Lax Security and Political Gains: Analysis of the Horrific Attack in Moscow

The recent horrific attack at the Crocus City Hall in Moscow has sparked a debate among Russians regarding the country’s lax security measures and the potential political gains for President Vladimir Putin. The attack, claimed by the Afghan arm of ISIL known as ISIS-K, resulted in the tragic loss of at least 115 lives, including three children, and left over 120 others wounded.

Aleksandra Chanysheva, a Russian language and literature teacher, blames the inadequate security measures in place for allowing the attack to occur. She highlights the low wages and ridicule faced by security guards in Russia, claiming that they often perform their duties in a subpar manner.

This attack has reignited memories of Russia’s dark history of lethal attacks on crowded public places, particularly during the second Chechen war. Analysts and opposition groups argue that the possibility of political gains for President Putin cannot be ruled out. They point to the impotence of Russia’s special services and law enforcement system, despite receiving warnings from the West, including a public alert from the United States.

The intelligence failure is further highlighted by the fact that a comprehensive face-recognition system, widely used to identify opposition protesters, failed to prevent the attack. Additionally, the delayed deployment of special forces due to heavy traffic congestion raises questions about the readiness of the security apparatus.

ISIS-K claimed responsibility for the attack, targeting what they referred to as “a large gathering of Christians.” However, doubts have been raised regarding the authenticity of this claim. Some suggest that Russian special services may have had prior knowledge of the attack and potentially directed it for political purposes, such as discrediting Ukraine and justifying a new wave of mobilization.

Critics of President Putin draw parallels to the late 1990s when explosions at apartment buildings were blamed on Chechen separatists, leading to the start of the Second Chechen War. These incidents bolstered Putin’s political standing and paved the way for his election as president in 2000. Fugitive ex-FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko even claimed that Putin ordered the attacks.

While the investigation into the Moscow attack is ongoing, the Forum for Free Russia, an alliance of exiled opposition activists, suggests that Russian special services may have organized the attack. They anticipate that the responsibility for this act of terrorism will be falsely attributed to Ukrainians or armed Russian opposition groups.

Author: CrimeDoor

2 Responses

  1. While it is understandable that the recent attack at Crocus City Hall has raised concerns about security measures in Russia, it is important to approach this issue with caution and avoid jumping to conclusions. Blaming President Vladimir Putin for the attack and suggesting that he may gain political benefits from it is a stretch.

    Firstly, it is crucial to acknowledge that no security system is foolproof, and incidents like these can occur even in countries with stringent security measures in place. It is unfair to single out Russia and its

  2. There are no errors or inaccuracies in the post. The statement accurately reflects the recent attack at the Crocus City Hall in Moscow and the subsequent debate among Russians regarding security measures and political implications for President Vladimir Putin.

Leave a Reply

Share on:

[mailpoet_form id="1"]

Subscribe to Our Newsletter