Introductory confirmation from the St. Petersburg dreaded assault points to an arranged endeavor by Western governments to attempt and remove Russian President Vladimir Putin from office.
On April third, a blast at St. Petersburg metro murdered 14 individuals and left another 49 hospitalized. Data about what happened is still rare. Notwithstanding, we do realize that a second explosive device, indistinguishable to the main, was found by law implementation authorities close-by.
One thing is known for sure: ISIS, the main Islamist organization on the planet, has not claimed responsibility for this terrorist attack. Perhaps something will change and we still have yet to hear of an Islamist trace.
Nevertheless, we regard the terrorist attack of April 3rd to be preparation for disrupting the presidential elections scheduled for March 18, 2018. This conclusion is based on the many oddities of this terrorist act. Perhaps it really was carried out by a Kyrgyzstan native, but is an Islamist internationale the one that ordered this crime? The history of international terrorism is full of examples where fanatical killers or suicide-bombers were “shadily” used by governments’ intelligence services or, on the contrary, those ordering terrorist acts were covered under the veil of Islamic terrorism (recall September 11th, 2001).
But the most important point allowing the version of an Islamist terrorist attack to be regarded skeptically is something else. This is the fact that in the new world balance of power, Russia is breaking the links binding it to the West and is transforming into an independent center of power, or rather into the main rebel of global geopolitics.
Now a small digression. In September 2013, I delivered a report at an international conference in Moscow in which I stated that Russia is, through its declarations (Putin’s Munich Speech) and deeds (Russia’s local war against the avant-garde of the collective West in August 2008), breaking the established New World Order (Pax Americana). Yet these actions of Russia’s are more than just a particular case of “rebellion.” Putin’s Russia is restoring the violated principle of national sovereignty. Let us note that this was long before the Crimean Spring and the peninsula’s reunification with Russia, after which the rift between Russia and the West became irreversible.
Nevertheless, after Crimea’s return Russia still retained very strong and numerous threads connecting it with the West. In the sphere of financial and economic policy, Russia is still stooped in liberal-Western discourse. A significant part of the ruling establishment headed by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev continues to be oriented towards the West. The influx of new personnel into the political and administrative spheres has been too slow. As a result, President Vladimir Putin is metaphysically lonely.
The very powerful (perhaps most powerful) forces of the West are interested in whatever is necessary to remove President Putin and prevent his election or the election of one of his proteges. Perhaps their plans include organizing turbulence in Russia similar to as in Ukraine. Therefore, it is perhaps no coincidence that the terrorist attack in Saint Petersburg took place the day after a loud but ineffective opposition protest.
If our intuitive assumption proves correct, then the terrorist attack in the St. Petersburg metro is the first “harbinger” boding an active year in Russia. And it will be followed by other resonant crimes and protests whose aim is the same despite their divergences. That goal is blowing up Russia from within ahead of elections, and frustrating and turning the people of Russia against Vladimir Putin.