Eurasia Insight:
CHECHNYA: AN END TO SEPARATISM?
Sergei Borisov: 3/25/03
A EurasiaNet Partner Post from Transitions Online

The referendum on a new Chechen constitution was to have been the major political event of the spring in Russia. In the event, Iraq has grabbed the headlines, with Chechnya taking the lead spot only on 23 March, the day of the referendum. The war in Iraq even forced a response from the leader of the pro-Russian Chechen administration. “We in Chechnya are well aware of the pain that war brings,” Ahmed Kadyrov told ITAR-TASS on 20 March. “The actions of the United States toward Iraq are an undisguised diktat,” he went on, adding that the war in Iraq would hurt the religious feelings of Chechen Muslims.

Still, the outcome of the referendum proved to be a formality. Within six hours, the 50 percent turnout needed to legitimize the referendum had been passed. By the end, 80 percent of the electorate had voted in the first major poll since 1997. Not all votes have been counted yet, but the preliminary results conveyed by the television channel NTV leave no doubts about the outcome. Ninety-six percent voted for the new constitution, 96 percent for a law about establishing a parliament, and 95 percent for a law on presidential powers.

The scale of the turnout was far higher than even the Kremlin’s own prediction that 66 percent of Chechens would vote. "We hadn't projected this even in our most optimistic forecasts," said Kadyrov. In one area, as many as 95 percent of the electorate went to the polling stations. In refugee camps in Ingushetia, Dagestan, and the Stavropol region, the turnout was also unexpectedly large.

There are doubts, though, about the validity of the vote. The referendum was preceded by a major clash between Russia and Council of Europe rapporteur Frank Judd, after Judd in January called on Russia to postpone the referendum on the grounds that security could not be ensured and that the electorate had not been provided with adequate access to information. The Council of Europe ultimately accepted a watered-down resolution on 29 January in which it said that "it is unlikely" that the conditions necessary to hold a referendum would be in place in time.

The Council of Europe did not send observers. Nor did the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), though it sent a small team of fact-finders. According to Hrair Palian, the leader of the team, "the organization and conduct of the referendum were not without shortcomings," but in an Interfax report cited by the Moscow Times, said the referendum was "a starting point for political changes in the republic."

Prior to the vote, there were claims that people had been blackmailed into registering to vote under threat of losing their entitlement to food aid. Suggestions that the number of voters registered had been inflated were coupled with questions about the decision to allow 36,000 Russian military serviceman to vote. There were also reports of fake leaflets allegedly from rebel leader Aslan Maskhadov calling on Chechens to vote yes in the referendum. Maskhadov had called for a boycott.

However, in one area of concern, security, there are fewer doubts about the relative success of the day. Threats to disrupt the vote failed to materialize, perhaps because of a huge military presence. However, that presence, along with the disappearance of two Russian helicopters on 20 March, underlined just how far from normal Chechnya remains.

‘BROAD AUTONOMY?’

What the Chechens voted for was the effective end to separatist ambitions. The new constitution will make Chechnya once again an “autonomous republic,” though Putin has described the autonomy as “broad” with many “extremely flexible” elements.

The powers of the new president, who should be elected next year, will, however, be limited. Unlike the presidents of other autonomous republics, the Chechen president can be dismissed by the Russian president. At present, two men have said they will stand: Kadyrov and Aslambek Aslakhanov, a former general and now a deputy in the State Duma in Moscow.

Clauses such as that have fueled skepticism about the referendum. Some Russian observers believe that the main aim of the Kremlin is to create the semblance of normality and to remove the residual legitimacy that Maskhadov enjoys as the last elected Chechen president. Maskhadov, the best-known rebel leader, was elected president in 1997. Although his term in office has expired and although he is not recognized by Moscow, Maskhadov is widely considered in the West to be the elected head of Chechnya.

Maskhadov himself has rejected the referendum. The Chechen separatist site Kavkazcenter quoted him as saying that “for centuries, our ancestors have not recognized [Russian] power, and now they are trying to force us to vote at gunpoint.”

THE KREMLIN WOOS

The central association that Moscow wanted the Chechens to make was clear in the official campaign slogan: “The referendum means peace.” It was a theme picked up immediately after the vote by Russian President Vladimir Putin, who said that "the Chechen people had voted for peace."

Speaking to the Chechen people in a special broadcast on 16 March, Putin had called the referendum a “historic moment,” the “basis of a political settlement,” and “the most important step in the struggle with devastation and a step toward order.” As a sign of just how historic a moment this is seen to be, 23 March is due to become a public holiday in Chechnya.

This is the latest in an apparent attempt by Moscow to convince the world and the Chechens that normality is returning to the republic. Last year, Putin said that the military campaign in Chechnya was over, transferring responsibility for subduing continued rebel activity to the security service, the FSB. A similar motive was seen in attempts begun last year to persuade refugees to return to Chechnya, sometimes under pressure.

This was a theme picked up by Putin, who promised to begin paying compensation for homes destroyed during the war. The second Chechen conflict began in late 1999. According to the Russian media, this passage of his speech elicited significant interest among Chechens.

Despite skepticism that this was further Kremlin propaganda--no date for repayment was given--the promise may have encouraged some Chechens. Some observers believe that Putin’s address, which received wide coverage in Chechnya, was perhaps the most successful part of the Kremlin’s PR campaign for the referendum.

Another may have been the announcement by moderate Chechen opposition members elected to the republic’s parliament in 1997 that they supported the referendum. Their declaration followed a meeting with the secretary of the Security Council, Vladimir Rushailo, and the Putin aide chiefly responsible for Chechen issues, Sergei Yastrzhembsky.

Yastrzhembsky indicated to the Rossiya state television channel on 22 March that Putin would be willing to accede to the delegation’s call for an amnesty for Chechen fighters. Yastrzhembsky made it clear that Putin personally favors a broad amnesty for those not guilty of serious “crimes.”

Such public signs of support could conceivably undermine the ongoing campaign by the rebels.

The bigger question for the rebels is how deep the support for the referendum really was. With over 400,000 Chechens reportedly voting in a poll that he wanted boycotted, the referendum raises strategic questions for Maskhadov, the most prominent figure in a fractured rebel movement.

That remains to be seen, as too does the broader question of whether the referendum might bring peace to Chechnya. But there will be some who directly benefit from the referendum: according to RIA-Novosti, the mothers of the 33 children born on the day of the referendum will receive 10,000 rubles each.