|
Analytics
|
 |
|
Roman Silantyev.
On some lessons of Nalchik
Now, several days after the bandit attack on the capital of Kabardino-Balkaria, the consequences and some causes of this deterrent action have become clear. The local community of zealots of ‘pure’ Islam, called ‘jamaat’ for a lack of imagination, simply decided to show who was real master in that republic.
True, its amir leaders have reasons to believe that the long mass media campaign waged on every level to discredit the republican authorities and the local muftiate has been a success and that journalists and political scientists have come to believe in the beautiful myth about national heroes who, though defamed and labelled ‘Wahhabis’, are selflessly opposing the corrupted clans.
And now these very ‘heroes’ led by ‘very cultured and intelligent’ Anzor Astemirov (as Ruslan Nakhushev, a leader of the Russian Islamic Heritage and the above-mentioned jamaat, too, has described him) attacked a peaceful city and killed several dozens of people. Many analytics have hastened to account for this action by their despair at the sight of social injustice, growing poverty and continued persecution of Muslims. They say it is the authorities and the muftis who sold themselves to them that must share the blame for all this. Look, how far they have pushed these nice people!
In fact, the presumptions like ‘the low living standards pave the way for emergence of terrorist organizations’ are profoundly wrong. Their authors appear to believe that an impoverished or mistreated man will lose not only his material wealth but also his conscience and feel free to rob and kill. No, he will not. Wealthy Saudi Arabia has given to the world dozens of times more terrorists then Bangladesh, while destitute peasants in the Russian heartland are not inclined for some reason to solve their problems the way the quite well-off jamaat members in Kabardino-Balkaria do it. Neither Bin Laden nor Basayev nor other leaders of the terrorist international have ever been short of money. Therefore, the Marxist-Leninist approach assigning primary importance to economics is at fault in this case.
It is unlikely that Syoko Asahara’s militants let off gas in the Tokyo subway to protest against ‘the domination of corrupted clans’ or because of their own poverty. They simply had a grudge against the authorities for their reluctance to bow before their ‘great teacher’, just as ‘Islamic’ terrorists have a strong grudge against everyone who does not want to live in a world caliphate and opposes its establishment. The people of Asahara, Bin Laden and the late Anzor Astemirov are united by one common feature. They are members of sects who dream of world domination. Give them power over the world and you can sleep in peace. They would not accept anything lesser. That is why the Wahhabis in the North Caucasus see in the federal subsidies not an act of good will but a tribute paid out by a weak and scared adversary who must be forced to pay more. |
