home arrow 2011 arrow Methods of combating terrorism

home |

RussianEnglish

similar

Ipatova, Elena
, 6 . . ...
04/06/23 03:22 more...
author

Rozgon, Svetlana
, -!. . ...
13/04/23 14:42 more...
author

Kurbatova, Christina
, ,. , . ,,, ...
20/01/23 19:55 more...
author

Chernykh, Dmitry

1980 . ...
15/12/22 14:18 more...
author

Borisova, Elena

, - 512. , . ...
30/10/22 20:02 more...
author

Methods of combating terrorism
Written by   
, 06 2011
ImageRadio station Echo of Moscow, broadcast of Cover-2
Guest: Sergei Kovalev
Moderator: Tikhon Dzyadko
T.DZYADKO: In Moscow it is 7minutes after 8in the evening and Iwelcome anyone who is listening to radio station Echo if Moscow. Cover-2 is a program in which we talk about topics that major foreign weeklies put on their covers. Asyou well know, we have a project called Cover-1, which is on Mondays, and there we talk about topics that the Russian weeklies put on their covers, while on Sundays we meet here in the studio with our guests and discuss topics relevant to foreign weeklies. Today Iwill be talking about terrorism and ways to combat terrorism, topics that are no less relevant for Russia than they are for our neighbors, and in some ways, perhaps even more so. Iwill talk about it with my guest today, Sergei Kovalev, a human rights activist. Sergei Adamovich (Kovalev), good evening.
S.KOVALEV: Good evening.
T.DZYADKO: Allow me to remind everyone about how to reach us. We, of course, have video feed, two of them. First of, the usual way is our little web cam, but in addition to video from the ‘Echo’ website, you can watch our live stream on Setevizor, which allows you to monitor everything happening here in the studio with multiple camera angles, because there is more than one camera on, and, accordingly, this video can be viewed on iPhone, iPad, and the Google Android mobile platform. So, go to the website and choose that feed that is closest to you and that you find more interesting, and enjoy what is happening here in the studio.
And also, of course, our telephone number for texts is up, so send your text messages to +79859704545. Youcan also send in questions via the Internet and via Twitter, if you send the message to my account@vyzvon. Thatis everything Iguess, so let us get to the point: methods of combating terrorism.
I would like to start with a statement that was made, and Dmitry Medvedev made this statement while he was speaking at a conference called “Great reforms and the modernization of Russia.” It took place the other day and it dealt with the 150th anniversary of the abolition of serfdom. Dmitry Medvedev spoke at a kind of a keynote address, where he talked once again about freedom and, in particular, he said that the enemies of free development would continue to be intolerance, extremism, and their extreme manifestation, terrorism. Thisis my question to you, Sergei Adamovich. Whatdo you think, as far as Russia is the most serious enemy to free development today terrorism? Oris this not the main enemy?
S.KOVALEV: It is a major factor. Itis a major problem for us and not only for us. Thisis quite true, and it is a global problem. Thisproblem involves real politicians who are trying to develop some strategy and something they can do about it, but Ithink they will not be very successful, and it cannot be otherwise. Iwill talk about this later. Ithink that the problem of terrorism is not a major obstacle on our path to freedom. Themain obstacle on our path to freedom is that, excuse me, our government is illegitimate, it understands that it is illegitimate, and wishes to remain that way. Thisis because this illegitimacy guarantees its stability and guarantees it a long duration, and that is how it is going to be. Herenow we have a new definition for a presidential candidate: a successor. Thisis a shameful definition. So, we now have a successor, and our “duumvirate” is getting ready to decide on which of them is going to run, and they are not even shy about saying this out loud. Doyou follow? Thatis the picture.
T.DZYADKO: Look, as far as terrorism in general and a free society, how they are linked? Because if we look at countries where this problem is also acute, these are countries with various levels in terms of freedom.
S.KOVALEV: Completely different.
T.DZYADKO: How directly are the two phenomena here, shall we say, interrelated?
