Alexey Malashenko
{
"authors": [
"Alexey Malashenko"
],
"type": "commentary",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Caucasus",
"Russia"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
The Olympic Threat
Probably for the first time in the history of the Olympics, sports-related issues concerning the Games took a back seat to the issues of security. Keeping the Sochi Olympics safe is a matter of Russia’s political prestige, as well as the evidence of its ability to respond to terrorism.
Reading the Sochi Olympics media coverage, one may get the impression that those behind it would be very surprised if the Olympics actually went without a hitch. Probably for the first time in the history of the Olympics, sports-related issues took a back seat to the issues of security. From this standpoint, these are perhaps the most politicized Olympics since the 1980 Moscow Games, which were boycotted by the United States and other major sports powers in the aftermath of the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan.
Keeping the Games safe is a matter of Russia’s political prestige, as well as the evidence of its ability to respond to one of its major internal challenges, which also has a direct bearing on Russia’s external politics. Russia appears more vulnerable to the acts of terror than other countries, with the obvious exception of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Arab states. Apart from the perennially unstable North Caucasus, terrorist attacks are carried out in other Russian regions, including Moscow. The last three explosions in Volgograd, in October and December 2013, have demonstrated how vulnerable Russia is in the face of terror. Some think that by concentrating all the security efforts around Sochi, the authorities might enable terrorists to act as they please in other regions.
If the terrorists actually manage to penetrate into Sochi, it will to some extent devalue Russia’s security and stability-based foreign policy agenda. It will adversely affect President Vladimir Putin’s popularity, since he will be the one held primarily responsible for the terrorist incidents.
Putin took the risk right from the start, when he proposed that Sochi host the Olympics. As the games draw closer, the risk becomes increasingly evident. Those getting ready to head for Sochi are bound to be asked, “Aren’t you scared?” Attending the Games resembles extreme tourism of sorts (an acquaintance of mine was considering a similar business venture after the end of the second war in Chechnya).
I do not want to discuss where the threat to Sochi comes from, how it is to materialize, and which terrorist factions are more dangerous than others. I will only mention the so-called “ghost” suicide bombers, which the media has been reporting on literally in the last few days. No one yet really knows where these “ghosts” come from.
One more thing comes to mind in this respect. How will the authorities react if something indeed happens in Sochi? Who will they take their grief and desperation out on through accusations of aiding and abetting the terrorists?
But what a sigh of relief will the Kremlin breathe if everything goes as planned. What a match it will win! And against what adversary! Keeping Sochi safe will be the most valuable gold medal for Putin and his Kremlin Olympic team. Some will even believe for a while that the authorities have found a working remedy against terrorism.
We do not yet know the final score of the Russian Security Forces vs. the Terrorists United game. Whatever we think of the current regime, let us wish success to the Team Russia.
About the Author
Former Scholar in Residence, Religion, Society, and Security Program
Malashenko is a former chair of the Carnegie Moscow Center’s Religion, Society, and Security Program.
- What Will Uzbekistan’s New President Do?Commentary
- Preserving the Calm in Russia’s Muslim CommunityCommentary
Alexey Malashenko
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- The Fog of AI WarCommentary
In Ukraine, Gaza, and Iran, AI warfare has come to dominate, with barely any oversight or accountability. Europe must lead the charge on the responsible use of new military technologies.
Raluca Csernatoni
- How to Join the EU in Three Easy StepsCommentary
Montenegro and Albania are frontrunners for EU enlargement in the Western Balkans, but they can’t just sit back and wait. To meet their 2030 accession ambitions, they must make a strong positive case.
Dimitar Bechev, Iliriana Gjoni
- Taking the Pulse: Can NATO Survive the Iran War?Commentary
Donald Trump has repeatedly bashed NATO and European allies, threatening to annex Canada and Greenland and deploring their lack of enthusiasm for his war of choice in Iran. Is this latest round of abuse the final straw?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- On NATO, Trump Should Embrace France Instead of Bashing ItCommentary
Donald Trump’s repudiation of NATO goes against the Make America Great Again vision of a U.S.-centered foreign policy. If the goal is to preserve the alliance by boosting Europe’s commitments, leaning into France’s vision is the most America First way forward.
Rym Momtaz
- Europe Doesn’t Like War—for Good ReasonsCommentary
The wars in Ukraine and the Middle East are existential threats to Europe as a peace project. Leaders and citizens alike must reaffirm their solidarity to face up to today’s multifaceted challenges.
Marc Pierini