Are there subterfuges to the attack by ISIS, aimed at diverting Russian attention elsewhere from Ukraine? Was ISIS alone in this operation? Points to ponder.
On 22 March, a music venue in Moscow was shaken by a devastating terror attack that killed 139 and injured 182 civilians. Russia is not new to devastating terror attacks. This attack was reminiscent of a similar attack in a Moscow theatre in 2002 by Islamist terrorists from Chechnya, which led to death of 132 hostages, and injuring several hundred civilians. In 2004, Russia was again rattled by a brutal terror attack and a shocking hostage crisis in a school in Beslan, North Ossetia. It resulted in the tragic death of more than 300 civilians, including 186 children. However, that was a different era when Russia was still besieged with conflicts in North Caucasus region, especially in Chechnya and Dagestan. It is a bygone era now.
Incidentally, ISIS has already claimed responsibility for the attack in Moscow, and the United States has declared that it had warned Russia of similar terror attacks much in advance. However, does it all add up? Is it all that simple? Or, is it that there are many subterfuges to each of the acts of omissions and commissions by different protagonists in this case?
RUSSIA DEFEATED ISIS IN SYRIA
There is no denying that ISIS harbours deep animosity towards Russia. Had it not been for Russia, the dark and inhuman reign of ISIS in parts of Syria would have continued. Since 2015, it was predominantly the Russian presence in Syria, in aid of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, and its use of airpower that led to the literal extermination of ISIS there. Russian Air Force used to the hilt its wide array of aerial platforms like Tu-22M3, Su-24, Su-25, Su-34 and Su-35, to rain cluster munitions, and precision guided bombs, on ISIS strongholds. The West, led by US, may have claimed credit for defeating ISIS, but in reality, the pivotal role was played by Russia.
Post its defeat in Iraq and Syria, ISIS literally fragmented and dispersed. The cadres and foot soldiers returned to their home states. ISIS leadership went for the virtual model of inspiring its members online, and exhorting them to resort to lone wolf attacks in their host countries. Defeat of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, thus resulted in the meteoric rise in lone-wolf terror attacks across the world, especially in Western Europe and parts of Asia.
IS ISIS STRONG ENOUGH TO EXECUTE MAJOR ATTACKS ON ITS OWN?
Lone-wolf attacks notwithstanding, does a severely depleted ISIS still have the wherewithal to execute a full-fledged terror attack as it happened in Moscow? A Moscow type terror attack, requires major logistical preparations, intelligence inputs, dry runs, understanding of vulnerable points of the city, exit options for terror operatives, procurement of weapon systems, and above all, funds to get it all done. Was it all done by ISIS alone without any external help? Doubts remain.
NO CLEAN CHIT FOR ISIS
It is not to say that ISIS is not behind the attack. ISIS is one of the most brutal terror groups of the world, known for its grotesque display of violence. The key question is whether there was any other invisible player beside it or not. Did some major organizations, inimical to the Vladimir Putin regime, use the highly radicalized Islamist elements of the region, to get the job done, and then let ISIS take the credit? In any case, ISIS has a habit of claiming credit for any killing, of their liking, anywhere in the world. As Prof Madhav Nalapat, Editorial Director, The Sunday Guardian, stated recently, “Elements of ISIS are like mercenaries. You give them the right kind of money; they will do anything for anybody.”
STRANGE PARALLELS WITH 26/11 TERROR ATTACKS
Some interesting parallels can be drawn between the Moscow terror attack and the 26/11 terror attack that happened in India in 2008. During the 26/11 terror attack, Ajmal Kasab, the LeT terrorist who was caught alive, was wearing a sacred red thread in his wrist, which generally Hindus wear. Had Kasab not been caught alive, and had the reality of involvement of LeT, backed by ISI of Pakistan, not been exposed, the world would have believed the peddled narrative that some “Hindu” terror group was behind 26/11 attack.
In fact, pushing such a perception, by making Islamist terrorists, on rampage, wear Kalawa (Hindu sacred red thread) was literally in sync with the fake narrative of “Hindu radicalism more dangerous than LeT” that some were trying to push in India during those days. The ISIS angle behind the Moscow attack, therefore, even though not impossible, definitely needs deeper probe and corroborative evidence. Recently, the Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova in an article published in Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper, wrote, “Attention—a question to the White House: Are you sure it’s ISIS? Might you think again about that?”
The footage of the Moscow terror attack also revealed something that had eerie similarity with 26/11 terror attack. In both cases, the terrorists did not resort to indiscriminate firing. Their shooting approach was controlled, as if to conserve ammunitions, even while mercilessly killing innocent civilians. It was trademark of tradecraft. In case of the 26/11 terror attack, it is all known too well how the LeT terrorists were trained by instructors from the Pakistan Army. Who professionally trained the ISIS operatives for the Moscow attack is the big question. Is ISIS the real brain behind the attack? Or is it that the ISIS is the mere executioner, while the brain belongs elsewhere?
