On Sunday, gunmen linked to Islamic State attacked several locations in Russia’s Dagestan province, leaving at least 20 killed and 46 wounded . The attackers burnt down an empty synagogue and killed a Russian Orthodox priest while assaulting his church. On the same day, an ATACMS strike by Ukrainian forces was intercepted by Russian air defense, with one missile exploding over a beach and causing the death of at least four civilians with over 100 wounded . These attacks reinforce a Russian feeling of being under siege, weaken President Vladimir Putin’s image as a strong leader, and necessitate a future reaction on his part.
Though Russia conquered the Muslim-dominated Caucasus region in the 19th century, local unrest and violence continued through Tsarist and Soviet times. The fall of the Soviet Union only saw the region experience more brutal wars and instances of mass violence. During the high-water mark of the ISIS caliphate, thousands of Russian citizens from Dagestan joined the caliphate and subsequently returned home after its collapse.
The war in Ukraine has only exacerbated Russian ethnoreligious conflicts. Rural regions on the borders of Russia, including Dagestan, have provided an outsize number of military recruits. This mobilization has also led to labor shortages, causing the increased use of Central Asian migrant workers. Many of these migrants now face greater suspicion and discrimination following the Moscow attack in March that left 145 dead. The war in Gaza has also inflamed religious divisions, as seen when a mob stormed a Dagestan airport attempting to find Jewish passengers on a plane from Israel.
The ATACMS strike in Crimea has reinforced this sense of instability caused by foreign crises. The use of U.S.-made weaponry to attack Russian territory and the loss of civilian life has foisted upon the Kremlin another challenge to Putin’s authority.
These two recent attacks have threatened Putin’s image as a strong leader capable of maintaining domestic stability. His handling of the 1999 Russian apartment bombings as prime minister led him to win the 2000 presidential election. He knows that attacks on Russia can damage his standing with the public. After the 2004 Beslan school siege, which saw Chechen terrorists massacre hundreds of children, Putin only visited the hospitalized survivors in the middle of the night . He knew then that security failure hurt his public image.
This means that Putin has little choice but to react in some form. But against which threat: the West or the Islamist terrorists? In the Crocus City Hall attack, Russian state officials said the attackers had links with Ukrainian nationalists. Putin has already accused the West of fomenting separatism in the Caucasus. It seems likely that the reaction to the Dagestan attack will attempt to tie in alleged Western perfidy so ethnoreligious tensions can be downplayed.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Meanwhile, the ATACMS strike will be added to a long list of Russian grievances against Western support for Ukraine. This recent attack, combined with the recent agreement with North Korea and the deliveries of Western aid to Ukraine, means some form of progress or escalation in the war in Ukraine is likely in the near future.
A strongman’s regime requires a strong reaction to threats.
Most Popular
Comments / 0