REPCO

Chechnya, under the tight control of Ramzan Kadyrov, operates as a fully authoritarian regime deeply intertwined with the Kremlin. While Chechnya might seem like a localized issue, its future is intricately tied to the broader political landscape of Russia and its relations with Europe. In the context of international sanctions, military actions in Ukraine, and Russia's growing isolation on the world stage, the stability or instability of Chechnya is becoming an important indicator of the vulnerability of the Russian Federation. This could of course have possible consequences for the security of Europe and global geopolitics.

 

The publication Russia 2030 Futures: The View from Central and Eastern Europe highlights Chechnya’s central role in shaping Russia’s domestic and foreign policies. This report emphasizes the fragility of Kadyrov’s regime, which is built on personal ties to President Vladimir Putin. This has allowed Kadyrov to consolidate power by fostering a new Chechen identity centred on nationalism, religious authority, and personal loyalty to him. Yet, Kadyrov’s potential death or political upheaval could destabilize this balance, forcing Chechnya to renegotiate its relationship with the Kremlin. This could have far-reaching consequences for the stability of the region and Russia’s control over the North Caucasus. Such a scenario would inevitably ripple across Europe, particularly regarding security and migration policy.

 

1.  The fragility of the Kadyrov-Putin alliance and its impact on Russia

Chechnya’s authoritarian regime depends heavily on the personal bond between Kadyrov and Putin. This unique relationship has kept Chechnya stable in recent years, with Kadyrov ensuring the suppression of internal opposition and Putin providing financial and political support in return for Kadyrov’s loyalty. However, any disruption in this relationship – whether due to political shifts, health crises, or even the death of one of the two leaders – could severely destabilize the region. The reliance on these personal ties makes the alliance fragile, raising questions about what will happen when Kadyrov or Putin can no longer maintain their roles. Recently, it has become increasingly clear that Kadyrov is aware of his health prospects and is therefore trying to promote his children and close relatives as much as possible. While Kadyrov has reasons to prepare his descendants to take over, it is unclear whether power will be successfully transferred to a Kadyrov Jr. At the same time, it is uncertain whether Kadyrov’s loyalists would accept this transition or attempt a coup.

 

Without the Kadyrov family in power, Chechnya’s leadership would need to renegotiate its relationship with the Kremlin, which may not be as favourable without the personal support of Putin. Kadyrov’s regime has managed to pacify much of the opposition both within Chechnya and in the Chechen diaspora, largely through repression and co-opting religious and nationalist narratives. This has allowed him to foster a new Chechen identity that is based on a blend of nationalism, religious authority, and personal loyalty. Kadyrov has subsequently positioned himself as both a political and spiritual leader. Yet, Kadyrov’s death or political exit could lead to a collapse of this carefully constructed identity, forcing a new leadership to rethink how to govern Chechnya and how to maintain relations with Moscow.

 

The broader implications of this for Russia are significant. Chechnya’s role within the Russian Federation is not just one of a semi-autonomous region; it is a symbol of Moscow’s ability to maintain control over the volatile North Caucasus. Should Chechnya’s leadership become destabilized or face internal challenges after Kadyrov’s departure, this could inspire other regions in the North Caucasus, and perhaps even beyond, to question their relationship with Moscow. This scenario poses a serious threat to Russia’s territorial integrity, as it would expose the underlying ethnic and nationalist tensions that have simmered beneath the surface since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

 

For Europe, instability in Chechnya would have direct consequences. A destabilized Chechnya could increase migration flows, especially among Chechen refugees fleeing potential conflict. It could also

 

lead to a rise in radicalization within the Chechen diaspora in Europe, as these communities may become more isolated and disillusioned by the events unfolding in their homeland.

 

2.  The risk of ethno-nationalist resurgence and historical trauma

Kadyrov’s death or political decline could reignite ethno-nationalist sentiments and revive unresolved historical traumas that have shaped Chechen identity for generations. The deportation of Chechens under Stalin in the 1940s, followed by the two brutal wars in the 1990s and early 2000s, left deep scars on the collective Chechen consciousness. Kadyrov has instrumentalized these events to consolidate his regime, as he has positioned himself as the leader who “healed” Chechnya following traumatic events.

