THE ISLAMIC TRADITION AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER
It is for the first time in world history that a super-mighty force has appeared on our planet to openly declare its goal, i.e. to subordinate all the peoples of the world to a New World Order. The bombing of Iraq and Serbia (and previously Libya) by the Western Countries, along with the pompous and complacent jubilee of the NATO, which is expanding to the West, has once again proved that this order's structure designed by the secret architects of globalism is in full swing today. Never before has the consolidation of transnational capital and that of the Western Countries round the USA been so strong and close, never before has the USA demanded from all the members of the UNO in an open and tough manner to acknowledge that it plays a part of world gendarme, never before have the markets of goods, services, finances and information in North America, West Europe and South-East Asia as well as the markets of labour force, raw materials and hydrocarbon resources in Eurasia, in the Middle East, in Africa and North America been so integrated and correlated, never before has the technocratic, secular, consumer civilization of the "sea" dominated the local folk cultures of the "land" to such an extent and posed so evident a threat to the hotbeds of theocratic "barbarism", still preserved in the "mountains". To put it in a nutshell, never before has the project of an open, civil society been so close to its accomplishment on a global scale as it is today. Now we witness that the forces of globalism undoubtedly possess all necessary means (material and technical, ideological and propagandistic, political, military, etc.) to achieve their geostrategic goals and have the necessary will to realize them that equally threatens the independence and the originality of all the peoples. The shadow of globalism, which is hanging over the world and which, as a matter of fact, is the newest form of nihilism or, in other words, that of programmed individualism ceased to be simply a superpopular subject of liberal and progressive publications long ago, but now it has turned into a real system threat to all natural, to all national, i.e. to all living.
What is the specific way this threat manifests itself? It lies in that the forces of globalism attempt to undermine and bring to naught the sacred traditions of the peoples (religion and custom) which create the stability and predictability of a social life. The availability of traditions is the main obstacle in the way of modernism and expansion of consumer values which are devoid of any spiritual content and which are being imposed by the West. Hence a simple, but most efficient strategy to be resorted to in order to counteract globalism, i.e. to revive the Traditions, becomes evident for all the opponents of the New World Order. The consecutive cognition, narration and accomplishment of this strategy make us, the participants of this conference and our like-minded people throughout the world, cast a glance at the whole complex of world problems including, first of all, the problem of Russian-Chechen relations in quite a different manner, and in a similar manner identify our "friends" and "foes" as well as define more accurate criteria to distinguish "these' from 'those".
In order to understand clearly who are those to be considered on our side in the modern world ('we and our allies") and who are those to be considered "strangers" ("they and their allies) and what are the specific characteristics to be taken as the basis for classifying "who is who", i.e. what is the way to establish one criterion of truth to be accepted by all "our" people, I propose to start with the three prerequisites which are important in principle:
- firstly, who are we, who are our allies, what is to be taken as our common starting-point? Proceeding from the fact that Eurasia is the original motherland of all mankind and that the sacred center of Eurasia is the Caucasus, where prophet Noah (peace be upon him) and his companions, from whom all the peoples were descended, found their rescue, the native country of prophet Noah (peace be upon him), i.e. the Mountains (the Caucasus), must be taken by us and our allies as the only starting-point, namely the arch-typical Centre of the World. Proceeding from the fact that the Mountains and the Land, oriented to the Mountains, are natural allies existing in a closed system with respect to which the Sea, historically, is a hostile factor, i.e. an open anti-system, the "we and our allies" category must embrace all the peoples who follow a centripetal course in accordance with their way of life and their value orientation. Therefore, the way we counteract the policy of globalism must be oriented to the traditional aims (values) and traditional means (theory) and must be able to evaluate only those results (practice) which, according to all the criteria, correspond to the aims and means selected by us. It is obvious that such a triple test to check the conformity to the principles of centripetal tendencies within the framework of our closed system can only be taken by the supporters of primordial and traditional values;
- secondly, who are our enemies, i.e. who are they and who are their allies? The carriers of globalism, i.e. its vanguard in the modern world, are represented by the leading postindustrial countries, united in the "sea" structures such as NATO, Big seven, EC and their system subdivisions oriented to a boundless economic expansion, which have raised the utilitarian values of capitalism to the level of "common-to-all-mankind values" defining, from their point of view, such notions as "civilized world", "world community", "freedom and democracy". Proceeding from their "sea" logic and technocratic principles of programme materialism, the supporters of the New World Order have named those who deny their deities and values, those who desire to preserve their independence and national originality, those who believe in the absolute sovereignty of the Single Creator "social outcasts", "fanatics", "barbarians", "enemies of freedom and democracy" making them demons in the eyes of the civilized world by thus, and at the same time they are prepared to reveal, isolate and exterminate them systematically on the pretext of the fight against international terrorism, for the good of all mankind. It is they who worship the golden calf. It is they and their allies who are "aliens";
- thirdly, realizing the fact that globalism is the product of western civilization while western civilization is the product of the modernization of the natural communal order which, after going through the intermediate stage of collectivism, will inevitably result in the triumph of individualism, one can deduce a formula in accordance with which:
modernism is a cult justifying the turn-about of human being's axiological orientation from natural to artificial in the name of virtual values; it is an ideology extolling the necessity of altering one's faith, consciousness and existence for the sake of material prosperity in such a way as to make any innovation, or spoilage of all that is living, confined, perfect, traditional and sacred be estimated as the good by an individual estranged from his or her communal or collective social environment; it is a political technology of authority which in practice substitutes truth for lie, good for evil, beauty for ugliness, justice for violence, religion for atheism; it is giving new names to new things.
Proceeding from this formula, the criteria for defining "who is who" in the modern world are reduced to revealing the factors promoting the creation or destruction of the value basis of a natural and closed system. For revealing these factors it is required to determine their location and the vectors of their movements on the "axiological map of the world". The drawing of this "map" makes it necessary to differentiate three sources of world values in descending order. It is the Mountains that are to be taken as the primary and central source. The values derivative of the Mountains are associated with religion, tradition, barbarism, social statics, "children's" respect for "fathers" and "fathers' command over "children", i.e. the algorithm of community-based way of life (extended patriarchal family, consanguineous community, clan, family, tribe, family-tribe nation, confederation of peoples) and the paradigm of a closed system. The values derivative of the secondary source, i.e. the Land, are associated with philosophy, history, culture, local social dynamics, conflict between "fathers" and "children", i.e. the algorithm of collectivism in the way of life (narrow civil family, village, city, historical nation, national state, multinational empire, UNO) and the paradigm of a system uncertainty. The values derivative of the tertiary source, i.e. the Sea, are associated with politics, everyday occurrence, civilization, global social dynamics, triumph of "children" over "fathers" and "fathers' " following "children", i.e. the algorithm of individualism in the way of life (sterile and virtual "family, port, virtual "nation", transnational state, NATO) and the paradigm of an open system. Therefore, individualism is a centrifugal destructive force with respect to the primary closed system while the collectivism striving for communality and the communality craving for reproduction are creative forces within the framework of this system. Thus, we obtain a method, axiologically consecutive, understandable, objective and independent of any political situation, a method to distinguish our allies ("our people") from enemies ("alien people") and estimate the way they accept or deny the values. This is the criterion of truth in the modern world.
From this point of view, the anti-globalism movement, which is increasing in the West, is not and can not be a real alternative to globalism because, despite its radical form, this movement in essence is but a post-modernistic dissident-like "riot", i.e. an echo of hippies' counter-culture, a student revolution of 1968 and a populist ecologism. All those actions were against the cynical forms of consumer civilization suppressing all that is living, organic and natural, those were the actions to defend individualism from omnipotent etatism; but no causes of the disease itself were revealed, nobody understood that etatism is an inevitable consequence of individualism and that, by defending an individual, "rebels" defend a state and its integral production technologies of new elite of authority, new things, new semantic systems and new identity. Therefore, the anti-globalism movement, in case it succeeds, will result, sooner or later, in a secondary globalism.
All that has been said above concerns the most influential (state-level) centres such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Cuba, China, North Korea which have an anti-West orientation in the modern world. It goes without saying that the same thing can be said with respect to some other states which came into existence on the ruins of the USSR, i.e. Russia, Byelorussia, etc. As far as the ideological level is concerned, the power regimes of those states are also anti-West and anti-America-oriented. But from the point of view of the meta-ideological level of basic values, they are the same "americans" as they are the supporters of modernism and the worshippers of the golden calf, which inevitably results in the practice of subordinating a religion to politics, ecology to economics, a village to a city, a human being to a state, etc., which makes these regimes to be the agents of Western civilization and globalism, though, of course, they do not acknowledge this. It is modernism that is the basic "value" of globalism, i.e. its main "engine" and its system content. And, in the long run, this content does not become less detrimental for a human being and his or her environment when it is given a religious, communist, socialist or fascist form, though this form and its conformity to the given stage of historical development alter the rate of society's progress on the road of social and technological modernism.