WHAT WAS THE ANTICIPATED END GAME OF REAL MASTERMINDS?
The issue is complex and may not have a straight answer. Was this terror attack a sort of an attempted trigger aimed at pushing Russia into revenge mode, and thus, by default make it land into Middle East or Afghanistan, to rain bombs on remnants of the ISIS again? Was it aimed at provoking Russia to initiate military operations inside the erstwhile Soviet republics of Central Asia, which are Muslim majority by demography? Was the attack aimed at creating a deep divide between Islamic countries and Russia, particularly the Sunni bloc? Would a Russian operation inside Central Asia, in case it happened, have helped the West in pushing the narrative that Russia under Putin is “expansionist” and wants to bring whole of Central Asia under Russian fold?
CAN THIS ATTACK HAVE A UKRAINIAN ANGLE, AS RUSSIA CLAIMS?
In spite of US-led NATO members pumping in billions of dollars’ worth arsenal into Ukraine, reality remains that Russia, despite its intermittent setbacks, continues to have a major edge in the conflict. More so because Ukraine is fast losing support from its NATO allies. The Russia-Ukraine conflict is no more getting the traction it got in the global media earlier. Volodymyr Zelenskyy is almost forgotten. The focus has not just shifted to Middle East, the cost of keeping Ukraine afloat by sustained supply of weaponry, is also fast becoming a major burden for the US and other NATO members. More so because sanctions on Russia only resulted in cost of energy rising disproportionately for the European states, resulting in most facing severe economic challenges. The US likewise, has pivoted itself more towards the Middle East, following the Israel-Hamas conflict and the challenge posed by Iran backed Houthis in Red Sea.
President Putin meanwhile, in spite of major challenges, has only consolidated his position as the unrivalled and unmatched chieftain of Russia. No amount of sanction or disinformation warfare could dethrone him. Russia today is more resilient than before, and has vindicated its indispensability in the global commodity markets. With the US President facing a challenging election in 2024, and Western Europe being neck-deep in its own quagmire of economic and social turmoil, the reality is that the war that the West could have avoided, but did not, in Ukraine, by acknowledging the legitimate space of Russia in the global scheme of things, has not yielded desired results. Ukraine, for all its valour has only been led into fighting a war that in the long run can have just one consequence, a Russian victory. Zelenskyy, propped by the West, pushed Ukraine to fight a war against Russia that full-time NATO members themselves avoid.
A reactive Russian attack on Tajikistan on the pretext of the ISIS terrorists being of Tajik origin, just as US acted post 9/11, may have helped Putin’s adversaries to not only project Putin as a “perpetual warmonger” but would also have given some respite perhaps to a hapless Ukraine. However, the persistent insistence of some in the West, especially the US, to give Ukraine a clean chit, and pin the blame on ISIS alone, perhaps has made Russia even more resolved in continuing with its military operations in Ukraine.
IRAN IN JANUARY, RUSSIA IN MARCH: CONNECTING DOTS OF MAJOR ISIS ATTACKS
In January 2024, more than 100 people were killed in Iran in a suicide attack by ISIS on the occasion of the fourth anniversary of the assassination of Qasim Soleimani. The key question also is whether there are links between these two attacks, and is a harbinger of the reemergence of ISIS. Is it a warning by ISIS of larger attacks elsewhere as well? Or is it that ISIS now considers Russia and Iran, their bigger enemies than others?
TRUTH LOST IN MILIEU: THREAT OF A BIGGER CONFLICT LURKING IN CORNER?
In the recent past, Russia has shown considerable concerns for events taking place in the Gaza region. It has often voiced its opinion in favour of the people of Gaza. Its relationship with Muslim majority countries of Central Asia remains warm as well. Therefore, ISIS cannot attack Russia by terming it as “anti-Muslim” anymore. Meanwhile, Russian officials continue to pin the blame on Ukraine and the West for the attack. Some analysts maintain that given the role of the US, in the past, in training Mujahideens to defeat Soviet Union in Afghanistan, the potential proximity of the West to radical Islamist elements simply cannot be ruled out. While some others draw the analogy of the US singularly holding ISIS responsible for the attack, is as credulous as that of West blaming Russia for the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage, was.
Russia perhaps knows by now the truth behind all that happened. It has enough intelligence capability to peel through the layers. While the real facts may never come out in the public domain, two critical issues continue to be disconcerting. First, the ISIS threat in the first place, remains a “clear and present danger” for the civilized world. The next attack, no one knows where, and when, would happen. Second, with President Putin firmly entrenched in Kremlin, revenge for what happened in Moscow is round the corner. Russia is known for ruthless retribution with a vengeance. Whether the Russian bombers and long-range missiles would travel beyond Ukraine’s western borders, instead of Central Asia or Middle East, in search of revenge, is a million-dollar question. What apocalypse it may trigger, is anybody’s guess.
Pathikrit Payne is a Senior Research Fellow with Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee Research Foundation, New Delhi.