Customer Reviews

Chienne de Guerre: A Woman Reporter Behind the Lines of the War in Chechnya

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Anne Nivat deserves praise for risking her life to report all sides of the Chechen war. Although its obvious her heart lies with the Chechen civilian population, Nivat goes the extra mile to report on the war from not only the Chechen civilian perspective but also the Chechen rebel and even Russian points of view.

I read this book a week before I visited Chechnya (a few weeks after September 11th). Before heading to Russia I had a hard time believing some of Anne's accounts were true. After spending 4 days in the region, I have no doubts that everything she describes in this book is true. You must pay a bribe to get across the Kavkaz checkpoint and the trading of both people and corpses is widespread. I spent only four days in the region with ARMED bodyguards 24/7 and I was still scared for my personal safety. I can't imagine living for 6 months the way Anne did to cover this war.

If you are interested in Chechnya..especially the little reported 2nd war...this book is a must read.

I've never been so compelled to keep reading a book that made me cry so hard. Anne Nivat describes in horrifyingly matter-of-fact detail the innumerable ways in which this "Russian internal conflict" has devastated ordinary Chechen people and their land.

The Western (especially the American) press too often picks up on the Russian military's frequently espoused view that all Chechens are potentially violent rebels, and that one can't be too careful in dealing with them, because each one of them is a potential combatant. Through her descriptions of the numerous people she meets in her journeys through Chechen villages and cities, Ms. Nivat manages to bring home the idea that the Chechens, no matter how Russian government propaganda or Russian public opinion may portray them, are human beings like all of us. Even if you believe that the Russian government has the right or the need to gain military or political control over Chechnya, it's hard to believe after reading this book that this goal should be accomplished at the expense of the lives of thousands of ordinary human beings and the destruction of their homeland.

It's amazing to think that this account of war correspondence could be true, but it is! It reads more like a thriller. Anne Nivat is 'the real thing' as far as journalists go - willing to defy Russian restrictions on the press and sneak into Chechnya many times in disguise and without credentials to get the true story. Over the course of this ongoing Muslim rebel conflict in the Caucuses mountains, she reported about both the Russian and Chechan sides, showing us how this alleged anti-terrorist operation is demolishing the lives and spirits of the citizens of Chechnya. She dodged bombs, terrorist kidnappers, and minefields to find rebels, mothers, soldiers, whoever could explain to the outside world what was really happening under the smokescreen of fictional Russian government press reports. Nivat's reporting has had a profound impact on European public opinion, and this memoir will have a profound impact on any reader who cares about doing whatever it takes to defy propaganda and get to the truth.

A very brave woman in a very sad place. This book will take you as close to that place as you'll want to be, and in the process burn through the foggy reporting so typical of the American media accounts of the war in Chechnya.

This is another of those works whose content takes on new significance after Sept. 11, 2001. Prior to those events, Western public opinion of Moscow's handling of Chechnya was overwhelmingly critical. The Chechen conflict was usually described as a "dirty war". In order to garner international sympathy for the plight of Chechen civilians caught between Islamist extremists and Russian Federal forces, Ms. Nivat clandestinely infiltrated the battlezone. She risked arrest by the Russians, kidnap and torture by the rebels, and death in the crossfire as she conducted her interviews with the populace. Any humane reader will grieve for the suffering of the innocents. But like many antiwar treatices, "Chienne de Guerre" wears its heart on its sleeve and conveniently neglects to tell the whole story: After having won de-facto autonomy, Chechnya rapidly became a region of abysmal poverty and lawlessness. Its leadership, divided by power-struggles between warlords and religious extremists, descended into anarchy. In a close parallel with Afghanistan, Wahhabists gained control. Eventually, these "rebels" began making incursions into neighboring Russian republics. Rebel-occupied Daghestan appealed to Moscow for assistance. Daghestanis, although Muslim, vehemently reject the Wahhabi sect of Chechen Islamists. After Russian Federal troops had freed one Daghestani town, its residents held a meeting to determine the fate of the Wahhabi mosque the Chechens had erected there. The mayor favored razing it, but several townsmen suggested converting it into a strip-club -- "since that would disgrace it more". This anecdote demonstrates the depth of Daghestani hatred. It was the Chechen invasion of Daghestan, followed by a series of terrorist bombings in Moscow, which provoked the second armed response. Like their Taliban counterparts, Chechen Wahhabist rebels have been unaverse to using noncombatants as human shields, and callously exploit civilian casualties for propaganda. This willingness to sacrifice innocent lives did not endear the rebels to the populace whose "cause" they were ostensibly defending. Enter the naively pro-Chechen Anne Nivat. Even she distrusted the motives of the rebels, although at the time their alliance with al-Qaeda was still generally unknown. Since 9-11, Chechen complicity in international terrorism has been widely exposed, and all pretense on the part of rebel mujahedin abandoned. Chechen websites today proudly boast allegiance to bin Laden, post videotaped torture and executions, and make threats against Russian, American, and Israeli targets. Mujahedin leaders defiantly reject any political or diplomatic reconciliation: the only solution they advocate is jihad. Violent terrorist acts, such as the bombing of a Daghestani Veterans Day parade and the raid on a Moscow theater have become increasingly commonplace. Likewise, Chechen-run terrorist training camps and Chechen/al-Qaeda terrorist plots have been uncovered in France, Pakestan, and Afghanistan. Foreign-born Wahhabists now openly direct the Chechen rebel leadership. Talib influence was unmistakable during the Moscow theater siege, in which numerous burka-clad, explosives-wired female terrorists, the so-called "Black Widows", participated. Under Wahhabism, the only way for women to obtain Paradise (and possibly reunite with fallen husbands) is by martyrdom in jihad. President Bush no longer criticizes Putin's handling of Chechnya, but supports the Russian War on Terrorism. The US military, on the other hand, has never criticized. For several years, the American military has closely observed the fighting in Grozniy, and has been practicing urban warfare in deserted bases throughout California. Our military has acknowledged that similar US urban action could result in the same discouraging casualty rate experienced by the Russians -- and with a similar, unavoidable civilian toll. The relevance, post-911, of "Chienne de Guerre" is its documentation of that enormous human tragedy. But, as was the case of Afghanistan and al-Qaeda, Chechen civilians are suspected of supporting terrorists. (Albeit, as Nivat writes, often reluctantly.) So much so, though, that Chechens -- unlike Albanian, Somali, and other Muslim victims of aggression -- have not been permitted refugee status in the West. In closing, I would say this book is probably the best and least biased on the subject. But a mere year has provided new light and different perceptions on this "dirty war".

