I think it is truly remarkable that the united states is willing to give warnings to Russia and Iran, given that they say it It is difficult to imagine Russia or Iran returning the favor, but I...
I think it is truly remarkable that the united states is willing to give warnings to Russia and Iran, given that they say it
...risks revealing how the United States obtained the intelligence, potentially putting clandestine surveillance activities or human sources at risk.
It is difficult to imagine Russia or Iran returning the favor, but I guess who knows.
It'a a rare form of integrity I wish we'd see more. When human lives are in mortal danger, maybe your own interests can take the back seat for a bit. Props to the US for this.
It'a a rare form of integrity I wish we'd see more. When human lives are in mortal danger, maybe your own interests can take the back seat for a bit. Props to the US for this.
I want to believe it's integrity, but I can't help but wonder if it's not also just a win-win scenario for the US. If they share the info with Russia, and they act on it, the US looks good. If...
I want to believe it's integrity, but I can't help but wonder if it's not also just a win-win scenario for the US. If they share the info with Russia, and they act on it, the US looks good. If they share the info with Russia, and Russia doesn't act on it, Russia looks bad.
But I might also be too jaded for my own good at this point.
Even with adversaries, it is in the national security interest of the United States to warn of terrorism and to help combat it. Especially with Chechnya, that has proved to be fertile...
Even with adversaries, it is in the national security interest of the United States to warn of terrorism and to help combat it. Especially with Chechnya, that has proved to be fertile breeding/crossover ground for Islamic extremists (cf. the Tsarnyev brothers).
I find it more likely it's cold practicality. This terrorist attack can and almost certainly will be used as propaganda: 'look how these foreign enemies are attacking the motherland, we must...
I find it more likely it's cold practicality.
This terrorist attack can and almost certainly will be used as propaganda: 'look how these foreign enemies are attacking the motherland, we must continue this war out of self-defense! ..er, I mean, special military operation, definitely it isn't a war... ..because we made it illegal to call it that... ...yeah.
An attack on civilians in your own territory has a 'rally around the flag' effect. The US certainly wouldn't want anything to happen that would increase domestic support for the war. Simple as that.
The US had a standing policy to warn of terrorist attacks it's aware of, regardless of nation. It warned Iran months ago of one. It's not Ukraine war related, but it is a practical move because...
The US had a standing policy to warn of terrorist attacks it's aware of, regardless of nation. It warned Iran months ago of one. It's not Ukraine war related, but it is a practical move because nations have a vested interest in discouraging terrorist attacks in general and the good deed may come around.
From the article: ... ... ... (The attack was on March 22.)
From the article:
The U.S. identification of the Crocus concert hall as a potential target — a fact that has not been previously reported — raises new questions about why Russian authorities failed to take stronger measures to protect the venue, where gunmen killed more than 140 people and set fire to the building. A branch of the Islamic State has taken credit for the attack, the deadliest in Russia in 20 years. U.S. officials have publicly said the group, known as Islamic State-Khorasan, or ISIS-K, “bears sole responsibility,” but Russian President Vladimir Putin has tried to pin the blame on Ukraine.
...
While Washington routinely shares information about possible terrorist attacks with foreign countries, under a policy known as the “duty to warn,” it is unusual to give information about specific targets to an adversary, officials and experts said. Doing so risks revealing how the United States obtained the intelligence, potentially putting clandestine surveillance activities or human sources at risk.
But the information that pointed to an attack on the concert hall also pointed at a potential danger for Americans in Russia. On March 7, the U.S. Embassy publicly announced that it was “monitoring reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts,” and advised U.S. citizens “to avoid large gatherings over the next 48 hours.”
The United States shared its information with Russia the day before that public warning, according to people familiar with the matter. Naryshkin said “U.S. intelligence agencies” gave the information to the FSB, Russia’s state security service.
Under the duty to warn policy, the United States has also recently shared terrorism information with another adversary — Iran. In January, U.S. officials warned that the Islamic State was planning to carry out attacks in the country, according to U.S. officials, who said the intelligence was specific enough that it might have helped Iranian authorities disrupt twin suicide bombings that killed at least 95 people in the city of Kerman. The Islamic State, which views Iran’s majority Shiite Muslim population as apostates, attacked a gathering of thousands of mourners as they commemorated the fourth anniversary of the death of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, who was killed by a U.S. drone strike in Iraq in 2020.
...
Despite the lack of effective security at Crocus City Hall, there are indications that the Russian government, at least initially, took seriously Washington’s warning — which included information about Islamic State plans to attack a synagogue, according to one U.S. official. The day after Moscow received that information, the FSB announced that it had prevented an Islamic State attack on a synagogue in Moscow.
...
Why security wasn’t increased and sustained after the initial warning remains unclear. It’s possible that Russian security services, seeing no attack materialize in the days soon after March 7, assumed the U.S. information was incorrect and let their guard down, some of the U.S. officials speculated.
Putin publicly ridiculed terrorism warnings from what he deemed “a number of official Western structures” during a meeting with top FSB officials on March 19. “You are well aware of them, so I will not go into details at this point,” Putin said, according to an official Kremlin transcript.
I think it is truly remarkable that the united states is willing to give warnings to Russia and Iran, given that they say it
It is difficult to imagine Russia or Iran returning the favor, but I guess who knows.
It'a a rare form of integrity I wish we'd see more. When human lives are in mortal danger, maybe your own interests can take the back seat for a bit. Props to the US for this.
I want to believe it's integrity, but I can't help but wonder if it's not also just a win-win scenario for the US. If they share the info with Russia, and they act on it, the US looks good. If they share the info with Russia, and Russia doesn't act on it, Russia looks bad.
But I might also be too jaded for my own good at this point.
When doing the right thing also looks good, hopefully we see more of it. Often, governments understand their self-interest rather differently.
Even with adversaries, it is in the national security interest of the United States to warn of terrorism and to help combat it. Especially with Chechnya, that has proved to be fertile breeding/crossover ground for Islamic extremists (cf. the Tsarnyev brothers).
If Russia had acted on it then there is a solid chance we would never hear about it.
Maybe that's me just being a bit cynical though.
I find it more likely it's cold practicality.
This terrorist attack can and almost certainly will be used as propaganda: 'look how these foreign enemies are attacking the motherland, we must continue this war out of self-defense! ..er, I mean, special military operation, definitely it isn't a war... ..because we made it illegal to call it that... ...yeah.
An attack on civilians in your own territory has a 'rally around the flag' effect. The US certainly wouldn't want anything to happen that would increase domestic support for the war. Simple as that.
The US had a standing policy to warn of terrorist attacks it's aware of, regardless of nation. It warned Iran months ago of one. It's not Ukraine war related, but it is a practical move because nations have a vested interest in discouraging terrorist attacks in general and the good deed may come around.
Hmm, fair enough. Maybe I'm actually being too cynical?
From the article:
...
...
...
(The attack was on March 22.)
Mirror, for those hit by the paywall:
https://archive.is/Uu9O8