On January 31 of this year, Ahmed Zakayev made a sensational statement in the European Parliament during a forum on the decolonization of the peoples of Russia, saying that on May 11 of this year, the 105th anniversary of the creation of the Mountain Republic of the Peoples of the North Caucasus, the government of Ichkeria plans to hold a conference to discuss its restoration. As the question of reorganization of the territories currently controlled by Russia is becoming increasingly relevant in world politics, and for Muslims the question of the future of the occupied Muslim territories is particularly important, we asked Ahmed Zakayev to answer questions for the readers of «The Voice of Islam», which he graciously agreed to do.
In the interview, the prospects for the revival of the Mountain Republic, the parallels between it and the Caucasus Emirate, the idea of an international protectorate for Ichkeria and related issues, and the subject of internal disagreements within Chechnya and the Caucasus were discussed. Ahmed Zakayev also pleased us with the information he had about our brother Tumso Abdurakhmanov.
Before publishing this interview, we would like to note that among our readers, including Chechens and supporters of the independence of Chechnya and the Caucasus, there may be both supporters and opponents of Ahmed Zakayev. And for both of them we would like to emphasize that we try to maintain neutrality towards all healthy forces of Muslim peoples and support them in their good work. That is why we are ready to provide a platform for the expression of constructive ideas to anyone who has them, and if representatives of other Caucasian projects, who are affected by the issues discussed in this interview, wish to use it, we will be happy to conduct such interviews with them.
Editorial staff of «The Voice of Islam
G.I: Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh. On January 31, 2023, you announced on the walls of the European Parliament that the government of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria plans to hold a founding conference or meeting on May 11, 2023, the 105th anniversary of the proclamation of the Mountain Republic (Union of the Peoples of the North Caucasus), in order to revive or restore this state formation.
Could you clarify whether you are talking about a public meeting of the supporters of the restoration of the Mountain Republic, who will declare the goal of its restoration, or directly about a state founding meeting, where the restoration of this state formation will be announced? And considering that the initiative for this meeting comes from the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, that is, from its government, who will participate in this meeting on behalf of other Caucasian peoples as their representatives?
AZ: Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh. Thank you very much for the questions and our conversation, which I think is very necessary for those who have observed and listened to us, our speech, because this statement and the information that I have expressed at the conference in Brussels has intrigued many people and confused some and even disturbed others. Many unclear questions arose. You have formulated very well this particular question of what it is. Let’s start with the fact that what I said refreshed historical memory. This happened at the very forum where the question of the dissolution of Russia, the Russian Empire, and the creation of some new state formations in its place was discussed. And in view of this, of course, we must understand and clearly define for ourselves that any idea of transforming Russia and dismantling the Russian state is absolutely relevant today. This idea is alive, these questions are being discussed, but every good idea can be taken to absurdity. We cannot simply forget this moment when we hold such events and declare possible solutions to this problem.
Therefore, I would like to remind the participants of the conference, residents of the Caucasus, residents of Russia and the European Union, that the project we were discussing — the confederation of the peoples of the North Caucasus, called the «Mountain Republic» — was not just a theoretical solution, but already a formed structure, recognized by dozens of countries. Today’s existing countries. That is why I wanted to draw attention to it, and what we are planning for May 11 cannot be called a founding assembly, where the structure of this state formation will be restored.
Yes, we will have to discuss the issue and explain to those who are ready to return to this issue today and discuss it, that it is a very long process. Of course, these regions themselves are not able to do this today, because they are under strict control of Russia and the Kremlin. There are established occupation regimes that are very strong today. In order to implement this project, we need the help of the international community, international institutions, and associations. In other words, the European Union should be interested in creating such a form. The Ukrainian state should be interested in restoring such a state formation. The United States of America, which is already present in the Caucasus, should be interested. Turkey, as a country with historical ties to the Caucasian peoples and the Turkic-speaking population, should be interested.
Therefore, this is no longer just a project or an initiative of Zakayev, but we, as an independent and sovereign state, are ready to initiate these processes and become the cornerstone of the restoration of this state formation. Undoubtedly, this structure should include only countries and peoples who declare national sovereignty and state sovereignty and are ready to defend them. And if such processes take place in the Caucasus and other regions, for example, in the Stavropol Krai, Kalmykia, which today declares similar intentions, the Krasnodar Krai, as well as the Kuban Cossacks and the Circassians, who also have historical rights to these territories. All these issues should be resolved in a comprehensive manner, and very strong state formations such as the United States, Turkey, the European Union, and, of course, Ukraine as the leader of the free world today, should be interested in resolving all these issues. That is exactly why I sent my message in these four directions. We have to show our interest in the creation of this state formation, our readiness — at least the readiness to discuss and address these issues, and in the future to make some political decisions.
