wps.ru
POLITICAL FORECASTS (press review)
October 9, 2001
THE WAR BETWEEN THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH HAS BEGUN, AND AS USUAL
RUSSIA IS IN BETWEEN
"In the face of today's new threat, the only way to pursue peace
is to pursue those who threaten it," said President George Bush on
television an hour after the first missiles were fired at Afghanistan
(cited from the [Vedomosti] newspaper).
The major goal of the US military action is to eliminate the
terrorist bases in Afghanistan, as well as to destroy the military and
the industrial structure of the Talib regime until its total
liquidation. Besides, [Vedomosti] reports, the US believes that the
bombing will lead to a change of the Taliban forces in the country and
thus, will make at least some of the Talib commanders desert or to
join the Northern Alliance. Moreover, the US also hopes that deserters
will provide the necessary and true information on where Osama bin
Laden and his associates are hiding. The paper cites a statement of an
anonymous representative of the US administration, "We understand that
we are unable to "get" Mullah Omar and bin Laden by our bombs, but we
hope that the side effect will work."
It is rather doubtful if these goals are real to achieve. And all
who are aware of the Afghan reality have many doubts about this. For
instance, the [Kommersant] paper states that the first and foremost
practical objective of the US air strikes - to protect the US Air
Force from anti-aircraft fire - is most unlikely to be achieved. A
quarter of a century ago, during the first Afghan war, the US gave the
Afghan Modjaheds a thousand Stinger missiles, which were used for
shooting down Soviet planes. After the Soviet troops left Afghanistan,
the Pentagon tried to buy out the remaining Stingers, and offered very
big money for this; however, all it managed to return was about 200
systems. So, at present the Talibs have several hundreds of rather
compact anti-aircraft systems, which are very easy to take away from
the bombed area if necessary.
The [Komsomolskaya Pravda] newspaper informs where exactly the
military equipment of the Talibs may be hidden. Referring to an
anonymous officer, a participant of the first Afghan war, the paper
writes that Afghanistan is pierced by a tremendous amount of mines and
tunnels, which were once made in the mountains for pumping melted
water to the driest areas. The length of some of such tunnels amounts
to ten kilometers. And it was these tunnels that gave the Modjaheds a
possibility to not only mysteriously get out of surrounding, but to
also take their weapons and combat equipment out. In those underground
labyrinth Afghan guerrillas are almost absolutely safe; at least the
Soviet troops did not have a necessary weapon to fight against them.
So, [Komsomolskaya Pravda] writes, perhaps, the US has such a weapon,
but it should also be taken into consideration that over the past 25
years the Afghanis must have improved and strengthened their
underground shelters.
Meantime, the Russian press has no doubts that Afghanistan is not
the only country to be involved in the war, whether if bin Laden is
caught or not.
According to the [Novye Izvestia] newspaper, the US will also
want to "put in order" the countries neighboring Afghanistan, in order
to "deprive radical Arabian countries, in particular those where,
according to Washington's estimates, terrorists hide themselves and
are trained, of any chance to threaten the national security of the
US, even in the far future."
So, after the Afghan Talib regime, it may be the turn of Syria,
where the combat units of the Kurdish Labor party are hiding
themselves, and where the camps of Arabian extremists who carry out
terrorist acts in Israel are supposed to be situated.
Iran and Iraq are not forgotten either; especially after these
countries have protested against the US "revenge acts".
According to [Novye Izvestia], as for Iraq, "it is planned to
intensify the scheme of people's rebel against Saddam Hussein with US
weapons, instructors, and aviation cover". Recenlty, Tarik Aziz said
in his speech on CNN channel that the US will never find bin Laden,
and if Bush younger ever decide to attack Iraq, he will be taught a
lesson no worse than his father had been taught once.
In fact, as [Novye Izvestia] remind, ten years ago the US gave
Saddam Hussein a chance to preserve his regime. However, at present
the US politicians are close to decision to finish up with it.
According to the paper, the US plans to finish its "big war against
international terrorism" in Baghdadi.
As George Bush in the aforementioned television address to the US
nation, "we did not want this mission but we will fulfill it."