The same can be said about the idea of an "Islamic state" proclaimed by some radicals of Islamic movements. By denying the secular and secularized models of a social life in favour of a religious model based on shariah, these movements attempt to transform various types of states existing in the Moslem world into a universal type of "Islamic state", i.e. to preserve the political form of social order despite the fact that it is the chief promoter of modernism. And that means that the population of an "Islamic state" is doomed to deislamization because any society is religious or secularized depending on the laws it is guided by, i.e. a religious society lives in accordance with the Almighty's laws while a secularized one - in accordance with the secular laws based on the political and economic interests of the state. And it seems appropriate here to put a simple question, i.e. can any state be Islamic in principle? The answer to this question will be more illustrative when the modern "Islamic states", and Iran in particular, are cited.
The unconditional priority of the religious laws to become the laws of the State was the motto of the "Islamic revolution" in Iran. Any state proclaimed to be the defender of an Islamic way of life should be strong to fulfil this function. The strength of a state finds its specific expression in military and technical as well as economic might. In other words, a strong state implies the availability of advanced technologies, economic prosperity, stable financial system, prevalence of experts of science-capacious goods over imports, etc. But these conditions, on which any state might is based, can only be realized in case an "Islamic state" is ready to be integrated into a "world community", to accept the dictates of "international law" and to make its legislation to conform to those canons which are followed by a "civilized world". Otherwise an "Islamic state" will have no access to the newest technologies and credit lines, its goods will be boycotted, and in political respect it will turn out to be an "outcast country", as was the case with Iran until recently. To find the way out of isolation in order to provide necessary conditions for an increase of state power, Iran had to resort to some "progressive reforms", i.e. to substitute the strictly observed formula of "modernization without westernization" for the formula of "modernization and westernization". In other words, Iran kept on converting the Almighty's laws into the secular ones for political and economic reasons. Thus, a key word in the phrase "Islamic state" became the word "state" rather than "Islam". And Iran, in chase of "Islamic state's might" which is designed to defend the values from "external enemy", destroys these values with its own hands.
The example of Iran makes it possible for us to give a general evaluation to the whole doctrine of "Islamic state", whatever movement pretends to be its initiator (that of talibans, that of "Brothers-Moslems", that of Chechen "ikhvans", etc.). When two notions, i.e. "Islamic order" and "state order", are combined conceptually, the Islamic movements are doomed to be caught in a trap of "state interests" and become hostage of the economic value-based structure which functions in accordance with its specific laws that are not only contrary to the laws of Islam but antagonistic to them. By and large, it makes no difference whether the economy of "Islamic state" becomes part of global world economy (which immediately transforms a state into a political agent of globalism) or functions in the regime of autarchy (which in itself is utopian, considering the modern realities). The important fact is that a motive force of any economic system, i.e. prerequisite of its dynamic functioning, lies in material incentives which make the people persistently find and introduce new and new laws (very often through bloodshed revolutions). In other words, a state, when becoming a symbol of society's might and prosperity, makes the people be the adherents to profit and wealth rather than to the Almighty's laws, i.e. the adherents to the golden calf or the Devil which, when banished from paradise, swore to pervert the people by "embellishing what was going on in the world". Such an "embellishment" is effected through the cities which are an inexhaustible source of vicious temptations or a chief attribute of any state. All this proves not only the absurdity but the utmost blasphemy of combining such notions as "Islam" and "state". All this proves the primary and principle-based impossibility of living in accordance with the eternal and inalterable laws of the Koran and Sunna in a state system, the very existence of which can only be associated with a "conveyor"-type production of new things that constantly alter people's relationship and their social life. All this proves the fundamental ignorance shown by the adherents to the false doctrine of "Islamic state" not only with respect to the nature of a state, which makes the people be doomed to religious apostasy, but with respect to the basic principles of Islam, i.e. that which is peremptory and that which is forbidden.
The contradictory coexistence of "Islamic form" (Shariah) and "state-system content" (politics) in a single social field can not, by its nature, be either stable or everlasting and that has been proved by the detailed system analysis of the purport of such a contradictory peculiarity. All the compromises between the human being's passions and the Almighty's laws are a regular manifestation of a weak character, crippled by ignorance or scepsis, which (and it has been proved by the historical and modern experience) inevitably results in a decisive victory of content over form, politics over Shariah, "state interests" over the commandments of the Koran and Sunna, and everyday occurrence over eternity.
The historically conditioned phenomenon, which lies in the increasing participation of a Moslem traditional society in the process of formation and modernization of "its" states, may result either in its neutralization under the influence of the traditions and because of the some disorder in the immune system which protects the national organism (state) against modernization (which is an extremely rare occurrence) or in the destruction of a traditional society (which is a direct result of Islamic societies' evolution everywhere). Such is the scenario which awaits any "Islamic state" and its population, and it will remain as such until the Moslem peoples realize it properly and subordinate their practice and theory to the invariable Koranic values, until they revive the communal origins of life in accordance with the Tradition of "the forefathers".
A real alternative to an open system of centrifugal globalism (civilization) can only be a closed system of centripetal communality (barbarism) which has noting to do with the former but which has a powerful inner potential sufficient enough to force globalism out of our existence without touching it, without adapting itself to it, and without allowing any forms of convergence. In order to succeed, mankind should acknowledge that globalism is a deathly infection brought about by the viruses of individualism and should develop a reliable method of natural protection by way of restoring the immune system without making use of any "technogeneous drugs" and using "traditional medicine" only. Traditionalism, according to its definition, is an ideology of social statics which is irreconcilable with and antagonistic to social dynamics which is the essence of modernism. That is why, in my view, the Eurasian movement should rid its ideology of the conceptual contradiction, created by both traditionalistic and modernistic categories contained in it, and raise it to the level of Eurasian traditionalism realizing the fact that all this is but a transitional stage to a saving revival of true traditionalism, i.e. the Tradition of "the forefathers".
By introducing the notion of "Eurasian traditionalism", I would like to show the way it differs from the notions of "eurasianship" and "neo-eurasianship" known to politologists, and to define my position with respect to them.
Eurasianship, which started being introduced in Western Europe at the beginning of the XX century by such Russian emigrants as prince Trubetskoy N.S., Florovsky G., Savitsky P.N., Vernardsky G.V., attempted to work out an ideology alternative to communism but at the same time to preserve such notions as "state", "progress", "civilization", i.e. the chief categories of modernism, as positive values at a meta-ideological level. Apparently this logic made the Eurasians try to find the formula of "squaring the circle".
As to neo-eurasianship, it is to be stressed that the impulse to its restoration was given by Lev Gumilyov in his historic research concerning the problems of ethnogenesis while Mr.Alexander Dughin, who is present here, gave it the ideological content and the political and organizational form by combining modernism with traditionalism (selectively re-comprehended in the individualistic spirit of Rene Ghenone and Julius Evola) within the formula of "modernization without westernization", which was based on "sacred history" and geopolitical utilitarianism.
Yet, such a change in wording the notion of eurasianship transformed it from an abstract historico-philosophical and theological theory into a powerful applied weapon of populism. It is such a populism which is required for to-day's Russia, full of contradictions associated with its post-Soviet ideological vacuum, to make it reconsider its ideological and historical orientation and to see the force of orthodox and Russian national origins of "Russia-Eurasia" in the sphere of both internal and external relations.
I am a man standing on the side not only opposite to reader-like eurasianship in all its varieties but to all political ideologies in general. I am a man of community-oriented consciousness based on consanguinity, who denies all innovations brought to the sacred Tradition by culture and civilization, I am a staunch supporter of the independence of Checheniya. But nevertheless I have accepted the invitation of the ad hoc committee of this conference taking place in the capital of the state which is at war with my people, and moreover, I am its co-organizer and initiator. The reason of this lies in the fact that I clearly acknowledge the necessity of being in need of neo-eurasian ideology which is actual for to-day, i.e. at a transitional stage, and I see its capabilities to reach the level of Eurasian traditionalism later on. In order to be successful, the neo-eurasians should rid themselves of all the illusions of modernism as well as the dialectical attempts to combine it with traditionalism within the framework of one ideological system which is as paradoxical as any attempt to create a stable synthesis of dynamics and statics, sea and land, lie and truth, golden calf cult and single God worship. There is no sense in defending such a futile attempt because citing the example of imperial Japan to be taken as a model of successful combination of traditions and innovations stands no criticism. The traditionalism of the Japanese in combination with the modernistic content of their everyday life is of a purely formal and superficial nature which (in accordance with the said regularity) makes it doomed to the conversion into folklore and to the inevitable vanishing.
