PSCRP-BESA Reports No 43 (March 24, 2024)
Background on ISIS Preparations for the Attack on Moscow Synagogue
According to the information from Russian sources on March 7th, in the Kaluga Oblast, during a shootout, Russian special services killed two citizens of Kazakhstan who were planning a terrorist attack on a synagogue in Moscow. Two members of the ISIS-Khorasan group (the Afghan branch of the Islamic State) were planning an armed attack on a Moscow synagogue in the context of the conflict in Gaza. The perpetrators of the planned attack were found in a private house in the Kaluga Oblast. During the arrest, the suspects offered armed resistance and were killed. It turned out that they were two Kazakhs: 35-year-old Sabit Ashiraliyev and 32-year-old Dzhanibek Taskulayev. They arrived in Russia on February 28th. During the search, a Makarov pistol, an AK-47 assault rifle, and materials for making explosive devices were found.
A second terrorist attack was prevented, and two more natives of Central Asian republics were detained. In this case ISIS-Khorasan militants planned an armed attack on a chemical industry enterprise in the Kaluga Oblast.
Andrey Serenko, a well-known Russian expert on Afghanistan, commented on these events as follows:
“1. The Afghan branch of ISIS is beginning active terrorist activities in Russia. Its supporters are resorting to actions involving the mass murder of Russian citizens.
- Currently, the target selection of Afghan ISIS militants in Russia is limited to objects associated with the Israeli narrative. Obviously, this is due to the ongoing armed conflict between Israel and the Palestinians in Gaza. But this does not mean that the Afghan ISIS militants will not expand the “range” of their targets in Russia in the future.
- The Afghan branch of ISIS in Russia is oriented towards carrying out terrorist actions in “Greater Russia,” in Moscow, beyond the traditional jihadist activity areas (the North Caucasus, the south of Russia). Supporters of the “Wilayat Khorasan” demonstrate a clear interest in the “far Moscow region.” It can be assumed that this interest will further concentrate closer to the capital of Russia.”
On the grounds of similar analysis Russian Minister of Defense Shoigu made a statement regarding the increased threats to Russia from ISIS-Khorasan as early as the end of February 2024[5]. He noted that in 2023, the number of ISIS-Khorasan militants increased by 15%. According to Shoigu, the main goal of the terrorists is to spread radical ideology and engage in subversive activities in Central Asia and Russia. Shoigu also highlighted the financing of ISIS activities through drug money along the Northern Route from Afghanistan to Russia and further to Europe through Central Asian countries. Although the minister subsequently, in line with Russian propaganda ideas, linked this threat to the activities of pro-Western non-governmental organizations in Central Asia, three main theses – the growing influence of ISIS-Khorasan amid instability in Afghanistan, the trend of expanding activities towards Central Asia and Russia, as well as financing through drug trafficking – are fully confirmed by Russian experts working in this field. It should be noted that it is Shoigu in the Russian power structure who is responsible for the war in Syria and the functioning of Russian military bases in Central Asia, as well as for the situation in Afghanistan. Therefore, he often voices real assessments of the situation on the northern border of Afghanistan, while the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs often takes pro-Taliban positions.
The story of U.S. warnings of terrorist plots in Russia
On March 7, 2024, the U.S. Embassy in Moscow issued warnings to its citizens in Russia, urging them to avoid mass gatherings for the next 48 hours. The embassy’s statement mentioned planned extremist terrorist attacks in large gatherings. Later, several other countries, including the UK, issued similar warnings.
Well-informed Telegram channel “Nezygar” reported that after receiving the warning from the U.S. Embassy, the FSB introduced enhanced round-the-clock surveillance for terrorism units and on transportation in Moscow and nearby regions from March 8th to 10th. Increased monitoring was also observed during the election period. There is a version that terrorists planned an attack at the “Crocus City Hall” from March 9th to 11th. However, the heightened security measures in Moscow, the elimination of some of the terrorist groups in Kaluga, and the public statements of the U.S. Embassy and Western countries might have postponed the execution of the attack in Moscow region. The terrorist attack on March 22nd occurred precisely during a period of relaxed monitoring.
Later, after the March 22nd terrorist attack, the U.S. Embassy in Moscow commented on its warning about the threat of terrorist attacks in Moscow. They explained that they issued it to prevent the loss of innocent lives, as it is a common U.S. practice to warn governments about potential deadly threats when such information is available. It was also stated that the U.S. government supports communication channels with Russian authorities to exchange important security information.
Indeed, the Coordinator for Strategic Communications at the U.S. National Security Council, John Kirby, stated that he is not aware of any connection between the terrorist attack at the “Crocus City Hall” and the statements made by the U.S. Embassy on March 7th. However, he confirmed that the U.S. had some concerns about the possibility of a terrorist attack in Moscow and its outskirts in early March. Kirby also noted that according to U.S. information, Ukraine was not involved in the terrorist attack.
It is important to notice that at the time of the U.S. warning, Russian authorities did not acknowledge the threat. Putin directly commented that these were Western threats to Russian voters ahead of the presidential elections in Russia. In his style, he referred to this information as “blackmail” by Western intelligence services.