At the same time the Russian analysts can see many drawbacks in
the US plans, and not only from the point of their realization. For
instance, the [Novoe Vremya] magazine says the discussion about
fighting against terrorism is an "empty chatter".
However, the magazine agrees that "it is necessary to make all
the effort to prevent a terrorist raid every time it is being
planned". Defensive objectives of such actions are quite clear; in
these terms it is sensible to discuss only the necessary spending. As
for offensive objectives, things are much more complicated about them.
As [Novoe Vremya] writes, "retribution actions only heat the
conflict up and increase the probability of the next terrorist raid."
It is clear that responding attacks are carried out in order to weaken
the opponent and to prevent new terrorist acts, but they are unable to
radically resolve the issue, to stop the war. They only lead to
permanent increase of the violence level, as it has happened in the
Middle East lately, and now is going on all over the world. "The war
like a chameleon is changing its forms depending on the multiple
circumstances," the magazine emphasizes.
Besides, [Novose Vremya] writes, there is a question: is it
possible to preserve untouched the traditional liberal values of the
North in case of the inevitable escalation of the war between the
North and the South, the civilization and the middle ages?
The forecasts are rather sad: because of the natural course of
events, the threat of increasing authoritarian elements will be
constantly growing. Thus, a necessity to concentrate the resources,
control transportation, transferences and cargo transportation, as
well as spreading information will emerge (actually, has already
emerged). "And Russia and Russians know better than many other
countries what regime is likely to be finally established, covered by
all these plausible pretexts," the magazine notes, "There is no
grounds to believe that it will be different."
In any case, [Novoe Vremya] believes, still a certain combination
of slavery and freedom is possible, like it used to be in the US
before abolishment of slavery or in the SAR before the apartheid
regime was eliminated. "From the standpoint of those locked in
ghettos, there was no liberalism and democracy. While 'full-value'
citizens could enjoy all that." So, according to the paper, now
something similar may happen to the US and to the rest of the world.
"If war escalation goes on and on, the zone of democracy and freedom
will keep narrowing; however, it will exist even under the war
conditions for a rather long time." As [Novoe Vremya] notes, it would
be good to "fin ourselves within this zone, in its comfort and warmth,
and not to stay outside in the cold."
The viewpoint of the [Profil] magazine is rather similar to the
aforementioned. [Profil] is convinced that attacking Afghanistan and
even defeat of the Talibs "is not a full-value response to the
international terrorism" for all this is most unlikely to increase the
extent of security of the US and the rest of the "civilized world".
What this world is unanimous now is understanding of the
ineffectiveness of the prior defense methods, "International pacts,
aircraft carriers, antiaircraft defense systems and other that was
invented for defending against an external enemy is absolutely
helpless against a single kamikaze with a test-tube of killing virus
in a pocket."
Moreover, today's post-industrial civilization is so complicated
that from time to time disasters happen without any terrorist acts -
the Kursk nuclear submarine disaster is one of the most convincing and
frightening instances. And the vulnerability of the present
civilization is undoubted - it contains too many vitally important
joints, and attacking any of them can provide for a real "domino
effect".
Evidently, it is absolutely impossible to control the whole
infrastructure of a developed country. That is why, according to
[Profile] "it will occur to everyone rather soon that it is much
cheaper and efficient to control people (and in present situation any
person is potentially dangerous) than to dumbly keep watch over
communications and put agents to every plane."
It is especially easy in the west because along with improvement
of democracy and development of the freedoms a process of gathering
and accumulation of information (including the most confidential one)
on individuals has bee on: for instance, on those who become bank
clients, or takes a new job, or fills out a tax declaration form -
which means about almost everyone without an exception.
As [Profil] writes, "there is a file for each citizen of Europe
and America, sometimes several files," and this allows to make an
absolutely full database over a very short period of time.
While if there is a total control there is always a possibility
and a temptation to manipulate the behavior of a person. And everyone
knows what it is like, either from the history of his or her own
country or from futuristic anti-Utopia novels.
The [Obshchaya Gazeta] newspaper proposes its own way for
salvation of the world in an articles titled "Racing the apocalypses".
