"MOSCOW TRIBUNE", 
12 October 2001 
THIS IS ALSO RUSSIA'S WAR 
So Let Us Consider the Risks 
By Stanislav Menshikov

In the aftermath of the US-UK strikes at Afghanistan it has been suggested that this is "their war", in which Russia does not and should not participate. But such assertions are ostrich behaviour, i.e. ignoring reality. Like it or not, Russia has been involved for two years now in a bloody war with terrorists in Chechnya who are supported by Osama bin Laden' s terrorist international based in Afghanistan, among other places. After September 11, Russia is therefore a natural part of an international coalition to fight global terrorism. It has provided its air space for US planes used against Taliban and agreed that Uzbekistan's and Tadjikistan's air space and bases are used for the same purpose. By agreement with the US it is shipping armaments to the Northern Alliance with the specific aim of assisting the elimination of the Taliban regime. It is therefore for all practical purposes an active participant in the battle. The operation in Afghanistan is thus Russia's war as much as it is America's and Britain's. Doing away with bin Laden and the Taliban is in Russia's national interest. The limits to Russia's participation set by Vladimir Putin do not make it a neutral party.

The apparent fear displayed in some quarters of getting directly involved in the fighting is understandable. Russia's own recent military experience in Afghanistan has not been a success story. The country has lost too many soldiers in the last two decades to be prepared for new human sacrifices. The hope is that its armies will not have to fight yet another war, and the president has assured us that this would not happen. However, the future is not totally determined in the Kremlin. Even peaceful nations get involved against their will in wars when attacked or threatened. So what are the risks in this case?

Some are connected with the possible failure to eliminate bin Laden and Taliban by military means. US commando forces may not be able to finish the job if faced with too many casualties. The Northern Alliance and other opposition forces may prove to be too weak to overrun the existing regime even with outside help. If they are defeated, the emboldened Taliban could attack Uzbekistan and Tadjikistan forcing Russia to participate in their defence. Would the US fight together with Russia on its side?

Al-Qaida could activise its operations in other regions. Combined Chechen-Arab bands have already invaded Abkhasia. A new war threat is being created on Russia's southern border in the Caucasus in the immediate vicinity of Sochi, the seat of one of president Putin's principal residences. The other intention is to provoke tension, if not outright military confrontation between Russia and Georgia. Is the US prepared to take Russia's side, at least politically, against this new act of aggression?

The possibility of a militant Muslim regime taking over in Pakistan should not be discounted either. So far General Musharraf seems to be in control, but support for Taliban in Pakistan is real. If the militants succeed, they could gain control over that country's nuclear arsenal. What are US and Russia's contingency plans, if any, for this apocalyptic scenario?

But suppose that the US operation in Afghanistan is a success. A major terrorist base is destroyed and a new coalition government is installed in Kabul. Would that prompt Washington into the euphoria of strikes against other countries? The US has already put the UN Security Council on notice that it could expand its military operations to other nations. Iraq is a probable next choice. Because there is no convincing evidence that Saddam Hussein is behind terrorist activities against the US, an attack in Baghdad would lead to confrontation, at least political, with Russia. Does Moscow have any understanding with Washington to that effect?

There are also serious doubts as to whether the US would not use its newly acquired bases in the Central Asian republics to create a permanent military presence there. Direct claims in the US media (the "Washington Post", for one) have been recently made that the Bush administration should consider retaining its bases there well after the current operation in Afghanistan is over. Does Moscow have an explicit understanding with Washington on that delicate matter? If not, it could certainly become a serious bone of contention between the two countries and easily help ruin their partnership.

And not only that. By siding so closely with the US Vladimir Putin is opening up to domestic claims that he is a "new Gorbachev" or "new Yeltsin" making too many unilateral concessions, which are detrimental to Russia's national interests. Such criticism is already being voiced from both the Left and Right sides of the political spectrum. Unlike George W. Bush who enjoys overwhelming support of Americans in his anti-terrorist drive, domestic support for the Russian president's policies towards Afghanistan is far from unanimous.

There is no doubt that Mr. Putin is consciously taking a risky road. Whether he has correctly weighed all of the risks against the advantages remains to be seen.

Back to the Top    Next Section