However I realize, in spite of all this criticism, that the value contradictions as well as the religious syncretism in the depths of neo-eurasianship can be justified at a transitional stage by a mobilizing force of populist compromises which bring about the necessary stages for evolutionary and step-by-step return from everyday occurrence (politics) to history (philosophy) and then to the Tradition (religion). That is the only way to restore harmony and back relations between the three levels of world outlook model, i.e. between the demands based on principle at a meta-level (axiology), those based on succession at a middle level (theory) and those based on efficiency at a sub-level (practice). That is why I am sure, despite all the existing contradictions, that the sincerity of neo-eurasians in their attempts to find the origins of the Tradition distorted by the New Time civilization will make them (after the completion of a transitional stage) reach the level of Eurasian traditionalism, i.e. to move from the platform of everyday political compromises to the platform of absolute value-based imperatives. Thus, both the Chechens and the Russians, understanding that they are at the starting point of the process to re-comprehend all the values in the spirit of Eurasian traditionalism, realize, for the first time in history, that there is a real basis for peace, mutual understanding and necessity to be united against the common enemy. Namely, for the partnership in the name of the common good.
What is my confidence based on? Why is such a union possible despite the fact that Russia and Checheniya are at war now?
Russia's target in this war is to defend its great-power origin, its ethno-cultural identity against globalism, i.e. to defend them by way of restoring the multipolarity of the world lost during the collapse of the USSR. One of the means of Russia's self-defense against globalism is to oppose the creation of bridgeheads for the Atlantic forces in post-Soviet space. The Kremlin starts realizing more clearly that the only way to oppose globalism lies in the attempt to do that at a value-based level, i.e. through restoring and strengthening the ethno-religious traditions of the peoples living in Russia in every possible way. Now let us consider the goal pursued by the Chechens in this war as well as in all the previous wars. This goal is to protect the traditional values the Chechen society has been guided by since earliest times. It is evident that every side (both the Russian side and the Chechen one) makes an attempt to defend itself by protecting its traditional values, and there is a trifle thing left to be done, i.e. the Russians should understand that when the Chechens attempt to attain the Chechen goal that promotes the attainment of the Russian goal because the nature of a traditional society is such that it does not accept the consumer western values which lack spirituality and that the Chechens will never allow their land to be transformed into an Atlantic bridgehead; meanwhile the Chechens should understand that the way Russia opposes globalism with making use of traditional means also promotes the attainment of the Chechen goal.
Thus, the Chechens and the Russians may proceed in their bilateral relations from the absurdity of war to the logic of common enemy and further- to the logic of common goal. In such a case, the peace treaty in combination with the stabilization of situation in the Caucasus will make it possible to create necessary conditions not only for the union between the Chechens and the Russians but for the efficient and conceptually-grounded model of integration for the whole of Eurasia.
By challenging globalism and by setting itself a task to return a multipolar world, Russia has proved to be unbiased in its championing the interests of all the peoples of Eurasia. The next step is logically predetermined, i.e. Russia, taking the ideology of Eurasian traditionalism as the basis, will start up the process aimed at consolidating the peoples of our ancient continent. But the neo-eurasians, as I have already mentioned above, should decisively make a turn from modernism (an utilitarian approach to geopolitics) to traditionalism, i.e. in favour of traditionalism (a principle-based approach to religion), in order to make this process stable and world-outlook-oriented.
Why do I think so?
There are two strategies Russia can resort to in order to oppose the expansion of the Atlantic forces.
The first one, i.e. a geopolitical one, was already tested in the times of cold war. It lay in the system of "dynamic equilibrium", i.e. symmetric "challenges" and "responses". The purport of such a strategy was to preserve the parity with the Atlantic forces in all the aspects of military and scientific and technical competition imposed by the West. Even the Soviet Union, which possessed far greater resources, which was in a more favourable geopolitical position, as compared to modern Russia, and which acted in a symmetric way, could not stand such a competition and collapsed as a result. There is no doubt that Russia will suffer the same fate if it takes a similar path.
As to the second strategy based on the ideology of Eurasian traditionalism, there are all necessary conditions there for Russia to be able to pass on to Eurasian authoritarianism and to restore the spiritual and natural values conforming to it. That is the way of a patriarchal development, i.e. social statics.
The West gains victories in those areas where the liberal, civil institutions and the purely consumer and artificial values devoid of spirituality but relevant to them are established, i.e. those institutions and values which are raised to absolute by the West. That is the way of a democratic development, i.e. social dynamics.
Consequently, the logic of value-based opposition prompts that western democracy should contrast with eastern authoritarianism, civilization with religion, a state-structure organization with a people's-structure organization, an open system with a closed one. Then the opposition to globalism will be carried out on a system-like basis, i.e. by determining the antiglobalistic ideology and its social content with the use of value factors to obtain a social order, as a result, in which the content accords with the form, and the form - with the content. This will recreate the primordial identity between faith, world outlook and earth; spirit, consciousness and existence, i.e. aims, means and objects which must be a subject of free choice to be made by a supporter of antiglobalistic opposition. Only in such a manner, only by means of a consecutive and crucial choice of a straight path and only by way of an axiological orientation based on morals can Russia withstand and gain a victory in its opposition to the West.
I understand that the word "authoritarianism" grates on one's ears because it provokes associations with totalitarianism. But, as a matter of fact, the totalitarian system (which was busy preparing "biological raw material" for democracy, i.e. for a consumer civil society, by way of atomizing the people and erasing the religious and national values from their minds) has nothing to do with authoritarianism of the Eurasian type aimed at reviving both, the spiritual sacred objects and the religious and national self-consciousness of the peoples. I would like to remind you again that by "eurasianship" I mean traditionalism, i.e. the revival of the sacred heritage of all the peoples descending from a single Eurasian root; by "authoritarianism of the Eurasian type" I mean an authoritarian power with its vector orientation towards the revival of traditional values. It is this orientation towards true traditionalism that reliably guarantees that Eurasian authoritarianism will never regenerate into godless totalitarianism.
Generally speaking, Russia faces a crucial axiological choice, i.e. either to pursue a value-oriented course towards Washington (the epicenter of modernism) which symbolizes globalism aimed at mixing all the peoples in a "single melting-pot" to make them lose their religious and national originality and perish in the end, or to pursue a course oriented to Vedeno (the epicenter of traditionalism) which symbolizes traditionalism aimed at differentiating the peoples to let them preserve their religious and national identity. In other words, Russia, Eurasia and the Land are to determine whose value-based supremacy seems to be more preferable, i.e. the elements of the Sea or the strongholds of the Mountains, the elements of the human beings' tricky passions or the strongholds of the Almighty's everlasting commandments.
Are there any other possibilities for Russia ( besides its being oriented to the Mountains or to Vedeno) to preserve its originality, not to be transformed into a "raw material appendage" for the West and into a commodity market for cheap and low-quality goods? No, there are not, because the Land civilization's low-level dynamics, which is typical of Russia, is unable, in any way, to compete with the Sea civilization's high-level dynamics.
Pursuing the course of modernism but lagging behind the West with respect to the rates of development, Russia is doomed to failure in such a technological race, i.e. to a futile waste of its resources, means and efforts. Moreover, such a senseless race entails the spoilage of land, the loss of the sense of "closeness" which is the most important spiritual content of all the monotheistic religions. I would like to repeat it again that only the struggle at a value-based level, only the revival of religious and national traditions, and only the ideology of traditionalism are capable not only to put an end to the expansion of the West but to provide powerful means for gaining a victory over it.
The West, the USA as its leader in particular, can be cited as an example of the total domination of a state, moreover, the West represents a political system, brought to automatism, in which the human factor is reduced to zero despite the priority of human rights declared. This accounts for the fact that every individual is subordinated to the code of state laws, he or she thinks by the categories of these artificial laws, i.e. he or she becomes a "bio-robot" (citizen) programmed by the state and the laws. This proves the full conformity of the form (the way of thinking by the categories of a "democratic state") to the content (the atomized masses of a civil society).
The archaic Old World, when encountered with a political system of the "dictatorship of law" imposed by the New World, it gave rise to, is doomed to retardation and failure. Because the religious and national traditions, which are beyond the force of the official laws and which very often contradict modernism, are still playing a significant role in it. The New World has gone far ahead on the road of progress in roundabout ways by managing to get rid of all the archaic "survivals", i.e. by raising the process of annihilating the natural origins of a human being's outer and inner world to an almost irreversible level.
