False flag? Analysts say Russia ‘likely staged’ Kremlin drone attack it blamed on Ukraine and the West

False flag? Analysts say Russia 'likely staged' Kremlin drone attack it blamed on Ukraine and the West

A sign prohibiting unmanned aerial vehicles flying over the area is on display near the State Historical Museum and the Kremlin wall in central Moscow, Russia, May 3, 2023. 

Evgenia Novozhenina | Reuters

Speculation is mounting that Russia staged the drone attack on the Kremlin that it blamed on Ukraine, with political analysts saying there are a number of reasons why the alleged strike — which Russia called a “planned terrorist attack” — just doesn’t add up.

Russia accused Ukraine of attempting to attack the Kremlin Wednesday, saying the government in Kyiv had tried to strike at the heart of Russia’s government in Moscow using two unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones.

Russian President Vladimir Putin was not injured, the Kremlin said in a statement, in what it characterized as an assassination attempt (in fact, Putin had not been in the Kremlin at the time of the alleged incident) but did not provide any evidence that Ukraine had carried out the attack.

Ukraine denied any involvement in the incident, with officials saying it more likely signaled that Russia was planning a large-scale terrorist attack against Ukraine in the coming days.

Russia has often been accused of plotting “false flag” attacks that it can blame on Ukraine, and use to justify or escalate its own military aggression against the country as the war drags on into its 15th month.

“Of course, Ukraine has nothing to do with drone attacks on the Kremlin. We do not attack the Kremlin because, first of all, it does not resolve any military tasks,” Mykhailo Podolyak, an Ukrainian presidential advisor, noted.

The Kremlin went further in its accusations on Thursday, claiming that Washington had helped Ukraine to plot and orchestrate the drone attack. Again, it did not provide any evidence for its claim.

‘Staged’ attack?

A still image taken from video shows a flying object exploding in an intense burst of light near the dome of the Kremlin Senate building during the alleged Ukrainian drone attack in Moscow, Russia, in this image taken from video obtained by Reuters May 3, 2023. 

Ostorozhno Novosti | Reuters

As such, the ISW noted, it was therefore “extremely unlikely” that two drones could have “penetrated multiple layers of air defense and detonated or been shot down just over the heart of the Kremlin in a way that provided spectacular imagery caught nicely on camera.”

In addition, the Kremlin’s “immediate, coherent, and coordinated response” to the incident also raised suspicion, suggesting that the attack was “internally prepared in such a way that its intended political effects outweigh its embarrassment,” the think tank noted.

Had the attack been a surprise, the ISW believed, “it is very likely that the official Russian response would initially have been much more disorganized as Russian officials scrambled to generate a coherent narrative and offset the rhetorical implications of a clear informational embarrassment.”

CNBC contacted the Kremlin for a response to claims that it was likely behind the drone attack itself. It has not yet responded.

Doubts over the footage

Doubts about the authenticity of the attack quickly started to arise as video footage began to circulate on social media purportedly showing the drone attacks.

Videos showed smoke rising above the Kremlin and wreckage on fire on the domed building of the Senate Palace within the Kremlin’s walls. Another video showed a drone exploding above the domed building of the Senate. Beady-eyed viewers were quick to say two unidentified figures could be seen climbing on the domed roof when the drone detonated.

A view of the roof of Senate Palace of the Kremlin from Red Square on May 3, 2023 in Moscow, Russia. It appears undamaged after video footage showed drone wreckage on fire on the building.

Contributor | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Questions have also been asked as to why the Kremlin waited so long, hours after the incident purportedly took place, to announce it and just why Russian social media channels, usually a-flutter with talk about the war with Ukraine, Russian military strategy and leadership, had been silent about an incident that allegedly took place in full sight (albeit at night) in central Moscow.

Why, too, did videos of the “attack” only appear after the incident and, indeed, who captured the footage — and what prompted them to start filming it just moments before the drones were shown above the Kremlin?

Western officials were also quick to cast doubt over Russia’s claim that Ukraine had made an attempt on the Russian president’s life. For one, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. could not validate Russia’s accusation and that the claim should be taken with a “very large shaker of salt.”

Analysts also note that, were the incident an assassination attempt, it would reflect a poor understanding of the highest security being operated by the Kremlin, or of Putin’s habits.

“People should really stop talking about this as an attempted assassination attempts against Putin,” Mark Galeotti, a political analyst, academic and author of a number of books on Russia, said soon after the alleged incident emerged, saying this was “just playing to Kremlin talking points.”

“He notoriously rarely goes to the Kremlin, let alone stays there overnight, and there were no scheduled early morning meetings or the like there which might make one assume he might be in his (palatial) flat there,” Galeotti noted on Twitter.

Russian President Vladimir Putin takes part in a ceremony launching production at the Kovykta gas field, which will feed into the Power of Siberia pipeline carrying Russian gas to China, via a video link in Moscow, Russia, December 21, 2022.

Mikhail Kuravlev | Sputnik | Reuters

“Besides, that is, I understand, quite well protected. Not quite a bunker, but something that would be hard to hit by anything unable to make some sharp turns, which would make it vulnerable,” Galeotti added.

He added that were we to presume Ukraine was indeed behind the “attack” it should be considered more of a “performative strike, a demonstration of capability and a declaration of intent” along the lines of “don’t think Moscow is safe.”

Why do it?

Analysts are careful to state that it’s impossible to know precisely who launched the drones. What matters instead, they note, is the implications of the “attack” and how Russia will use it at a domestic or international level.

The timing of the purported attack, coming just days ahead of the May 9 Victory Day parade commemorating the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany, has not gone un-noticed — nor was it meant to, analysts said.

The Kremlin said the drone attack had taken place “on the eve of Victory Day, the May 9th Parade, at which the presence of foreign guests is also planned.”

It added that “the Russian side reserves the right to take retaliatory measures where and when it sees fit” also suggesting the attack could be used to justify an escalation of its aggression against Ukraine.

Moscow likely hoped that the incident would bolster its attempts to portray Ukraine as an existential threat to Russia, analysts said, particularly ahead of this year’s Victory Day parade, a slimmed-down affair this year with Russian officials citing “security considerations” and concerns over possible attacks.

Russia has “considerable firepower” and it is reckless to talk about defeating the country, Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University said.

Tian Bing | China News Service | Getty Images

admin