[>BKA< T Wrecks]

Well, I'm still not convinced that oil is the real reason behind the Chechnya crisis and behind the war on Iraq, although it is certainly a factor that favoured those wars. All the money that went into building those pipelines through Chechnya... what's that compared to the money that went into building those pipelines that deliver oil and gas from the farthest regions of Siberia towards the west? Not much, I would guess, especially because pipelines through permafrost territories like the Siberian Taiga are more difficult to maintain and to repair.
Besides, I haven't heard of a single terrorist attack in Chechnya that was aimed at oil pipelines or refineries. AFAIK, they were all against Russian policemen and soldiers - and civilians.
I've read that Russia had a contract with Chechnya that permitted the Chechens to use 120,000 metric tons of oil per year for their own purpose as a recompensation for the strategically and economically important pipeline. Given the enormous losses of oil and gas in Siberia due to run-down facilities and frequently damaged pipelines, I would guess that those 120,000 tons weren't something that threatened to break the neck of Russian economy.
IMHO, a much more important role in this game is played by the separatist tendencies of many former USSR provinces in central asia. If Putin permits Chechnya to leave Russia and become an independent state, many more ethnic groups that were once forced to become parts of the USSR would see their chance to break free and follow Chechnya's example. I still think this game is about power and control, and only marginally about oil.
And any claims saying that Chechnya would drift off into anarchy (or worse, into a fundamentalist Islamic state that breeds terror) without Russian troops providing some "order" (yeah, right) are quite hypocritical IMHO. At the moment, they may even be true, that's the saddest part. But why is that? Did the Russian intervention focus on pro-Russian economic interests and leave civilians in peace? Did Putin ever leave room for a moderate Chechen leader to take matters into his hands, negotiate with the Russians and keep the rebels under control? Not that I know of. If they had taken care of the civilians, built schools and protected civilians instead of torturing them for nothing, killing them for dubious reasons or abducting and violating them, things might look different. Unfortunately, however, they did the opposite. And now, even another lie may become true... It's nothing unusual for government leaders to blame those groups that they are fighting anyway (with or without reasons) for anything that happens in order to cover up what's really going on and get the support of the population:
Bush did so when he made Saddam Hussein responsible for 9/11 (which was obvious nonsense, as Hussein led a regime that was quite hostile towards religion and Al-Qaeda is a network of religious fundamentalists). But Bush and his cronies are buried waist-deep in unpleasant relationships with the Bin Laden clan, so admitting that this very Osama Bin Laden they had supported before was the initiator of the terrorist attacks would have made them look very, very bad... a scapegoat was needed, and while I'm typing this, people in Iraq are dying as a consequence. (Of course, Hussein, who had also been supported by the US to provide a counterpart against Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran in the 80's (who came to power by leading a revolution that overthrew the corrupt government that had been installed by, you guess whom - the USA!) had given the USA other reasons to have a bone to pick with him...)
Aznar, Spain's ex-president (I like the "ex" part particularly) did so when he blamed those horrible train bombings in Madrid on ETA terrorists before even one piece of evidence was found. Why did he do so? Because he readily joined Bush in his "holy war" against Hussein, although of all European countries, Spain was the one where people were most definitely against the war (some 85 - 90 %, according to official numbers). But he gave a shit about his people's will (as usual) in order to look good as a strong ally of the USA (at the same time also giving a shit about what became known under the term "old Europe" thanks to that idiot Rumsfeld) ). And what happened? The war came back to Spain - and he couldn't admit that the bombings had been committed by Islamic fundamentalists because then people would have realized that his arrogant denial of their will and his boot-licking attitude to the US killed - whom? Him? Ha, no! Of course, the very innocent civilians that wanted him to say no to the war on Iraq!
And now, Putin is interestingly eager to deny everything that has to do with Chechen rebels. In his official statements about Beslan, not even the word "Chechnya" appeared! Why not? Because he is pretending that things are going fine, and the Chechen people revolting against Russia is an image that doesn't fit into his propaganda scheme. So what to do? Easy. After the war on Iraq, government leader worldwide have almost unlimited freedom to do anything if only they can claim that it's a part of the "war against terrorism". Now if he manages to tell everybody that all of a sudden and for no apparent reason, Islamic terrorists have chosen to attack Russia, he will receive support for his politics. ATM, it looks like he's having success. "Terrorism" has become a slogan that seems to deactivate the brains of people. It's a diffuse and undefinable threat (diffuse and undefinable is ideal for politics!), and with the campaign against this threat, you can get support even from those that would normally be your political opponents.
But that's not all...
Before the war on Iraq, there was no connection between Hussein and Bin Laden. But now, the lie has become a truth. Now Iraq has become a macabre playground for Islamic fundamentalists, many of which are likely to support Al-Qaeda at least ideology-wise.
And I fear that the situation in Chechnya might develop into a similar scenario.
This is bad in two respects: First, it means more terrorist actions. Second, it makes those "fighters against terrorism" like Bush and Putin look like they had always said the truth and encourage them to intensify the fight. This, in turn, will breed more hat and fanatism on the other side... and the viscious circle is accelerating...