How will Putin respond to the assassination attempt in Moscow?

A clear and present danger.

For more than a year now — for almost a decade, since the occupation and annexation of Crimea, in fact — that’s what Russia has been to neighboring Ukraine.

But a rash of increasingly daring incidents – capped by Wednesday’s apparent attack by two drones on the Kremlin in Moscow – aim to show that the script is being turned dangerously upside down as an emboldened Ukraine mounts its bid to recapture occupied territory.

Unmanned aerial vehicles that crashed into the dome of the Kremlin’s Senate building, which houses President Vladimir Putin’s executive office, were not fatal, Russian officials said.

But it is among the boldest and most symbolic strikes against the seat of Russian political power since it invaded Ukraine in February 2022.

Russian officials say Putin was not present at the time and that there were no other casualties. Video of the aftermath appeared to show part of the building’s roof burning, directly beneath the waving Russian flag.

However, the press service of the Kremlin reported the incident as “a planned terrorist attack and an assassination attempt targeting the president.”

“Russia reserves the right to take countermeasures wherever and whenever it deems appropriate,” he added.

In other words, the attack risks ushering in a new and unpredictable stage in the deadly conflict.

Moscow says Ukraine is behind the drone attacks, although an adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy denied that the country’s military or intelligence services were responsible.

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken struck a skeptical note also.

“I see the reports. I cannot in any way validate them. We just don’t know,” he said. “Second, I would take anything coming out of the Kremlin with a very large shaker of salt. So let’s see. We’ll see what the facts are.”

Maria Popova, an associate professor specializing in post-Soviet politics at McGill University, said she sees no upside for Ukraine in carrying out such a spectacular attack on Russian soil.

“It will only galvanize the Russians,” he said. “This is completely counterproductive for Ukraine. Why would the Ukrainians want that?”

However, leaked Pentagon documents, revealed that the United States urged Ukrainian intelligence services not to launch attacks in Moscow last February, on the one-year anniversary of the Russian invasion.

Russia said Ukrainian drones were used to strike a fuel depot last week in Sevastopol used by Russia’s Black Sea naval fleet.

And last month, the head of Ukraine’s military intelligence service, Kyrylo Budanov, boasted in an interview with New Voice media that Ukrainian drones were capable of reaching Moscow.

Lacking its own supplies of massive firepower, agility, stealth and surprise attacks have become a hallmark of Ukrainian forces.

But Popova said the drone attack on the Kremlin could have been a provocation – a “false flag” operation designed by Russia’s security services to justify an eventual harsh response.

Any number of factional Russian hawks could have an interest in escalating the war, said Lhasa Chandurije, a professor of international affairs at Norwich University in Vermont.

“If they did, the main reason would be to provoke (Putin) to do more than what the Russian state has done (so far),” he said.

The reaction in Ukrainian circles, and among others opposed to the Putin regime, ranges from celebration of the strikes’ symbolic resonance to fear of possible repercussions.

The security breach came as the Russian state and its military prepare for the annual May 9 Victory Day parade in Red Square, celebrating the defeat of Nazi Germany by the Soviet Union. It is something of a national holiday with deep cultural and historical significance for Russians.

Although such celebrations have been canceled for security reasons in some Russian cities near the Ukrainian border, Moscow’s parade will go ahead as planned, the Kremlin said on Wednesday.

But after hearing the news and seeing the video images of an explosion over the red-walled fortress, Muscovites will surely have a wary eye on the sky if they venture out for the parade next Tuesday.

This could be considered a strategic victory.

While Putin has tried to insulate his people from the economic shocks of the war and banned any expression of anti-war dissent, Ukraine and the West are trying with sanctions, diplomatic protests and a fierce information war to make Russians feel and understand the effects of the conflict. held in their name.

Aside from targeting his Kremlin offices, the threat of an armed strike on Moscow is one of Putin’s biggest concerns and among the stated reasons for invading Ukraine.

A few days before giving the order to his troops, Putin Ray of the existential threat posed by the eastern encroachment of the NATO military alliance. US cruise missiles, if launched from Ukraine, could reach Moscow in 35 minutes, he said, while ballistic missiles could reach the Russian capital in eight minutes and hypersonic attack weapons in just five.

“It’s like a knife to the throat,” Putin said.

While Kiev and its backers in NATO are committed to achieving the goal of Russia’s military defeat, there are differences over how to achieve a final victory.

Ukraine is said to be planning a counter-offensive in the coming days or weeks aimed at retaking occupied Ukrainian territory. Some analysts have predicted a major push that could push Russia back to pre-invasion positions by the end of the summer.

However, Tchantouridze said Western countries would prefer to see a protracted war of attrition in which Russian forces are severely degraded before suffering final defeat.

The surprise attacks, whether the work of the Ukrainian state or a group waging a secret war against Russia, offer a way to bypass the restrictions that NATO countries have imposed on Kiev.

Two drones crashing behind the Kremlin walls in the middle of the night won’t bring Russia to its knees, but the mess it makes presents Putin with an internal challenge.

Now he has to decide how to react.

Last year’s sinking of the Moskva, a Russian warship, in the Black Sea — a Ukrainian military missile strike against a Russian military asset — was an important early strategic and psychological victory for Ukraine, which Moscow has largely denied.

Two high-profile murders on Russian soil that killed journalist Darya Dugina, daughter of Russian nationalist Aleksandr Dugin, and military blogger Vladen Tatarsky were blamed by Russian officials in Ukraine but dealt with by the criminal justice system.

And last October, the day after Putin’s 70th birthday, a massive explosion destroyed part of the bridge connecting mainland Russia to Crimea, the Ukrainian peninsula annexed by Russia in 2014. The bombing was an embarrassment for Moscow, but also military setback, since Crimea is a supply hub and staging area for Russian forces.

“The main reason for the attack on the Kremlin is Zelensky’s and Washington’s and NATO’s confidence in impunity, that there will be no harsh response from Russia,” Sergei Markov, a pro-Russian political analyst, wrote on Telegram. “Russia has already allowed the West to cross dozens of red lines, and there is a strong belief in the West that Russia is afraid to retaliate.”

The most troubling of Russia’s red lines is the one used to justify the use of its nuclear arsenal in the event of an “existential threat” to the Russian state, although there has been no indication that Putin has or is considering ordering his nukes forces to higher alert after drone incidents.

Markov wrote that the use of smaller tactical nuclear weapons “will not give much military effect.”

“And it will lead to real political isolation of Russia in the world.”

Some Russian political leaders have already embraced this isolation and abandoned ambitions to regain favor with the West.

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who is now the elderly deputy chairman of Russia’s security council, wrote on Telegram that the attack on the Kremlin forces Russia to return to its original goal of regime change in Ukraine.

“After today’s terrorist attack, there are no other options left but the physical elimination of Zelensky and his ilk,” he wrote.

Others in Putin’s political circle will urge him to hold off, if not on the facts about who was behind the drone strike, at least until the most opportune moment to respond.

“The Russian leadership is not single-minded – although they meet it – so they will think about it first. … They are thinking of a response,” Tchantouridze said.

“Even if they find out it was done by some rogue element in Russia or Ukraine without the Ukrainian administration’s knowledge, they can use it as a measure to strike back against Ukrainian political objects.”

Alan Woods is a staff reporter for the Star based in Montreal. It covers global and national issues. Follow him on Twitter: @WoodsAllan

SHARE: