In the wake of the tragic Moscow concert hall attack that left over 130 individuals dead, critics have raised pointed questions about the efficacy and focus of Russian security services. The death toll, which marks the deadliest assault in Russia in two decades, has shed light on the potential shortcomings of a security apparatus that, according to detractors, appears to have prioritized the suppression of political dissent over the protection of its citizens from actual threats.
Despite prior warnings from the United States Embassy in Moscow about the imminent threat to large gatherings in the city, the Russian security forces—historically lauded by President Vladimir Putin as elite operatives—were unable to prevent the attack. On March 7, the embassy had alerted to “reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts.” Putin, however, dismissed these as attempts to “intimidate and destabilize our society” and remained focused on the “special military operation” in Ukraine and the hunting down of pro-Ukrainian sabotage groups.
The Islamic State claimed responsibility for the horrific incident that took place at Crocus City Hall, although Russian officials have not yet commented on these claims. Some of Putin’s critics argue that this tragic event underscores a dangerous diversion of resources. Ivan Zhdanov, the former head of Alexei Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation, stated, “The FSB is busy with everything except its direct responsibilities – killing their political opponents, spying on citizens and prosecuting people who are against the war.”
Criticism extends to a perceived intelligence failure on the part of the Russian authorities. The accusations hold particular sting for Putin, a former Soviet spy and head of the FSB, who has long positioned himself as the arbiter of Russian security. Leonid Volkov, Navalny’s former chief of staff, echoed this sentiment, claiming that the FSB prefers to fabricate “non-existent terrorists… so there’s not enough time for the real ones.” The stark increase in terror-related criminal cases, from fewer than 20 annually between 2012-2017 to a record 143 last year, further highlights a shift in the focus of the security services.
Observers have noted the disproportionate allocation of security service resources toward monitoring and suppressing domestic opposition, particularly following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. This has included targeting individuals over anti-war sentiments on social media and even LGBTQ+ individuals for purported extremism.
The criticism gains weight from the historical context of Putin’s rule. His tenure began with the promise of security amidst a series of terror attacks in Russia, which subsequently led to a curtailing of civil liberties and an intensified crackdown on opposition, all justified as necessary measures against terrorism. The recent attack has thus sparked a new debate on whether Putin’s longtime strategy of repurposing the security services to clamp down on dissent has come at the expense of genuine anti-terror preparedness.
In the aftermath of the attack, Moscow observed a national day of mourning, with Putin making a somber church visit to honor the dead. However, the focus has inevitably shifted to the security services’ operational effectiveness and priorities. The Kremlin has historically relied on the FSB and related agencies to counter opposition, often branding them as extremists or terrorists.
The incident has also prompted international speculation, with Ukrainian military intelligence and some Western commentators suggesting the possibility of a “false flag” operation, a claim for which there is no current evidence. The Kremlin’s allusion to Ukrainian involvement in the attacks has been fiercely denied by Kyiv and may serve as a potential tool for political maneuvering in the ongoing war rhetoric.
Relevant articles:
– Russian Opposition Blasts Putin’s Broken Security Promises After Moscow Attack
– Did Ukraine war lead Russian security services to neglect Islamist threat? The Guardian, Mon, 25 Mar 2024 02:30:00 GMT
– Russia’s opposition blasts Putin’s broken security promises South China Morning Post, Sun, 24 Mar 2024 20:25:50 GMT
– Terrorist attack in Russia exposes vulnerabilities of Putin’s regime The Washington Post, Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:18:00 GMT