GI: If I understand you correctly, you are talking about some kind of international public forum. Not a state-founding assembly, but a public-international forum?
AZ: Yes, absolutely. That is where it should start. If the Mountain Republic had preserved the mechanism of succession at that time, then today we could say that we are the successors and we are recreating it. But since the succession of the state structure was not preserved, but the succession of the public organization was preserved, you know, since 1990 there has been the Confederation of the Peoples of the North Caucasus, and today even the president of this association, the Confederation of the Peoples of the Caucasus, is Ruslan Kutayev. He is its president. But it is a public organization. And that is why I think that we should cooperate with them and other interested people and unite all our efforts to come to a starting point and determine what we are going to do. To be interested in the issues that I mentioned earlier.
GI: I understand, thank you very much. You partially answered the second question, but I will ask it anyway. During the debate between the supporters of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria (ChRI) and the Caucasus Emirate, the former often pointed out that, unlike the latter, it had a national state legitimacy.
This is because in the only republic in the North Caucasus where this happened, the Ichkerian National Congress declared an independent state, held a referendum and presidential elections, and established full-fledged state structures. In all other republics of the North Caucasus, the supporters of their independence in the post-Soviet period were not able to create anything similar, and therefore the situations of Ichkeria, which defended its state territory against Russian occupation, and other Caucasian republics, which did not emerge from this occupation, were fundamentally different.
How similar will the state union be, in which the government of the CHR, relying on the legitimacy of the national state, will enter into an alliance with representatives of other Caucasian peoples, who do not have the mandate granted to the government of the CHR as a result of its creation? Given that this project is initiated by the Chechen government and its partners will inevitably be not state structures but public structures with dubious legitimacy, are you not afraid of the risk that it will be presented as a project of Chechen domination in the Caucasus?
AZ: Let me answer in order, because there are many aspects in one question that need to be addressed. I will start with the fact that [although] today someone is trying to somehow draw parallels between what happened in 2007, that is, the restoration or the declaration of the Caucasus Emirate, and what I spoke about on January 31, 2023, the difference here is like night and day. I am not going to go into what happened in 2007, we, those who conducted the relevant investigation, have proof that it was a project of the FSB — to proclaim it in such a form, such a format, the so-called Caucasus Emirate. We definitely opposed it in this form, and the main reason was the ineffectiveness of this project, in the sense that the peoples included in the composition of this emirate themselves did not know that they had an emir and a spiritual leader who declared war on the whole world in their name. America, Israel, Russia, England… we all remember this.
But the point is that for Russia itself, the confederal form of statehood in the Caucasus or the unity of the Caucasian peoples has always been a painful issue, not only since the emergence of the Cheka or the KGB, but since the time of the tsarist guard. They understood how they suppressed and conquered the Caucasus and what processes were going on there. This problem has always concerned them, because the Caucasus is a single organism, and at any moment they could declare their unity in all respects and try to resist and break away from the influence of Russia. From the time of the Tsarist Guard until today, these aspects have been closely monitored by special structures in Russia.
At each historical stage, they created some parallel structures. I would just like to remind you that the Mountain Republic [arose] after the revolution. When the Russian Empire collapsed, a confederation of the peoples of the North Caucasus called the Mountain Republic was formed. Three years later, the Chekists created the Mountain Autonomous Republic under the same name. They replaced a real confederal sovereign republic with an autonomy that was part of [Russia]. These processes continued through the ’80s and ’90s, even in 1997, when the Congress of Chechnya and Dagestan was created. This was also used as a pretext for launching the second military campaign. In other words, these were all projects that served the interests of the Kremlin.
To answer your question, what happened? Chechnya is a fully independent, free, sovereign state. All the North Caucasian republics went through this stage. If you remember the so-called «parade of sovereignties», according to the laws adopted by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR in April 1990, all these republics declared and accepted declarations of state sovereignty.
With the exception of two regions — Ingushetia and Dagestan. The other republics accepted declarations of state sovereignty, but the thing is that later, in 1992, they came to an agreement with the Russian Federation and signed the Federation Treaty. As sovereign entities, they signed a treaty on the creation of the Russian Federation. And they signed a treaty on the division of powers. Tatarstan held out until 1993, but then they also signed. The only Chechen Republic retained its status as a sovereign independent state and did not sign this treaty. Going back to the legal basis that you mentioned, that the Chechen Republic can become a dominant, an established independent state, what distinguishes it from others is that Russia unilaterally denounced this treaty in 2002. In other words, in 2002, Putin was supposed to extend the treaty of federation, which he did not do.
