ISSN 2330-717X

Ingush Opponents of Border Accord Denounce Russian Court Ruling As ‘Political’, Promise To Continue Protests – OpEd

By

Despite the decision by the Russian Constitutional Court, the subsequent veto by the Ingush Electoral Commission on a referendum, and appeals by republic officials to come to terms with the September 26 Ingush-Chechen border accord, Ingush opponents say they will continue to protest and now plan to appeal to international courts.

Ruslan Mutsolgov, one of the protests, says that the Russian court’s decision “was taken in favor of bureaucrats and destroys the federal structure of the country … As a result of this decision, all regions of the country, including Kabardino-Balkaria, Adygeya, Stavropol and Daghestan may suffer” (kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/328813/).

He says that opponents of the border accord will make use of “all legal means” to have it reversed. “We reserve the right to hold meetings and to appeal to international institutions.” His argument is supported by Zakri Mamilov, a deputy of the Ingush legislature, who adds that that body will support a referendum on the accord as required by the Constitution.

And the Ingush deputy continues with the observation that “the impression has been created that [the powers that be] view Ingushetia as a second-class region. I personally am feeling a deep spiritual disappointment.” His feelings almost certainly are shared by many Ingush who live in one of the smallest federal subjects which is now to become even smaller.

Three other developments over the last 24 hours related to the Ingush-Chechen border dispute include:

Yunus-Bek Kadyrov and Ramzan Kadyrov say that the decision of the Russian Constitutional Court puts an end to the argument about the border accord. They add that they will work together to develop the frontier area between them (kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/328816/).

Ever more commentators are suggesting that now that he had won in Ingushetia, Chechnya’s Kadyrov will seek to annex territory in Daghestan as well (caucasustimes.com/ru/kavkaz-gotovjat-k-ukrupneniju/ and themoscowtimes.com/articles/ramzan-kadyrovs-next-target-op-ed-63745).

Russian historian Daniil Kotsyubinsky says that the differing legal theories advanced by the Russian Constitutional Court and by the Ingush Constitutional Court are sufficiently compelling that the two sides will continue the fight in Ingushetia and that that fight is likely to cause the Kremlin ever more problems in the future (rosbalt.ru/posts/2018/12/07/1751732.html).


Enjoy the article? Then please consider donating today to ensure that Eurasia Review can continue to be able to provide similar content.


Paul Goble

Paul Goble

Paul Goble is a longtime specialist on ethnic and religious questions in Eurasia. Most recently, he was director of research and publications at the Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy. Earlier, he served as vice dean for the social sciences and humanities at Audentes University in Tallinn and a senior research associate at the EuroCollege of the University of Tartu in Estonia. He has served in various capacities in the U.S. State Department, the Central Intelligence Agency and the International Broadcasting Bureau as well as at the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Mr. Goble maintains the Window on Eurasia blog and can be contacted directly at [email protected] .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

CLOSE
CLOSE