Religious Ethnic Cleansing by Russia in Chechnya - Essay Example

Religious Ethnic Cleansing By Russia in Chechnya Religious Ethnic Cleansing By Russia in Chechnya The conflict in Chechnya is the most protracted of the entire post- Soviet conflicts (Tishkov 2004). The violent is the only conflict secessionist that has taken place within the Russia Federation. As political, social and cultural issues resurface between the contemporary ethnic Russians and the Northern Caucasus-Chechen minority group, this centuries-old-religious and ethnic battles continued in a war over national self-determination and territorial integrity (Murphy 2004). Chechnya has an Islamic origin since the Qadiriya Sufi and Naqshbandiya established it. Mendleson (2002) and Benjamin (2005) affirm that these brotherhoods became a fundamental part in the Chechen society and during the rule of Stalin’s deportation. Though the two brotherhoods of the Wahhabi and Sufis were not compatible, the Wahhabi brotherhood successfully established their religion and traditions within the Chechen boundaries (Dunlop and Rajan 2009). Hosking (2001) and Schwartz (2003) define religious ethnic cleansing as an attempt that aims at getting rid of (through displacement, deportation, and mass killing) members of unwanted religious and ethnic groups to establish an ethnically and religious homogenous geographic area. The Chechens’ desire for independence was perfectly understandable, however, as a minority ethnic group; the Chechens were mistreated by the Russian Empire and the Soviet regime (Murphy 2004). In 1944, the Russian Empire accused the Chechen along with various ethnic groups of having collaborated with the Nazis. The ‘collaborators were deported to Siberia. Schwartz (2003) established that, on February 23, 1944, Stalin ordered more than half a million Chechen to be forcibly deported. More than half a million of Chechens were forcibly herded on cattle cars then sent them to Western Siberia. According to Tishkov (2004) and Dunlop and Rajan (2009) as many as half the deported Chechens died on the road and uncounted thousands died in the unfavorable Siberian winter. Tishkov affirms that the exiles were dumped in the open and harsh snowy fields where they were left to fend and cater for themselves (2004). The Russians did not allow the Chechens to return to their homes. Therefore, by the time of perestroika, a reformation and restructuring political movement, Chechen adults had been born in Siberian exile (Khamidov 2002). The Chechens did not want to live close to the Russians because the Russians had mangled their lives. The Russian troops used indiscriminate and inordinate attacks and use of force against the Chechens (Fowkes 2006). The war entailed shelling, bombardments, “cleansing,” and rapid assault of Chechens populated areas. The Russians had an aim of driving away the Chechens ethnic groups so that they can make the entire region (Esposito 2002). The Russian empire committed many atrocities against the Chechens. The Chechens was subjected to the extrajudicial killings by the Russian troops and some of the victims disappeared without a trace. Thornberry (1993) confirms that these are against universal human rights and legal structures that are guarantees, which protect individuals and even groups against omissions and actions primarily by the State that interferes with the entitlements, freedoms, and dignity of human beings. Benjamin (2005) emphasizes that the full spectrum of international human rights calls for respect, fulfilment and protection of cultural, civil, political, social and economic rights. Human rights are universal meaning that they apply inherently to all humans and that they are interdependent and indivisible. Russian State mistreatment of ethnic and religious minorities, Chechens, is a major issue. The developments of Russia and Chechens independence have led to re-emergence of nationalist and ethnic issues (Schwartz 2003). The problems of national consolidation of newer states are inevitably raising a lot of questions concerning religion, culture, and language (Ben 1998). The rights of the minorities have proven difficult to accommodate in the individualist and Universalist models of human rights. International laws are required to deal with various issues dealing with dilemmas such as an individual versus the collective rights, the passivity on the states’ part towards the minority groups or positive activities that will promote them (Hosking 2001). International Laws and the Rights of Minorities explore various responses of international laws to these vital questions by analyzing of customary and treaty laws, including regional treaties. Fearon and Laitin (2000) emphasize that the war in Chechnya was characterized by huge violations of international humanitarian laws. They confirm that the Russian military perpetrated violent crimes on the Chechnya population including deliberate and indiscriminate bombing, mass killings,unlawful arrests, torture and beatings, systematic rate, shelling of areas populated with Chechnya civilians, and forced repatriation or exile from neighboring Ingushetia to war zone areas. Intensifying the already dangerous situations, some Chechen fighters used innocent civilians as human shields when they took over the hospital and held hostages (Dunlop and Rajan 2009). Chechen defense forces have executed Russian troops in a contravention of humanitarian law. According to Fowkes (2006) Russian forces committed most of the