MM
ME Miami
Inessa S ️️ dan repost
Some intresting context to the above:
Salafi-Wahhabism came to Chechnya in the 1990s, predominantly via Samir al-Suwailim (known as Ibn Al-Khattab) - an ultra nationalist Saudi cleric & terrorist. You can find him here torturing Russian soldiers.
The roots of Jihadists of that era emerge from the CIA-funded Mujahideen ("freedom fighters") in Afghanistan, designed to fight the Soviets who were invited to Afghanistan by the non-Mujahideen government of the day (much like in Assad's Syria.)
From there, they were sent to Russia's Muslim regions to promote disintegration from the State, using religion as a tool. To put simply, the forms of Islam propagated by Saudi clerics were not native to Chechnya.
Western support included the International Red Cross & "Voice of Chechnya" (registered in the U.S), while one of the loudest funding stories was with the "Benevolence International Foundation" (closed in 2002) - involved in everything from finance, arms smuggling & logistics of rebels from abroad.
Financial support equally came from Russian-based oligarchs against Putin, doing the fighting with the hands of the Chechens (Ukrainians of the day.) It became apparent that this two-fold power struggle was not in the interests of the Kadyrovs (Snr & Jr.) Should the West & oligarchs win, Chechnya also loses, amongst other things, federal funding as Russia would likely be 'Balkanized.'
Putin was able to strike a deal using the 2003 Constitutional arrangements as leverage. Chechnya, while part of the Federation, is an Autonomous Republic that implements federal programmes - but can also legislate itself.
(If Zelensky had any common sense, he would have done this with Donbass! Not that the people of Donbass were ever armed & dangerous.)
Eventually, Mosques preaching sectarianism were closed & rebels apprehended. Kadyrov has been implementing a strong policy of anti-secessionism in Chechnya, which is why he also has his own opposition even today.
___
The difference here is who is pulling the strings and for what purpose - in Chechnya, Putin's objective was to keep Russia's territorial integrity intact. But with Turkey/Israel/USA occupying different parts of Syria, does it serve the interests of the people of Syria?
Therefore, I think it is difficult to compare "reformed terrorists" in Chechnya to Syria's as the overall objectives in the two regions appear to be opposites.
And still - Kadyrov's decision to change sides, in the name of peace, the 'true' faith & financial stability of the Republic, was nothing short of geopolitical genius by him & Putin.
The premises of the comparison made are too different to come to the conclusion that HTS can be a good force for Syria. (Putin doesn't actually say this, it's only posed as a question in the forwarded channel's caption.)
Subscribe@InessaS
Salafi-Wahhabism came to Chechnya in the 1990s, predominantly via Samir al-Suwailim (known as Ibn Al-Khattab) - an ultra nationalist Saudi cleric & terrorist. You can find him here torturing Russian soldiers.
The roots of Jihadists of that era emerge from the CIA-funded Mujahideen ("freedom fighters") in Afghanistan, designed to fight the Soviets who were invited to Afghanistan by the non-Mujahideen government of the day (much like in Assad's Syria.)
From there, they were sent to Russia's Muslim regions to promote disintegration from the State, using religion as a tool. To put simply, the forms of Islam propagated by Saudi clerics were not native to Chechnya.
Western support included the International Red Cross & "Voice of Chechnya" (registered in the U.S), while one of the loudest funding stories was with the "Benevolence International Foundation" (closed in 2002) - involved in everything from finance, arms smuggling & logistics of rebels from abroad.
Financial support equally came from Russian-based oligarchs against Putin, doing the fighting with the hands of the Chechens (Ukrainians of the day.) It became apparent that this two-fold power struggle was not in the interests of the Kadyrovs (Snr & Jr.) Should the West & oligarchs win, Chechnya also loses, amongst other things, federal funding as Russia would likely be 'Balkanized.'
Putin was able to strike a deal using the 2003 Constitutional arrangements as leverage. Chechnya, while part of the Federation, is an Autonomous Republic that implements federal programmes - but can also legislate itself.
(If Zelensky had any common sense, he would have done this with Donbass! Not that the people of Donbass were ever armed & dangerous.)
Eventually, Mosques preaching sectarianism were closed & rebels apprehended. Kadyrov has been implementing a strong policy of anti-secessionism in Chechnya, which is why he also has his own opposition even today.
___
The difference here is who is pulling the strings and for what purpose - in Chechnya, Putin's objective was to keep Russia's territorial integrity intact. But with Turkey/Israel/USA occupying different parts of Syria, does it serve the interests of the people of Syria?
Therefore, I think it is difficult to compare "reformed terrorists" in Chechnya to Syria's as the overall objectives in the two regions appear to be opposites.
And still - Kadyrov's decision to change sides, in the name of peace, the 'true' faith & financial stability of the Republic, was nothing short of geopolitical genius by him & Putin.
The premises of the comparison made are too different to come to the conclusion that HTS can be a good force for Syria. (Putin doesn't actually say this, it's only posed as a question in the forwarded channel's caption.)
Subscribe@InessaS