by Eric Martin
Certain foreign policy objectives pursued by the Russian government over the past decade are beginning to bump up against the basic fiscal reality. It's quite simple really: long term military deployments are enormously expensive and can crowd out other vital budgetary initiatives. There is only so much money, attention and other resources to go around, and if military engagements are consuming large portions of each, then there is less left over to address other national interests. From the New Atlanticist:
After 10 years of armed conflict in breakaway Chechnya, is Russia about to declare victory and pull out?
That seems to be the message coming out of Moscow and Grozny in recent days. State Duma speaker Boris Gryzlov said on March 26 that it is time for Russia to end its effective state of war in the separatist republic, where it has battled rebel forces since 1999. Gryzlov's comments came one day after Ramzan Kadyrov, Chechnya's Moscow-backed leader, predicted that a decree ending Russia's "anti-terrorist operation" would be enacted by the end of March. "We have completely rooted out terrorism and extremism," Kadyrov said. "There are still certain circles of bandits that run around neighboring regions and make their appearance here. But they do not represent any threat for us. He continued: "We are building a new economic and political life in the republic. The people have already forgotten [the rebels]. That is the main thing."
Analysts say the decision is most likely motivated by financial concerns, as Russia reels from its worst recession in a decade.
Speaking to RFE/RL's North Caucasus Service, Aleksei Malashenko of the Moscow Carnegie Center explained that it will be difficult for Russia to pursue a costly military reform and continue operations in Chechnya in the midst of an economic crisis and low oil prices. "I think financial problems are playing a decisive role," Malashenko said. "There is an economic crisis and we are discussing how to finance the armed forces. I think there is an objective reason for what is happening. The most interesting question is how will this develop."
It's as if Russia forgot some of the central lessons from its Afghan excursion during the 1980s, and are now reacquainting themselves with that scholarship.
We, on the other hand, would never make such an elementary and obvious mistake. In Afghanistan. And Iraq. Because we're flush with cash right now, and what's another trillion here, a trillion there.
I don’t know whether it’s good or bad that Weezy F. Baby unites right and left on this blog. (At least as to titles.)
Most likely a sign of the apocalypse.
This ‘repression’ is going to spawn a lot of new ‘progressives’ and ‘liberals’, people who want to look at the price tags on goods marked ‘war on [ insert here]’…
I agree with Eric
Chris-
Ask for a new mantra.
I wonder if part of the Russian calculation is that with an impending US pull out in Iraq, a lot of the insurgent techniques, technology, and true believers will soon be moving north.
Um. The Chechnya occupation is — as these things go — fairly cheap. Chechnya is physically part of Russia; you can get in a car and drive there from Moscow. It’s like the US sending federal troops into Idaho. And Russian troops are not very expensive, and the numbers involved are not that large.
What’s missing from the discussion here is that the situation in Chechnya has _actually improved_ in the last few years. As in, improved a lot. Kadyrov is a complete shit — he’s a truly wretched human being, brutal, vicious and corrupt — but he’s not stupid, and he’s done a good job of leveraging Moscow’s assistance. The insurgency is on the ropes; things have been going badly for them since Shamil Basaev was killed three years ago. The average Chechen civilian hates Russia and is none too fond of Kadyrov either, but everyone is thoroughly tired of war. The prevailing opinion seems to be that Kadyrov may be a thug, but he’s preferable to chaos.
Will this hold? Who the hell knows? But from a purely military POV, Russia’s position in Chechnya is better today than at any time since the breakup of the USSR. So, while the recession is probably a precipitating incident, the Russians were likely going to ramp down their presence in Chechnya anyhow. The crisis is just encouraging them to do it sooner and faster.
Doug M.
Hi, I agree.
Since this obviously about Afghanistan and not Chechnya, I have to say it looks like you and Biden basically won this one. The result is going to be horrible for the people of Afghanistan, particularly women. The costs in the long run are probably going to be greater for us well-fed Westerners too, but I hope you’re right about that.
I feel somewhat heartened by Andrew Sullivan’s criticism of Obama “doubling down” on Afghanistan (I wish), since Sullivan has never, ever been right about anything.
I can only say that I’m disappointed the title didn’t attach to a post on the bailouts or some other aspect of the financial crisis. Otherwise, really nice work.