S.KOVALEV: Iwill allow myself to say the following. Ithink that the relationship between the systems of government, freedom, the legality of state, and terrorism is as follows: terrorism is one of the children of Realpolitik, and in politics we hold onto the art of the possible and do not wish to try and build a new global political paradigm, and so terrorism will remain one of the major enemies of a free society.
T.DZYADKO: But simply after all, we see that, for example, as far as a country that has a problem with terrorism that is similar to ours, Israel is an example of a fairly free society.
S.KOVALEV: Yes. Youknow Well, if you speak very seriously and about the most important, the major thing, Israel is not such a free country. OrAmerica. OrWestern civilization, in general. Israel, alas, is like us in something that it does. Well, no, of course, it is a much more free society than we have in Russia today, more so than in the former Soviet Union, but it is still not quite a free society, because, to a considerable degree, freedom in these countries is an imitation, just as it is here. Herewe have elections. Theyare alternatives, and they are so proclaimed, but actually there are none.
Fine. Hereis an example for you, and we do not have to go very far to find an example of Western political philosophy. WhenI was a kid, Iwas very pleased to hear that the anti-Hitler coalition was defending universal values. Ihad already heard about these universal values, and naively believed that, yes, the West, these are countries, so to speak, an area with universal values. Herethey were defending them, and this was clearly stated during the Second World War and afterwards. Right?
So how did they defend them? Tellme please: are universal values compatible with the carpet-bombing of peaceful cities? Isthe nuclear bombing of Japan compatible with universal values? Excuse me, but was the Yalta conference better than Munich? Atthe Yalta Conference they offered payment to the bandit Stalin for the Soviet army’s major role in the victory over Hitlerism, they paid him with the freedom of about 100million people, half of Europe, Eastern Europe, their fellow Europeans. Hereis how it was. Hereare universal values for you.
So Iask you: were universal values really the goal of governmental policy, as stated? Andhow about the values that they are insisting on right now? Arethey values, or it this merely a chant, a hypocritical incantation? Iam inclined to think that they are nothing but an incantation. HereI gave you some examples. Refute them, please.
T.DZYADKO: Look, let us return to what you were talking about earlier. Yousaid that there is something that can be successful in the fight against terrorism in Russia today.
S.KOVALEV: Yes.
T.DZYADKO: What can this be, exactly?
S.KOVALEV: For many countries, besides Israel, for example. Iwill digress for a moment. Ican say about Israel the same thing that Isaid about the anti-Hitler coalition, and Israel, by the way, is also is not such a perfect country. Overthere they are also full of this imitation of freedom. Fine. This, of course, does not mean that Iam on the side of Israel’s enemies who intend to topple it into the sea. No. Quite the opposite, but nevertheless, that is how it is.
So, with regard to success in the fight against terrorism, Israel is one of the leading countries in this respect. TheAmericans are succeeding, as are the British. Theyhave been able to prevent it. Itseems that recently the Germans prevented some serious terrorist threats. Alltrue. Thesuccess is there, and the world can only congratulate this success. Thissuccess has been solely due to the police measures.
T.DZYADKO: Do you mean through intelligence activity and so on?
S.KOVALEV: It is intelligence activity, and police protective measures such as inspection of baggage and all that and so on. These are necessary measures, and yet completely hopeless when it comes to any serious alteration of the global environment and a lessening of terrorism, a lessening of the threat. Police measures are absolutely hopeless. Theycan really do nothing. Asa matter of fact, what are police measures? Theyare intelligence activities and all possible severe measures, including the threat of death against a potential terrorist.
But today we mostly see suicide bombers, and they seek death and their own death does not frighten them. Police measures are very important, and they are absolutely necessary, but they do not solve the problem of terrorism, well, not in any serious, essential
T.DZYADKO: Is it at all possible?