The paper writes, "New man-made disasters can be prevented only by
means of improvement of the safety measures. While the total danger
globalization can be prevented only by globalization of fighting
against them."
According to [Obshchaya Gazeta], in present situation the
terrorism centers are almost impossible to eliminate, "In the long
run, it is senseless to liquidate the presently existing terrorist
networks and to simultaneously allow the leaders of national states,
who often have extremely narrow and selfish ends to create new
terrorism centers, which will allow terrorism to spread all over the
world."
That is why the only response to the more and more global threats
to the modern more united and more fragile world can be only
"establishment of a united world authority system, and in the long run
- a united world state." This is, according to [Obshchaya Gazeta], the
"clearly determined agenda for the 21st century."
The paper notes that this state is already being established, and
the already past stages are international tribunal court ob Yugoslavia
and Rwanda; various UN, OSCE and Council of Europe's inspections; as
well as NATO operation in Kosovo and arrests of General Pinocet,
former Ukrainian Prime Minister Pavel Lazarenko, and even Russian
official Pavel Borodin.
As [Obshchaya Gazeta] believes, the September 11 events
considerably intensified this process. Terrorists attacked not only
New York and Washington but also the principle of state sovereignty
and non-intervention to interior things of other states, "Today even
Russia, that had reacted so painfully to NATO's actions in former
Yugoslavia, does not object against actions in 'sovereign Afghanistan'
and 'intervention' into its 'interior affairs'".
At present the civilized world is forced to act as "authoritarian
policeman, a teacher, a 'civilizer'". The paper is convinced that
there is no other way out at present.
At the same time, it is undoubted that at present the situation
is extremely complicated and contradictory, "The 'civilized' mankind
has entered the way on which it will have to connect unconnectable
things... This is a way on which it is very easily to 'get infatuated
with one's own leading and dictating position' and to give up to the
natural intention to fix it; it is very easy to 'mix up' the
objectives of survival of the mankind and one's own profit."
From the standpoint of the paper, it is a very long and difficult
way, which demands 'colossal self-restrain and intellectual honesty'
and so on. As a result, this way is to lead to "creation of a global
democratic society where the principle 'one man- one voice' is to be
realized. This means everyone will have the right to influence the
course of events."
[Obshchaya Gazeta] writes that only such a society can guarantee
preservation of liberal values; only such a society can be really
stable and we should constantly remember about it as about our final
objective.
While so far "using of paternal and dictating elements, as well
as imposing to liberal minorities the norms without which the mankind
will die" is inevitable. Well, it is another version of a classical
Utopia: "let's drive the mankind into happiness with an iron hand". It
seems everything has already been said about noble aims which are
justifying not very civilized means.
Meanwhile, the journal [Expert] views the situation in quite a
different way, and its opinion rules out prospects of creation of a
global democratic state.
Alexander Privalov, observer of the journal, cites an article
from The International Herald Tribune devoted to the military campaign
in Afghanistan that states that an undesirable or disappointing result
of this campaign could provoke an isolationist reaction in the US. The
new American isolationism is most likely to be based on a new narrowed
alliance that would apparently include NAFTA countries, Israel,
Taiwan, and probably Japan. [Expert] draws the reader's attention to
the fact that the US does not intend to ally with Europe anymore.
The quoted article states that the new alliance may become the
dominating military force of the world and may become a commercial
competitor of its former enemies and allies.
Alexander Privalov stresses that this article clarifies the
situation: "Never mind the North or the South! There is America and
its closest satellites that should be protected by all means including
ballistic missiles and restrictive import duties."
However, there have not been any official announcements about it.
At the same time, the observer of [Expert] believes that Russia now
has a chance to take advantage of the disagreements between Europe and
the US. Moreover, he is of the opinion that America does not leave any
other chance for Europe but alliance with Russia. "That is why
President Putin's speech in Bundestag had such an effect!"
In the opinion of the journal [Novoe Vremya], this speech is
Putin's attempt to use the same style in Europe that helped him gain a
success in Russia during the presidential campaign.
The journal thinks that the "American tragedy gave Russia a
chance to take advantage of anxieties of any European audience,
including parliament members, prime ministers, and presidents." Putin
used this chance when he called for the West "to transform the cold
war into the anti-terrorist war." Europeans and almost the whole world
now feel the same as Russians felt after the explosions in Moscow,
Buinaksk, and Volgodonsk in 1999.