Does the deliverance from the "burden" of traditions, which hinders progress, give Russia or other Eurasian countries any hope of being successful in the technological race with the West? I do not think so, because it is not an easy task to "free" the peoples from "the burden of the past" if the peoples consider the past to be a sacred heritage of theirs, an inseparable religious and national purport of their existence, and a basic symbol of their identity; moreover, the only way to root out those "survivals" is to make use of the western consumer values, but then it will become necessary to join the ranks of the West's vassals and to obediently obey the orders and "recommendations" coming from Washington, which in such a case will remain the only leader. To prevent this, there is the only way out for Russia, i.e. to be persistent in denying all the values and institutions of modernism on a step-by-step basis, to give up the urbanization and the building of new cities, to decline the development of industrial macroeconomics servicing these cities, and to repudiate the imperatives of modernism. In other words, Russia, first of all, should resist the temptation of following the path of progress, and deny the virtualization of manpower and economic resources of the country, because all this results in the penetration of modernism through the wide open doors and in the triumph of the Atlantic civilization, i.e. in the destruction of all that is living, organic and natural.
What will happen if the Old World or Russia, to be more specific, renounces the rules of dynamics (the technological race) and accepts the rules of statics dictated to it by its "land-like" nature? Let us consider this problem in detail.
The most important practical consequence of such a value-based re-orientation will be that Russia will free the tremendous resources, which are spent for the technological race with the West, and will be able to invest them in the branches, which are really important for the people, i.e. to restore agriculture, which is in a permanent crisis, to re-invest money in land reclamation and to make investments in the microeconomic projects aimed at the restoration of villages.
I believe, that many Russians may feel a certain apprehension, because, by giving up the idea of technological progress, Russia will turn out to be defenseless before the military might of the West. But this apprehension is absolutely groundless for the evident reason, i.e. until the Eurasian traditionalism bears real fruit, until it gives rise to moral processes in the West such as the nationalization of state authority, the ecologization of economy, the nuclear disarmament of the NATO, Russia keeps on preserving its nuclear arsenal for the transitional period, which has a deterrent effect with respect to the enemy and which is sufficient not only to safeguard its security but to defend all its Eurasian allies. It is to be specified that in principle "the nuclear umbrella" is purely a psychological factor which gives the feeling of being defended rather than being really defended.
Moreover, the atomic arsenals considered to be their own ones by the countries they belong to, have nowadays become a source of pernicious threats, because the countries, which possess nuclear weapon and nuclear technologies, more often suffer the consequences of accidents and "haphazard catastrophes" of the Chernobyl and "Kursk" type. But this is only one side of the problem making the powers be hostage of nuclear weapon and nuclear technologies. The other side of the problem aggravating the situation lies in the so called "arms race", which involves tremendous material, power and intellectual resources and which in the long run becomes an end in itself, i.e. a factor which is difficult to substantiate with rationalistic arguments. Russia has a good chance to interrupt this arms race process by starting the process of disarmament unilaterally. How will the West respond to Moscow's peaceful challenge?
In the West, this process will start "from bottom to top", and the faster Russia and its Eurasian partners start annihilating their arsenals of weapons of mass destruction, i.e. nuclear, chemical and biological, in a step-by-step manner, in principle, openly, in the name of God and for the good of all mankind, the faster will be a similar process in the West. This process in the West takes on the inevitable dynamics of chain reaction, but not because of the fact that the democratic governments are open for moral and religious argument. There is nothing of this kind there. These technocratic governments are absorbed with utilitarian Machiavellism to such an extent that they unerringly turn any moral or religious impulse, coming from below, any new fashion, trend, orientation or any social movement, into their political capital, i.e. additional money to finance the election campaign, positive clamour to be raised by the mass media, new votes of electors to be won. At the same time, the "West" is not a monolith. It is a contradictory mosaic of forces, conflicting with one another, that of interests and that of values. It becomes evident when one looks at an absolutely different way the Americans, the British, the French and the Germans, to say nothing of such carriers of western civilization as Jews, Greeks, Argentinians or Australians, interpret the European identity and the place "Europe" occupies in the New World Order. Yet, despite all the existing differences, the common denominator, to which such an obscure notion as "West" can be reduced to, is the "supreme value" of the cult of individual and "human and citizen's rights". This is the value basis of dynamics, that of political and economic might as well as that of scientific and technical development of the Western countries acting in the interests of an individual. On the one hand, such an individualism in the lower strata gives rise to such a pernicious phenomenon as consumer civilization supported by an extreme egoism, on the other hand, it gives rise to such anarchistic and dissident movements as unilateralism, antiglobalism, ecologism, counter-culture, "new rightists" and "new leftists", structuralism, post-structuralism, post-modernism, nomadism, etc. the roots of which grow from the same soil that gave rise to antimodernistic doctrines of Jean Jacques Rousseau who denied civilization, Proudhon who denied state system, Nietzsche who denied Judaic-Christian philosophy, Heidegger who denied Hellenic-Roman culture with its dead metaphysical stereotypes, Levi-Strauss , Foucault and Derrida who denied eurocentrism and those western technologies of authority and production of new things, new semantic systems and new identity of human being, which promoted its global expansion of eurocentrism. This "soil" is not a superficial and intellectual fashion, it is not a cultural and civilizational layer in world outlook, it is not a territorial base of this or that state, but it is a genetic inheritance of lots of generations of ancestors of a modern western man who made a "jump" from barbarism to civilization, hardly knowing (as compared with the authoritarianistic East) anything about slavery or serfdom. They started their historic walk in life as free, communal people, and began to destroy the degraded islands of ancient civilization in their way, but when they realized that there was no contradiction between their spirit of freedom and the Hellenic-Roman individualism, they accepted the false and alien-to-them way of life of the conquered civilization, by thus betraying the truth. They made the worst choice out of possible ones by changing communality for individualism, but it was the spirit of freedom that caused such an erroneous choice.
Therefore, the moral and religious impulse, coming from the upper strata of the East to the lower strata of the West, will turn the western individualism in the countries of the NATO against the technocrats who are at the top of authority. It is the mass dissident movement in the West that will use all its political capital and democratic mechanisms to deconstruct democracy, to make the NATO disarm unilaterally, and to collaborate with the top authorities in the East on the problems of the ecologization of mankind' global economy and the restoration of natural forms of society organization on a principle basis, because the man in the West instinctively understands the nature of individual freedom and that of individual's natural interests. The authorities in the East have initiated the processes, to be started from below, in order to give up all the forms of military confrontation and (which is no less important) to restore in the Eurasian continent a natural and ecologically pure economy as well as moral and religious bases of a society formation, i.e. those processes whose aim is to deprive the NATO and the technocratic governments in the West of their basic argument, namely "Eastern threat", which they make use of for military purposes to accumulate huge money collected from the taxpayers (voters) frightened with the image of Russia or Iran, Iraq, Libya or North Korea as an "unpredictable enemy". New positions, taken by Russia and other Eurasian countries, i.e. the denial of spirit-lacking modernism, the cessation of armaments build-up, and the protection of environment and family, will not only support the "dissident" movements in the West but turn their spontaneous "riot" against the system formed up, in a positive and creative channel of "moral renaissance". Thus, the ideology of the Eurasian traditionalism will spread everywhere, especially in those countries which strive for saving their people and their environment from a destructive effect of blind mechanisms of progress.
It next to impossible to enumerate in a short speech all the advantages and benefits Russia will have if it renounces the technological race with the West. On being inspired with a national and religious spirit, Russia will understand that this weapon is stronger than an atomic bomb and that neither all the armies of the world nor all the Devil's ruses are capable of fighting against it; and then the most important postulate of true traditionalism will become evident to everybody, i.e. we are not to be guided by what the enemy planned to do, but by what is to be done by us. By converting this theory into practice, we should be guided by the motto embracing all the religious commandments and all the absolute values of a human being's inner and outer world, i.e. to improve the land and to heal the soul. The first real (in the fundamental sense of this word) successes to be achieved by Russia, if it denies the rules imposed on it by the West and if it is guided by the clear truth of the said motto, will be the rescue of the whole planet as well as that of mankind's soul. Then the people may put a question to themselves, i.e. what is a real importance, as compared to everything that has been said above, in all "the achievements" made by civilization, in all those space flights, in Nobel Prizes, in atomic electric power stations, and in nuclear warheads? In that case, it will become evident for the whole world that all this is the Evil One's trick. And then, even a sceptic will understand it clearly that the nuclear weapon is not a force but a weakness and that the real force and security for his or her people lies in denying the use of nuclear weapon under any conditions and in starting its annihilation for the triumph of religion in any way which seems to be convincing for all the world. Then, the population of the West, i.e. the descendants of the "brigands of land and sea", will again show the spirit of recalcitrance and, as individualists, they will start the processes of disarmament from "below" while the similar processes will be started in the "collectivistic" East from "above". So, what the governments in the East will impose on their peoples, the peoples in the West will impose on their governments.