S.Kovalev: Ithink so. Ithink that there is only one alternative to police measures. Well, not an alternative, because police measures should be used anyway. Inthe fight against guerrillas or terrorists, which is the same thing, what is the key to success? Depriving them of their popular support, and that is it. Deprive them of resources, deprive them of the resources from which they derive future suicide bombers. Deprive them of moral support, and not just moral, but also material support.
Nowadays they have stopped broadcasting those pictures, our television stations Imean, and, maybe overseas as well. First of all, whenever there has been an act of terrorism, on television we would see on the standard triumphant crowd out on the streets of major Muslim cities, shooting into the air and dancing and shouting various slogans and so on. Thisis support for terrorism.
Then on the same screen on other programs we would see these talking heads in turbans, and they would be explaining about what a humane religion Islam is and how wonderful it is, and that Islam requires you to share with the poor and how during a feast you would kill a bull or a ram and you had to give more than half of it to the needy. Great! Only, you know, why are they telling you and me all this? Itis not me, and Ihope, not you who are supporters of a war with Islam. Wewant to be friends with Muslims, just as with everyone else, right? SoI do not need persuading. Those guys need to go out into the street where they are all dancing and shooting and cheering and explain: “Our Muslim Brothers, our brothers in faith, you are not serving Allah. Youare serving Satan.” And good luck waiting for that to happen. Bythe way, there are these people, Ihave heard that in some Israeli cities where they have large Arab populations, not in Jerusalem, but Ithink it is in Nazareth or somewhere. There are these activists, community activists, mostly Jews but also Arabs, Palestinians, who are trying to take these sharply divided and opposing communities and in some way get them to interact and understand each other. These people should be given the Nobel Peace Prize, not Yasser Arafat. Allthese bandits have gotten the prize, but not these people. Thatis the point.
As a matter of fact, what is modern Muslim society? Well, it seems to feel that the current world order is a challenge to it. Itfeels, well, defeated, and that it should have to leave.
T.DZYADKO: Does it seem that the reasons for the terror problem that we see today, are they based on religious issues? Isit a question of two different cultures, or not?
S.KOVALEV: No, it is not. Iam absolutely convinced that it is not. Youknow, Iam not a religious scholar and, moreover, not an Islamic scholar, but still, Itried to read the Koran. Among other things, in the Koran there is nothing along the lines of a call to carry out terrorism.
T.DZYADKO: Certainly not.
S.KOVALEV: And that liar and murderer Ramzan Kadyrov was lying when he answered a question for ‘Novaya Gazeta’ in an interview. Hewas asked: “Did you order killings?” “Yes, Iordered them.” “You aren’t worried?” “No, it was Allah, not me,” Ramzan Kadyrov responded. TheProphet called on him to kill Wahhabis. Whenthe Prophet Mohammed was alive, there were no Wahhabis in existence, so he could not call on anyone to kill people he never knew, but Imust say that the Prophet Mohammed did not call on anyone to kill anyone, actually. Thiscan seen from reading the Koran.
You waste your time if you look through the Koran trying to find calls for jihad, as we now know it. Howdo we understand this in the Western world? Jihad what is it? Itis a holy war against infidels who must all be destroyed because they are not Muslims. There is nothing like that, and the relevant verses are much easier to understand as a call to war against ones own sins, or, anyway, and a call to defend.
T.DZYADKO: Then we come to the issue of education.
S.KOVALEV: Here we come to this problem. Forgive me, listeners, Ihave had negative experiences with my close friends who are Muslims, and Ihave heard enough accusations. But, nonetheless, here is what Ithink, and so Iwill say it. Ithink that Islam is certainly overdue a Reformation. Hereis why: the Koran, which is sacred to every Muslim, and, by the way, an overwhelming majority of Muslim priests, mullahs, in our Muslim North Caucasus, for example, they read it without any understanding, since they do not know Arabic. Theysimply read, well, some pointless text.
