stary.prochazka
14.09.04, 12:52
The following commentary by VICTOR EROFEYEV was published in the New York
Times; September 11, 2004:
MOSCOW ? The blow struck by Islamic terrorism at the twin towers in New York
three years ago came as a complete surprise to Russia. We had not suspected
that the new century would begin with such a bloody dawn. Our people spent
that day frozen in horror in front of their television sets: What kind of
enemy was this, capable of bringing to life the most monstrous fantasies of
Hollywood? I was outside the American Embassy in Moscow late on the evening
of Sept. 11, 2001. The pavement was littered with flowers and lighted
candles. I think that never have Russians been brought so close to America by
such profound and heartfelt compassion.
We Russians believe that grief brings people closer together - it has always
been and still is a feeling that is shared. Sept. 11 changed the image of the
United States in Russian consciousness forever: we realized that we live in a
single world and that world is in need of our care and protection. Sept. 11
also affected us in another way. The whole of Russia was struck by the
disciplined manner in which Americans and their government behaved during
that tragic time.
The Russian state, alas, has lagged behind the heart: the leadership here has
lacked the courage to draw the conclusion that we share a common enemy. I am
by no means one of those who believe that America under George W. Bush has
done everything right. In apparent mockery of its own freedoms it has
developed ominous tendencies toward Orwellian social distortion. But at the
same time, I admire America for seeing what we should have seen in Russia.
There's a paradox here. After all, you would think that Russia, with a
perspective born of historical experience, would have been able to guess
where the extremist ideology of Islamic fundamentalism was leading. Remember,
revolutionary terrorism was born here and honed in Stalin's gulag. Islamic
radicalism grew up in moral opposition to the "rotten" West - an idea that
those of us reared in the Soviet Union can easily grasp - out of resentment,
poverty and national humiliation. (We know where the Germans were led by
these feelings.) Now this same flammable mixture has exploded within our own
borders.
Shamil Basayev, the Chechen rebel leader, might well be feeling pleased with
himself. Probably his greatest victory so far had been to impose a state of
dual power on Russia: President Vladimir Putin as the ruler of Russia and Mr.
Basayev as the commander of fear. What happened at the school in Beslan was
something that Mr. Basayev had never managed to achieve before. He forced
Russia to sit up and listen. Now everyone has realized that this business is
not coming to an end, that it is only just beginning, the beginning of a new
war.
Where does Mr. Basayev end and Al Qaeda begin? A separatist and a
fundamentalist are two very different things. The first demands political
separation; the second declares holy war against us. But the separatist
Basayev no longer exists. A massacre of children worthy of Herod is not a
coded invitation to peace negotiations. Mr. Basayev's message can no longer
be reduced to vengeance, an idea that presumes we call it quits when all the
scores have been settled.
The military dispute over Chechen sovereignty, morally impossible for Russia
to win from the very beginning, has mutated, leaving none of the old
certainties in place. Like Osama bin Laden's attack on the United States, Mr.
Basayev's attack signifies the start here of the Third World War of which the
whole of Western civilization is so rightly afraid, which it tries with all
its might to postpone, which it even tries to ignore.
Russia is far from certain that it has any substantial relationship to this
newly imperiled civilization. It relapses into a stupor in the face of its
enemy's audacity. It looks back, sometimes with nostalgia, on Stalin's
cunning imperial maneuvers, at his seizure of half of Europe. Nowadays it is
awkward and ungainly.
But while Russia has been unsuccessfully searching for its own national idea
since the collapse of communism, the extremists have listed it as one of
their enemies, and have acted accordingly. A war has begun here, and we have
to live by the laws of wartime and submit to the ruling authority. This
authority has unfortunately inherited a bad legacy; it is not responsible to
anyone and it is inclined to tell lies. But no matter what one might think of
Mr. Putin - we know his weaknesses, we know his penchant for censorship and
restrictive legislation - he is the one who must lead us. In the absence of
any real political opposition or civil society, it is the president who must
decide whose side Russia will be on in the war. As to the right decision,
there is no question.
Russians would like to remain hors de combat in the conflict of
civilizations, but they won't be able to. On Sept. 11, 2001, we wept in
sympathy with America; after Beslan we have to dry our tears and try to build
genuine ties with the West.
Victor Erofeyev is the editor of "The Penguin Book of New Russian Writing"
and the author of "Russian Beauty."' This article was translated by Andrew
Bromfield from the Russian.