As the entanglement in the corkscrew of Putin’s Russia becomes apparent, discussions within the Muslim community are intensifying about the geopolitical goals that Muslims in this area should pursue in the event of the regime’s collapse. In general, it is evident that among all the radical and yet realistic alternatives, the advocates of independence for enslaved peoples, especially Muslims, are emerging as leaders. There are several reasons for this:
1. The Russian opposition as a whole makes a politically inconsistent impression in terms of its chances of victory in the struggle against the current regime and the seizure of power. It also does not inspire confidence among the enslaved peoples, including the Muslims, because it did not do anything to include them in its ranks or to enter into dialogue with them when it was still possible and necessary to do so.
2. In the history of Russia, there have been periods when short-lived democratic revolutions and hopes were followed by longer periods of reaction and revanchism. These periods often began with the oppression of enslaved peoples. As a result, a growing number of people have come to the conclusion that regardless of the authority and regime in power, Russia, within its current borders and with its military capabilities, including nuclear weapons, poses a threat to the world and serves as a prison for its peoples.
3. While there are still those in the West who are willing to give Russia and «good Russians» a chance for another «perestroika,» its immediate neighbors such as Ukraine and its closest allies seem to have decided that the empire of evil must be eliminated rather than transformed into an «empire of good. They have begun to interact with national liberation movements of enslaved peoples.
As a result, if we are talking about the Muslim wing, Muslim opposition supporters who want to reform Russia today do not have the support of the weak Russian opposition, the support of Muslim countries, most of which are interested in cooperation with the Kremlin, or the support of Kremlin opponents around the world. Meanwhile, the representatives of the Muslim peoples seeking independence are beginning to create their own centers, platforms, media resources, and some even have the beginnings of their own armies based on Ukrainian military units.
Against this backdrop, discussions have resurfaced about the need for Muslims not to seek the collapse of Russia and separation from it, but to lead it and reform it. But how exactly this can be done, even in theory, remains unclear. There are two options on the table — the systemic and anti-systemic approaches — so let’s consider them.
The systemic approach suggests that Muslims should actively participate in the war on the side of Russia and make themselves visible. This would lead to Muslim military leaders taking charge of a «jihadizing» Russia. We wrote extensively about these illusions in the early months of the war, and made detailed arguments about why this strategy would not work. And now it is easier for us because those we argued against at the time have either disappeared from the media radar with active propaganda or have declared that they are no longer involved in politics because it has been destroyed in Russia.
In general, it is absolutely clear that active participation in the war on the side of Russia will not lead to Muslims coming to power in Russia. Coming to power in today’s reality implies an increase in opportunities and resources, while the Russian war machine simply destroys one and grinds down the other. By the way, everyone involved in this, including the vaunted «Wagner», is experiencing a real collapse, despite its apparent increase in forces and capabilities. But we are talking about Muslims in Russia, whose only prospect in this spinning meat grinder is to become meat and be ground into mincemeat in the name of the «Russian world». And nothing more! But if it is clear with the systematic path of Muslims’ conquest of Russia, there are still individual dreamers who confuse thinking Muslims with lofty conversations about how Muslims should take advantage of the collapse of this system, not to integrate into the global system, but to ride the wave of Russian chaos and direct it against the global system. Whoever is suggested to do this — «this secret is great». After all, even the Taliban, who have real capabilities and resources, are not trying to do this, and probably not because they do not want to, but because they remember how their solo opposition to the global system ended for them last time. The same goes for Hamas or the Syrian rebels, who are focused on holding their territory. And here these hopes are placed in those who not only do not have their own army, but do not even have the beginnings of a mass political organization, which these dreamers have not created in all these years when it seemed that there was an opportunity to do so. And here it is necessary to understand that if tomorrow there is a struggle for power on the territory of Russia or post-Russia, the determining factors and their ratio will be: quantity and quality. If we are talking about Muslims, their prospects will also depend on these factors. Where there are many of them, that is, where there is quantity, even elementary quality at the level of ability to transform mass movement into taking power and organizing order in their territory will be sufficient to succeed, if Allah wills it. In the same places where there is no such quantity, hypothetical success can only be achieved through a very high level of quality, thanks to which the Muslim minority can gain the support of the non-Muslim majority and lead it. And now let’s ask the question — where do the Muslim diasporas of Russia have something similar, in conditions when all the active ones were either imprisoned, killed, or expelled abroad, and those who remained were discouraged from active public, let alone political, activity? Therefore, if we descend from the clouds of dreams to the ground, there are real political prospects for Muslim forces where Muslims have an absolute demographic majority and/or (at least with a relative majority) a status at the level of quasi-state entities that allows them to achieve self-determination. At the same time, even there, the seizure of power does not mean that it will be maintained in the long term, without which the wave of chaos can engulf the former revolutionaries and the peoples they lead. And here, too, the establishment of relations with the so-called global system will require a responsible approach on which the success or failure of the political project may depend. If you are strangled in the bud, as many desperate and bold Islamic projects have been in our memory, the threat you pose will not be to the global system, but rather to the surrounding Muslims and those who will follow you. It is also worth mentioning the voices that declare that Muslims should not pursue national projects, but rather larger ones, such as a unified state of the Caucasus or the Volga-Ural region. You can say anything up to a world state, which some have been doing for years. But in practice, the more ambitious such statements are, the less chances their supporters have to take and hold power even «between two cliffs». And of course, if you have the ability to do it «from sea to shining sea,» no one will oppose you. But to actually do it and not betray those who believed in you again. Finally, the diaspora, that is, situations where Muslims are in the minority. Does all this mean that they should refrain from any political activity there? Of course not. It will simply most likely take the form in which Muslims in Western countries do it — as local politicians, but at the same time mobilizing support from their communities and striving to protect their interests. And here is a good example of how Muslim Ukrainians, who are a minority in a non-Muslim country, behave as its citizens, gain the trust of society, and expand the space of their possibilities as Muslims. And the last question — is it possible to somehow connect all these centers later? In theory, yes, but by moving from the particular to the general, not the other way around. That is, if Muslims who are established in certain places establish interaction among themselves in order to strengthen each other. But actually, the territory of Russia should not be a fetish in this sense, because it is not mentioned in the Quran or the Hadith. Therefore, in principle, Muslims can and should strive for interaction beyond national borders, but the priority directions of such interaction do not necessarily have to be within the present borders of the Russian Federation.