The reality is that ISIS-K in particular sees Russia as being complicit in activities that regularly oppress Muslims.
Early this month, America’s intelligence services stumbled across some alarming information. Undercover agents buried deep within ISIS told their CIA handlers that the extremists were preparing to attack Russia, probably targeting a concert venue in Moscow where there would be a large gathering of young people. The US embassy in Moscow immediately set about warning its citizens to stay clear of such events in the immediate future and, in accordance with the longstanding “duty to warn” policy between the two countries, shared the information with the Kremlin. But in a speech a few days later, an angry President Vladimir Putin blasted the American warnings as “provocative”, saying “these actions resemble outright blackmail and the intention to intimidate and destabilise our society”.
Putin was either badly briefed before making these remarks, or was suffering from memory loss. His own state-run RIA Novosti had reported only a few days beforehand that six ISIS members had been killed in a counter-terrorist operation in Southern Russia. On 7 March, the same outlet reported that Russian security services had uncovered and “neutralised” a cell of the banned ISIS organisation Vilayat Khorasan, whose members were planning an attack on a synagogue in Moscow. A week later, it reported that a commander of an ISIS combat group had been detained in Moscow. Ever since November there had been a steady stream of intelligence indicating that ISIS-K, an affiliate of ISIS that is active in Afghanistan and the surrounding region, was determined to attack Russia. Intelligence sources say that ISIS-K has been fixated on Russia for at least two years, accusing the Kremlin of having Muslim blood on its hands because of Moscow’s interventions in Afghanistan, Chechnya and Syria.
With this stack of intelligence and a “friendly” warning from Washington of an imminent threat, why did the Kremlin refuse to take any action to protect more than 6,000 young Russians who had flocked to the Crocus City Hall, a music site part of a shopping mall in Moscow’s suburbs about 12 miles from the Kremlin? On 22 March, the venue was about to host a concert by the pop group Picnic when gunmen burst into the foyer shooting randomly before proceeding into the concert hall itself and opening fire there. A video filmed from the upper floor shows four men walking through unguarded metal detectors shooting people point-blank while huddled together. Another video shows people fleeing as the crackling of gunfire echoes around them and flames begin to engulf the building. There are no signs of any guards, police or special-forces anywhere in the vicinity to protect the music lovers, resulting in the death of at least 139 and more than 100 wounded. These lives would have been saved had Vladimir Putin not been too proud to dismiss out of hand the helpful warnings from the US government and his own intelligence community.
In the deadliest terror attack on Moscow in decades, the assault came less than a week after Vladimir Putin won a staged-managed election by an overwhelming majority to secure yet another term in office, tightening his grip on a country he has ruled since the turn of the century. There is no little irony in that while he had boasted about national security as Russians went to the polls, shortly afterwards Islamist terrorists simply walked into Russia from neighbouring Tajikistan to kill and maim so many people. In an address to the nation last Saturday, Putin confirmed that authorities had detained a total of eleven people, including four suspected gunmen who were allegedly captured while trying to escape to Ukraine through a “window” prepared for them on the Ukrainian side.
In this absurd attempt to spin the blame on Kyiv for the attack, Putin failed to mention ISIS which had already claimed responsibility. They had even circulated visual proof including graphic bodycam video footage filmed by one of the assailants. Despite this overwhelming evidence, Putin’s acolytes filled the media with disinformation to amplify the Kremlin line that the attack was sponsored or assisted by Ukraine, without producing the slightest piece of evidence. Former president Dmitry Medvedev, a man increasingly detached from reality, posted on his Telegram account: “these terrorists of the Kyiv regime are impossible to deal with in any other way than by executions and repression. All of them must be found and mercilessly destroyed as terrorists—including government officials of a nation that committed such an atrocity. A death for a death.” Putin’s long-term friend, Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev, retorted “of course Ukraine was responsible.” Margarita Simonyan, head of the state-funded international news television network RT, wrote on X (Twitter) “ISIS! ISIS??? About ISIS, that’s fake”. Simonyan, who idolises Putin, repeatedly blamed the Ukrainians, calling them “dogs” and describing the West as their “trainers”.
On Monday the four captured gunmen appeared in court showing signs of heavy bruising, according to Russian media the result of being tortured during interrogation by the security services. One of them, showing multiple cuts, was brought into court in a wheelchair and sat semi-conscious with his eyes closed throughout the proceedings. Russian media also explained why one suspect had a heavily bandaged head—his ear had been sliced off during interrogation. A later graphic video posted on Telegram, showed the moment the ear was detached, after which the suspect was forced to eat it by his interrogators. “I’m right here”, an interrogator was heard saying, “you have only one ear left”, as the suspect, barely able to speak Russian, struggled to answer the question. It’s well known that Russian authorities regularly resort to violence and torture to obtain a desired confession and two suspects have already admitted guilt. It will come as little surprise if under further torture they later confirm a link with Kyiv. This will be important for Vladimir Putin as otherwise he will have to explain why he is butchering fellow Slavs in Ukraine while Russians are being butchered by Islamist terrorists in Moscow.
After a full 19 hours of silence during which he desperately searched for a reason for the massive intelligence failure, Putin finally acknowledged that “radical Islamists” were behind the attack, but he was still trying to somehow pin the blame on his favourite scapegoat, Ukraine. “The question that arises is who benefits from this? This atrocity may be just a link in a whole series of attempts by those who have been at war with our country since 2014 by the hands of the neo-Nazi Kyiv regime,” he claimed, conveniently failing to mention that it was Russia who invaded and annexed Crimea in 2014, when Kremlin-backed fighters also seized territory in eastern Ukraine.
Putin then tried to dispel any threat from Islamists by hinting that Russia’s cosy relationship with Hamas and pro-Palestinian stance in Israel’s war in Gaza meant that the country would not be an ISIS target. “Are radical and even terrorist Islamic organisations really interested in striking Russia, which today stands for a fair solution to the escalating Middle East conflict?”, he asked, ignoring the Islamic State’s long-standing gripe with his country. The reality is that ISIS-K in particular sees Russia as being complicit in activities that regularly oppress Muslims. One of their many sources of grievances is Russia’s involvement in the war in Syria, where the Kremlin has backed the Assad regime against the Islamic State and other rebels.
For their part, Washington and much of the West have unequivocally condemned the outrage in Crocus City and expressed condolences for its victims. Together with Ukraine and others, the US has also rejected the absurd and unsubstantiated allegations that Kyiv played any part in the attack, blaming ISIS-K solely for the atrocity. While the event could in theory dent Putin’s image as a national guardian and undermine his current narrative of strength, or even highlight the incompetence of Russia’s security services, in reality Vladimir Putin will probably use it to bolster his own power and objectives by channelling the national outrage and grief into a “rally-around-the-flag” event to tighten his power and support his invasion of Ukraine. Known to the world as a state that uses terrorist methods both against its own people and also its neighbours, Russia’s autocratic ruler will jump at the chance to tar Ukraine’s government with the same brush.
Meanwhile, as fresh barrages of Russian missiles target their country, Ukrainians have responded to allegations of their alleged involvement in the Moscow terror attack with typical gallows humour, quipping that according to Vladimir Putin, “Ukraine is a Nazi Islamist state headed by a Jewish President”. Proving yet again that ridicule is the best antidote to tyranny.
John Dobson is a former British diplomat, who also worked in UK Prime Minister John Major’s office between 1995 and 1998. He is currently Visiting Fellow at the University of Plymouth.