Thus, the return to the religious and national traditions will be not only the most efficient protection against a hypothetical enemy, against a real threat of modernism or against a pernicious lack of spirit, which triumph both in the West and in the East, but also the way to earn the Almighty's mercy or the way to return to a straight path leading to paradise; in other words, it is the way which does not lead to "temptation" embellished by a scientific and technical progress but the way which leads to the Kingdom of the Almighty. And that is the ultimate goal of the believers who take their terrestrial existence as a test or as a spatial and temporary period of time on the straight path leading from eternity to eternity. It is the only way for us to realize that our future is in our remote past.
When planning its strategy of relations with the West, i.e. with the civilization of the Sea, Russia should understand that it is a land country. The land does not have and can not have such a high dynamics which is peculiar to the Sea. Any attempt to attach the dynamics of the Sea to the Land can only result in the intrusion of the Sea into the Land or in a virtual flood of values under which all the originality of the peoples and all their traditional values vanish. The Land, subjected to moral shifts and value-based fluctuations, is doomed to be flooded by the civilization of the Sea. In order to be safe and sound, the Land should rid itself of the binary paradigm of geopolitics based on the "Land-Sea" dialectics and take the Trinitarian paradigm of Eurasian traditionalism based on the "Mountains-Land-Sea" order. The value-based orientation with regard to such an order is given in the Sacred Koran, namely: "And We have placed in the earth firm hills lest it quake with them" (21:31).
In order to oppose the civilization of the Sea, Russia, as a land power in its nature, should make a choice, i.e. either to be oriented to the dynamics of the Sea and surrender to the atlantic forces, or to be oriented to the statics of the mountains and win. The decision of Russia to fight against the West at a value level is adequate to the choice in favour of statics, i.e. in favour of traditions. The traditions are the statics, i.e. the mountains. When the mountains consolidate the Land preventing it from being shaken, the traditions consolidate the peoples' consciousness. The peoples, living in accordance with the traditions, know perfectly well how they should behave in this or that situation. They act the way their "the first generations" did, i.e. "the forefathers" did, they follow the path their ancestors chose, which is the statics, i.e. the path to paradise shown in the Koran, namely: "Then, can they expect aught save the treatment of the folk of old? Thou wilt not find for Allah's way of treatment any substitute, nor wilt thou find for Allah's way of treatment aught of power to change" (35:43). The traditions serve as stable supports for their social life preventing the human souls from being seized by shady passions.
It was the deviation from the traditions and the estrangement from the Primordial World that resulted in that the Old World begot the New World, i.e. "the world of the children", which to-day makes their "fathers" be inundated with the waves of modernism, i.e. the completely desecrated values of the Sea, and the salvation from which can only be found in a natural and hierarchical union of the Earth ("low"), with the Mountains and the Sky ( "high"). The same as it was in the case of the ancient flood in the times of prophet Noah (peace be upon him), the salvation of those who have decided to be saved and who have accepted the sacred commandments of the Creator lies only in the mountains or in the restoration of the traditions which are still being preserved among "the peoples of Noah", i.e. Noh-chi, as the Chechens name themselves. I want to believe that Russia, whether consciously or being guided by the instinct of self-preservation, will be oriented that way.
What is your confidence based on? - a sceptic may ask. I know that the present Russian elite of authority is principled in rejecting a liberal and democratic way of life and is inclined to consider the Atlantic West as its adversary rather than its enemy, while the Eurasian East as its ally. One can be convinced of that by analyzing the external initiatives made by the Russian government, which turned out to be Eurasia-oriented, by analyzing its emphasized attitude towards the spiritual leadership, as well as its course aimed at reviving the "Moscow-Caucasus-Teheran" axis as a counterbalance to the "Washington-Caucasus-Tokyo" axis. One can also be convinced of that by analyzing the marked statement made by the Russian president in Rostov-on-Don in November last year in which he said: "The status of Chechnya is of no importance unless its territory is used by the enemy as its bridgehead".
I would like to be understood correctly. I do not belong to the number of the Chechen "pacifists" who appeal to the Russian and world communities to establish whatever possible peace in Checheniya. The Chechens do not need "peace at any price", because any price can be paid but for the absolute values, and that is the only reason for fighting, as I see it. It goes without saying, that we are fighting in order to win, to save our religion and our way of life. But we are not interested in the defeat of Russia in this war, because if Russia loses the present leadership of Russia, which has pursued the policy of resisting the democratic infection disastrous for both Russia and its neighbours, including the Checheniya, will be replaced by the supporters of westernization inimical to traditionalism, i.e. to everything that is really religious and national.
I am expecting a question concerning Wahhabism, i.e. the ideology which is to undermine the Chechen traditionalism from inside.
The acquaintance with literature and publications associated with religious history proves that throughout the world there is not a clear understanding of either traditional Islam or the ideology which is now called "Wahhabism". I would like to emphasize that Al-Wahhab is one of the sacred names of our Creator which can not be mentioned in political definitions and that is why in the future I shall use such terms as "ikhvanship" or "ikhvans". Although some sources call them "fundamentalists".
In fact, the fundamental Islam, if the Koranic Islam is meant by it, represents a religion of consanguineous communities which are the basic cells of a tribal structure of the people. Such a social realization of the principles of Islam, which were formulated explicitly in the numerous commandments of the Koran, can be found in the social fundamentals of the ummah created by Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and greet) in Yatriba (Medina).
The final goal of all the believers, despite all the ideological differences, is Allah's paradise. Yet, the way the Moslems choose the means to achieve that sacred goal is different, though not only the goal but also the means to achieve it are given in the pillars of Islam, i.e. in the Koran and Sunna. As to the details of the problems in question, you can find them in my works, but now I am going to be brief in describing the social content of the Medina ummah, which was created by the Prophet (may Allah bless him and greet), i.e. the basic document of the ummah, namely "Dustur", and which is known in literature associated with religious history under the title of "Medina Constitution".
1. The form of a society organization-tribal (religious-ethnic-traditional);
2. The structural unit of a social organization - a consanguineous community;
3. The subject and object of blood retribution: a consanguineous community (a principle of community responsibility).
But if we consider the principles of an ikhvan ideology we shall find that, it appeals to the same sacred goal to be achieved, but the means proposed by the ikhvan religion for attaining it are purely political though they manifest themselves in a religious form:
1. The form of a society organization - a state system (political-territorial-innovative);
2. The structural unit of a social organization - an individual;
3. The subject of blood retribution: a state system; the object of blood retribution: an individual (a principle of individual responsibility).
That is why it is incorrect to give "ikhvanship" the name of "fundamental Islam". By declaring the doctrine of an "Islamic nation", i.e. the internationalized Moslem masses deprived of any significant characteristics of their national identity, the "ikhvanship" can not help realizing that the national originality of the Moslem peoples is the main obstacle which hinders it to attain its goal, religious in form but globalistic in content. So, it is quite logical that ikhvanship spares no efforts to undermine (as something "anti-islamic", "jahilic" and "heathen") the national self-consciousness expressed in the Moslems' national traditions and, by thus, to turn them into a mob which has neither nationality nor origin. And that is a direct attempt on the Almighty's will and conception to create "nations and tribes" in order that they could "know one another" (the Koran, 49:13). The knowledge is a prerequisite of one of the most important Koranic categories of Al-Furkan ("Distinction"). Without knowing the distinction between good and evil, between piety and sin respectively approved of or prohibited by the Almighty, it is impossible to be the owner of Distinction, i.e. to be a Moslem. Therefore, by attempting to remove the prerequisite allowing the peoples to know one another and making it possible for them to compare and confront "themselves" with the "others" on the positions of moral canons, ikhvanship (whether it is understandable or not) makes a real attempt on Distinction, i.e. one of the sacred categories of Islam, and undermines the foundation on which the identity of the Moslems, i.e. the slaves of Allah, is being built.
