As the fighting in Chechnya enters its sixth week, the diplomatic hypocrisy rings clear in the silence of western governments. They have said only what a shame there has been such bloodshed _ no condemnation of its cause no support for those who democratic aspirations are being fired upon. It is as if they regretted the ineptitude of the Russian conscripts and the tenacity of the Chechen resisters. Such an untidy inconvenience. What a pity it could not have been wrapped up in a couple of days and then put out of the world’s conscience as Russia merely dealing with an internal affair _ an internal affair, the diplomatic euphemism for turning a blind eye to repression of minorities and oppositions. What a bitter irony in the conduct of world affairs that western governments pretending to follow the great tradition of President Woodrow Wilson’s 14 points should so blindingly support President Boris Yeltsin in the name of supporting democracy. The Cold War is dead but it rules western diplomacy from its grave.
The Soviet police state so joyously disbanded has regrouped. Chechnya joins Timor, Tibet and Burma on the sell-out list. Democracy is fine as long as it is not inconvenient, as long as it does not upset the power plays. Both western governments and Boris Yeltsin are foolishly mistaken if they believe that the resistance can be defeated in a short time. The historic pattern is that people with common language and culture will not abandon their hopes for independence, nor will people endlessly tolerate repression by external or internal rulers. The sooner that is recognised and western governments pressure Mr Yeltsin into unconditional talks the better. Mr Yeltsin present policy of refusing to talk to the Chechen leader Dzhokhbar Dudayev is painfully short-sighted _ not only for the people of Chechnya and the Russian soldiers needlessly sacrificed in the fighting, but also for Mr Yeltsin himself. What does he hope to gain? Does he want power over the Chechen people?
The tenacity of resistance shows that the achievement and maintenance of that power comes at a heavy price. Does he want to ensure Russian maximises its economic strength by holding on to Chechnya? Surely, the ruins of Grozny tell him that Chechnya is now an economic liability not an asset. Does he want to save face? He has no face to save. The folly of his policy is recognised by the Russian people. There is only one sensible course _ the offer of unconditional talks with Mr Dudayev and the withdrawal of Russian troops. There is only one sensible course for western governments _ to press unequivocally upon Mr Yeltsin the necessity of this course. The present ineffectual hand-wringing is sickening.