Accusations, denials, speculations and scenarios have been provoked attack by two drones, at noon on Wednesday, in the complex of buildings of the Kremlinheart of the Russian state.

Moscow blames the attack on Kyiv, calling it “an attempt to assassinate the Russian president” and asserting its right to retaliate. Kyiv categorically denies the allegations.

So far, no one can speak with certainty about this event. Nevertheless Russian calls for retaliation grow, as do Western analysts’ fears of escalation.

Geo-validated study.

UAV attack on the Kremlin.
(Never thought I’d ever write this.)

Russia: “Two drones tried to attack the Kremlin, the residence of Vladimir Putin, and were shot down. This is an assassination attempt on President Putin on the eve of Victory Day.”

1/X pic.twitter.com/h7iHVw78cv

— GeoConfirmed (@GeoConfirmed) May 3, 2023

Some express concern about its escalation Russian attack on Ukraine with yesterday’s incident as an alibi, while NATO warns of a “significant” risk of Russian sabotage of submarine cables risking disrupting “life in the West”, from Internet services to natural gas supplies.

Others fear the implementation of Russia’s nuclear doctrine, which says that if Russia faces an “existential threat” in the form of a nuclear or conventional attack, it may use its nuclear weapons.

However, as Phillips O’Brien, professor of strategic studies at the University of St. Andrews, points out, the possibility of boosting Russian nuclear power is unlikely. “They’re not going to say, ‘Now that there’s been a tiny drone attack, let’s go nuclear,'” he said.

On the same wavelength and Abbas Kalyamov, former press secretary of President Putin, who left Russia. “If enemy drones reach the Kremlin, then any other target on the territory of the European part of Russia is generally defenseless. Therefore, I do not believe that this was a provocation conceived by the Kremlin in order to influence public opinion,” he said.

It is reported that it was at this moment that a drone crashed into the Kremlin. pic.twitter.com/MiUob8fSV9

— Anton Gerashchenko (@Gerashchenko_ru) May 3, 2023

If this was indeed an attack by Ukraine, “it should be considered as one demonstration blow and a statement of intent aimed at they say that even in Moscow it is not safe“says Mark Galeotti, a Russian military and security analyst at University College London.

However, if Moscow’s allegations of a Ukrainian attack and genuine attempt on the life of Putin, one of the most closely guarded leaders on the planet, are true, “this is extremely embarrassing incident for the Kremlin,” notes Will Vernon of the BBC.

Four Scenarios for an Assailant

But if not Kyiv, then who else could strike at one of the most protected points in Europe against the backdrop of the conflict in Ukraine?

Tom Nichols of The Atlantic sees four scenarios for “masterminds” of yesterday’s strategic attack.

“Firstly, perhaps the Ukrainians or some Ukrainian group used drones in Moscow. But it is unlikely that they did, because it makes no sense. An attack on the Kremlin would have been clearly a symbolic action, but hitting an empty building at night would be a waste of time of the already limited resources of the Ukrainian special services and is likely to irritate the Americans and NATO, ”he notes.

“It is highly unlikely that two drones penetrated several layers of air defenses and were shot down right over the heart of the Kremlin in such a way as to get impressive camera images,” the Institute for the Study of War think tank said in a report. .

The second possibility, Nichols says, is that Russian intelligence and military authorities learned of the plan to attack the Kremlin but allowed it to develop without preventing it from being used as a means to escalate violence in Ukraine.

“My friend Nick Gvostnev, of the Institute for Foreign Policy Studies, reminded me that Russian spies are not exactly averse to such rude actions: in 2002, terrorists took hostages in a theater in central Moscow, and in subsequent years there were accusations that the special services knew about attack and, in spite of everything, allowed it to be used as a means for a greater force to deal with such events, ”he emphasizes, specifying, however, that this scenario does not consider the possible.

According to Nichols, perhaps the attack came from Russian dissidents – especially if it was carried out by some kind of “dummy” device …

“But then again, this is unlikely, although not impossible, especially in the face of growing public anger over the massive conscription that was supposed to cover the Russian countryside and never touch Moscow and St. Petersburg. In this case, Russian intelligence would have every reason to blame Kyiv, because the worst thing is only preventing the strike of Ukrainian special forces it would be attempted murder Putin by the Russians right under their noses“, he says himself.

Nichols is cited as the most “worrisome possibility» scenario in question “Russian project created by the government from start to finish”arguing that there are many reasons why this makes more sense than other explanations.

An attack on the Kremlin, he said, would give Putin an alibi and “legitimation” for further “dramatic and deadly actions,” not necessarily of a military nature, that would destabilize Ukraine in the face of an expected major counter-offensive.

The ISW report notes that “the Kremlin may use the attack to justify either cancellation or further restriction of May 9 celebrations“.

“I think the Russians are afraid of this upcoming operation and want to change the course of events at home and abroad. I have no idea what Putin has up his sleeve, but even in his best days he is prone to strategically stupid moves. He may try to drag Belarus into the war. This could lead to new nuclear threats or even ordered to intensify efforts to assassinate ZelenskyNichols appreciates.

Source: The Atlantic/New York Times/ABC/BBC/Guardian.