> In the case of Chechnya, in 1994 ... Moscow thought at the time
> that all Caucasians are the same and didn't really notice a difference
> between Chechens, Avars, Laks and so forth.
But they knew the difference between a Russian and Belarusian? Are you sure it had nothing to do with economics, e.g. the oil in the Caucasus?
> ... everone is trying desperately to get closer to
> Russia and it is nearly universally recognized that independence was a
> disaster for practically everyone who tried it.
Logically, it very often is anywhere since a national bourgeoisie (or other local ruling class) often has a lot less interest in foreign trade than an imperial bourgeoisie. In fact some of the postcolonial countries which have done better than their neighbours are actually those in which a war of independence was brutally defeated by the imperial power (e.g. Kenya and Malaysia).
> You would have to be a
> lunatic to want your country to become something like Armenia, let alone
> Chechnya.
I know it and you know it. Now tell it to the Chechens, the Armenians, the Moldovans, the the Palestinians, the Tamils, etc.
> Over half the population in hypernationalistic UKRAINE wants
> reunification with Russia.
Given that the Ukraine government makes Putin look like a statesman, I'm not surprised.
> Seventy-five percent of the
> population has left. There are something like 200,000 Chechens in Moscow
> alone. Who is trying to break away from what?
Impressive figures. But who has counted them? I would guess many of those in other parts of the Federation are simply economic refugees who would face even worse hardship if they left Russia(?)And clearly the other 25% is fighting like hell.
regards,
Grant.