Wahhabis, money, Georgia

The terrorist attack in Dagestan against Sheikh Said Afandi Chirkeysky and the latest terrorist attacks in Tatarstan, where an employee of the Spiritual Administration of Muslims of Tatarstan Valiulla Yakupov was killed and Mufti Ildus Fayzov was wounded, are very similar to each other. Not by handwriting - they are executed in different ways - but by meaning.

In Tatarstan, after the terrorist attacks, law enforcement agencies let several hundred Muslims, presumably Wahhabis, through a pre-trial detention center: they “rolled off” their fingers, photographed them in profile and full face, and entered them into the database. At the same time, people were in pre-trial detention centers, some for a day, and some for two. Seven people were arrested and spent about a month in pre-trial detention, and then were released without explanation. None of the performers, much less the customers, have been found. An analysis of previous events leads to the conclusion that there could be many reasons for the terrorist attacks - from purely religious to purely financial (it is known, for example, that in addition to the anti-Wahhabi struggle, the mufti also became famous for his desire to take over the entire pilgrimage business associated with trips to Hajj to Mecca) . But what is noteworthy is that it was the “Wahhabi” version that was declared the main one.

Experts stated that a great many Wahhabis had divorced and should be burned with hot irons, and against the backdrop of these cries, all the “operational search” activities of the security forces, which boiled down to the detentions and arrests of people disliked by the official clergy, went almost unnoticed.

It seems that something very similar is happening now in Dagestan. The main version is again Wahhabis. Yes, in Dagestan it is true that the official clergy (who adhere to traditional Islam) and the Salafis (supporters of “pure Islam” or, as the security forces call them, “Wahhabis”) are conducting a dialogue. The dialogue began at the end of April, and a few days later, at the beginning of May, a major terrorist attack occurred in Makhachkala - a suicide bomber blew himself up at a checkpoint. It seemed that this would disrupt the negotiations and the traditionalists and Salafis would have nothing to talk about. But they stated that the terrorist attack was carried out with the aim of disrupting the dialogue, and they continued their dialogue. The murder of the most famous Dagestan sheikh Said Afandi, whose murids (students) worked in the Muslim Spiritual Directorate of Dagestan and even in the authorities, will undoubtedly stir up the republic. And, of course, this time it will be much more difficult for the two conflicting currents in Islam in Dagestan to sit at a common table. After all, Said Afandi was almost a saint for traditionalists, but for Salafis he was a protégé of the special services and a charlatan. And just as this sheikh was respected by traditionalists, he was not accepted by Salafis, who generally do not accept any mediators between themselves and God. And this may indeed be a motive for murder in a society torn apart by religious divisions.

That is, the “Wahhabi version,” of course, should be considered. There is only one thing alarming about this version - if this murder was committed by Salafists, they set themselves up, because they are the ones who will now become the object of checks, detentions, and arrests. And even if we assume that they so desperately did not want reconciliation with the official clergy, mass arrests and searches are not the price that is paid for the breakdown of negotiations. If the security forces are interested in disrupting the negotiations (and this version is very popular in Dagestan), then again, not at such a price; after all, if a civil war breaks out, they will have to clean it all up. The government of Dagestan believes that the version of a “third force” should not be discounted, saying that if anyone is interested in destabilization and war, it is foreigners.

This version had not yet been voiced, but in neighboring Georgia, right on the border with Dagestan, a large-scale special operation began to capture militants of the so-called Tsuntinsky group (after the name of one of the high mountainous regions of Dagestan - Tsuntinsky). According to the official version of the Georgian special services, militants took several local residents hostage in the town of Lapota: special forces recaptured the hostages, 11 militants were killed (as it became known later from official sources, 1 militant was killed, the rest are wanted - editor's note), 6 are wanted, in During the operation, three Georgian special forces officers were killed. Judging by the large-scale information campaign that is being waged in Georgia around this event, one of the tasks of the local security forces is to show that they are not harboring terrorists (which Moscow often accuses them of and which could become a reason for some kind of anti-terrorist operation of the Russian Federation in Georgia). but, on the contrary, they are fighting the terrorist threat from Russia. One can even agree with the Georgian opposition and assume that the country’s authorities could stage a staged attack by Dagestani militants, in case Russian intelligence services once again find a “Georgian trace” in a Dagestani terrorist attack. The only confusing thing is that the result of this staging was three killed special forces soldiers and 11 killed militants. If the Georgian special services publish their data, and even better, if they detain the surviving militants, it will become clear that these are real people who posed a real danger. If the whole story is limited to official statements, the question will remain open.

It is noteworthy that the FSB of the Russian Federation on Wednesday evening denied information that militants invaded Georgia from Dagestan. The background has noticeably changed - now the FSB of the Russian Federation seems to be making excuses for Georgia, instead of the usual “attacking” it for harboring militants. So this time, perhaps, the “Georgian trace” will not be found in the Dagestan terrorist attack.