea of how extremism might take root there:
The KBR government has imposed restrictions on Islam that recall Soviet rule. All mosques save one in Nalchik have been closed, and the wearing of beards or praying outside the home marks an individual for arrest. Some young Muslims detained by police have had crosses shaved into their scalps. A list of 400 people deemed security threats has been compiled, though some suspect the list contains many non-militants whom the regime dislikes. Mukhozhev notes that "It is very hard for us to keep the youth from retaliating. The authorities' policy cannot be described as sensible – rather, it is provocative." [2] The FSB maintains that the KBR has become a base for terrorism and religious extremism.3
I suspect the FSB is correct in that regard, though they're likely confusing the effect with the cause in this instance.
Both Russians and Islamists accuse the other of provoking war in the KBR. Russia has steadily increased the number of soldiers, police and secret services in the republics over the last year and incidents of torture, arbitrary arrest, and disappearances are now commonplace. The Yarmuk statements suggest that Islam will serve as a rallying point for young people tired of repressive rule, corruption and lack of economic opportunity. The war in Chechnya continues to serve as the catalyst for the violence, and the Kremlin's pursuit of a military solution there ensures an escalating cycle of insurgency and repression in Kabardino-Balkaria.
Now before I get accused of sympathizing or legitimizing Basayev's jackboots, do understand that I nothing but abhorrence for their methods and as long-time readers know I don't consider there to be much of a distinction between Yarmuk, the Riyadus-Salikhin, the International Islamic Peacekeeping Brigade, and every other jihadi group active in the Caucasus and Zarqawi's al-Qaeda in Iraq (particularly since they've openly thrown in with him), especially if you look at where the money's coming from and who's ultimately calling the shots. However, basic counter-insurgency, especially if the insurgency is taking place in your own backyard, is to try and win over as much of the population as possible. Accepting that Kabardino-Balkaria is majority Muslim and is going to remain so for the immediate future, these types of Russian policies only serve to feed into resentment in the area and gain more recruits to the banner of people like Basayev.
That all said, nothing can excuse the horrific actions of Yarmuk, particularly since the majority Muslim population of Nalchik (particularly those who just happened to be at the store, the airport, or the school on the day in question) weren't occupying anything except perhaps their town. Today's events are yet another grim reminder of how al-Qaeda and its allies, among whom must be counted Basayev, Abu Hafs al-Urduni, and Abu Omar al-Saif, have once again twisted the Chechen independence movement and instead turned into yet another front in their global jihad.








Why is ti policy makers in the USA and other Western capitals are unable to help grant the legitimate aspirations of these variying religious-ethnic-nationalistic groups whom want mostly to rule themselves from Jihadists? Is it simply a couple of centuries of colonialism(neo and other), a sense of superiority or what that has made policymakers unable to come to grip with these problems?
Thanks for the long analysis, especially for the data. I can understand if you're proud of yourself of being objective and balanced.
You said that the Russian has failed to win over the population of muslim majority of North Caucasus. But as far as I know, the Russian never had any intention to "win over the heart and mind" of the North Caucasus muslim since the annexation in the 19th century. Repression, sanctioned state-version of Islam, the 1944 mass-expulsion to Siberia. The Russian always try to suppress the problem instead of finding the solution.
So I think, the muslim of North Caucasus don't held too much expectation on the Russian to yield to the peaceful solution. Independence, is the only way.
Robert: Think about what you're saying. Looka t a map. "Granting" them anything in effect requires going to war with Russia in order to forcibly strip those regions from its governance.
Since those people are not likely to be either friends or allies, and since we have no compelling immediate national interests, how would we justify the lives that would be lost, both military and civilian, in the process?
Sorry, man, what you're saying "in a vacuum, with constant gravity, etc etc" sounds nice... but placed in a real-world context, your simple prescription is a well-intentioned recipe for horror.
Russ
I understand your comments and appreciate the realpolitik of them. I often despair not so much for areas we(USA) can't effect but for those we can. This inability to seperate the Jihadists from those parts of the population that essentially want self rule themselves. Iraq remains a place this could happen.
It sounds more like the Chechins had their heads handed to them thananything else, if this report from strategypage.com can be trusted.
Chechen Assault on City Fails
October 14, 2005: Yesterday's assault on the city (of some 235,000) of Nalchik was apparently an attempt by Chechen rebels to take many people hostage (and demand Russia get its troops out of Chechnya.). This time, the Russians were ready, and at least 70, of over 100 armed Chechens, were killed by police and soldiers. Some two dozen police and civilians were killed as well. There were over a hundred wounded. The Chechen were organized into at least ten teams when they assaulted the city police stations and government offices. Some police and civilians were held hostage, for several hours and in several different locations, before police moved in and rescued the hostages. The Chechens have used these mass attacks several times before, often with spectacular effect. But this time, the attack was a spectacular failure.
Dan, I'm not sure if you've seen this report yet, but RIA Novosti are reporting that Ilyas Gorchkhanov, the Yarkuk co-leader was killed in the raid yesterday. Unlike the rumour of Basayev's death yesterday, the source is a named Deputy Interior Minister, so I'd say there is a reasonable chance it is an accurate report.
Also, I've seen a lot of reports about clan conflicts being behind the raids. Valerii Kokov, the President, was recently replaced by a pro-Kremlin businessman, which could be said to mark a change in elites, and I wonder if that could have been a factor in the timing of the raid. I'm not really up on the local politics, so I'm not to sure what to make of them at the moment, and I'd be very interested to hear your comments on this aspect of the regions politics.
Robert: Not realpolitik, I promise you. I hew far more to Palmer than to Huntingdon.
----
I think the fact that they were able to mount the attack speaks volumes about who is controlling the countryside, versus who says they are. Glad to hear they got themselves spanked, though.
Robert M -- don't forget the historical context in which this occurs. Russian rule under the Kievan Monarchs was destroyed by the Mongols who in the course of a few centuries became Muslims (the Golden Horde). The Russian view of things was that they were enslaved by the Tatars and such (arguably true) and simply pursued their former colonial masters southwards and eastwards. Colonialism arguably exists farther back than the 1800's; this conflict is based on a sense that Russia being weak, the various Islamic peoples can revolt and form their own independent Islamic republics (which are likely to be nasty little places like the Taliban's Afghanistan).
Ultimately, Russia with even semi-competent leadership and organization is much bigger and stronger than these would be Islamic Republics. I foresee some Putin successor acting as a "reform Stalin" and appealing to Russian Nationalism, Orthodoxy, and simply booting the various ethnic peoples of the region to Siberia or elsewhere, with the rest of the world not caring very much.
While guerilla warfare has it's uses; without a sheltering or allied superpower against a regular army with little limits on it's conduct there isn't much to be done. Al Qaeda has the same myth. Thais are dealing with the same delusion (enough terror and they will simply let go a big chunk of their country); same with the Philippines, Western China, and likely before too long, Albania's neighbors.