Now, the point is that these entities that declared themselves independent but signed the treaty lost this status, but now this status is formally returned to them because Russia unilaterally denounced this treaty, so they also have this status. But whether there are forces and means to help them return to this status is another question. This is a process that needs to be discussed, and I think that on May 11, when we meet in Brussels or somewhere else in Europe, we will discuss this issue. Are these regions ready to return to the status quo they had before 1992, before the signing of the Federation Treaty? Today it is very remarkable that Ingushetia, for the first time in all this time, has created a state committee for independence and has adopted a declaration of state sovereignty. And Dagestan, [the Dagestanis] with whom I spoke at the same time, they are now preparing to adopt the same document. It turns out that these two republics, which were excluded from the «parade of sovereignties» and did not declare their subjectivity, are now doing so. This already allows us to talk about a unified legal space for these entities that are ready to come forward and conclude a confederal agreement and create this state structure. I believe that this project has absolutely prospects, and the changes that are taking place in the world are aimed at strengthening the position of those who want to create this unified state structure, and this issue will be demanded by other parts of the international community.
GI: The Mountain Republic consisted of 7 states, and your Foreign Minister Inal Sharipov stated that you see its revived format as a similar confederation of these states. Tell me, please, is there a plan to discuss the borders of these states at what stage, including the disputed issues between Chechnya and Ingushetia and Dagestan, or Ingushetia and Ossetia, and so on? Considering that we are talking about a union of states with defined borders, how do you see the solution of such territorial disputes in principle within this union?
AZ: I see the solution to these problems precisely in the creation of such a state structure. These delayed-action mines, which have been laid in the Caucasus since the first days of Russian expansion, will be dismantled and neutralized. You speak of «disputed territories,» but both the Chechens, Ingush, Ossetians, and Dagestanis, wherever there is such a problem, all understand that these territories are not disputed. They know where the borders were, but how the borders were drawn by Tsarist Russia and the Chekists is a completely different issue. When the influence of this structure and the state that created these artificial disagreements and disputes ends, they will disappear along with those who created them. I am absolutely sure of this, because the Caucasian peoples — and the Caucasus is an ancient land, we existed before Russia appeared — have never had territorial disputes.
They never existed in our history, they began only with the appearance of Russia, and I am confident that when Russia’s influence in this region ends, all these controversial issues will disappear. We are capable of solving these problems in a Caucasian way, friendly, peaceful, based on a sense of justice. I am confident that we can solve these problems. And the basis for solving these problems is a form of confederation. Today there is the European Union, each country has its own territory, sovereignty. We live here in Europe and see how countries live here. Nobody will have to reinvent the wheel, there will be no need for that.
GI: But technically, do you think that the demarcation of borders will precede the creation of the Mountain Republic, or will it happen within it?
AZ: I think this is basically unimportant. This question should be discussed when we come to the specific topic. There are more global issues concerning the Krasnodar region, the Circassians, the Adyghe, and so on. All these issues can be solved as a complex, and of course [we must] reach agreements through negotiations. And if necessary, we will discuss these issues for a month, two months, three months… However long it takes to decide what is more important for us — to constantly return to the past and give up building the future, or to start building our future at a certain stage. I think everyone will be interested in building the future, not in digging into the past and getting involved in bloody wars and conflicts.
GI: You said that Chechnya would need a kind of international protectorate during the period of state reconstruction after the de-occupation. Given that the international community is largely an abstraction and rarely acts as a united front, which specific countries or alliances do you see as guarantors for Chechnya or even the entire Caucasus, and in what kind of structure could they interact with each other and with you?
AZ: You see, the international protectorate of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria and, in general, the protectorate of the Confederation of Caucasian Nations almost overlap. I am confident that for the implementation of the Caucasian peace project any interested country will have to strengthen the independence and sovereignty of the Chechen Republic as a subject of international law. And Chechnya itself can initiate the creation of this confederal union with other republics and regions. Therefore, I am confident that at the beginning the international protectorate will consist of two or three countries interested in the implementation of the project itself. Not only in the creation and strengthening of the Chechen state, but also in the strengthening and creation of this confederative state formation that will be created between the three seas — the Azov, the Black and the Caspian.
Such a region is already becoming interesting not only for one or two countries, but for many powerful states. Both the United States of America and the European Union, as well as the United Kingdom, Turkey, and others are interested in creating this format. I mean these countries specifically, and whatever we call it — an international protectorate, allies, or a coalition for the creation and strengthening of [the Caucasian Confederation] — these are forms that need to be discussed and decisions made individually. But the principle is that the guarantors should be those who are interested in creating this new state formation. And the part of Russia that will remain after Putin should also be interested in this. It is in their interest that the region should be stable.
