In Russia, the death toll from the attack claimed by the Islamic State group stands at 93 dead and dozens injured. It can still increase according to the authorities. In the early evening of March 22, armed men entered a concert hall located in the suburbs of Moscow. They opened fire before a fire spread over nearly 13,000 m². The Kremlin announces 11 arrests, including four suspected attackers. Interview with Emilia Koustova, professor of Russian history at the University of Strasbourg.
3 mins
RFI: This Saturday morning, no Russian media mentioned this claim from the Islamic State group, but rather the trail of Russian volunteers engaged alongside Ukraine. How do you analyze it?
Emilia Koustova: Whatever its true authors, this attack will certainly be exploited by the Russian authorities. She already was from the first minutes last night [22 mars, NDLR]. Obviously, Ukraine, or the volunteer corps of Russians fighting on the side of the Ukrainians, are obvious and ideal suspects for the Russian authorities. This would make it possible to use the terrorist act to mobilize or remobilize Russian society against Ukraine. But perhaps also seek to influence international public opinion, to weaken Western support for Ukraine.
Russia, which is already mobilized externally in Ukraine, is now targeted internally. Does this show a security flaw in Vladimir Putin’s policy?
Every terrorist act partly reveals a flaw. This is all the more striking in a state like Russia which is a police state, monitored, where an inscription on a label in a store or a post on a social network can be sentenced to prison. We were struck by the images we saw last night at the scene of the tragedy, while the fire continued. For example, in a group of journalists, one of them was violently beaten by a police officer. We do not know why. We see that the Russian police are very well trained to beat up, arrest and follow opponents or journalists. It turns out to be much less effective against terrorist acts.
What could be the reaction of the Russian authorities to this attack? ?
For the moment, Vladimir Poutine stays behind. We immediately got the information that he would be informed of what was happening, but he did not want to speak. Above all, he allowed characters to speak, some of whom are important, such as the spokesperson for the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, or certain deputies and senators who are much less central. And these are the people who have put forward the thesis of Ukrainian involvement, while Putin keeps a distance. This has often been the case in the face of any tragedy of this type, where he mainly sent those around him to the front line, but always kept this distance so as not to be directly accused of any fault, any dysfunction and to be able to remain unreachable. by critics.