OPINION / EXPERT PERSPECTIVE – The death toll from last week’s terrorist attack inside a concert hall in a suburban Moscow neighborhood is now at least 133 people in what is one of the worst terrorist attacks to occur during the presidency of Vladimir Putin.
The Crocus Theater and attached shopping mall were attacked by a number of armed gunmen, who shot the security guards and then opened fire on the sold-out crowd at the theater. The theater and mall were also set on fire, possibly using Molotov cocktails carried by the attackers. In the confusion that followed the slow Russian security/police response, the attackers escaped.
Early on March 23, Russian authorities announced they had captured eleven suspects including the four gunmen as they tried to cross the Russian-Belarus border. Later, Russian reports had the attackers attempting to cross the Russian-Ukrainian border. Although ISIS has claimed responsibility for the attack, Putin has blamed Ukraine and vowed to punish those responsible.
According to a spokesperson for the U.S. National Security Council, earlier this month, the U.S. provided the Russians with intelligence that ISIS was preparing for strikes in Russia. On March 7, the U.S. Embassy in Moscow issued a warning to U.S. citizens to avoid crowds and said it was monitoring reports that extremists might attack large gatherings in Moscow.
Apparently, cooperation on counterterrorism concerns and the passage of “duty to warn” threat intelligence is one of the very few remaining service-to-service channels still working between Washington and Moscow while other channels have soured in response to Russia’s illegal and brutal invasion of Ukraine.
Three days before the attack, Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the West of “provocative statements” about potential terror attacks in Russia and dismissed the warning. “I’ll remind you of recent, let’s say directly, provocative statements of certain official Western structures about potential terror attacks in Russia. All this looks like obvious blackmail and an attempt to intimidate, destabilize our country.” Putin made these remarks while addressing an audience at the Russian state security agency, the FSB.
It appears however, the Russians did act on the U.S. intelligence by raiding Islamic extremist cells in Ingushetia—a largely Muslim republic in the Russian Federation. This is the Russian version of “rounding up the usual suspects.” But Russian authorities missed the real operational cells in Moscow that carried out the attack. Reports indicate that attackers may be affiliated with ISIS-Khorasan and time may reveal that they probably infiltrated Russia from Afghanistan via Central Asia.
But the real question is what comes next. Putin has won his rigged election, but likely still has some insecurity (remember his reaction during the Prighozhin mutiny) so needs a scapegoat for this attack and needs to do something visibly violent to shore up support with the only constituencies that matter to him, the ‘Siloviki’—comprised of those in the military and security services and some in the oligarch community. Thus, he can’t blame the FSB for its clear incompetence in preventing the attack in his response to it. Similarly, he can’t publicly thank the U.S. for providing warning because that now runs against his narrative of the U.S. being an implacable enemy and the warning being a “provocation.” But Putin can claim that Ukraine (however implausibly) has cooperated with ISIS-K to facilitate this attack. Russian sources are already pointing the finger at Kyiv, and it is likely not a coincidence that the Russians are claiming that the “usual suspects” they rounded up, were heading for Ukraine.
Look for Putin to use this attack as an excuse to do something particularly nasty. Probably somewhere in Ukraine but really, anywhere. As we have seen over the past 24 years, Putin is a product of KGB training, a key principle of which is “the ends justify the means.” Don’t forget the Moscow apartment bombings that Putin almost certainly authorized in 1999, to justify Russia’s invasion of Chechnya. 307 Russians died in those bombings.
I don’t believe the evidence at this point, supports the argument that Putin authorized the attack on the concert venue, but he is certain to use it to further manipulate Russian public opinion against the Ukraine and the West. Putin appears increasingly detached from reality and it’s plausible to consider that he may not be receiving accurate information from his security services. He is, however, likely to respond brutally to this terrorist attack (and perhaps not rationally). Exacerbating the situation in my view, is that Putin is also confident in his ability to shape the global narrative in whatever way he pleases, no matter what he does.
This is a big deal.
I was in Moscow during the 2002 Moscow Dubrovka Theater attack when Putin had just taken power. The Russian response to that attack was to use gas and assault the theater. Nearly 150 hostages were killed in the assault, including U.S. citizens. Two years later, there was another horrific attack as terrorists took hostages – most of them children - at a school in Beslan. 334 of those hostages were killed.
The world will likely get a better sense of Russian retaliation in the coming days as Putin is likely looking right now at his “hit list” of enemies both domestic and foreign. In the near term, expect more repression and roundups inside the Russian Federation especially Muslim republics—and any remaining political opposition. Certainly, there will be continued strikes against non-military targets in Ukraine, but I would guess a more focused effort against Ukrainian leadership targets is in the offing. Attacks inside Ukraine may become more frequent and nastier.
Putin will be more patient with his overall “strategic” response. But it will happen. He is unlikely to use the Crocus Theater attack to start a direct confrontation with NATO, but he will push harder on the margins of NATO, almost certainly in Moldova and Transnistria. But since Putin cares most about keeping ‘Siloviki’ on side, he can take indirect action with the Russian hand not immediately visible but take credit secretly in front of that internal community.
More interesting may be what Putin might encourage his surrogates and allies to do, including Iran and its proxies. ‘Crocus’ means Saffron in Russian. It is a spice largely cultivated in Iran. Expect Iran to be part of Putin’s response plan.
The Moscow attack is a tragedy. Even more tragic is the Russian incompetence that allowed it to happen despite having been warned. The next tragedy will be the response.
Who’s Reading this? More than 500K of the most influential national security experts in the world. Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