abuses. Russian military methods and tactics leans directly to patterns that directly target civilians. These methods are against the requirements that are outlined in Article 48 of the First Additional Protocol to Geneva. The Article states that in order to uphold respect and protect the lives and properties of the civilian population the parties that are involved in a conflict must differentiate between a civilian and a combatant and the difference between civilian property and combatant properties, and that they should direct their forces towards the combatant and their properties. Russia carried out three large civilian massacres in Chechnya (Thornberry 1993). For example in Alkhan-Yurt village, the Russian troops killed over seventeen civilians during a looting spree where they burnt several homes and raped many innocent women. This was against Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that states that, everyone has a right life, security and liberty. However, the Russian troops did not uphold this right. In the district of Staropromyslovski, Russians soldiers massacred more than fifty civilians when they took over the control of the district (Khamidov 2002). In the district of Aldi, the Russian military shot more than sixty civilians who were unarmed they were just standing in the yards and streets waiting for the soldiers to check their documents (Dunlop and Rajan 2009). Additionally, on October 29, 1999 in the district of Ashkoy Martan Russian made an air attack on a humanitarian convoy that according to Benjamin (2005) included Red Cross vehicles that had the emblem clearly market on them. This attack violates Articles 5 of the Universal declaration of Human Rights that stipulates that no human being will be subjected to degrading treatment, cruelty or torture (Hoskin 2001). It also violates Article 21 of the Fourth Geneva Convention that states that vehicles that are carrying the wounded or the sick must be protected and respected. In a brutal religious and ethnic campaign against the minority Chechen, the Russian military concentrated on the population in the surrounded Grozny, which is the capital of Chechen (Schwartz 2003). In December 1999, Russian military aircrafts dropped threatening leaflets over the capital of Chechen, warning the Chechen civilians that they will be dealt with if they do not leave the city past December 11 (Dunlop and Rajan 2009). The Russian soldiers claimed that any civilian that will be remaining in Grozny will be labelled as bandits and terrorists who the military will destroy by aviation and artillery. It was evident that the Russian military did not consider the sick, the injured, or those who were too frightened to leave, or those who did not see the leaflets. According to Mendleson (200) even when the Chechen civilians tried to get out of the city through ‘safe corridors’ the Russian military continued to carry out direct attacks on the Chechens. Civilians were trapped for several months behind the Russian front lines. The worst humanitarian violations of human rights took place in the detention centers that were commonly known as “filtration” camps (Khamidov 2002). Russians carried out ethnic conflicts against the Chechens and detained whoever did not have residence permits or proper registration documents, or any one that is suspected of being a separatist fighter (Esposito 2002). Women and children were detained on suspicion of being related to any Chechen fighter. Mendleson (2002), Benjamin (2005) and Fearon and Laitin (2000) confirm that the government used a lot of tactics to hide the existence of such detention camps. This violates Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that states that every human being has the freedom of residence and movement within the borders of every state, and they can leave and return to the country including his country (Fearon and Laitin 2000). Esposito (2002) affirmed that the Russian government temporarily relocated the numerous detainees from the inhuman Chernokosovo camp whenever Council of Europe visited the area. However, Non-Governmental organizations have evidence that these camps exist. Khamidov (2002), Mendleson (2002) and Benjamin (2005) report that when the detainees due to ethnic and religious conflicts arrive at the “filtration” camps, they are forced to run through a series of Russian guards who beat them with clubs, nightsticks, and metal bars. The Chechen men, women and children were systematically and routinely raped in these makeshift facilities. Some of the men and women were brutally tortured with tear gas and electric shock. Khamidov (2002) affirms that the confessions of being a Chechen guerrilla fighter were extracted during such torture and beatings. Russian military practices in the “filtration” camps violated provisions of human rights and the Universal Declaration Human rights. These acts on Chechen civilians constitute human rights violation according to humanitarian obligations. A government has the obligations to protect its citizen against any abuse of their rights (Ben 1998). The Russian government violated Article 12 of the Universal declaration of Human Rights, which states that states that no human being will be exposed to arbitrary interference with his family, privacy, or his home. The government has a mandate to protect its civilians against attacks and interference. Moreover, Russian government did not ensure the implementation of Article 15 of the European Convention that gives human being