Articles and essays by Anna Politkovskaya of Novaya Gazeta could definitely be considered the most truthful and outstanding accounts of Chechnya's war among the rest of domestic journalism. Sometimes her narration is of a dairy nature, as if she happened to be in the long-suffering Chechen land perishing in fire and hunger in order to describe a village destroyed minutes ago as a result of bombing, to depict faces of locals and to convey their fast speech going with the wind. But in a wider context, Anna has never returned to her Moscow. It is always hard for her to complete another material - as if she says goodbye to a remote mountainous village and every individual villager forever. Anna is far from political rhetoric, which is common to today's journalists, and this strong feature is being intensified in the background of clear outlines of military madness she depicts. Politkovskaya skillfully conveys dialogues from both warring sides, and using their speech - always without distortions, she rightly weaves her North Caucasian carpet from collected testimonies. At war people do not talk about how it should have been, they are focused on the present day, which unfortunately ends not only in a prayer at sunset. Traditions are moved aside, Russian troops are engaged in looting, while two thirds of Chechens live in tent camps in Ingushetia and are unwilling to come back.

Anna Politkovskaya, interview with whom we offer to our readers, has managed to make a social snapshot of two Chechen wars, which resulted in a gallery of portraits - ranging from a brave Russian general to a Chechen resistance fighter, from Kadyrov's administrator to a Russian conscript, but more often - these are common residents of Chechen settlements, who have nothing to lose aside from their grief.

Question: Anna, in many of your articles you mention the mountainous village of Makhkety. It is known that you are going to visit it again shortly. What is the reason for that?

Answer: It happened absolutely accidentally, because in January-February this year letters from the settlement of Makhkety (Vedensky district) as well as other neighboring villages began to come to Moscow. These letters contained people's appeals. They asked for help to leave that district. That was quite unusual for Chechnya, even today, because people still stick to their houses, if not destroyed. And in Moscow - everywhere such letters came - at our editorial board, in the government, the Ministry for Emergency Situations, the State Duma - people paid attention to an unprecedented nature of such step. These were 90 families, who wanted to leave and asked for help. But unfortunately it later turned out that only I went to check the letters, though in the Duma and the government I was promised a company. That was how I happened to be in Makhkety. Before that I did not know a village with such name.

The information proved true - that was my job. I was to go further to Gudermes, as was agreed beforehand, to Chechnya's premier Ilyasov to tell him that everything was true and it was necessary to take people out of there. But unfortunately that did not happen, because in late February I did not manage to get to Gudermes.

The bulk of complaints were addressed to Russia's troops deployed at the outskirts of the settlements, and the military stopped me. I was not allowed to go to Gudermes, I was returned to the military base at Khankala by force to later be sent to Moscow. That was how I got to know residents of Makhkety, and naturally after February I tried to stay aware of their life, what was going on there. It is rather difficult, because there is no communication, phone lines almost do not work. In order to get some information it is necessary to meet in Shali - the center of a different district, or to invent something else. In general, I arranged such communication.

And unfortunately I began receiving information that the military's atrocities had turned more refined, many people, who had contacted me during my trip, suffered. Almost all those who could act as witnesses in criminal cases against servicemen - people started disappearing. Naturally, I had to write about Makhkety again, to attract attention to people's fate, i.e. to start from scratch.

Then Makhkety's school was heavily destroyed, and people appealed - please, help us with textbooks, books. Realizing we could do nothing, the editorial board announced such action, at least books - a bridge of trust. Now we have collected the books and need to transfer them. There is a strong opposition from the military, and a great "under-carpet" job is ahead to make it a reality.

Question: So, one could say that Makhkety's residents know you very well?

Answer: You know, that is a rather large settlement. And neighboring villages - several thousands people live there - and I cannot say that all of them know me very well, but at least I met many people.

Question: I would like to refer to your article [published recently by Novaya Gazeta] about what is going on in Chechen mountains, and in this respect I would like to ask you: why Russian mass media are so unanimous in distorting events in Chechnya? What has happened to our colleagues-journalists?

Answer: I cannot answer for all journalists. I know that this war is tough in terms of its coverage - when you might write only about what you see with your own eyes, basically it is a system of travel notes, because lie has reached such a level when everyone are lying from all sides. Many journalists have chosen another way. They trust information provided by the military and press centers working in Chechnya and they never meet civilians. Or such meetings take place in the present of servicemen and journalists are in an unreasonably delicate condition. As we know, not a single Chechen is going to speak openly when there are troops nearby. And there are many reasons for that. That is excluded.

Question: Don't you think that it has nothing to deal with journalism? The same as during the Stalin era Soviet writers praised Belomorkanal. Now they glorify Russia's arms might - but, awkwardly.

Answer: Such parallel could be drawn, but I believe that a collapse of such journalism scheme is not far ahead. You see, history of every war is being rewritten. Something similar would happen to this war. And the truth would inevitably come out, I have no doubt of it. And at that time I would not be ashamed. Whereas dozens our colleagues, I think, would be ashamed.

Question: Were there attempts to make you a part of the choir of obedient journalists?