GI: Today, many Muslims fear not so much political or military dependence on NATO, such as the establishment of military bases or something like that, but rather the militant imposition of alien ideologies, not only on Muslims but also on Christians, such as the promotion of LGBT, feminism, gender ideology, etc., which did not exist in the West during the previous Cold War. Are you ready to clearly, publicly, and transparently outline the red lines in discussions with potential partners and to determine what the peoples of the Caucasus are willing to do to meet potential partners in order to receive their support, and what they will not allow to be dictated to them, and where attempts at such imposition will be counterproductive? Are you ready to open a public discussion on this issue in the Muslim community of the Caucasus and involve its prominent representatives in discussions with potential partners?
AZ: I will answer in a moment. We do not need to invent any stories today. I believe that the existing world order distributes these opportunities harmoniously. Let’s take Turkey as an example. It is a NATO member and a member of many international institutions, but no one is forcing anything on it. I am confident that no one will have such a task. If the ground in a certain region allows it, it will be solved naturally, not by imposition. In my opinion, what you are talking about will not take such forms in the Caucasus in the next 200 years as in other European countries. This is my opinion, I understand the psychology and mentality of this region. I do not think that this will become a «bone of contention» on the way to the creation of this state entity. How many young people from the Caucasus, Chechens, Ingush, Dagestanis are in Europe today? Today’s youth speak dozens of world languages, they have received a colossal education, they are integrated into existing institutions, countries and civilizations. They are fully prepared for all challenges. I don’t think that today we should start talking about the creation of a confederation of Caucasian peoples and an international protectorate, assuming that something unacceptable and not accepted by the peoples of the Caucasus will follow. An international protectorate is a structure that protects the interests of this region and its population. I do not think that anyone will impose anything that is not in the interests of this region and its people, because it is excluded.
GI: Today it can be said that the Chechen and other Caucasian communities are divided into several camps in terms of values. The first level includes the supporters of independence and the supporters of Russia. The second level includes religious and secular supporters of independence. The third level includes conflicts between supporters of so-called «traditional» and «pure» Islam. With the exception of active collaborators and those involved in crimes against the people, will it be possible to restore unity between the supporters of independence and Russia among the Chechens and other Caucasians, and how can this be achieved? On what principles is it possible for representatives of non-religious and religious camps to coexist in the future within the Chechens and other Caucasians? On what principles can relations be established between representatives of so-called «traditional» and «pure» Islam?
AZ: Let’s start with the fact that there is no such thing as «pure» or «traditional» Islam. Islam is Islam, it is a unified religion. When we talk about the Caucasus region, the Caucasus has always been a multi-confessional land. There were different people living in the Caucasus who had different beliefs, and I think that this principle should be preserved. However, the opposition you mentioned between secular and Islamic, «traditional» and «pure» Islam, is only a situation created by the Russian special services, the enemies of this region.
People with higher education, tremendous education, both secular and Islamic, these people are now working in our structures, in government structures.
They are preparing to take responsibility, to hold elections after the occupation, to create executive power structures and to strengthen our statehood. Anyone who is not stained with blood, anyone who today is even slightly concerned about the future of our people, our future, the doors are open to them. We do not have a government in the classical sense, which pays salaries and allocates budgets. We are enthusiasts today. We have voluntarily accepted the responsibility in this difficult historical period. And we are ready to share this responsibility with anyone as long as it is beneficial. However, we will never give up the achievements of our people. This is the price we paid for freedom and independence.
Today, to pretend that none of this has happened and to start from scratch is something we will never choose, because we consider it a betrayal not only of the living and the dead, but also of our future descendants. If we were able to preserve this until today, when the world is already changing and recognizing that we were always right and that our state exists and our struggle for independence was justified, then refusing to do so would be a betrayal on our part. We will not do it under any circumstances. For those who want to see themselves in politics and nation building, the door is open. I am an old man, over 60 years old. There are young people who have taken the burden of responsibility and are carrying it, and they will move forward, Insha’Allah. We will help them from our side.
Interviewer: Earlier you mentioned that according to your information Tumso Abdurakhmanov is alive and safe. Without going into details, we would like to know if you can confirm this and if he is planning to return to public media?
Interviewee: I cannot answer the second part of this question, but as for the first part, yes, I confirm that according to our information he is alive and in a safe place. And when he returns to public activity, that is up to him to decide, taking into account the circumstances that forced him to do so.