俄罗斯车臣恐怖主义产生的根源

近年来,俄罗斯境内频繁发生车臣恐怖分子的袭击事件。究其原因有5方面:1.俄、车民族结怨很深且由来已久,这使得车臣族人很容易拿起武器,随时准备着用暴力证明自己的正确;2.冷战结束以后,一部分车臣人谋求政治独立,结果遭受俄军一再打击,受害者转而寻求以武力复仇;3.车臣地区社会贫困、经济文化发展落后,使得一些车臣人迫于生活压力从事恐怖活动;4.伊斯兰教原教旨主义不断向车臣地区渗透扩张,使部分车臣青年产生了驱逐甚至消灭俄罗斯异教徒的激进思想;5.包括穆斯林国家战斗人员、本·拉登“基地”组织和前阿富汗塔利班政权在内的国际恐怖势力的公开支持以及某些国家的纵容立场,都对车臣恐怖分子起到了姑息养奸的作用。惟其如此,俄罗斯国内的恐怖主义问题不仅层出不穷,而且成了一个久治难愈的顽症。     

Chechen ethnic identity: assessing the shift from resistance to submission

This article critically assesses the ostensible transformation in Chechen ethnic identity. Journalists and scholars who came to this conclusion based their claim on obvious changes in Chechen behavior. The brave and irreconcilable resistance the nation demonstrated during the First and the Second Russo-Chechen Wars of 1994–1996 and 1999–2009, respectively, was replaced by a submissive and loyal stance with regard to the new authorities and recent enemies. This article investigates whether such a change in behavior reflects a corresponding change in ethnic identity. This article asserts that ‘non-Chechen’ behavioral models do not signify changes in Chechen ethnic identity by presenting and analyzing Chechen narratives concerning the question. In summary, this article concludes that the ethnic identity of the nation remained mainly untouched. This conclusion is supported by the observed continuity of Chechen resistance, which has always been driven by cherished values such as freedom.     

Russia as a great power: Status inconsistency and the two Chechen wars

The article examines Russia as a great power from the point of view of status inconsistency theory. Applications of the theory to Russia have focused on the status accorded to Russia in diplomatic representation and membership of key international organizations, which suggests that Russia is a ‘status overachiever’ in that it has an international status that is greater than its actual capabilities would warrant. However, this article focuses on Russian perceptions of the country's status internationally, especially as reflected in the actual experience of membership in international organizations (OSCE, Council of Europe) and relations with the EU in the context of the two Chechen wars. The article demonstrates that, at least according to Russian assessments, Russia is accorded lower status in these organizations than the great power status which most Russians believe should be theirs. While concluding that status inconsistency is a useful tool for explaining Russian foreign policy behavior, the article notes that differing assessments of what Russia's level of status recognition is pose challenges for status inconsistency theory.