There were no suicide belts on the creatures… None of them intended to die. None of them were religious fanatics. ISIS was nowhere near there.
RT’s Editor-in-chief, Margarita Simonyan
Introduction
A recap of the ‘ISIS did it’ narrative before analyzing how Russia will respond. Firstly, Russia will build a file proving that ISIS did not perpetrate the attack, and that Ukraine organized and paid for the attack. The dossier is not to convince the ‘Golden Billion’ (U.S., EU, UK, etc.), but for Russia’s allies in the Global South, especially BRICS+ members. Secondly, the Russian Armed Forces will not deviate from current strategy, but escalations will include strikes on Ukrainian leadership and NATO assets inside Ukraine. The Kremlin’s objectives of carving a buffer zone between the Russian heartland and NATO-land, with regime change in Kiev and installation of a neutral government in ‘rump’ Ukraine—whatever is left after Russia takes lands east of the Dnieper—will continue without deviation.
The ISIS Narrative
Western media outlets are in a frenzy because Russia is not accepting their version of who committed the 22 March 2024 terror attack in Moscow. The ‘collective west’ and western media outlets insist that since ISIS claimed responsibility, then ISIS did the deed. They are also clearly desperate to deflect blame from Ukraine. How do Russians see it? The western perspective is of minimal importance. The Russian perspective is critical.
Simonyan’s quote encapsulates the Russian view. As I suggested in ‘False Flag Op in Moscow?,’ there were indicators that the perpetrators were not with ISIS: (1) they were paid: (2) they did not want to die: (3) they fled toward Ukraine. An extended analysis of these points was posted online on 24 March by Mr. Dmitry Polyanskiy, First Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN. It was later publicized that the terrorists did not escape, but were allowed to leave Crocus City Hall and followed by FSB. This allowed FSB to identify co-conspirators and the terrorists’ route into Ukraine. An analyst from Afghanistan, Mr. Popalzai, added that the photo released by ISIS of four masked men alleged to be the attackers showed them pointing their left forefingers, was wrong on two major levels: pointing at God and using the ‘unclean’ left hand. ISIS then re-released the photo but mirrored the image to show right hands, but in doing so, the Muslim profession of faith (shahada), ‘there is no god but God (la ilaha illa Allah) on the black flag in the background was reversed and rendered illegible! A collage of the ‘before’ and ‘after’ photos is below. Any Muslim, Arabic reader or not, can read the shahada. Whoever runs the purported ISIS outlet, Amaq News Agency, is not Muslim.
The two videos below have been viral on Russian social media: the first shows Obama stating that ‘we are speeding up training of ISIL forces’ (ISIL is ISIS). It was posted by RT—Simonyan’s employer. The second has Trump claiming Obama is the ‘founder’ of ISIS. One does not have to agree with Trump (few ‘normal’ people do), but many Russians believe the words of Obama and Trump, viz., that the U.S. Govt. founded and controls ISIS. Thus, the logic being, even if ISIS did it, ISIS attacked Russia at the direction of CIA.
The claim that the U.S. Gov warned Russia is irrelevant unless the U.S. Gov publishes the dossier sent to FSB (if any was sent). The State Department’s alerts system is hyperactive. London is classified as ‘level 2: exercise increased caution.’ Flurries of warnings go by email to Americans in the UK to avoid this place or that; and of planned demonstrations to be avoided. The White House’s claim of warning Russia must be rejected unless a dossier is published.
Lastly, the White House was too quick to blame ISIS. As I wrote in ‘False Flag,’
The very same government that could not solve the Nordstream bombing over the past 18 months solved the Navalny ‘murder’ within seconds of his death by conducting an instantaneous remote autopsy and toxicology. ‘Putin murdered Navalny,’ the US GOV proclaimed. Their stenographers at CNN, BBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, FOX, etc. ran with the story. But Kyrylo Budanov, head of Ukrainian intelligence said, ‘Navalny really died from a blood clot. That’s more or less confirmed… his death is natural.’ The American coroners that performed Navalny’s autopsy are today singing the ‘ISIS done somebody wrong song.’
False Flag Op in Moscow
White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre, White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby, State Department, and other U.S. Gov sources have insisted that Ukraine was not involved. Kamala Harris was trying to sell the ISIS story, a sign of desperation at the White House if she’s being allowed to speak in public! Russian media and social media users noted that the multiple denials are ‘suspicious.’ A case of ‘the White House doth protest too much’? The fear in Washington is not just that FSB will uncover Ukrainian involvement, but that FSB will uncover CIA involvement. This is a distinct possibility given that elements within CIA are prone to committing abhorrent acts, then scrambling to cover up their crimes—Gina Haspel and the destruction of torture videos come to mind. Putin said in a televised address, ‘we want to know who ordered it.’
* Just in (11:11 am GMT, 26 March): Nikolai Patrushev of the Security Council of the Russian Federation responds to the question ‘ISIS or Ukraine’ with ‘definitely Ukraine.’
Where does the Kremlin go from here?