 

Kadyrov’s blending of nationalism, religion and personal loyalty has created a new Chechen identity, one that contrasts Chechens with “others”, including both Russians and non-Chechen Muslims. This identity framework has been instrumental in maintaining stability, as it has fostered a sense of unity among Chechens under Kadyrov’s leadership. However, it has also laid the groundwork for future ideological conflicts. Should Kadyrov’s regime collapse or face significant challenges, unresolved traumas could potentially resurface, leading to the rise of ethno-nationalist or Islamist movements that could further destabilize not only Chechnya but the entire North Caucasus. While there is a precedent for instability in other North Caucasian republics, such as Dagestan, the extent to which these movements are prepared to take action remains uncertain. In this scenario, Chechnya’s internal fragmentation could lead to renewed calls for independence, a goal that has long been suppressed under Kadyrov’s rule. While the likelihood of full independence may be low due to Moscow’s strong military presence in the region, the push for greater autonomy or even secessionist movements could gain momentum, particularly if the Russian state weakens further due to its ongoing conflicts, including the war in Ukraine.

 

For Russia, this would represent a significant challenge to its internal stability, as it would be forced to contend with multiple nationalist movements across the North Caucasus. Historical precedents, such as the Chechen Wars and the insurgencies in Dagestan, demonstrate the difficulty of swiftly suppressing such movements, which often draw upon deeply rooted ethnic and religious identities, local knowledge of the terrain, and external support networks. Nationalist movements in these regions have historically utilized guerrilla tactics, making them harder to repress than more centralized opposition.

 

For Europe, the implications of this are clear. A destabilized North Caucasus could lead to increased security threats both in terms of terrorism and migration. The rise of nationalist movements could also exacerbate existing tensions between ethnic minorities and the Russian state, leading to further violence and instability. European nations, particularly those with large Chechen and other North Caucasian diasporas, would need to prepare for the potential fallout from such a scenario, including an influx of refugees and the risk of radicalization within diaspora communities.

 

3.  The role of the Chechen diaspora and European security

The role of the Chechen diaspora in Europe is a critical aspect of the broader security discussion. With tens of thousands of Chechens now residing abroad, especially in Western European countries such as Germany, France and Austria, their integration and potential for radicalization have become pressing issues. As previous conflicts have shown, the Chechen diaspora has at times played a role in extremist activities, and the lack of effective integration strategies can exacerbate social tensions. Moreover, as highlighted in recent scenario analyses, the diaspora could become a focal point for both radical movements and geopolitical manoeuvring, making it a key element in European security discussions. This makes it crucial for European governments to address these challenges proactively, with an understanding of the diaspora’s unique characteristics and vulnerabilities. The Chechen diaspora in Europe presents both an opportunity and a challenge for European security. On the one hand, the diaspora includes some well-integrated individuals who have contributed positively to European society. While mainly Chechen communities remain isolated and

 

fragmented, struggling with issues of identity and integration, it has been largely argued that Chechens are reluctant to contact the police or cooperate with the system of even democratically developed states. Instead, they prefer to concentrate on their communities.

 

On the other hand, European institutions have often categorized Chechens under the broader “Russian” migration label, failing to recognize their unique cultural and political needs. This lack of targeted engagement has left many Chechen communities feeling marginalized and disconnected from broader European society. This lack of a coherent strategy for engaging with Chechen refugees and migrants could result in serious security risks. Isolated and marginalized communities are more likely to become radicalized, especially if they feel that their cultural and religious identity is under threat.

 

For the European Union, addressing these challenges will require a more nuanced approach to migration and integration policies. European governments need to develop targeted programmes that address the specific needs of the Chechen diaspora, including education, employment and cultural engagement. By creating conditions for inclusion and social integration, Europe can reduce the risk of radicalization, ensuring that Chechen communities contribute to society rather than pose a security threat. At the same time, Europe should also consider how to deal with those who do not share the EU’s values and will not become members of European societies. In other words, European institutions should prevent the transformation of Chechen communities in the EU into marginalized, conservative enclaves ("auls"), which resist integration. This would only perpetuate romanticized images of Chechen identity, isolating their culture from outsiders and limiting the identity choices of their members.

