A senior Russian Opposition leader has been assassinated. But it’s unlikely that President Putin ordered the hit. So, who did the jobIJ
Every time I call (my mother)”, said Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov recently, “she gives me a talking-to: ‘When will you stop being rude about PutinIJ He'll kill you’.” Now Nemtsov is dead: Four bullets in the chest as he was walking home in Moscow with his girlfriend last Friday night. The protest march against President Vladimir Putin and the war in Ukraine, that he was planning to lead on Sunday became a memorial march instead.
So, two questions: Did President Putin order the assassinationIJ And if he didn't, then who did, and whyIJ The hit was carried out with professional skill only three minutes' walk from Red Square, St Basil's Cathedral and the Kremlin, in an area that is infested day and night by militia (police) on constant alert to break up demonstrations. You could put together a feature-length film with the footage from the countless CCTV cameras that tracked Nemtsov's walk across the square and down to the bridge where he died.
It took accurate intelligence to know where Nemtsov would be on Friday night, and serious organisation and planning to carry out the killing in such a heavily policed area. That points to members of the military or security forces, though not necessarily to ones who were acting on official orders. Because the first thing to say about this murder is that it did not serve Mr Putin's purposes.
No doubt the Russian President disliked and despised Nemtsov, but neither he nor any other opposition leader pose any threat to Mr Putin's power. Thanks in large part to his seizure of Crimea and his military intervention in eastern Ukraine, Mr Putin is currently enjoying an 85 per cent approval rating with the Russian public. Why risk upsetting this happy relationship with the first public killing of a senior political figure in more than a decadeIJ
It's much more likely that the killing was carried out by serving or former soldiers or intelligence officers who took it upon themselves to eliminate an ‘anti-patriotic’ politician who condemned ‘Putin's War’ in Ukraine. In the super-heated atmosphere of nationalist paranoia that currently prevails in Russia, such people could easily imagine that they were doing just what Mr Putin secretly wanted.
As for the rest of the world (or at least the Western part of the world), it has already written Mr Putin off as a man you can do business with. The Russian leader is, in many Westerners' eyes, an expansionist warlord who can only be contained by sanctions and threats. It may even take a new Cold War to stop him. Paranoia, alas, is a communicable disease.
The Western narrative that seeks to explain how, in less than a year, we have arrived at a point where the US is contemplating supplying heavy weapons to Ukraine to kill Russian troops, has several large gaps. The first is that the revolution in Kiev last winter overthrew a legitimately elected Ukrainian President only a year before the next election was due.
Mr Putin initially accepted that outcome (with the elections moved up to only one month in the future), which was brokered by the European Union. In other words, he accepted the illegal overthrow of the pro-Moscow President, Mr Viktor Yanukovych, so long as a free election followed — quite possibly because he thought Mr Yanukovych's supporters in the east might boost him back into the presidency again.
That same thought may also be why the revolutionaries in Kiev broke the deal and insisted on Mr Yanukovych's immediate removal from power. It was only then that Mr Putin concluded that he was faced with a Western plot to whisk Ukraine into Nato and create a strategic and political threat on Russia's southern frontier.
There was no such plot: Nato has not the slightest desire to assume responsibility for the defence of Ukraine. But there was a great deal of open Western rejoicing at Russia's discomfiture, and Mr Putin lost his cool and responded with the annexation of Crimea and then the encouragement of pro-Russian rebels in southeastern Ukraine.
“Absolute power corrupts absolutely,” said lord Acton. “All great men are bad.” In that sense, Mr Putin is a bad man, and more dangerous for being both paranoid and increasingly isolated. (His circle of advisers has dwindled to a handful of hawks.) But he is not planning to conquer even Ukraine, let alone the rest of the former Soviet empire. He almost certainly did not order Nemtsov's death.