Of course, the West may understand the Kremlin's game and adopt
it only as much as it corresponds to its foreign political interests.
However, these topics and disagreements are at the background.
In the opinion of [Nezavisimaya Gazeta], Russia has adopted an
extremely unprofitable role in the "third world war." The newspaper
stresses that President Bush has not mentioned Russia among America's
allies - actually, he has not mentioned it at all. The only thing left
for Russia is to hope that Bush implied it when he said, "The whole
world supports us in this operation." Thus, [Nezavisimaya Gazeta]
states that Russia's place in this military campaign "is somewhere
between Israel and Muammar Kaddaffi."
The newspaper notes that Russia is bound with the Northern
Alliance by partnership relations. Russia has already begun to deliver
weapons and military hardware to the Afghani Northern Alliance.
Meanwhile, it is clear that the Northern Alliance does not have the
necessary number of specialists able to manage this equipment. "Thus,
the Russian military may soon trail the same mountain paths as their
Soviet predecessors used to. It is also not ruled out that Russian
detachments will be in the avant-garde while attacking Kabul."
[Nezavisimaya Gazeta] states that the involvement of Russia in
the new war in Afghanistan means that it will have one more front. In
this connection it is clear why Shamil Basaev recently announced his
intention to support the Afghani people against aggressors.
Meanwhile, the newspaper is convinced that the US will never be
Russia's ally in the Caucasus, whereas its military participation in
this conflict "is a matter of time."
In other words, the US insists of the whole world's joining its
revenge campaign, whereas Russia is taking a risk to "be as isolated
in the 'Second Great Patriotic War' as it was in 1941" if it joins
America's campaign.
However, according to the newspaper [Vremya Novostei], Vladimir
Putin is clearly displaying signs of keeping a distance from the
operation in Afghanistan. Russia is actively delivering humanitarian
assistance to Afghanistan, but it rules out Russia's military
participation in the military operation there. The newspaper states
that both most of the military and of the Russian society consider
Putin's support for America's military operation to be too strong,
which is hazardous for his image of the president supporting interests
of its voters.
The newspaper cites data of some opinion polls stating that 61%
of Russians did not approve of even the very intention of the US to
perform the revenge operation. Sociologists are sure that this figure
is much larger after the recent missile strikes against targets in
Afghnaistan. Director of the All-Russian Public Opinion Study Center
(VTsIOM) Yury Levada says, "The painful memories of the events of
September 11 have been mollified, and now people see new victims on
TV."
According to VTsIOM's opinion polls, before the military strikes
87% of Russians thought America should have displayed wisdom instead
of aggression. Currently, 72% of Russians fear that the military
operation in Afghanistan may develop into a new world war.
Leonid Radzikhovsky, observer of the newspaper [Vremya MN], is of
the opinion that the main feeling uniting the Russian society is the
fear of war. Since there is nothing to soothe Russians so far, their
fear is developing into a stronger hatred for Americans because "the
tension and fear experienced by most Russians are caused by Americans'
actions."
Leonid Radzikhovsky believes that in reality most Russians,
including those sympathizing with the West, are not afraid of
terrorists. "Russians are not scared by explosions in New York." Even
those who hate and curse Moslem extremists do this out of their morals
but not because of the fear for their security. However, a large-scale
war that may involve the whole country in a bout of deaths is much
more frightening.
For the past six years of the Chechen war people have learnt to
think that they do not suffer from terrorists personally unless they
have a son who can be called to the Army. Meanwhile, the fear of being
involved in a large war in Afghanistan or Central Asia is a reality.
Leonid Radzikhovsky states, "Russia views the war that has been
unleashed in Afghanistan a completely foreign war, and its citizens
absolutely rule out any possibility of the country's participation in
this war on whatever side."
The Russian government will apparently have to count with this
opinion of the society because Russia is known to be a democratic
country.
Mavra Kosichkina
(Translated by Arina Yevtikhova and Kirill Frolov)
Serbian News Network - SNN
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antic.org/
