Institutional Solutions for the Post-conflict Development of the Chechen Republic

 
PIIS086919080021660-3-1
DOI10.31857/S086919080021660-3
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Occupation: Professor of Regional Governance and National Politics Department
Affiliation: Moscow State Institute of International Relations
Address: Odintsovo, 3, Novo-Sportivnaya street
Journal nameVostok. Afro-Aziatskie obshchestva: istoriia i sovremennost
EditionIssue 5
Pages43-54
Abstract

The article reveals the institutional solutions for the Chechen conflict and post-conflict development of the Republic within the Russian Federation. The author conducts a retrospective, event- and normative analysis of the stages of the Chechen conflict, when political actors (federal center and ethnic elites) tested various institutional decisions, each time adopting new “rules of the game”: 1) the period of institutional uncertainty from the “Chechen revolution” of 1991 to the dissolution of the first Parliament by Dzhokhar Dudayev in mid-1993; 2) the period of "temporary sorting model" - the search for a Chechen leader alternative to Dudayev for negotiations with Moscow, ended with the signing of a Peace Treaty with Aslan Maskhadov and then his attempt to create an Islamic state on the territory of Chechnya; 3) the stake on Akhmad Kadyrov as a consistent opponent of Wahhabism, who made a turn towards loyalty to the federal Center. At present, stability in post-conflict Chechnya is determined by the following institutional decisions: the constitutional model of Russian federalism, the republic's subsidized dependence on the Center, the integration of the republic's executive and legislative into a vertically hierarchized state system. But along with formal institutions in Chechnya, there are social practices that depend on the socio-historical context (clannishness, adherence to traditional Islamic values), supported by the influential Head of the Republic Ramzan Kadyrov. The spread of traditional socio-political practices shows the possibility of the formation the new gaps between secular society and the political system of modern Russia and the Chechen Republic.

KeywordsChechen Republic, Russian Federation, Chechen conflict, institutional solutions
Received03.10.2022
Publication date30.10.2022
Number of characters26961
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.
Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной
1 Почти два десятилетия после распада СССР Чечня воспринималась как «ахиллесова пята» Российской Федерации. Чеченский конфликт, хронологически разделенный на две кампании, Первую чеченскую войну (1994-1996 гг.) и Вторую чеченскую войну (режим контртеррористической операции 1999-2001 гг.), повлек за собой противоречивые последствия, омрачившие новейшую историю нашей страны. Однако сегодня, несмотря на экономические проблемы (дотационный характер экономики, безработица), Чеченская Республика позиционирует себя как достаточно стабильную в политическом отношении часть страны. Это делает Чеченский конфликт интересным примером для изучения того, как сепаратистское движение потерпело крах, а крайне нестабильная территория осталась в составе государства. Выявление детерминантов этнополитической стабильности связано с анализом институциональных решений и практик, посредством которых ее удалось достичь. Представители неоинституционального подхода в политологии считают, что хорошие институты могут смягчить социальные конфликты, в том числе возникающие на этнической почве [Easterly, 2001; Grofman, Stockwell, 2001]. Поиск баланса между центральной государственной властью и мобилизованной этничностью, поиск оптимальных институциональных решений и практик взаимодействия различных политических акторов внутри полиэтничного государства – все это сложные теоретические и практические вопросы.
2 Цель настоящей статьи раскрыть особенности институциональных решений для урегулирования Чеченского конфликта и постконфликтного развития Чеченской Республики как субъекта Российской Федерации.
3

Подходы к анализу конфликта

4 Анализ Чеченского конфликта с начала его возникновения велся по трем основным направлениям. Во-первых, исследователи сосредоточили свое внимание на его причинах и фазах [Tishkov, 1997, 2004; Гакаев, 1999; Косиков, 2001]. Исследования зарубежных авторов о Первой чеченской войне [Dunlop, 1998; Smith, 1998; Bennet, 2001] объединяет критическая оценка действий федерального правительства, отказавшегося от поиска компромисса с лидером сепаратистов Джохаром Дудаевым. Более того, А. Ливен называл Чеченский конфликт 1994-1996 гг. «могилой» имперского влияния России, потерпевшей неудачу от маленького воинственного народа [Lieven, 1998].
5 Во-вторых, многие ученые изучали социальные, экономические и политические последствия Чеченского конфликта [Цветкова, 2008; Le Huérou, 2014; Сайдумов, 2016). На рубеже 1990-2000-х гг. на российском Северном Кавказе возникла реальная угроза ваххабизма, одного из течений радикального политизированного ислама, что также привлекло внимание многих ученых [Малашенко, 2001; Добаев, 2015; Рощин, 2011].
6 В-третьих, конфликт рассматривался как часть сложных процессов национального и федеративного строительства новой России. По мнению А. Малашенко и Д. Тренина, в начале 2000-х гг. Россия вступила во «время Юга», когда проблемы на Кавказе из периферийных превратились в центральные [Малашенко, Тренин, 2002]. Т. Мамсуров, изучив возможности согласования интересов Центра и регионов, пришел к выводу, что необходима сильная государственная власть, которая могла бы ставить политические и правовые барьеры для сепаратизма [Мамсуров, 2001].