The Crocus City Hall Terrorist Attack
On the evening of March 22, 2024, unknown assailants opened fire in the Crocus City concert hall in the Moscow suburbs with automatic weapons before the concert of the band “Picnic.” The terrorists simply arrived in car(s) and opened fire, indiscriminately killing everyone in their path and advancing inside the building. They made no attempt to take any hostages. Their faces were originally covered with scarves, but beards and mustaches were visible. The criminals were dressed in military attire. They obviously had combat and possibly strikeball training (according to some assessments, they acted as a strikeball team). Footage from the scene showed that there were at least five attackers, armed with automatic weapons. Later, an explosion occurred, and the huge building unexpectedly and quickly caught fire, leading to a massive number of casualties. Initially, there was a version that bombs left by the terrorists had detonated, and then there was speculation that some gas cylinders had exploded. The fire was so intense that Rospotrebnadzor of the Moscow Oblast advised residents of the region not to go outside due to the threat of poisoning by harmful particles.
By midday on March 24, the death toll reached 133 people, but it still continues to rise. The Ministry of Health of the Moscow Oblast published a list of 145 injured.
The terrorists successfully fled after the attack. Most experts agree that Russia’s security services, especially, the National Guard and police, demonstrated low professionalism in this case.
State Duma deputy Alexander Khinshtein, acting as the spokesperson for the National Guard, later reported the arrest of two suspected terrorists in the Bryansk Oblast, not far from the borders of Belarus and Ukraine. According to him, the terrorists’ vehicle flipped over after a chase and gunfire. Weapons and Tajikistani passports were found in the vehicle.
Renowned Israeli expert Sergey Auslender stated that the version of the terrorists’ arrest appears to be a fabrication and is likely deliberately designed to blame Ukraine for the attack. Questions arise, particularly as to why the terrorists did not change their vehicle, why they headed towards the Ukrainian border where there are many military and police, and how they managed to drive so far through traffic jams and roads lined with cameras?
Auslender ridicules the contradictions in the official Russian version, stating, “A terrorist who committed the bloodiest attack in Russia in 20 years, well-prepared and trained, was found on a Telegram channel, the money for the execution was sent to his bank card, and after the massacre, he decided to flee across the Ukrainian border?”
Later, the head of the FSB, Bortnikov, informed Putin that 11 people had been detained, including four terrorists who attacked the “Crocus City Hall.”
Information that began to appear rapidly in Russian propaganda gradually increasingly indicated that the Russian authorities had decided to attribute blame to Ukraine. In particular, reports emerged in the Russian press that the terrorists were young men above average height. Speculations were made that they were Slavs and belonged to the “Russian Volunteer Corps.” Since the beards and mustaches of the criminals clearly indicated Islamists, the Russian press somehow began to write that they were fake.
Later the version with the Tajiks having potential links to Ukrainian and even Western intelligence became widespread in Russian propagandist sources.
Despite indications pointing to the involvement of ISIS-K, there are concerns among international experts that Russian authorities may have apprehended the wrong individuals, possibly extracting confessions under severe duress, in order to implicate them in ties to Ukraine. Furthermore, distressing footage depicting the torture of these detainees, including gruesome acts such as eye removal and ear mutilation (then making the person to eat this ear), has been disseminated online by some representatives of Russian security forces (for example, from “Rusich” Neo-Nazi goup), which contradicts internationally recognized legal norms.
Additionally, some Russian counterterrorism specialists publicly justify these actions against detainees, contending that it represents a legitimate approach to combat terrorism, citing interpretations suggesting that a man with a mutilated ear is not recognized as a Shaheed by Allah. Members of the Russian neo-Nazi group “Rusich” involved in the torture went as far as auctioning off the knife used to sever the ear of the Central Asian victim online.
Some Central Asian experts express concern that this situation may mark the commencement of “a concerted campaign of terror” targeting Central Asians and Muslims in Russia. The historical practices of Russian security forces against these communities have already been perceived by this group of experts as tantamount to mass terror for many years. After the full-scale invasion of Ukraine a practice of forced conscription into the army started to affect Central Asian labor migrants (both with Russian citizenship and without it). There is now a heightened risk that the pressure of Russian security services on Central Asian migrants would evolve into actual mass terror. Inclusion of extreme right wing Russian groups into these practices indicates that this terror may have racist background.
Versions of what has happened
- Russian propagandist version. After a long period of silence indicating the confusion of the Russian authorities, Putin appeared on television. In his statement, he indirectly accused Ukraine of the terrorist attack. He stated: “As for the investigation of this crime and the results of operational-search activities, the following can be said at present. All four direct perpetrators of the terrorist attack, all those who shot and killed people, have been found and detained. They tried to hide and were moving towards Ukraine, where, according to preliminary data, a gap for crossing the state border was prepared for them from the Ukrainian side.” Putin then compared the terrorists’ actions to “Nazis,” which seems to be his usual rhetoric towards Ukrainians.
