The Russian domestic situation and the attack in St. Petersburg

The attempt on the St. Petersburg metro station comes at a difficult time for the Russian domestic politics. About a year before the recent election polls show a rise of discontent among the population, due to the effect of the sanctions, which have worsened the general conditions of the citizens, is the growing resentment against the corruption of the political class and also for awareness incomplete democracy that governs a country where there are too contradictions and inequality more pronounced. This is evidenced by the demonstrations against the authorities, which led to a wave of arrests. Certainly this is not enough to endorse conspiracy theories, according to which the attack would be functional to restore order in the country, in the sense desired by the Moscow authorities. However, it seems undeniable that the Russian authorities, used to do follow a period of repression and all attacks, the opportunity that presents itself to adjust various accounts is presented. However the truth, in this sense, it is virtually impossible to ascertain, partly because there are concrete reasons for extremists, to hit Russia. The action of the Kremlin in Syria, net of political considerations in favor or against the Assad regime, often targeting civilians in order to wipe out the resistance against Damascus, often not even identified as the militias of the Islamic State, but as the democratic forces supported by the United States. One almost certain result of this conduct was the Russian ambassador's killing in Turkey. According to sources in the Russian government of Kyrgyzstan would be a bomber, this would lead to returning fighters from the battles fought in the ranks of the armed forces of the caliphate, a phenomenon that was overdue and that the Iraqi army advanced in areas where the Islamic state is losing control, threatening to be increasingly dangerous. Not that Russia does not have among its citizens fighters of the caliphate returned to their homeland, to which must be added the possible terrorists from Chechnya. We must also remember that Russian foreign policy, in the geographic area that Moscow considers to be its own exclusive competence, he has practiced the support and the support of dictators loyal to Russia, which eliminated virtually all civil rights, instilling in many large populations resentment against the Kremlin. The list of possible attackers is therefore long and ascertain the real provenance of those who carried out the attack in the St. Petersburg metro is anything but easy. Moreover, a strategy of terror could develop their own in the Russian village to bring uncertainty in a difficult time like the present, where the prestige of Putin and his government looks down. Potentially, Russia could be under attack for all the reasons listed above for an indefinite time, but this provides an advantage for an executive not too respectful of democratic rules and respect for rights. Unite in suppressing the possible Islamic terrorists and peaceful protesters, but strongly critical of the Kremlin, appears simple operation for an apparatus which is derived from the Soviet one. Let's say that the attack comes at a time when we needed a repressive action of the active protesters and at the same time, reduced the malaise, in favor of a compaction of the population towards the reasons of national security, which also allowed to accept more favorably and less objective in foreign policy action in Syria, but also in Ukraine, aimed at bringing Russia among the largest in the world; the rest of this topic is one of those on which Putin has always focused, enjoying success in its election campaigns. There is, therefore, for the government of Moscow, the concrete possibility to arrive at the next election by making sure to squeeze dissent and show up again as defenders of the nation, ninth only domestically, but also internationally. Moreover, the presence of a president to the White House as Trump can only encourage these purposes.