Answer: Such attempts have never ceased. During trips someone always follows you and makes such attempts. And very often you have to spend enough of trip time - which is very precious! - in order to get rid of it. But I think that readers should not bother about which methods you use to get to information. What is really important for readers is information, nothing else, not tears you shed to collect it. To my mind, people should understand that most of travel time in Chechnya is being spent on overcoming obstacles on the way to information. If my colleagues are lazy and do not want to overcome them - that's their problem, not mine.

Question: So, could you tell us how you prove this or that information? How many sources do you use - two? three? There should be a source in federal troops, among locals, where else?

Answer: As much proofs as I can get - the more, the better. Let's suppose there is information about the situation in the Oktyabrsky district department of interior of Grozny - the department is known as a place where people simply disappear - one could reasonably assume that people are being killed there. This is one of the most tragic stories in Chechnya today. What am I to do? To collect information from relatives, go right to this district department and try to do something about it. I have identification papers, I have accreditation, which allows me to go into this modern "Bermuda triangle," and it is absolutely necessary. Do my best to establish some contacts there - it is not a pleasant time spending - and check information there. Check it through top officials of Chechnya's Ministry of Interior - you could not do without it. Through Kalamanov, the president's special representative, Chechen prosecutor's office - one has to go through these structures. I have narrated a concrete story, which I had to check this time. Naturally, all sources must be used.

Question: Anna, how do you manage to get on with federals, to be on good terms with rebels and always be on the edge of events?

Answer: Well, people just know that I am not interested in good relations with anyone. I am not interested in maintaining good relations with either of the sides. I am interested in information. Here I am - its servant. I have to get it, and I am not interested in what someone might think about it. And since I have been working for a long time - since the beginning of the war - all have become accustomed to me, to my way of working, that it would be better not to stop me, because I would definitely make lots of noise.

Question: And colleagues journalists, who have not lost conscience yet, if anything happens to you as in February, or two years ago to Andrei Babitsky, Radio Liberty's correspondent, I think that journalists would not let you offended. But now I would like to ask you what is your stance towards negotiations with Maskhadov. Over the last few months there were rumors that such talks are being secretly prepared, or even are being conducted. Quite recently Maskhadov claimed such negotiations are underway, a week ago his representatives met the State Duma members in Switzerland to discuss the topic. What is your vision - would talks with Maskhadov take place before the end of the year?

Answer: I believe the talks are absolutely necessary, because the elected president, and even those Chechens, who dislike him and do not want him to rule any longer - there are many such people in Chechnya - they all say that such negotiations are absolutely necessary in line with mentality of the Chechen people.

Question: What terms would you suggest?

Answer: I think that the events in Alleroy, i.e. harsh "mopping up operations" prove that it might happen in the near future. I think so. Because there are many denials of refusing to start talks. I believe that something must happen now.

Question: Anna, what strikes you most in the Chechen slaughter? The question is somehow cannibalistic, but sorry, the topic we have is not very pleasant. Which aspect of the war?

Answer: Undoubtedly, attitude towards people strikes me. From the side of servicemen. This permanent hatred is always in place. This is what strikes me. In principle. The military treat them as de-humans. Time passes, war months, but it all the same - if you come up to servicemen and ask them why they act like this, they say Chechens are not humans, and different insults might follow. And such attitude towards non-humans, people of a lower sort, this knocks me down. Although it has been lasting for a long time.

Question: And the last thing: the war in Chechnya was unleashed - here we could guess - either by oligarchs, or Yeltsin's entourage, and now Putin and his people have to solve the problem. And he says there is nothing to talk about with Maskhadov, and Yastrzhembsky explains - only the prosecutor can talk to him. But do you think that Russia's society is split because of the war? Because the Kremlin launched this war, and does not know how to end it. Could we talk about power palsy, what do you think?

Answer: First, Russia's society is not split because of the war, and this is the tragedy of the war. The Russian society accepts it, and only a tiny handful think it should be stopped. Today there are many talks in Moscow that the authorities are unable to stop the war, and about three months ago I thought it was true. I thought: "Well, they are unhappy. It is necessary to help them, to make something special, to nudge them." But I believe it was a common KGB-made rumor, that the authorities do not know everything. If they wanted, some steps would have been made.

The authorities do not want to stop the war. Why - is another question. Which scenario would be used? To keep it going until the next presidential election? Most probably. Also many in the army are interested in Chechen oil. And even servicemen at block-posts could improve their financial status daily. The whole mechanism benefits from it. Yes, new authorities came to Chechnya. Executive authorities. Too many officials appear. And every official wants something from the common trough - "money for reconstruction," i.e. such benefits are being created before our eyes. And it is difficult to talk about something in such situation.

If the authorities wanted, Grozny wouldn't have been Grozny of today. Ruins remain ruins. There is no progress in the reconstruction process. I think that they expect local fighting in the city and do not invest money into it. And such local fighting would promote continuation of the war. It is necessary to prove that the war must be continued. I think that this is what is going on right now.

Source : www.ichkeria.org