The Koran is poetic, and like much of poetry it is very vague, so a lot depends on interpretation, and, unfortunately, the structure of Islam as a faith is such that it opens up a lot to interpretation. Doyou think that Al-Qaeda terrorists use quotations? Notfrom the Koran, but from the interpretations. Herethere are these ayatollahs, and one of them we know very well, Ayatollah Khomeni, and what he did in Iran, Iran still cannot escape from it.
But what is an ayatollah? Anayatollah is a man who is allowed to recite Koranic verses and do interpretation of the faith that carries the force of law. Sothese are the interpretations that Bin Laden refers to when he advises his terrorists.
T.DZYADKO: Well, yes, and we know that this is also the problem, for example, in the North Caucasus.
S.KOVALEV: Yes, in the North Caucasus.
T.DZYADKO: Which is that there a whole lot of them interpreting and teaching it in their own way.
S.KOVALEV: By the way, take note that the North Caucasus type of Islam, including Chechen Islam, is a quite young type. Itwas very tolerant and had many schools with different trends. Oneof the schools is the Kunta Hajji. Butwho was Kunta Hajji? Fora time he was the predecessor of Tolstoy and Gandhi. Herethere was an Islamic cleric in Chechnya, a man who before Tolstoy and Gandhi proclaimed nonviolence in the struggle against evil. Before the war in Chechnya this school enjoyed great respect there, and still does. Butnow it has gone completely to Wahhabism. Bythe way, there is Wahhabism that is not Wahhabism.
T.DZYADKO: Let us now take a break for the news on radio Echo of Moscow, after which we will return to the studio. Letme remind you that the program is Cover-2 and Sergei Kovalev is here today talking about methods of combating terrorism.
NEWS
T.DZYADKO: It is 33minutes after 8pm and, once again, good evening. Hereat the microphone is Tikhon Dzyadko on the program Cover-2, and Iam here in the studio today with human rights activist Sergei Kovalev as we talk about methods of combating terrorism. Letme quickly remind you of our communications. Youcan send your questions and opinions via text message to +79859704545. Youcan also send messages to our website and via Twitter, if you send messages, sent them to account@vyzvon. Asalways, there is our video feed, 2two of them. Oursite has a video feed. Thepicture is transmitted through our web camera, in addition to the usual feed from this site that you can also view at Setevizor. Thisallows you to monitor what is happening here in the studio with multiple camera angles, since we have a couple of cameras here. Video can be viewed on iPhone, iPad and mobile devices such as Google Android. Goto echo.msk.ru and send your texts to +79859704545.
Sergei Adamovich (Kovalev), if the situation is as you just described, what should be done? Forexample, if we are talking about Russia, what can be done about the problems of understanding, the problems of interpretation that lead to very serious consequences? Canwe somehow reduce these?
S.KOVALEV: Reduce these among disaffected Muslims in the North Caucasus? Well, you know, down there the field of action for our government is very wide, and Ithink that this part of the task can be accomplished relatively quickly and productively, more so than the task of educating a semiliterate Muslim population that has been deceived by all these interpreters (of the Koran), all these ayatollahs and other aggressors. Itis much easier. Thefirst thing to do, we must stop the arbitrariness of the police and military. Civilians should not suffer when security forces combat terrorists and bandit gangs.
In Dagestan, for example, Iknew from the short time that Iwas in Dagestan, Iwas fairly convinced that in a huge number of cases when people were being killed, they were civilians who were getting killed and then being passed off as militants. Itis very simple. InIngushetia this was right up until our current president, to give him his due.
But this sort of thing is not rare. Howwhat about these disappearances that have not stopped altogether? Andhow you feel about the death of Natasha Estemirova? Whokilled her? Didmilitants from the Vvedensky region kill her? No, certainly not.
So here is Oleg’s trial. Nowhe is already a criminal, this Oleg Petrovich Orlov. Iquoted something for you earlier, and Ihave dozens of these, direct quotes from Ramzan Kadyrov. Hereit has become quite the paradox, and our first task is to eliminate such paradoxes. Thisparadox is as follows: both sides claim the same thing.
T.DZYADKO: What?