When it is stated in the world press that ikhvanship (absurdly defined as "Islamic fundamentalism") carries a threat to the West, it is a superficial definition resulted from a declarative anti-western nature of Islamism. First of all, the ikhvan ideology is a direct threat to the Moslem peoples for whom it has prepared in truth a dreadful fate, i.e. to lose completely all the signs of their national originality and to vanish in the assimilation pot. Therefore, the goals of both eastern ikhvanship and western globalism with respect to the Moslem peoples are identical except for one thing, i.e. ikhvanship is more dangerous because it undermines traditional Islam in the "name of Allah" and, in doing so, it paralyses the will of the Moslems who do not seem to know or must have forgotten the sacred, Koranic sources of traditionalism. Traditional Islam, despite the fact that the "state-level shariah" innovations penetrated into it and weakened its "immune system", is, nevertheless, able to resist the Western utilitarian values; by undermining it, ikhvanship, despite its anti-western pathos, opens the road to globalism and becomes its guide.
The ideologists of ikhvanship raise the slogan of restoring the ummah and early caliphate, but consciously or through ignorance, they ignore the well-known fact that the ummah of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and greet) and that of the pious caliphs, by providing the necessary conditions for a peaceful and confederative coexistence of clans, tribes, nations, languages and religions, did not allow their arbitrary mixture but demanded the strict observance of the principle formulated by our Prophet (may Allah bless him and greet) in the Medina Constitution for every subject of the ummah, i.e. to live "in accordance with his/her customs, in a reasonable manner, and in a just way as it was customary with the believers". Later on, when the ummah of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and greet) was transformed into an "Islamic empire", that principle was violated and then completely forgotten after the Islamic societies fell to the level of an "Islamic state". And it is appropriate to notice that it was the so called traditional Islam ("imperial", "historic") that begot the modern Islam, i.e. ikhvanship, by duplicating the progressive development of states and justifying all the changing regimes of state authority, i.e. by being, as a matter of fact, renewed Islam.
Brotherhood based on consanguinity, which was so sacred in Islam, was substituted by the ikhvans ("brothers") for ideological ties, i.e. "jamaats", though the word "jamaat" in a traditional Arabic society meant a consanguineous community. In other words, instead of natural consanguineous ties, which promoted the creation of the united communities of the Moslems and which were sanctified by the authority of the Koran and Sunna of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and greet), the ikhvans suggested an organization which did not differ at all from any state-system organization except for a strict "barrack-like" discipline.
It is a regularity that ikhvanship, as a movement, not only duplicates the final etatic principle in its organizational structure but openly announces its intention to build up an "Islamic state"; moreover, ikhvanship is uncompromisingly hostile to consanguineous and tribal structures which are the antipode to a state. That is the purport of the conflict between the traditional and fundamental Islam, which is professed by the Chechens, and the "new Islam", which was brought to our soil by the emissaries of ikhvanship.
But this conflict manifests itself only for the periods of peace when the problems of a social formation of Checheniya become actual. For the periods of war this conflict ceases to exist because all the segments of Resistance are represented by a single and united force which is aware of the common character of its sacred mission. And it makes no difference what principles or indications make the fighters belonging to Resistance unite, i.e. those based on "jamaats", which are now considered as deliberately ignoring the consanguineous genealogies, or those based on blood relationship. The Russian propaganda, when saying that the ikhvans are fighting against the Russian army in Checheniya, makes an attempt to raise the popularity of their principles , whereas the Chechen fighters are compelled to wage a war because they are guided by an Islamic spirit, brought up in them by their consanguineous communities, rather than the ikhvan ideology.
The traditional Islam in Checheniya has been preserved in the community-based origins of the Chechen nation which still observes the fundamental "an eye for an eye" law and it can not be either annihilated or restored to the utmost extent without annihilating or restoring a consanguineous community, as well as a tribal hierarchy of the people, which is its natural product, i.e. without annihilating or restoring the Koranic commandment of the community-based (consanguineous) responsibility. Any trend in Islam beyond such a structure can not be innovative or distorted to this or that extent. The area, which is left by the fundamental Islam and in which the blood relationship disintegrates, creates the favourable conditions for a "new Islam", which adapts to a state system, and then an ideology is given rise to, i.e. "the newest Islam" or ikhvanship, which overcomes all the community-based and tribal "survivals".
In my opinion, all the abovesaid allows me to make a paradoxical statement that in Checheniya, as compared with the whole Islamic world, there are less favourable conditions for an accelerated development of ikhvanship, and I think so, because those present here, are accustomed to think of the Chechens through the habitual stereotypes imposed by the mass media which, by the way, are themselves but the victims of an "invisible hand" of the new semantic systems. This is because of the fact that the Chechens have managed till now to preserve the traditional forms of their social life to a great extent.
The Chechen ikhvans, because of the ongoing war accompanied by a propagandist campaign, have turned out to be the center of universal attention. In fact, in the similar Islamic regions of Russia, for example, there were far more favourable conditions for expanding and strengthening ikhvanship, because in those regions, the same as throughout the former USSR, the natural and the community-based forms of social life were completely disrupted under the influence of a communist anti-national and anti-religious policy, and that was the same way the similar forms of social life had been disrupted by the monarchy which had been modernism-oriented, i.e. had chosen the course unnatural in its origin. Under such conditions, the restoration of religion was doomed to be drawn to an ikhvanist "newest Islam" rather than to a traditional Islam. And that proves convincingly that ikhvanship resulted from modernism. That is why there is no efficient force that could oppose the ideology of ikhvanship except for the ideology of restoring a pure, fundamental and truly traditional Islam with its community-based (consanguineous) origins.
However, our main and common task, i.e. the task of all the peoples who are eager to preserve their originality, their religion and their traditions, is to oppose globalism. It was the goal to put on end to the expansion of the atlantic forces and then to oust them from the center of Eurasia, i.e. from the Caucasus, that made Russia start a second war in Checheniya. But to-day it becomes obvious that this war is working against that goal because Russia is fighting in Checheniya with traditionalism, i.e. the object it must restore in itself, and in doing so it opens the road to the western values. It can be judged that the Russian politicians have already understood that it is time to stop that war but all their initiatives are resisted by the military elite, which is inclined to continue it and which does not understand that by doing so it arms the democrats, i.e. the adversaries of "authoritarian Russia", and accelerates the processes of globalization in Eurasia. The Russian generals, when raising their corporative interest of the military and industrial complex in the rank of idol as well as pursuing their political and material ends, do not see the abyss they are moving to carrying all the country with them.
It is obvious that a long-term target, i.e. a strategic task of the Russian Federation connected with the necessity of being protected against the western civilization, is greatly affected by the fact, that the war between Russia and Checheniya is still on. Checheniya, being guided by similar reasons, is also interested in putting an end to that war. However, neither the Russian political leaders nor the Chechen ones are capable (in a unilateral way or even jointly) to stop the war and start a peaceful process because the "hawks", which are on the one side of the "line of the front", pursue their own personal and group-short-term interests under the cover of the "common good" while the certain Chechen forces, which are on the other side of the "line of the front", are being fascinated by a modernistic myth of "Islamic state". At the same time, it is obvious for everybody even at a subjective level that this objectively absurd war, which made the two sides collide, i.e. those countries which originally must have cooperated in order to protect themselves against the common enemy, has reached a deadlock and that it has caused a profound split and animosity in those Eurasian forces which possess the most powerful inner resources to oppose globalism and to gain a victory over it, i.e. Islam and orthodoxy. If the present war, the same as the previous one, is stopped by the western democratic structures (such as the UNO, OSCE, or PACE) it will be the triumph of the atlantic forces or a striking demonstration of the might of western civilization. That will be the victory of the West over the East, i.e. both Russia and Checheniya will be compelled to accept a western way of life. Besides, the victory of the democrats will mean for Russia that the politicians, which unleashed the war, and the military, which pursue their corporative interests, will repeat the fate of their Serbian "counterparts" who went through the crucible of the tribunal in the Hague. It is only within the framework of a peace treaty to be concluded on the basis of the religions of our Creator, i.e. on the foundation of our Holy Writs, that will make it possible to forgive those who are guilty and to stop prosecuting them. Only by accepting the sacred principles of God's law, both Russia and Checheniya will be able to avoid being caught in the trap of the international law, democratic in form and globalistic in content.
It is extremely important that a peace-making mission is taken by the traditional forces because only they are the carriers of those values and only they are oriented to such a way of life which can be acceptable to both the Russians and the Chechens and to which they are pushed by the logic of protection against democracy and globalism. Only these forces enjoy a natural authority among the people, and that means that neither the military nor the politicians will have any doubts about their true devotion to the common interests of Russia and Checheniya. Thus, it becomes evident that such a peace-making mission can only be accomplished by a monotheistic religion. When the Moslems and the orthodox believers understand that they worship One God and deny the Western cult of the golden calf, they will get a powerful impulse to unite. Then they will be joined by all the forces of the world which are dissident towards globalism and which deny the spoilage of land and the marginalization of peoples.