4.  The dangers of European inaction

Despite the growing instability in Russia and the potential risks posed by Chechnya’s future, the European Union has largely focused its efforts on selective human rights issues, such as LGBTQ+ rights, while ignoring the broader regional implications. While these efforts are important, they often alienate both local populations and the Chechen diaspora, who may feel that their more pressing concerns – such as security, cultural identity and religious freedom – are being overlooked.

 

The absence of a broader regional strategy for the North Caucasus leaves Europe unprepared for the potential fallout from Kadyrov’s departure or the broader destabilization of the region. As noted in Russia 2030 Futures, Chechnya’s instability could easily spill over into neighbouring regions and Europe itself, exacerbating migration challenges and security risks. In particular, the rise of nationalist movements and the potential for renewed violence in the North Caucasus could lead to an influx of refugees into Europe, further straining already overburdened asylum systems. Nationalism has historically been a key driver of mobilization in the region, as many ethnic groups seek to assert their distinct identities and autonomy in the face of perceived Russian oppression. Ethno-nationalist narratives remain potent due to historical grievances, territorial disputes, and the complex relationship between local identities and the Russian state.

 

To mitigate these risks, the European Union needs to adopt a proactive stance in addressing both the internal dynamics of Chechnya and the broader geopolitical implications of Russia’s potential fragmentation. This will require a multifaceted approach that includes diplomatic engagement, targeted economic assistance, and a comprehensive strategy for integrating Chechen refugees and migrants into European society. Moreover, Europe must rethink its intervention in the affairs of the North Caucasus, as there is an informal understanding regarding the term “Europe” on the part of the region's inhabitants. Even in regions where the European Union does not have an official presence, its core values – such as democracy, human rights and the rule of law – are often adopted or admired by local populations. However, this cultural

 

influence has largely been overlooked by European institutions, which tend to focus on more direct forms of engagement.

 

Why Chechnya matters now

The situation in Chechnya is not just a local issue; it plays a critical role in the broader question of Russia’s internal cohesion and its relations with Europe. Chechnya’s future carries particular significance for several reasons. Historically, the Chechen Wars of the 1990s illustrated how instability in one region can quickly escalate into a wider conflict that threatens Russia’s territorial integrity. Such instability could also lead to ethnic fragmentation, potentially inspiring other regions with strong identities, like Tatarstan or Bashkortostan, to seek greater autonomy, further weakening the unity of the Russian Federation. Additionally, renewed violence in Chechnya could trigger another wave of refugees, as was seen in previous conflicts, placing even more pressure on Europe’s already overburdened asylum systems. Finally, the risk of radicalization remains a serious concern. Europe has already faced issues of radicalization within segments of the Chechen diaspora, and any renewed conflict could intensify this problem, heightening security risks across the continent.

 

The European Union, in particular, must recognize the importance of Chechnya (and the broader North Caucasus) in the evolving geopolitical landscape. The current EU strategy concerning Russia, last updated in 2021, is already out of date due to recent developments, including the war in Ukraine and internal challenges within Russia. Without a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the internal dynamics in Chechnya and the broader geopolitical context, Europe risks being unprepared for the potential fallout from Kadyrov’s eventual departure.

 

Therefore, Chechnya’s future is highly relevant to current discussions on Russia’s stability and its impact on Europe. The European Union needs to take a proactive stance in developing strategies to address the challenges posed by the internal situation in Chechnya and its possible impact on European society. By recognizing the importance of Chechnya in the broader context of Russia’s geopolitical future, the EU can help mitigate the risks of regional instability and ensure greater security and stability both within its borders and in its relations with Russia.

Evgeny Romanovsky holds an MA in Political Science from the University of Vienna and is currently a PhD student at Charles University in Prague. He is also affiliated with both Queen's University Belfast and CEU. His current task within his IFR (Ideas for Russia) research internship is to analyze one of the key scenarios of the “Russia 2030 Futures” project under the guidance of Pavel Havlicek from AMO, Faculty of Social Science of Charles University, and the Boris Nemtsov Foundation. His research interests include ethnic conflict, border and visual studies, nationalism, and Europeanization. He is the author of several academic articles with experience working for several think tanks and media agencies both in Russia and Europe.