Latest news with #CrocusCityHall
Russia Today
9 hours ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
Moscow concert hall massacre carried out ‘in the interest' of Ukraine
Last year's terrorist attack on a concert hall outside Moscow, which killed nearly 150 people, was intended to destabilize Russia to Ukraine's benefit, Russia's Investigative Committee (Sledkom) said on Monday, marking the conclusion of its criminal investigation. On March 22, 2024, four gunmen opened fire inside the Crocus City Hall concert venue and set the building ablaze, killing 149 people and injuring 609 others. One person remains missing. According to Sledkom, all of the attackers were detained after fleeing the scene and attempting to reach Ukraine by car. All 19 individuals charged in connection with the attack are ethnic Tajiks. The four alleged gunmen – Dalerdhzon Mirzoyev, Saidokrami Rachabalizoda, Shamsiddin Fariduni, and Muhammadsobir Faizov – are citizens of Tajikistan. Although the Islamic State's Khorasan Province (ISIS-K), a regional offshoot of the Islamic State jihadist group, claimed responsibility for the attack, Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested at the time that Ukraine may have played a role. Kiev has denied any involvement. 'This heinous crime was planned and carried out in the interest of Ukraine's leadership, with the goal of destabilizing the political situation in our country,' Investigative Committee spokesperson Svetlana Petrenko said. She confirmed that the accused are members of ISIS-K. Petrenko added that some of the suspects received training abroad and had also planned to attack 'an entertainment venue' in the city of Kaspiysk, located in the Muslim-majority Russian republic of Dagestan on the Caspian Sea. Russia has experienced a recent surge in Islamist terrorism, including a June 2024 attack on several synagogues and Christian churches in Derbent, Dagestan, which left 27 people dead.
Indian Express
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Can India rely on Russia to diplomatically isolate Pakistan? It seems unlikely
Written by Aleksei Zakharov The status of India-Russia relations as a 'strategic and privileged partnership' has always imposed additional expectations on how the relationship should progress and how the two sides should support each other in difficult times. Contrary to this logic, there has been a gradual erosion of the convergence of geopolitical views between Moscow and New Delhi, with fewer signs of alignment on global, regional and strategic issues. This has led to their stance towards each other being subject to more diverse interpretations. The Russian official response to the Pahalgam terrorist attack and Operation Sindoor is a case in point. At first glance, it looks as though Moscow ticked all the right boxes in its response. Russian President Vladimir Putin quickly condemned the terrorist attack as a 'brutal crime' with 'no justification whatsoever' and expressed hope that the perpetrators would face a 'deserved punishment'. Subsequently, he reached out to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to reiterate his condemnation of the 'barbaric terrorist attack in Pahalgam' and emphasise the need to 'uncompromisingly fight terrorism in all its forms'. This strong language from the Russian leader is unsurprising, given that Russia itself has fallen victim to major terrorist attacks in the past, such as the Crocus City Hall attack in the Moscow region in March 2024. When India launched Operation Sindoor, Russia called on New Delhi and Islamabad 'to exercise restraint' and 'resolve their differences through peaceful, political and diplomatic means on a bilateral basis'. While the Russian response was generally perceived as an act of solidarity with India, there are some nuances that require further scrutiny. Firstly, while Indian diplomats were engaged in a series of phone calls with various foreign partners, it took over 10 days for the Russian and Indian foreign ministers to hold a telephone conversation. This delay stood in contrast with New Delhi's many other diplomatic engagements in the days following the Pahalgam attack. Secondly, as with the reaction to the 2019 Pulwama terrorist attack, Moscow once again attempted to strike a balance between New Delhi and Islamabad, offering 'to contribute to a political settlement' if both sides 'are mutually willing'. Despite being well aware that Delhi rejects third-party mediation and insists that Kashmir is a bilateral issue, Moscow continues to offer its services as a crisis broker, which obviously plays into Pakistan's hands. Thirdly, since Moscow and Islamabad have expanded their areas and levels of cooperation over the last decade, Russia is no longer in a position to put pressure on Pakistan regarding cross-border terrorism. With Russian and Pakistani special forces now conducting annual anti-terrorist exercises and foreign ministry officials highlighting the 'positive dynamics' and prospects of counter-terrorism cooperation, it is unlikely that Moscow would publicly call out Islamabad, even if it does suspect the Pakistani intelligence services of having links to terrorist groups operating in Kashmir. Russia's pragmatic stance following the Pahalgam attack also stems from