With her powerful description of life on the frontlines and the backroads and rooms of Chechnya, Anne Nivat helps put a voice to this incredible conflict. Having worked in the Caucasus with Chechen refugees, I know her accounts to be real. My only complaint is that she tries to focus on too much and ends up glossing over some of the more interesting and horrifying aspects of the conflict. I remember standing by the office door and actually counting the Chechen staff on Monday mornings after their weekend journeys home...Anne Nivat's book reminds me why. Courage and the will to survive seem to be common traits in the Caucasus and it is a most humbling experience to read this book in the comfort of my home back in the US.

It is helpful, painful and beautiful to read more than a "soundbite" about an awful, complicated and very real conflict. In a time when we simplify everything to deal with volume and complexity, Anne Nivat digs a little deeper. She gives us a messy, human tragedy.

Ragged at times, really reading like a journal, Nivat's on-the-ground views and emotions of a country at war remind those of us snug in our homes that the world continues to rage and at a very dear price.

I was randomly searching when I hit C-Span a few weekends ago. "Book TV" was cycling through, as usual, and I lucked upon video of Anne Nivat. I may not have kept watching, but I heard the word "Chechnya." This made me pause and try to catch up with what she was saying. I'm currently in a politics mode. This issue is one of the ones that any political being on this planet now needs to be interested in. We're talking about the first civil war in a fully nuclearized country. Although the Russians go for the minimal truth spreading and merely assert that they're engaging some terrorists. But, in the postconscious tradition, their engagement is of a quite detached variety. They mostly bomb population centers. Their bombs have no problem killing innocents, while the innocent victims have large problems getting acceptable medical help. What if the normal people want to leave and seek peace elsewhere? The Russians at one point decide to not let anyone else leave, after a large amount of refugees escape to miserable conditions in neighboring country. And the people in the parts of Chechnya that Russians have "liberated" discover the Russian whimsy may be to just continue bombing them. Why is this happening? Independence? Money? Religion? No one knows for sure, and as Anne said on TV, It's a lot easier to start a war than it is to stop one. A linked book is Franklin's _Vietnam and Other American Fantasies_. The issues are a bit more complex than the "consensus trance" leads us to beleive. Where is this world going? I don't know about you, but I'm going to die. Due to white middle-class male luck, my life before death will probably be better than the norm for humanity these days. Although I smoked pot for five years, without knowing it has many of the same carcinogens as tobacco. I may have killed myself. I'm not happy about it. Anne Nivat came close to death, and took her chances to visit hell and tell us about it.