Number of purchasers: 2, views: 219

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Bobrovnikov V.O. Muslim Traditions, Law and Society in the Russian Caucasus. Russia and the Muslim World. 2015. No. 3. Pp. 54–66 (in Russian).

2. Gakaev D. The path to the Chechen Revolution. 1999. http://old.sakharov-center.ru/chr/chrus08_2.htm (in Russian) (accessed: 02.03.2022).

3. Dobayev I.P. Ideological Substantiation of Terrorism in the World and in the North Caucasus. Russia and the Muslim World. 2015. No. 12. Pp. 69–87 (in Russian).

4. Treaty on Peace and Principles of Relations between the Russian Federation and the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria. Moscow, May 12, 1997. GARANT. https://base.garant.ru/10201015/ (in Russian) (accessed: 02.03.2022).

5. United Russia nominated Ramzan Kadyrov as a Candidate for the Post of Head of the Chechen Republic. June, 26, 2021. Parliament of the Chechen Republic. https://parlamentchr.ru/novsti-new/edinaya-rossiya-vydvinula-ramzana-kadyrova-kandidatom-na-post-glavy-chechenskoj-respubliki.html (in Russian) (accessed: 02.03.2022).

6. Interview of the Head of the ChR Ramzan Kadyrov to the TV channel RT Arabik. October, 17, 2019. Official site of the Head of the Chechen Republic. http://chechnya.gov.ru/novosti/intervyu-glavy-chr-ramzana-kadyrova-telekanalu-rt-arabic/ (in Russian) (accessed: 18.03.2022).

7. Kosikov I. The Chechen Republic Today. Vlast'. 2001. No. 5. Pp. 53–60 (in Russian).

8. Litvinova T.N. The Modern Political Elite of the North Caucasus: Problems of Formation. Kavkazskiy Sbornik. Vol. 3 (35). Ed. V.V. Degoev. Moscow: Russian Panorama, 2006. Pp. 283–300 (in Russian).

9. Litvinova T.N. The Political Crisis in Chechnya (1991–1993) in the Mirror of the Republican Press. Caucasian Sbornik. Vol. 4 (36). Ed. V.V. Degoeva, V.A. Zakharov. Moscow: Russian Panorama, ANO “Russian Historical Society”, 2007. Pp. 282–302 (in Russian).

10. Malashenko A., Trenin D. Time of the South: Russia in Chechnya, Chechnya in Russia. Moscow: Gendal'f, 2002 (in Russian)].

11. Malashenko A.V. The North Caucasus: Islamic Factor (Article One). Svobodnaya mysl' – XXI. 2001. No. 9. Pp. 6–22 (in Russian).

12. Mamsurov T. Russian Federalism: National-ethnic Context. Moscow: Variant, 2001 (in Russian).

13. Muzaev T. Chechen Republic of Ichkeria. General Review. 1997. International Institute for Humanities and Political Studies. http://www.igpi.ru/monitoring/1047645476/oct_97/chechen.html (in Russian) (accessed: 11.03.2022).

14. Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, December 6, 2001. No. 250-0 “At the request of the State Assembly – the Kurultai of the Republic of Bashkortostan on the interpretation of a number of provisions of Articles 5,11,71,72,73,76,77 and 78 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation”. 2001. ConsultantPlus (in Russian) http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_36750/ (accessed: 13.03.2022).

15. Popov N.P., Khaikin S.R. Northern Caucasus: Difficult Dialog with Power. Communicology. 2014. Vol. 6, No. 4. Pp. 124–155 (in Russian).

16. “R. Kadyrov Answered the Questions of the Program of the First Channel “Big Game””. October, 20, 2019. Official site of the Head of the Chechen Republic. http://chechnya.gov.ru/novosti/r-kadyrov-v-pryamom-efire-otvetil-na-voprosy-programmy-pervogo-kanala-bolshaya-igra/ (in Russian) (accessed: 18.03.2022).

17. Ramzan Kadyrov Hel a Meeting with Salakh Mezhiyev. March, 2021. The Spiritual Board of the of Muslims of the Chechen Republic. https://www.dumchr.ru/blog/archive/2021/03/page/2 (in Russian) (accessed: 18.03.2022).

18. Regions of Russia. The Main Characteristics of the Subjects of the Russian Federation. 2021. Rosstat. https://rosstat.gov.ru/storage/mediabank/Reg_sub21.pdf (in Russian) (accessed: 11.09.2022).

19. Rating of the INFLUENCE of the Heads of the Constituent Entities of the Russian Federation. Russian Regions and Regional Policy in February 2022. March, 6, 2022. Agency for Political and Economic Communications. http://www.apecom.ru/projects/item.php?SECTION_ID=101&ELEMENT_ID=7801 (in Russian) (accessed: 12.03.2022).

20. Roshchin M. Spiritual Administrations of Muslims in Post-Soviet Chechnya: A Historical Review. Pax Islamica. 2011. No. 2 (7). Pp. 148–155 (in Russian).