Senator Viktor Bondarev told RIA Novosti that he considers what happened to be sabotage by Ukraine. More realistically oriented sources suggest that the execution of the terrorist act was assigned to Muslims “to spoil Russia’s relations with the Islamic world.” Margarita Simonyan, the head of Russia’s main external propaganda structure, RT, stated that the ISIS version is a “fake.” In her opinion, the United States knew in advance that the perpetrators would resemble ISIS militants and therefore the U.S. organized everything. Ukraine, represented by the head of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense Andrey Chernyak and the advisor to the president’s office of Ukraine, Mykhailo Podoliak, rejected Russian accusations of involvement in the terrorist attack.
The Russian propaganda machine also immediately began accusing the United States of the attack. Foreign Ministry Ambassador Rodion Miroshnik believes that the U.S. knew in advance about the terrorist act. He reminded that the embassy’s warning on March 7 mentioned “large gatherings” and “concerts.” This position was also supported by Serbian President Vucic, who is close to Russia. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova expressed doubts about where the U.S. got the information that Ukraine was not involved in the terrorist attack. Member of the Federation Council of Russia Andrei Klishas stated that “the terrorist attack in Moscow is part of the war of Western intelligence services against Russia.”
- Version with ISIS. Established Western and Arab media (and even the Telegram channel of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards) stated that ISIS was involved in the terrorist attack; see, for example, CNN. ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack in a brief statement published on its affiliated news agency Amaq on Telegram on Friday. The New York Times confirmed that the U.S. had information that ISIS was planning a terrorist attack in Russia.
In favor of the terrorist attack being carried out by ISIS, the following facts are put forward: the statement was published on the ISIS website; the terrorist act matches the modus operandi of ISIS, particularly some attacks in France; U.S. intelligence agencies had information about ISIS planning an attack; the ISIS-Khorasan branch actively recruits terrorists in Russia and Central Asian countries. Listing all these arguments, Professor Peter Neumann of the Royal College in London comes to the conclusion on his Twitter account: “It’s neither Putin nor Ukraine, but ISIS“, writes terrorism expert.
- The version suggesting that the terrorist attack was organized by Russian intelligence services. The version that the attack was organized by Russian security services is actively developing among the Russian opposition. The reason for this is that the Russian opposition has long suspected the FSB of organizing terrorist attacks, both directly and through double agents in international terrorist organizations (see the well-known book “Blowing Up Russia: Terror from Within” by Alexander Litvinenko and Yuri Felshtinsky). Within this version, it is assumed that the terrorist attack was organized with the aim of shifting the blame onto Ukraine and the West, followed by either declaring a state of emergency throughout Russia or a general mobilization.
Prominent investigator Christo Grozev confirmed that the terrorist attack was most likely carried out by ISIS. However, he also pointed out to the connections of Russian military intelligence (GRU) with some Islamic militant groups in Afghanistan and did not rule out the involvement of Russian intelligence services behind the attack.
Several arguments can be noted against the events being organized by Russian intelligence services.
- Russian intelligence services showed extremely low effectiveness in suppressing terrorists and allowed fire to occur after the start of the shooting. The terrorists successfully fled the scene. If everything had been organized by Russian intelligence services, the terrorists would have been eliminated quickly. Why would the Russian government want to demonstrate the inefficiency of its security forces?
- Terrorist act took place just after Presidential elections, where Putin positioned himself as a leader that can guarantee stability for the country and security for ordinary Russians. Moreover, Putin himself publicly denied the possibility of such terrorist acts before it happened.
- Putin did not comment on these events for a long time, although the propaganda website RIA-Novosti immediately reported on a possible presidential statement. If the terrorist attack had been specifically prepared to declare a state of emergency, the president would have spoken almost immediately.
- Russian news channels commented very sparingly on the situation, instead airing entertainment shows. Information regarding the terrorist attack with its various versions remained contradictory for a long time, allowing for speculation that Russian authorities were on the fence between accusations against ISIS and Ukraine. The police beat and dispersed journalists, denying them access to the building. If the terrorist attack had been organized by Russian intelligence services, at least the propagandist press would have been given full access.
As noted by prominent Russian journalist and political analyst Kirill Martynov, Russian authorities simply “played war” with the West and Ukraine and forgot about real security threats to Russia. Hence their bewildered reaction when they had to face the reality.
Conclusions and consequences.
Terrorist act was most probably organized by ISIS-Khorasan. For Israel it is important that the Moscow synagogue was originally the primary target. Russian security services demonstrated very low effectiveness during the “Crocus city” events. ISIS or other Muslim terrorist groups inspired by the number of victims and by effect on international media may try to organize new similar terrorist acts. Russian authorities have to tighten anti-terrorism measures to prevent them Also, as Russian opposition circles fear, Russian authorities will probably exploit the terrorist attack for their own purposes, such as using it as a pretext to tighten the political regime within the country or to conduct more active attacks against Ukraine. After the terrorist act, position of Russia’s Muslim minority, especially of Central Asian labor migrants, will become especially vulnerable.