S.KOVALEV: Oleg Petrovich Orlov, with indignation, anger, and disgust, said: “He’s a murderer.” It is absolutely clear, and he clearly states this, that he does not suspect that Ramzan Akhmatovich (Kadyrov) personally shot Natalia Estemirova. Heeven suggests that Kadyrov perhaps never even ordered his staff to do it, but he repeatedly said: “Yes, he’s a murderer.”
What does he mean by this? Heclearly means something. Hemeans that Kadyrov has created a regime in which political assassinations are not only possible, but thrive.
And how did Kadyrov object? Kadyrov proudly said: “Yes, I’m a murderer, and I’m proud of it.” Well, he did not exactly say these words, but Icited and Ican cite other quotes in which he simply and explicitly recognizes murders that he has organized, and he has stated: “My hands are bloody, but it is the blood of bad people.” Yes? Andhe says he will not allow Chechen civilians or their children or other relatives to live here in this land, on Chechen soil, if they are suspected of belonging to the militants. Sogive up their scum-children for us to kill or imprison. Thatis what he says.
He said: “The prosecutor’s office is for minor matters, but all those people who were not even implicitly aware of the murder of my father, Ihave already settled the score with them: none of them is alive.” And so on. Andhe said plainly: “We won’t detain we will kill on the spot.” Yes? Herethere was the situation during the trial. Whatcountry is he the president of? Well, let us take, for example, France, because in real federations the regional governors are elected, not selected by the central government.
Fine. Wewill argue using France as an analogy. Imagine that Sarkozy had appointed the governor of a certain French province, okay? Meanwhile, it turns out that this governor has been suspected and accused, that there is a trial in which the opposing party claims that this governor had organized a system of governance in his province that led to political assassinations. Whatdo you think Sarkozy would do? Iassure you that, at least until the end of the trial, Sarkozy never renew that man’s appointment.
So what does Dmitry Anatolievich Medvedev do? Medvedev, who speaks so beautifully about freedom? Whatdoes he do? Hereappoints Kadyrov. Perhaps he is certain of how the trial will turn out. Ialso believe, and Iknow, that there will be a conviction, but that is another issue, an issue about which your mother wrote a book. Dowe have a justice system? Doyou follow? Thisis a question about our justice system, but if this were a normal court, how could he know in advance that Orlov’s charges would be deemed only slander? Butwhat if Orlov had were proven correct? Andwhat if there were a special, well, a private ruling about the need to investigate the actions of Ramzan Kadyrov as head of the Chechen Republic?
T.DZYADKO: Okay. Look, Sergei Adamovich, if we can return to what you were talking about earlier. Yousaid that one of the main reasons is this history with all these special operations being carried out by the security forces. Thatis, this well-known thesis, as they put it, about this vicious cycle of violence and the security services generating more violence because there are acts of revenge.
S.KOVALEV: We broke off while talking about Wahhabism. Asa matter of fact, real Wahhabism is not an extreme branch. RealWahhabism is a completely peaceful Islamic movement. Ithas its own peculiarities: it is a pretty strict return to fundamentals laid down in the Koran. Butit is quite peaceful. TheWahhabism that has now blossomed in the North Caucasus, this is monstrous and allows fatwas on hostage taking and so on, and allows all sorts of banditry and terrorism. Thisis a distortion of Wahhabism.
So where did it come from? There was nothing of the sort in the North Caucasus before the Chechen war of 199496, or even after. There was nothing like this in Chechen Islam, Iassure you. Iknow Chechnya quite well, but this here branch of Wahhabism, well, it is perhaps somewhat influenced by certain extremist Arab Muslim movements, but it largely owes its origin to the policies of the Russian government in the North Caucasus.
T.DZYADKO: Which government policies? Whatexactly?
S.KOVALEV: With the so-called restoration of constitutional order and its monstrous methods: the brutal cannibalistic war with incredible numbers of innocent victims, and all the tortures. Isaw it with my own eyes. Notjust corpses of the tortured, but that now famous train, that temporary prison on wheels. Itmoved around, hiding from outside observation. Igot on that train and Isaw what was happening. Isaw people who were involved in torture.
