The only indisputable facts about Wednesday’s Kremlin incident are that there were two explosions over Russia’s main political and cultural symbol around 2:30 a.m., and both Moscow and Ukraine reacted with outrage.
But whose indignation was real and who was feigned?
In this war, the battle for the story is as important as the battle in the field. While the Kremlin often lies and uses its powerful government-controlled media to create alternate realities, Ukraine too has proven itself adept at distorting the truth to serve its war agenda.
Breaking through the competing narratives to get to the truth can prove to be a tricky business, and that may be the point. Both parties benefit if their intentions and methods remain in the mist.
Was the apparent drone strike a bold but largely symbolic move by Ukraine to embarrass President Vladimir V. Putin as he prepares to lead the annual Victory Day Parade in Red Square next week? Was it a staged Russian provocation designed to justify even harsher attacks on the Ukrainian people, or perhaps against the Ukrainian leadership?
Or was it not carried out by either government, but by local Russian partisans who opposed the war, or rogue Ukrainian saboteurs?
Russia furiously accused Ukraine of trying to kill Putin with a drone strike, claiming a right to retaliate.
On Thursday, Putin’s spokesman Dmitri S. Peskov repeatedly said in a conference call with journalists that the United States had ordered the attack, without providing any evidence. “We know very well that the decisions about such actions and such acts of terror are not made in Kiev, but in Washington,” he said.
US officials strongly denied any involvement. On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” White House National Security Council communications chief John F. Kirby said, “Peskov just lays there, pure and simple.”
Ukraine also denied attempting to attack the Kremlin and accused Moscow of essentially fabricating a provocative incident to rally domestic support and justify escalation.
A Ukrainian attack on the seat of the Russian government would be a daring act. But the Kremlin said nothing about it for 12 hours.
When the press office finally got around to accusing Ukraine, it did so in an unusually detailed statement, suggesting it was keen for the episode to receive maximum public exposure.
That sparked a wave of public denials in Kiev, as well as some private head-scratching from Ukrainian officials who are usually quick with a wink and a nod to indicate association with bold and creative covert operations. They noted that the explosions were too small to accomplish much.
“Beautiful, but unfortunately ineffective,” a senior Ukrainian official said when asked about the attack shortly after the Kremlin issued its statement. “At the moment I don’t know who did it. Looks like it wasn’t ours.”
Someone knows what really happened, but for now no one is talking. More than a day later, no new information has surfaced that could clarify who was behind the explosions, but that hasn’t prevented incendiary statements and wild speculation from flourishing.
On Thursday, Russian officials continued to double down. The State Department released a comprehensive statement saying those guilty of carrying out what it called “terrorist attacks” would receive “severe and unavoidable punishment”.
In this case, Ukraine and Russia each had the means and motive to carry out the attack.
In more than 14 months of war, Ukraine has become adept at brutal actions that carry heavy symbolic significance. Last spring’s attack that sank Russia’s Black Sea flagship, the Moskva, did little to diminish Russia’s relentless attacks on Ukraine, but was a deeply humiliating setback for the Russian military.
Last summer’s explosion at the only bridge linking Russian territory to the occupied Crimean peninsula briefly delayed the transport of military supplies, but dealt another painful blow to Putin, whose forces had failed to evacuate a key strategic asset. from to protect. the front lines.
During the war, Ukraine developed deadly drones that terrorized troops on the battlefield and struck far behind enemy lines. Last December, Ukraine sent modified explosive drones hundreds of miles into Russian territory for attacks on two military bases that damaged aircraft and killed several soldiers.
In these and other cases, Ukrainian officials have not publicly taken responsibility, though they have often not outright denied their country’s involvement. Off the record, senior officials will sometimes acknowledge that their armed forces participated.
Wednesday’s episode was different. Top officials from Mr. Zelensky down issued immediate and unequivocal denials.
“Ukraine certainly has nothing to do with drone attacks on the Kremlin,” said Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to the president of Ukraine. “It makes absolutely no sense. It offers no military, informational or tactical effect on the eve of an offensive.”
The quick, firm denials may have meaning, but what that meaning is remains open to speculation.
Mr Podolyak suggested that the explosions were in fact a so-called “false flag” operation by the Kremlin – designed to make it appear Ukraine was at fault – to justify a possible large-scale attack aimed at undermining of the expected counter-offensive by Ukraine.
He did not explain why Moscow would need such justification. Mr Putin’s army has been carrying out massive attacks and killing civilians since the beginning of the war without feeling the need to come up with elaborate excuses.
Mr Zelensky compared the explosions in the Kremlin, which Mr Putin’s press service called a terrorist attack, with the Russian army’s attacks on Ukrainian cities on the same day. While Russian officials said the explosions in Moscow caused no injuries, Mr Zelensky shared gruesome photos of dead civilians after a Russian attack on the southern Ukrainian city of Kherson, which killed at least 23 people, including a grocery store and a train station. civilian targets.
“We will never forgive the perpetrators,” Mr Zelensky said in an Instagram post. “We will defeat the bad state and hold all perpetrators accountable.”
The Kremlin is, of course, adept at deceit and has never shown any reluctance to promote outright lies.
Putin’s justification for his invasion—that Ukraine was ruled by a Nazi junta committed to violence against Russia—was fabricated. Last week, a Russian state television report detailing a Ukrainian attack on a Russian-controlled city used footage that actually came from a Russian attack on the Ukrainian city of Uman, which killed more than 20 people.
Russia is using such distortion to promote an alternate reality that justifies its actions in the war, to both its own people and its allies, experts say.
Russian officials have already used the Kremlin incident to call for reprisals. Dmitry Medvedev, the bombastic former president of Russia and now deputy chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation – who often utters the most extreme versions of possible Russian actions – said the explosions “the physical elimination” of Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky and justified “his clique”. He sprinkled in a Hitler reference just to be on the safe side.
Mr. Peskov, the Kremlin’s spokesman, explained the 12-hour lapse between the explosions and the Kremlin’s announcement, saying that Russian intelligence agencies should first investigate. Mr Putin was working at the Kremlin on Thursday, Mr Peskov said, and would not make a special statement about the explosions.