21. Saganaev A. There is “Justice” in the Republic. Golos Chechenskoy Respubliki. May 21, 1992. No. 95 (in Russian).

22. Saidumov D. State Law Revival and Formation of the Chechen Republic in The Early Twenty First Century. Law Herald of Dagestan State University. 2016. Vol. 20. No. 4. Pp. 31–36 (in Russian).

23. Selenteva D. O., Sorokina E. V., Surina V. A., Cherkasova E. A. Implementation of the Principles of Traditional Islamic Management in the Modern Chechen Republic: Causes and Consequences. International Journal of Humanities and Natural Sciences. 2018. No. 11–2. Pp. 117–121. (in Russian).

24. The Council of Muftis of Russia Finalized The Grozny Fatwa on True Muslims. 21.20.2016. RIA Novosti. https://ria.ru/20161021/1479765081.html (in Russian) (accessed: 12.03.2022).

25. Composition of Deputies of Previous Convocations. 2019. Parliament of the Chechen Republic. https://parlamentchr.ru/obsh/sostav-deputatov-predydushchikh-sozyvov.html (in Russian) (accessed: 12.03.2022).

26. Decree of the President of the Chechen Republic No. 8 of February 8, 1993 “On Conducting a Survey of Citizens of the Chechen Republic on their Attitude to the Adoption of a New Version of the Constitution and on the Creation of a Commission to Take into Account Citizens' Proposals on the Need to Amend and Supplement the Constitution”. Ichkeria. February, 13, 1993. (No. 13) (in Russian).

27. Filippov Yu. Moscow-Grozny. The Fate of the AGREEMENT on the Delimitation of Powers. January, 27, 2005. RIA Novosti. https://ria.ru/20050127/8784127.html (in Russian) (accessed: 12.03.2022).

28. Tsagoev I. “I Will Serve the PEOPLE”. The North Caucasus. April 10, 2007. No. 14 (in Russian).

29. Tsvetkova V. F. The “Cost” of the Chechen Conflict (Based on the Russian Periodical Press). Izvestia: Herzen University Journal of Humanities & Sciences. 2008. No. 66. Pp. 252–261 (in Russian).

30. Chechen parliamentarism: history and modernity. 2019. Parliament of the Chechen Republic. https://parlamentchr.ru/chechenskij-parlamentarizm-istoriya-i-sovremennost (in Russian) (accessed: 12.03.2022).

31. Akayev V.Kh., Nanaeva B. B., Salgiriev A. R., Soltamuradov, Magomed D. and Gaziev V. Z. Islamism in the North Caucasus: Appearance, Conflict with Traditions, Measures Against. The European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences. 2020. Pp. 3528–3534.

32. Bennet V. Crying wolf: The return of war to Chechnya. London: Pan Books, 2001.

33. Buchanan J.M., Tullock G. The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1962.

34. Dunlop J. B. Russia confronts Chechnya: Roots of Separatist Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

35. Easterly W. Can Institutions Resolve Ethnic Conflict? Economic Development and Cultural Change. 2001. Vol. 49. No. 4. Pp. 687–706.

36. Grofman B., Stockwell R. Institutional Design in Plural Societies: Mitigating Ethnic Conflict and Fostering Stable Democracy. UC Irvine: Center for the Study of Democracy. 2001. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/16s1c0mt (accessed: 02.03.2022).

37. Le Huérou A. Chechnya at War and Beyond. London: Routledge, 2014.

38. Lieven A. Chechnya: Tombstone of Russian Power. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998.

39. March J.G., Olsen J.P. Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics. New-York, London: Free Press, 1989.

40. North D.C. Transaction costs, institutions, and economic performance. San Francisco: International Center for Economic Growth, 1992.

41. Roberts S.P. Converging party systems in Russia and Central Asia: A case of authoritarian norm diffusion? Communist and Post-Communist Studies. 2015. No. 48. Рp. 147–157.

42. Smith S. Allah’s Mountains: Politics and war in the Russian Caucasus. London: I.B. Tauris, 1998.

43. Swirszcz J. The Role of Islam in Chechen National Identity. Nationalities Papers. 2009. Vol. 37. No. 1. Pp. 59–88.

44. The Theory and Practice of Institutional Transplantation: Experiences with the Transfer of Policy Institutions. Edited by M. De Jong, V. Mamadouh, K. Lalenis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.

45. Tishkov V. Chechnya: Life in a War-Torn Society. Berkeley – Los Angeles – London: University of California Press, 2004.

46. Tishkov V. Political Anthropology of the Chechen War. Security Dialogue 1997. Vol. 28. No. 4. Pp. 425–437.

47. Wolff S. Approaches to Conflict Resolution in Divided Societies: The Many Uses of Territorial Self-Governance. Ethnopolitics Paper. 2010. No. 5. Pp. 1–37. http://centres.exeter.ac.uk/exceps/downloads/Ethnopolitics_Papers_No5_Wolff.pdf (accessed: 02.03.2022).

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up