But what can you expect? Here, people who do not speak Arabic and have no way of even reading of the foundations of their faith, so some semiliterate types like these so-called muftis or the elder Kadyrov (interpret it). Itwas he, after all, who declared jihad in Chechnya, among other things. Youknow this, right? Backwhen he was on the opposing side.
So, these kinds of people are talking, these extremists, are talking and they say that Allah is calling on them, that he permits and encourages terrorism, and he calls on them to struggle using any and all means. Whatcan you expect?
T.DZYADKO: Okay. Letme remind our listeners that we have Sergei Kovalev in the studio. Westarted out talking about the main issues. Youtalked about government policies regarding use of force and special operations. Hereour listeners our asking, they have sent questions: “As far as a reason for what we are witnessing in the North Caucasus today, how important and serious is the socio-economic situation?” Here is what Dmitry from Yekaterinburg writes: “Maybe we need to solve the social and economic problems of the North Caucasus first, such as eliminating unemployment, poverty and so forth?”
S.KOVALEV: Well, you know, these are problems that need to be solved, and not just in the North Caucasus. Inthe North Caucasus and, alas, not only in the North Caucasus, but in the Caucasus in general, things are mostly done, well, using methods that Iwould call corruption. Itis a tradition left over from the Soviet times, only now it has intensified.
Certainly, these problems need to be solved, but will this necessarily be a successful weapon in the fight against terrorism? Idoubt it. Inaddition to unemployment and social injustices, which, of course, outrage the public, there are other things. There is that very same freedom that our current president speaks of so beautifully. Iassure you, there is also craving for freedom in the North Caucasus. Itis not the most characteristic feature of people in the North Caucasus. Theyare, as a rule, physically brave, though not cavaliers when it comes to civic courage. Nevertheless, there is civic courage, and, alas, it is paradoxical and shocking that this also leads to methods such as terrorism, because the not very literate population is having their heads filled with these interpretations of Islam.
This is why Isay that, if there ever should appear in Islam a collective opinion by a literate, educated religious authority, this would be a step forward. But, alas, Islam is arranged differently. There are no ecumenical councils. There is no, if you like, hierarchical religious structures, and there is this complete freedom to interpret everything to mean anything, and complete ignorance on the part of the population. There needs to be an Islamic authority that speaks to its flock.
T.DZYADKO: But in this situation, what can the government do? Andwhat should the government do?
S.KOVALEV: What can and what must the government do? Encourage it. Youknow, encourage it, so to speak, do not be afraid of cultural religious influences. After all, what is said without the sanction of authorities is suspicious and should be, well, doubted. Youas a reporter probably know this better than I.
But Iam talking about us, and it is not just about us. Thatis, as a matter of fact, Ithink Iwill repeat once again one simple thing. Certainly, all police measures are necessary and, of course, they should improve. Butyou certainly must understand in advance that they will never win the victory over terrorism. Thevictory will only be when the “black widows” no longer appear, and they stop coming by to pick up their suicide bomber belts. Whencultural Islam at last opposes the influence of religious fundamentalists (there will be victory).
The government can do a lot in this regard, or try to do it, to spend some money to organize, to find people who can talk about this. Doyou follow me? Butwhat does the government do? Itfears. Well, our government, and Ido not know what is going on in America with their system for combating terrorism. Atleast, Ido not know in detail, anyway. Butwhat is our government doing? Itis increasing the harshness in this area. Inthe words of our top political leaders, we have repeatedly heard: “p--- on them in the outhouse” (a famous Putin line about killing terrorists anywhere and everywhere ed), and various other statements. And(the government) is afraid. Itis afraid of free thought and afraid of normal debate. Doyou follow?
