War fatigue left Russia open to terror attack

The March 22 attack on a packed concert hall in Moscow is a blow to Russian President Vladimir Putin with uncertain consequences for the country and the future of the war in Ukraine.

The attack was reportedly conducted by five men in camouflage who shot hundreds of people and set the building on fire. Over 115 people are dead and hundreds are wounded. As we write, the attackers are still at large.

ISIS-K, a radical Islamic organization based in Afghanistan, claimed responsibility for the attack. Russia fought ISIS in Syria while supporting the Assad rule in Damascus.

As news broke, senior Russian officials, such as former President Dmitry Medvedev, claimed that Ukraine was behind it. Kiev immediately denied any involvement.

In the past two weeks, the US had issued a warning about a possible terrorist attack in crowded places in major Russian cities. In the capital’s tense atmosphere rife with anti-American sentiment, some Russians see the warning as evidence of the US involvement in the attack.

It is unclear whether this will be an isolated incident or if more terrorist attacks are to be expected in the coming days. Increased security has been enforced in public places and transportation, imposing a heavy toll on the urban population.

Perhaps it is not essential who carried out the attack. The incident is a significant setback for Putin, coming shortly after elections that were widely believed to have been wholly rigged.

The attack revealed Russia’s vulnerability to terrorist attacks and underscored the need for systematic increased security in its cities. This new focus on internal security may impact war preparations in Ukraine as it may draw resources and attention from the frontline.

Moscow is amassing over 100,000 troops for a summer offensive to break through the Ukrainian defenses. Military-industrial production has increased over the past two years, and Moscow appears more prepared for a prolonged war of attrition.

It is uncertain whether the attack will be a minor distraction in the conflict or if terrorist threats will become a significant issue on the Russian home front.

The security failure is a sign of war fatigue in Russia.

In June of last year, Yevgeny Prigozhin, the leader of the Wagner mercenary group, rebelled and sent troops to march on Moscow in protest against Putin’s conduct in the war. In the initial year of fighting, Prigozhin’s frequent disputes with the generals over strategy helped keep the army on alert. It is unclear whether muzzling these disputes was beneficial to the war effort.

Despite having a greater supply of equipment and reinforcements, the Russian army has struggled to achieve significant results against Ukraine, leading to a prolonged and grinding war of attrition.

So far, major Russian cities have been largely shielded from the war’s spillover. Soldiers have mainly been recruited in rural areas and not urban areas. Greater security concerns and more threats in Moscow or Petersburg might change all of that.

In two years, it is the third major failure of Russian intelligence. The first was at the beginning of the war when Putin believed he could win in a couple of weeks.

The second was last year when he failed to see and prevent Prigozhin’s revolt. This is even more significant because the US warned him about it. Putin is an intelligence man, and these failures cast a shadow on his core abilities.

China, an essential player in Russia’s re-industrializing effort, could get cold feet about increased Moscow’s vulnerabilities. China has reportedly increased its machine tool exports to Russia ten-fold in the past two years. The attack and its fallout may lead to a rethink in Beijing.

This essay first appeared on Settimana News and is republished with permission. The original article can be read here.