The key role in mobilizing the Moslems and the orthodox believers to realize that idea, as well as in organizing the traditional forces, can be played by the existing structures of Muftiyat and the Orthodox Church, if only they express the will to be reoriented from the short-term (everyday) and long-term (historical) tasks to the accomplishment of their eternal (traditional) mission. And if the Russian-Chechen conflict ends with a true peace to be approved of by the universally recognized leaders of both sides under the oath taken on the Holy Writs of our religions, that will result in the triumph of the traditional way of life throughout our continent, i.e. from the Caucasian Mountains (through the Eurasian land) to the shores of the sea. That will be a common victory not only for the Chechens and Russians but also for all the peoples striving for improving the earth and for healing the souls of mankind.
To begin with, the Central Spiritual Board of the Moslems of Russia could use its authority, its connections with the governmental circles and its status of an official institution in the state structure to be able to be an initiator and mediator of the process of negotiations in the Caucasus together with the Russian Orthodox Church. It is the cooperation between Islam and Christianity, which historically was associated with the hostile-to-each-other religions, that could transform that peace-making impulse in Checheniya into the beginning of revolution of consciousness throughout the whole Eurasian continent. It is time for us to recall a simple truth: we were created by one God and we all worship Him only; and that truth was clearly formulated on the pages of the Sacred Koran, i.e. "We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our God and your God is One, and unto Him we surrender." (29:46).
If up till now, as I have already mentioned, the democrats from the law-defending structures, such as the OSCE and the PACE, have always been the mediators in the Russian-Chechen conflict, now it becomes possible to achieve peace through the mediation of the religious figures of Islam and Orthodox as well as to demonstrate the great peace-making potential of monotheistic religion. This step may turn out to be a decisive victory of our religions over the globalistic cult of the golden calf, i.e. to be a vector-like course towards the restoration of traditionalism and towards the union of the Islamic South with the Orthodox North, about which I have mentioned above; to be a value-based foundation for the integration of not only the Eurasian peoples but all the peoples of the world, to be a shattering and irreversible defeat of the sea civilization of the West. It will not be an exaggeration to say that this will be a turning point in the tragic history of mankind burdened with wars and enmity, a turning point to the life on God's land in accordance with God's laws. All the conflicts existing to-day in the Caucasus, as well as in the Balkans and in the Middle East, can be solved on the basis of the principles of monotheistic religions. I have used those principles in the text of a peace initiative, the full substantiation of which you can find in my book "Vedeno or Washington?"
As to the opposition to ikhvanship, I am aware that the Moslem peoples of Russia have not preserved that community-based way of life which is capable of creating a natural immunity against ikhvanship in the Chechen nation. But the Muftiyats of the Moslem regions of Russia, as well as all the Moslem countries, which try to protect themselves against globalism, must understand that only the sermon can be the "Achilles'heal" of the ikhvan ideology, i.e. the sermon of consanguineous (community-based) bonds created by the Almighty: "There is not an animal in the earth, nor a flying creature flying on two wings, but they are peoples like unto you. We have neglected nothing in the Book (of Our decrees). Then unto their Lord they will be gathered."(6:38). The ikhvans do not have and can not have any arguments against that reason, and everybody will see an obvious inconsistency of ikhvanship with Koranic Islam: "Would ye then, if ye were given the command, work corruption in the land and sever your ties of kinship? Such are they whom Allah curseth so that He deafeneth them and maketh blind their eyes". ( 47:22-23)
It must be understood that the struggle should be carried on against the ikhvan ideology, i.e. "ikhvanship", rather than against the ikhvans who number scores of thousands of Moslems in the population of Russia; against the causes of delusion rather than against those who are deluded, in other words, this struggle should show the youth, involved in it, those postulates of ikhvanship which are totally incompatible with a community-based nature of pure Koranic Islam and which are presented by them as "fundamentalism". Then the youth will stop being divided into ikhvans and traditionalists, the tragic split between religious consciousness and that of national one will vanish and the to-day's ikhvans will become the staunchest traditionalists. The way to restore traditional Islam in Checheniya is simple enough, i.e. this process is not to be hindered, and then the Chechens will re-create the primordial society in which there will be no room for ikhvanship and which will exist in the form of community and live by the laws of the Koran and Sunna of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and greet).
Such a question may arise, i.e. why wasn't the traditional society restored in Checheniya for the three inter-war years? The trouble was that the job, the leaders of Checheniya were engaged in, was completely the opposite, i.e. the leaders of Checheniya were engaged in building a state.
I am sure that the conception, which is designated in the present report and which has been fully developed in my book "Vedeno or Washington?", will be accepted by all the Chechens including ikhvans who are at war now. I have already explained above why it will be so, I am also sure that the conception proposed will find its positive response in Russia as well.
I have no doubts that my programme is the only way to protect the multipolar world and to restore natural order. Why am I sure that my programme will be accepted by the Chechens and Russians as well as by other Eurasian peoples? Because it is based on truth. Why am I convinced of the fact that it is truth? Because it is commensurable with the spirit and letter of all the monotheistic scriptures.
All the contradictions and conflicts among the true believers have a historical and purely political nature rather than a religious one, and the sooner we are able to understand that we are the keepers of the heritage of all the prophets of God of monotheistic religions, i.e. khanifs, the sooner we can overcome them.
I am convinced that the cleaning of our common Eurasian house from the cult of the golden calf as well as from the consumer civilization of the Sea, which lacks spirituality, will start from Checheniya, the ancient land of prophet Nuha (peace be upon him). It was to my people that the striking words, said by Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and greet), were addressed, and I would like to cite them:
"On the doomsday the people will come whose iman will be amazing. There is good news for you and for the sake of you, peace be upon you! Be glad, because you enter paradise for ever. The angels, the prophets and the people will envy them". The aschabs asked: "Oh, Prophet of Allah! Who are they?" The Prophet answered: "They are not from us (prophets) and not from you. They will appear at the time when the people stop reading the Book of Allah and the Sunna. They will be armed with the Koran and Sunna, they will breathe a new life into them, they will read them and teach them to others. They will suffer a great deal on this path and their torments will be greater than yours (those of aschabs). The iman of one of them is equal to the iman of forty of you, and their one shahid is equal to forty of your shahids. You will get assistants in finding the truth, but they will get none. They will be surrounded from all the sides by the unjust people and they will be in the salvation corners of Baitulmukyaddas. Under such conditions, Allah will come to them to help, and they will raise the honour of Islam". And the Prophet begged Allah: "Oh, Allah, give them victory and make it so that they could accompany me in my voyage by the river of Kovsar".
The Prophet (may Allah bless him and greet) said that his ummah would be divided into 73 parts and only one of them would remain on the straight path and would deserve paradise. Who represents that part of the faithful Moslems? The life in accordance with the Koran and Sunna, i.e. in accordance with the eternal and unalterable laws given by the Almighty, is incompatible with a state system based on the laws, which are of a temporal character and which always depend on a political situation. Therefore, the Moslems who live in a state in which the laws alter, must understand that they live contrary to the Koran and Sunna and that it is hardly possible to live under state-structure conditions. It is common knowledge, that all the Moslem peoples, except for the Chechens, live to-day in some states, recognize the regimes of these states and have staked on progress and technocratic civilization which damages the earth, breaks the indissoluble bonds of relationship and makes the community-based life impossible. It goes without saying, that all this has resulted in that the peoples were guided by their passions and their aspirations for being rich, i.e. they worshiped the golden calf. It is known that to-day, as ever, only the Chechens, who constantly call themselves Noh-chi in their language, which in the literal translation means the people of Nuh (peace be upon him), as it is said in the Koran, or Noah, as it is said in the Bible, preserve a consangioneous and community-based way of life. The fundamental principle of the community-based consciousness and community-based life (the collective (consanguineous) responsibility) does not allow any division into parties and hinders any penetration of the viruses of individualism into the living organism of the nation, it also does not allow any conversion of tradition into innovation, any creation of a town (city) or a state, any triumph of politics over morality as well as any subordination of God's commandments to the imperatives of progress and civilization. The Chechens are strangers to all the forms of individualism, that is why they deny all the "good" of civilization, they live without a state, they deny the state and they declare their determination to live without it in the future. There is no need to prove that we, the Chechens, since the times of prophet Nuh (peace be upon him) have been preserving and defending one and the same way of life given to us by the Almighty through all his prophets and, despite the fact that we are surrounded by modernism from all the sides, we remain the last stronghold of true traditionalism. Our mission is to restore a just society fully and completely and to restore a natural order without any politics which could correspond to that pattern of a religious community which was established in Medina by our Prophet (may Allah bless him and greet). In other words, our mission is to restore a true theocracy. That is why the Chechens have been compelled to fight to preserve their faith and their traditional way of life during their whole observable history. That is why the Chechens have turned out to be surrounded by the "unjust people from all the sides. And that is why my people suffer "terrible torments on that path".