But look at how things stand in the case of massive terrorist attacks in Russia. Thisis a disgrace!
T.DZYADKO: What exactly?
S.KOVALEV: There has been just one large-scale terrorist incident, Budennovsk, in which my team and Iplayed some role, and most importantly, Gaidar and Chernomyrdin. Gaidar persuaded Chernomyrdin to appoint me as a negotiator. Thiswas the only time in the Russian Federation during a large-scale terrorist and mass hostage taking that the most important consideration was the lives of the hostages, that they were the priority. Inall other instances of terrorism, at ‘Nord-Ost’ and Beslan, in the bombings of the apartment buildings, the main priority was the government priority.
“Never under any circumstances negotiate with terrorists.” So, how can you not do this? Youknow, the Budennovsk case, it just sticks out from all of the rest. Bythe way, note that besides the large number of casualties among the hostages that occurred during that half-day when they carried out the assault, none of the hostages was killed at Budennovsk. Thatis something. Theywere somehow all killed during the assault, and killed en masse. Well, Imust speak the truth: when they were driven into the hospital (by the terrorists) there were some casualties, and that is the nature of terrorism you cannot get it done otherwise.
So, the whole time the hospital was cordoned off by Russian troops, the hostages were only killed by our commandos’ bullets and grenades and shells. Nothing else. Justimagine if the assault had continued. Theycertainly would have taken the hospital. Ithink that Basayev was a very experienced fighter, and his squad had some very well trained soldiers. Theywould have suffered losses, but they probably would have slipped through the ring, and there would have been an immeasurably greater number of hostages killed.
T.DZYADKO: Well, yes. Likewhat we saw in Beslan, for example.
S.KOVALEV: Yes, of course. InBeslan, by the way, who said that in Beslan the assault, the real tragedy, started after blasts carried out by terrorists? There is a very good reason to believe that this was not so. Whatstarted it was the assault by the security forces. Thearmed residents of North Ossetia who came there and tried to surround the school did this not to prevent the terrorists, but to prevent an assault.
Do you follow so far? Andmuch about what went on in Beslan makes you realize that our security forces launched the assault, and no one denies this. Theinvestigation was never completed, just as no one investigated who ordered the same with respect to gas at ‘Nord-Ost’, and, as a matter of fact, that was a crime. Whatdo you think, could this action have been carried out without Mr. Putin’s approval? Iseriously doubt it.
T.DZYADKO: But as far as Wehave a few minutes left before the end. Asfar as the fight against terrorism, in your opinion: are transparency and openness good weapons?
S.KOVALEV: Well, what are they? These are, rather, not a weapons, but conditions for the use of the ideological weapons that Iwas talking about. Wemust demonstrate honesty and we must demonstrate that our main values in anti-terrorism are the lives of the hostages. Wemust show that we are ready to talk with the terrorists. Thisdoes not mean fulfilling their demands immediately.
I think that here it may be a deception, but one that is observed in international practice. Itis, nevertheless, the main value: people’s lives, not some distorted view of national prestige.
T.DZYADKO: Unfortunately, our time has come to an end. Iremind you that today on Cover-2 we were talking about methods to combat terrorism in the world, and in Russia to a greater extent, and we were talking about this with Sergei Kovalev, one of our well-known human rights defenders. Ithank you, Sergei Adamovich.
S.Kovalev: Thank you.
T.DZYADKO: The program Cover-2 will end on this and we will meet again in exactly one week at the same time in the same studio. Myname is Tikhon Dzyadko. Havea good weekend and be happy.

Views: 4157| E-mail

Be first to comment this article

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Suchmaterial will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
Comment:

Code:* Code
Iwish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment Copyright 2004by Arthur Konze www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved

 
< Prev   Next >