Political Capital with the Global South
Western governments and media outlets believe their perspectives are influential. In the recent past, yes, but not today. The term ‘Golden Billion’ is a pejorative. Putin used it twice in his interview with Tucker Carlson. It refers to the ‘collective west’: North America, Europe, UK, Australia, and New Zealand. The Global South are the erstwhile ‘developing nations’ or ‘Third World’ (Latin America, Africa, Asia). The Global South plus Russia and China believe they are unfairly treated by the Golden Billion; BRICS+ is an outgrowth of this resentment. The Global South includes about six billion souls; and BRICS+ surpasses G7 in GDP as measured by PPP. Putin and Xi have diligently courted the Global South, and made inroads to Latin America and Africa. In June 2023, Putin showed African leaders the tentative peace agreement with Ukraine struck in Istanbul that was scuttled by Boris Johnson. This enabled him to bolster the original Russian argument that the Russia-Ukraine War was ‘imposed’ by multiple waves of NATO expansion, and where Russia’s attempts at a negotiated settlement with Ukraine before 24 February 2022 and then in April 2022 were thwarted by the Golden Billion, which wanted nothing more than Russia’s military defeat. By publishing a dossier of Ukrainian involvement in the 22 March terror attacks, Putin will gather more political capital in the Global South. A powerful argument to be made is that NATO is a party to terrorism by continuing to support Ukraine. Hitherto, terror attacks by Ukraine on Russian civilians—the assassination of Darya Dugina, shelling of Belgorod, and more—have been ignored by western media. If they continue to ignore Russian evidence and support Ukraine, it will reinforce interpretations widely held in the Global South, especially within its potent subset, BRICS+, that the Golden Billion, which insists on daily genuflections by the Global South to their unpublished holy book, The Rules Based Order©,[1] is hypocritical and using The Rules Based Order© to keep blacks and browns politically feeble and economically impoverished, and dependent on ‘whitey’ for endless streams of foreign aid and IMF loans. Russia’s supply of free grain to select countries in Asia and Africa strengthens bonds that date to the USSR and Cold War. To date, only the Golden Billion plus military dependencies—South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan—support Ukraine and the ‘unprovoked’ war narrative, supply arms to Kiev, or recognize US/EU sanctions. The Global South stands neutral or behind Russia. They do not recognize sanctions imposed by the Golden Billion.
Special Military Operation
The ‘Special Military Operation’ is low key relative to Russia’s ability to project force; only an estimated 20% of available resources and manpower are being used. There are many reasons for this, one of them being to minimize political fallout in the Global South if Russia goes ‘full throttle’ against Ukraine. Dmitri Peskov, Kremlin spokesman, said that the SMO had ‘escalated’ to a ‘war’ given the active involvement of NATO. Does this mean a formal declaration of war is forthcoming? Probably not. A declaration of war brings with it legal obligations that Russia may prefer to avoid.
Escalation
There will be escalation but not of the type that detracts the Russian Armed Forces (RuAF) from their current strategy. The ‘contact line’ is under enormous pressure by RuAF; it is crumbling in key spots. A Ukrainian collapse is inevitable but not imminent. RuAF’s westward push to secure territories east of the Dnieper, and down to Odessa (to landlock Ukraine), will continue. There will be consequences, however, for the Crocus terror attack.
1. Turning the Lights Out
On 21 March 2024, RuAF struck several power plants and dam on the Dnieper, turning off lights and heating, and forcing Ukraine to import electricity from Poland, Slovakia, and Romania. Expect more such attacks. They serve several purposes, one of which is depopulation: Ukrainian speakers will move west of the Dnieper as life becomes harder without energy supplies, while Russian speakers move east. This makes RuAF’s tasks easier, and minimizes casualties. An exodus of Ukrainians is a critical objective. Russia does not want hostile peoples living in its new territories. Russian speakers can return to their homes after Russia wins and rebuilds ruined urban areas.
2. Ukrainian Leadership and Regime Change
Return to the status quo before Maydan is an objective. A ‘friendly’ government in Kiev that is de facto or de jure neutral. Kiev’s leadership, especially military and intelligence leaders, are at heightened risk of decapitation strikes. Head of FSB, Aleksander Bortnikov, announced that Ukraine’s Kyrylo Budanov, head of GUR (the ‘Main Directorate of Intelligence’), ‘is a legitimate target for the Russian Armed Forces, as are all those who commit crimes against Russia.’Already, ‘decision-making centers, SBU [Ukr Security Service] facilities, and Ukrainian defense industry enterprises have been struck.’ In the last 24 hours RuAF hit ‘the top management of the SBU.’ Zelensky is safe—for the moment. He is more useful to the Kremlin alive than dead. But that will change once RuAF advances to the Dnieper and the Kremlin is confident that it can successfully effect ‘regime change’ in Kiev.
3. ‘De-NATO-fication’
RuAF and Russians in general have chafed at overt support for Ukraine by U.S., UK, and NATO, which includes NATO troops disguised as ‘mercenaries’ and ISR flights prior to strikes on RuAF assets and Crimea. CIA has twelve centers in Ukraine. They will surely be targeted. ‘De-Nazification’ will become secondary to ‘de-NATO-fication.’ A price for NATO support that has killed Russians will be exacted by RuAF. Blood for blood.
4. Iran and the Middle East
Iran is a founding member of the ‘Coalition of the Sanctioned.’ Iran-Russia military cooperation since the start of SMO has increased. Cooperation will continue, and possibly accelerate. Important Russian voices have suggested that the Kremlin should support a ‘proxy war’ in Middle East against American forces. Will this come to pass?
Conclusion
Whatever bizarre logic propelled leaders in Kiev to contract a terrorist atrocity against concert attendees in Moscow will blowback against them. Russian citizens are uniting behind Putin and RuAF stronger than before. Their emotions have been inflamed. The Clausewitzian Trinity—Emotion, Chance, Reason—governs more strongly the emotions and actions of RuAF, and the Russian citizens that back their troops. Emotion—defined as ‘primordial hatred, violence, and enmity’—has been aroused, but anger will not detract the Kremlin and lead it to make foolhardy decisions—like the U.S. did with Iraq. The Kremlin’s actions will continue to be dominated by reason—with war ‘as an instrument of policy.’ The objectives of removing Kiev’s leadership and creating a buffer zone between Russia and NATO will not be derailed.
[1] See Andreas Kluth, ‘Ditch the ‘Rules-Based International Order’ (Bloomberg, 8 February 2024).
Perspectives 
You must be logged in to post a comment.