its continued reliance on the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in its broader strategy for Eurasia. Despite the organisation failing to bring about any tangible changes to the regional security situation and not leading to the improvement of India-Pakistan relations as some in Russia had expected, Moscow still sees the SCO as a key mechanism for Eurasian integration. This approach means Russian diplomacy is forced to tread carefully between New Delhi and Islamabad, both of which have been SCO members since 2017. Despite the common wisdom that Russia's foreign policy, including its shifting approach to South Asia, may be under Chinese sway, there is no solid evidence to confirm this. Indeed, there have been instances of trilateral coordination between China, Pakistan and Russia, such as their consultations on Afghanistan, which have recently evolved into a quadrilateral format with the inclusion of Iran. Furthermore, in late April 2025, Moscow and Beijing discussed the security situation in South Asia, which undoubtedly included the rising tensions between India and Pakistan. However, Russia has not bought into the China-Pakistan narrative of holding 'a fair and just investigation' into the Pahalgam attack; instead, it has advocated a joint 'fight against the global terrorist threat' together with India. The level of cooperation between Russia and Pakistan is nowhere near that of India and Russia. While India and Russia have a long-standing partnership spanning various sectors that has weathered many storms, Moscow's engagement with Islamabad is still in its infancy and is hampered by Pakistan's cash-strapped economy and unstable domestic politics. Whereas Russia has shared with India its cutting-edge defence systems, such as the S-400, which have proven instrumental in bolstering India's defence against Pakistan's air strikes. There is nothing as substantial in sight in Russia's dealings with Pakistan. That said, Russia has acted as a neutral party in the recent India-Pakistan conflict. While India can still rely on Russia's emotional diplomacy, Moscow seems to stop halfway when it comes to providing political support for Delhi's case, steering clear of making any critical remarks towards Islamabad and Rawalpindi. India must take this into account when preparing for a future crisis. The writer is a Fellow with the Strategic Studies Programme at Observer Research Foundation
Reuters
28-02-2025
- Business
- Reuters
Russia's Severstal warns of construction risks as region bans migrant labour
MOSCOW, Feb 28 (Reuters) - Russian steelmaker Severstal ( opens new tab on Friday slammed a decision by a regional governor to ban migrant workers in the construction industry and said the move could cause serious harm to industrial projects. The company reacted swiftly and sharply to the ban, announced in a decree on Thursday by Georgy Filimonov, governor of the Vologda region northwest of Moscow. The rare public clash between a powerful regional politician and a major business highlights Russia's reliance on migrant workers and the difficulties that companies are facing as the country grapples with a widespread shortage of labour. "Such measures jeopardise the implementation of dozens of construction projects, both in the region's industrial and social spheres," Severstal said in a statement on the ban. It said the move would "seriously complicate" its plan to build a low-pollution iron ore factory in Cherepovets, a major city in the region, where it plans to invest over 120 billion roubles ($1.36 billion) this year, and could jeopardise a contract with a Chinese supplier. Heavy recruitment by the armed forces and defence industries has drawn workers away from civilian enterprises, and hundreds of thousands of Russians have left the country since President Vladimir Putin sent his army into Ukraine in 2022. With unemployment at a record low of 2.3%, Putin has flagged labour shortages as a major economic problem. Filimonov, the Vologda governor, did not state the grounds for the migrant ban, but he has publicly questioned why businesses cannot recruit local workers. Migrant workers from Central Asia have described growing hostility towards them in Russia since Islamist militants from Tajikistan attacked the Crocus City Hall, a concert venue near Moscow, killing 145 people, in March 2024. Nationalist politicians are ratcheting up rhetoric against foreigners and pushing legislation that impacts the lives of migrants working in Russia or those wanting to do so. Filimonov in October published a video showing workers putting the finishing touches to a new, life-sized statue of Soviet-era leader Josef Stalin. Videos previously published by Filimonov demonstrate an affinity for Soviet leaders, and photographs of secret police chiefs Lavrentiy Beria and Felix Dzerzhinsky hang on the walls of his office. He has dubbed a painting of himself shaking hands with Stalin, which hangs in his reception room, as "conceptual". Severstal said its repeated efforts to engage with the regional administration had been rebuffed. "Instead of constructive interaction, we were confronted with the distortion of facts, manipulation and a refusal to comply with agreements already reached," Severstal said. ($1 = 88.4500 roubles)
