August 29, 2004
HO HUM
Russians Find Explosives on 2nd Plane (Steven Lee Myers, New York Times, August 29th, 2004)
Investigators found traces of explosives on the second of two passenger airliners that crashed simultaneously in Russia, security officials announced Saturday, confirming that they consider the twin air disasters to be terrorist acts.Facing a menacing turn in Russia's fight against terrorism and eager to calm travelers, the officials announced that they would increase security at the country's airports. The new measures included having Interior Ministry officers screen passengers, starting immediately, and installing sensors able to detect the presence of explosives.[...]
Investigators have reportedly focused attention on two passengers - both women, apparently from Chechnya - who bought tickets for the flights shortly before departure. Izvestia reported that one of the women, who registered for Flight 1303 as Amanta Nagayeva, 27, was born in the Chechen village of Kirov-Urt.
The newspaper quoted the village's administrator, Dogman Akhmadova, as saying that one of Ms. Nagayeva's three brothers had been seized by Russian forces three or four years ago and never seen again.
It is now five days since Russia’s worst airline terrorist incident. There appears to have been no statement from Putin or other leaders, no national call to arms and no marshaling of any public resolve to confront and destroy those responsible. Imagine this happening in the States with the only response from Washington being a promise to beef up airport security.
The left likes to argue that defter, more respectful diplomacy would bring more of the world on board in the war on terror. This misplaced argument assumes the horror, anger and resolve Americans felt ethically and spiritually in the wake of 9/11 would be shared by other countries if it happened to them. It wouldn’t. The Russians, Chinese and even the French see terrorism as an inevitable fact of political life to be managed and checked strategically rather than an abomination to be eradicated.
The American “zero tolerance” attitude is basically shared only by those in the Anglosphere, and by no means all of them. Most of the rest of the world will fight terrorism if they perceive it to be in their short term material national interests, and they wrongly assume Americans do the same. If ducking or quitting rather than fighting seems safer for the moment, they will duck or quit.
On the other hand, when they do move, they don’t get sidetracked by Abu Ghraib type scandals or let their courts give the terrorists a helping hand.
Posted by Peter Burnet at August 29, 2004 9:21 AMNote also that in those same countries you list, mass rallies and protests and riots are considered legimate political activity, while here, as we will see in the streets of New York this week, they are at best an entertaining side show, but otherwise irrelevant, or even discrediting a cause. I would content the two are related.
We knew this would be the case -- now let's be sure to interpret it properly.
It is now five days since Russias worst airline terrorist incident. There appears to have been no statement from Putin or other leaders, no national call to arms and no marshaling of any public resolve to confront and destroy those responsible.
Maybe because Russia is already confronting and destroying those responsible.
They are at war in Chechnya.
Also, although it may be Russia's worst airline terror incident, it occured during a war, was traced back to those with whom Russia is warring, and only killed five score people.
America was shocked because it occurred during peacetime, killed thousands, and destroyed or damaged some of America's largest and most famous buildings, landmarks.
If 9/11 had involved two crashed airliners and 100 dead, would we have reacted so strongly ?
A promise to strengthen air security may indeed have been all it would have taken to resolve the issue, at least publicly.
Further, the Oklahoma City bombing was worse than Russia's air disaster, and nothing was done nationwide to prevent future occurences.
It was just treated as a spectacular criminal event.
The reason we didn't have a nuclear war with Russia is because the bombs would have blown up the the USSR's masters along with it's slaves.
I suspect part of the reason the Kremlin is so chilled about domestic terrorism is that the muslim terrorists have little chance of getting through the security and killing someone who's life actually matters.
Posted by: Amos at August 29, 2004 7:49 PMAnd as it turned out, Oklahoma City was a isolated event, and not part of any campaign. It also fit the standard template for such terrorism, in that the perpetrators did nothing new or unusual, unlike 11 September.
If there had been an escalation in bombings over the following few months or years in places like Great Falls, Raleigh, Sacramento or South Bend, (in other words, in out of the way places that don't matter to the elites) and we continued to treat them as criminal matters, then there'd reason to criticize the response.
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at August 29, 2004 9:35 PMOJ: What do you want Putin to do? Flatten Grozny?
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at August 30, 2004 2:10 AM