the right of derogation and permits partial limitation during a state of emergency or a war (Tishkov 2004). The Russian government failed to secure for its citizens the right of derogation and it breached the various provisions in the European Convention. They violated Article 5 that protect the life and ensures the security of a person, and Article 3 that prohibits inhumanly or torture, or exposing an individual to a degrading punishment or treatment (Dunlop and Rajan 2009). Response of the International Community Fowkes (2006), Mendleson (2002) and Benjamin (2005) affirm that during the 1994 to 1996 Chechnya war, the international community condemned the Russian atrocities, but they went quiet when the Russian government remained quiet and failed to start investigations or take any action to punish the culprits that caused the humanitarian crimes. Esposito (2002) say that the silence by the international community is a familiar response, and again, the Russian government has failed to investigate, prevent, or even to punish the criminals of these humanitarian crimes. Despite the Russian government failure to account for its killings, the international community has distanced itself from getting involved in the Russian affairs. Khamidov (2002) confirmed that the April 2000 decision by the Council of Europe to suspend the delegates from Russia from voting was the concrete measure that signified international oppositions. The Council of Europe restored Russia’s voting rights on January 25, 2001. These stand showed a retreat from the harsh stand that the Council showed Russia (Fearon and Laitin 2000). Various advocacy organizations termed this move as a voting propaganda move for Russia’s victory. President Putin announced that Russia will reduce the number of troops in Chechen and he approved a new structure that the Chechen government adopted (Schwartz 2003). Additionally, the Russian government transferred offensive control in Chechnya from the military form to the Federal Security Service, FSS, which succeeded the KGB. Khamidov (2002), Ben (1998) and Schwartz (2003) ascertain that the West response to the war was contradictory. During the Kosovo war, Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister, was instrumental in ending the war and his remarked aimed at easing war in Kosovo. However, during the Chechnya conflicts, the international community has failed to demonstrate such motivation to end the war (Dunlop and Rajan 2009). Human Right groups were angered by the Russian move to evacuate Chechen civilians in Grozny (Benjamin 2005). They raised concerned about this issue and they gave the Russian government an ultimatum and threatened them that the G8 nations and the entire European Union will isolate Moscow if they did not stop with their inhuman acts (Tishkov 2004). The Russian troops were responsible for looting civilian properties and burning down hundreds of houses, and even killing those that resisted. The April 2001 Human Right Commission condemned Russian troops when they committed violations on Chechnya. Esposito (2002), confirmed that Russian forces tortured, performed executions, and forced disappearance of civilians. The E.U had strong U.S backing and they both sponsored special rapporteurs who investigated the abuses and reported the humanitarian violations. The resolutions that the E.U adopted required Russia to cooperate with intergovernmental and NGO agencies that sought to conduct inquiries in Chechen conflicts. The Russian government was to grant unrestricted and immediate access to the international committee for the Red Cross and UN Commission for Refugees. Russia refused to comply with the resolution that the commission adopted. The UN Commission adopted the 56th session that required the deployment of humanitarian law and called on Russia to establish a national and a broad-based commission that was to investigate and prosecute criminals according to international law. Bibliography Ben, F 1998, Russia and Chechnia: The Permanent Crisis. Great Britain: MacMillan Press. Benjamin , A 2005, Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the Twentieth Century. London: Cornell University Press. Dunlop, J., & Rajan, M 2009, Chaos in the North Caucasus and Russia’s Future, Survival, vol. 56, no.9, 97-115. Esposito, J. L 2002, Unholy War: Terror in the Name of Islam. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fearon, J., & Laitin, D 2000, Violence and the Social Construction of Ethnic Identity. International Organization, vol. 45, no. 22, 846-867. Fowkes, B 2006, The Future of the North Caucaus: Islamic Movements in the North Caucasus,” 2006. The Jamestown Foundation:. Washington DC: The Jamestown Foundation:. Hosking, G 2001, Russia and the Russians: A History. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University. Khamidov, A 2002, Brewing Ethnic Tension Causing Concern in South Kyrgyzstan, TOL Wire, vol. 43, no. 32, 54-67. Mendleson, S 2002, Russian Rights Imperilled: Has Anybody Noticed, International Security, vol. 23, no.8, 40-70. Murphy, P. J 2004, The Wolves of Islam: Russia and the Faces of Chechen Terror. Washington: Brassey’s Inc. Schwartz, S 2003, The Two Faces of Islam: Saudi Fundamentalism and Its Role in Terrorism. New York: Doubleday. Thornberry, P 1993, International Law and the Rights of Minorities. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Tishkov, V 2004, Chechnya: Life In a War-Torn Society. Berkeley: the University of California Press. Read More