In the spring of 1999 the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia over Kosovo changed the global political landscape in some unintended ways. The world most powerful military alliance went to war, throwing all its might, as an ally of a fairly ordinary guerilla insurgency, not much different from dozens of other separatist movements in various parts of the globe. This was not, of course, the first time a tinpot rebel group was used in a power play in bigger political games. The unusual part was little evidence of any truly strategic interests in that adventure, as opposed to purely opportunistic reasons, such as to demonstrate NATO usefulness in the eve of its 50-th anniversary celebration in April 99, or for Clinton to exorcize ghosts of his humiliation after impeachment over Monica affair. This immediately gave boost to various militant separatists all over the world. In May 99 Pakistan-supported Kashmere rebels launched their biggest offensive in decades against India in Carghil region; East Timor went in flames that summer, with large loss of life and hundreds thousands people uprooted from their homes; from Sri Lanka to Columbia all kinds of militants increased their activity. Ironically, Turkey, itself a participant of NATO operation in Kosovo allegedly to protect ethnic minority, in the spring of 1999 carried the most intensive attacks in years against Kurdish guerillas, with frequent incursions into northern Iraq, where Kurds were supposedly protected from Saddam army by international forces. Another place, where the war in Kosovo coincided with upsurge of violence and separatism, was Chechnya. After Russian withdrawal in September 1996, Chechnya, while relieved of large-scale fighting, quickly descended into lawlessness, hotbed of the most radical Islamic extremism and bloody turf war between local warlords. It largely disappeared from western media radars, except for occasional reports of yet another gruesome murder of some missionary or aid workers (of which the killings of six Red Cross employees and kidnapping and beheading of four British telecommunication engineers are the most known examples). Early 1999 saw rapid increase in incursions of bands from Chechnya into neighboring regions, mainly Daghestan and Stavropol. Some of it was just petty crime, such as stealing of a few cows from surrounding villages by Chechen peasants whose economy collapsed since independence. But others were much more aggressive raids to stoke further separatism and inflame the war in the neighboring Muslim communities of other ethnic groups. Finally, in August 1999 Chechen warlords launched a full-scale invasion of several thousand rebels into mountainous areas of Daghestan, which precipitated Russian response and the second Chechen war. Since 1996 Chechnya wasn't a good place for journalists. During the 1994-96 war Chechen rebel government understood very well the role of propaganda and media coverage, and spend a great deal of efforts on courting both Russian and western reporters. After the war, as near-anarchy set in, journalists became expendable. Many of them that ventured there after the August 96 were kidnapped for ransom, including those that provided very sympathetic coverage to separatist cause during the war. For example, Elena Masyuk of Russian NTV channel, who invariably painted a romantic picture of warriors for independence during her 1994-96 war coverage, was herself kidnapped with her crew members in 1997 and held in horrible conditions by thugs who only laughed when she reminded how she supported their side during the war. Dozens of other journalists from Russia and western countries went through similar ordeal, several were murdered. Now, in the late 1999, as Russian troops moved quickly to repel two invasions into Daghestan and started bombing militant camps in Chechnya itself, situation changed again  with rebel forces suddenly in need of a few good propagandists. Or, at least, willing ones, as they found in A. Nivat. She arrived first in September 1999 into Daghestan in the areas of recent fighting, with explicitly stated purpose to refute the Russian government version of events. When she didnt find much to support her refutation, in particular that the invasion had very little popular support among local ethnic groups that Chechen bands claimed to liberate from Russian oppression, and that citizens there overwhelmingly favored strong military actions against rebel forces, A. Nivat simply dropped the subject completely, almost in mid-sentence. As Russian troops moved against militant strongholds in Chechnya itself, she entered Chechnya incognito, without official approval. This was courageous move, of course, which she should be given credit for, although she was probably in less danger than most other journalists before her in the previous few years, when kidnapping and even murder was a likely outcome. She was constantly protected by rebel soldiers and operatives. She avoided being in the middle of bombing or fighting, although was close enough to hear the explosions, or encounter wounded guerilla soldiers streaming from areas of recent fighting. There is no question that many civilians are suffering in this war, but still the author presents too one-sided view of the events. When she tries simply to describe facts, without ideological preconditions, they form somewhat different picture. For example, she often mentions the infamous cleansing operations in Chechen villages by Russian troops, invariably cited for terrible abuses. But the only time  mentioned almost as a slip of a tongue  when she actually came in contact with Russian special forces during one such cleansing, it didnt look anything like pillage and destruction. Russian soldiers were polite, didnt hurt anybody and their only looting was taking several videocassettes (leaving receipts for them) to check for the presence of rebel propaganda or evidence of their attacks, training or torture of prisoners. So much for indiscriminate brutality  the staple of reporting about such operations in the western media. This is the first book about the second Chechen war, and some weaknesses can be excused. Still, it all too often leaves out any inconvenient facts and does not have a minimum degree of objectivity and impartiality to be sufficiently credible.

Before there was "Operation Iraqi Freedom", there was the war in Chechnya. A war that the Russians try to disguise as an insurrection. A war that could easily have been avoided if Moscow had simply given Chechnya the sovereignty it sought in the early 1990s. Here in this book, Anne Nivat shows both the horrors and absurdities of the Chechnyan War.

Like the other reviewers, I commend Mlle. Nivat for her courage in going out on her own into Chechnya to get at the heart of the story. Anne Nivat is a gutsy woman. Her story is all the more remarkable and sobering given the efforts of Moscow to censure the news reportage from Chechnya. Being a fluent speaker of Russian also allowed Nivat to form personal bonds with many of the people she met. Thus, the reader gets a more intimate insight into the daily perils people face in Chechnya.