All that has been said above proves that there is no doubt that the Moslems, who divided into a great number of groups whatever was their confidence in the correctness of the historic path they chose and still follow or in the correctness of a political viewpoint they keep on adhering to nowadays, have objectively made a tragic mistake. Though they acknowledge the sovereignty of a state and international law, they attempt to involve some associate partners to deal with the Koran and Sunna, and by justifying their attempt with the aid of a great number of the existing religions to be taken into consideration, they substitute the eternal truth for a political trick and, in doing so, they remain satisfied with themselves and get some short-term mundane benefits. So, they are doing the very thing against which the Koran warned: "Turning unto Him (only);and be careful of your duty unto Him, and establish worship, and be not of those who ascribe partners (unto Him)".(the Koran, 30:31). Unlike them, the Chechens do not allow any compromises between the traditional laws of the natural law reflected in the Koran and Sunna and the temptations of progress, while the perfect closed system of the primordial nation does not allow the creation of any sects or parties. The community-based consciousness preserved by the Chechens gives the only correct key to the understanding of the Koran and Sunna and to their true interpretation while the interpretation itself breathes a new life into the sacred sources of the Islamic religion and makes it possible for the Chechens to "teach the Koran and Sunna" to those who departed from the community bases of Islam and got lost on the crooked paths of collectivism and individualism, which is a derivative of the former, in their pursuit of "the good" of progress and civilization. That is why a handful of the Chechens, which only relies on the religion of Allah and which is only armed with the Koran and Sunna to breathe a new life into them, fights on a small piece of land and gains victory over a nuclear state, which occupies 1\6 of the territory of the world, which benefits from the technogenic progress, which is armed with the newsy types of the military technology and which has all the might of a civilized state. That is why, by interpreting the tradition of monotheism as a saving and unshakeable dogma and by denying all the innovations, derivative of state and politics, culture and civilization, arts and sciences, as a pernicious lie, the Chechens are for improving the land and for healing the soul, for preserving their way of life, and they are ready to struggle and win all over the world and they are ready to sacrifice their property and their lives on that path for the sake of these absolute values and for the sake of preserving their community-based way of life. That is why I have no doubts that out of 73 parts of the ummah, my people is the only part which follows the "straight path" and that it was to my people the words from the Koran were addressed: "Of all those who were created by us there is a people who is guided by the truth and makes justice with the aid of it", and that is why we should apprehend the eternal tradition, which has been kept in our nation since the times of the "forefathers", as a sacred heritage of all the peoples of the world, descended from prophet Noah (peace be upon him) and his community, or as an "ark of covenant", i.e. the only possible way to save humanity from civilization and globalism as well as from a new virtual flood.
The hadith of Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and greet) convinces us that we await the help of Allah. I do not think that this help will be long in waiting, because more and more peoples in Eurasia, as well as those throughout the world, begin to understand that the way to be saved in this life, as well as in the eternal one, is designated in the motto, namely "the salvation of the earth and the healing of the soul", and I think that one should preserve rather than annihilate the hearth of a traditional life which is being defended by the Chechens on their land. The annihilation of this hearth will result in the annihilation of a living specimen of the indissoluble unity of the religious and national values established in the covenant concluded by the Almighty with Prophet Noah (peace be upon him). In this case, the ark of covenant, i.e. the traditional bonds of a social life, which are being kept by the peoples of Noah (Noh-chi), will be lost irrevocably.
Although the Chechens have preserved their community-base consciousness they do not attempt to adjust the Holy Writ to the contemporaneity or their way of life to the international law, they only acknowledge the sovereignty of the Almighty and they are aware that the life in all its manifestations should only be commensurate with those specimens, which are reflected in the Koran and in accordance with which all the prophets of the Almighty lived. Nobody is allowed to alter these specimens arranged by Allah; by altering them, we betray the law of the Almighty: "So, set thy purpose (O Muhammad) for religion as a man by nature upright - the nature (framed) of Allah, in which He hath created man. There is no altering (the laws of) Allah's creation. That is the right religion, but most men know not -" (30:30). That is why (and it is to be emphasized) to-day only the Chechens have a community-based consciousness not distorted either by the individualism of the West or by the collectivism of the East, and only the Chechens may truly interpret the Koran and Sunna to "breathe a new life into them". Therefore, the true believers should not have any doubts that for all the peoples of the Earth there are only two contrary and incompatible choices, i.e. either to choose the Chechens, who have preserved their natural and traditional form to organize their social life and natural economy the way all the peoples of the Earth did, or to choose the Americans, who have come to such a state of individualism that they cannot even dispense with the artificial state institutions which could secure the functioning of their complicated and technology-consuming economy. And that means that collectivistic Russia, which is now perplexed, should make its choice, i.e. would it be community or individual, namely Vedeno or Washington?
I am a realist and I know perfectly well in what kind of society we live. I never urge anyone to destroy any state by a revolutionary way. Because that would result in chaos, since the modern world lacks any consanguineous principles of forming a community and is absolutely unaware of the notion of a typo-tukchamic (clan and tribal) organization. That is why I urge an evolutionary way which could make it possible to restore the religious and national traditions and which in itself will be a spiritual revolution or a value-based upheaval, i.e. the rebellion against the cult of the golden calf, as well as the way to be saved in this life or in the eternal one. First of all, all the peoples living close to the center of Eurasia (the Caucasus), i.e. the Slavonic, Turkish and Iranian peoples who follow the tradition of their forefathers, will become the kernel of the union between the orthodox North and the Islamic South (to become the center of the All-Eurasian integration in the future) and may be united in their struggle against the civilization of the Sea in the Eurasian Confederation of the Authoritarian States. In order to make such a goal achievable (not utopian) and realizable in a consecutive manner, the necessary means are to be chosen. It is obvious that they cannot be borrowed from the ideology of modernism or at least infected with its viruses, i.e. the values of a city, a state or a consumer civilization. That is why the Eurasian Union of the villages, organized on the principles of the Ganzeh Union but downright contrary to it as regards the vector-based values, can be considered as a starting point of the first stage to restore the natural order. To counterbalance to the Ganzeh Union and typologically-close-to-it-city-based leagues beginning from the Athenian marine union, the Eurasian Union of the villages should be oriented towards the mountains rather than the sea in the sense that the land village should consider the mountain community not only as its ally to oppose the city conglomerate but also as the model of a natural social order. The Russian leaders will be able to prevent the dissolution of the "empire" and to be efficiently protected against offensive globalism only in case they rely on a countryman re-channelling the budgetary means from cities to villages to restore the latter, in case they avoid the expenditures to support or construct industrial giants, which function to satisfy the needs of citizens, and in case they start financing the small-scale family farms capable of producing natural, ecologically pure and healthy food in full harmony with the land. Moreover, all this will create a moral bridgehead for eschatological victory over the civilization of the golden calf.
The final stage, that will come as a result of the restoration of villages and the deepening of traditionalism, will lie in that the paradigms of system-like openness and uncertainty will be completely substituted for the paradigm of system-like closeness and that the traditional social order will be restored on the basis of the Eurasian Confederation of the Authoritarian States but in the form of the Eurasian Common House in which the subjects will be represented by the peoples living in communities according to their traditions rather than by the states. That is the way to re-create the community of the type of our Prophet (may Allah bless him and greet) in which all the generic and tribal nations and confessions could live in peace and concord within the framework of the genuine United Nations Organization based on the natural law rather than on the international law, with its headquarters not being located in the most prosperous and world-famous port-city (New York) but on the native land of prophet Noah (or Nuh /peace be upon him/ in accordance with the Koran) which in the Chechen language sounds like Nohchi-Latta-Islam (the "Islamic land of the descendants of Nuh" or "Nuhit land of Islam, which is one and the same), which is the starting-point for the whole of mankind and which is in the Centre of the World, i.e. the most ascetic village of all the mountain villages in the Caucasus (Nozhay Yurt). Maybe, to-day's conference is the first step towards the realization of that saving and pleasing-to-God idea. All that has been said above allows me to propose the draft of a peace treaty the participants of the conference may get acquainted with.
Thank You for your attention.