169 Bilten Slovenske vojske DINAMIKA POMORSKEGA TERORIZMA, KI OGROŽA RUSIJO, IN ODZIV VLADE DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE Simon Saradzhyan Pregledni znanstveni članek Review article Na začetku članka so predstavljeni teroristi, ki so dovolj sposobni in motivirani za pomorske teroristične napade proti Rusiji. Nato so obravnavani ruska pomorska in sladkovodna infrastruktura ter dejavnosti in opisani izbrani scenariji terorističnih dejanj, s katerimi bi bilo mogoče izkoristiti šibke točke te infrastrukture in objektov. Sledi pregled odzivov ruske vlade na terorizem in tudi napak v njihovem odzivu. Na koncu avtor ugotavlja, da je pomorski terorizem, vključno s terorizmom katastrofal- nih razsežnosti, še naprej resna grožnja, navedena pa so tudi izbrana priporočila za zmanjšanje verjetnosti takšnih napadov. Al Kaida, Čečenija, Rusija, jedrski napad, pomorski terorizem. This paper begins by identifying those actors that have the capacity and motivati- on to commit acts of maritime terrorism against Russia. The article then reviews Russia’s maritime and freshwater infrastructure and activities before outlining selected scenarios of terrorist acts that could take advantage of vulnerabilities in this infrastructure and facilities. It then offers an overview of the Russian government’s response to terrorism, including the flaws that have existed in this response. The paper concludes that the threat of maritime terrorism, including catastrophic terrorism, remains serious, and offers selected recommendations on how to minimize the like- lihood of such attacks. Al Qaeda, Chechnya, Russia, maritime terrorism, nuclear attack. Russia has been the victim of a number of horrendous terrorist attacks at the hands of endemic actors, such as networks of radical separatists and terrorists based in the North Caucasus. These networks have bombed a Coast Guard residential complex Povzetek Ključne besede Abstract Key words Introduction 170 Bilten Slovenske vojske and a parade at a Caspian Sea town, killing dozens; they have plotted to hijack one atomic submarine and claimed responsibility for sinking another; and their suppor- ters seized a vessel with Russian passengers on board and threatened to blow it up. Some groups within these networks have already crossed the moral threshold between conventional and catastrophic terrorism by staging such horrendous attacks as the hostage taking in Beslan, in which 331 people, half of them children, were killed in 2004. The hostage-taking raids on the Beslan School and on Moscow’s Dubrovka Theatre in 2002 demonstrated the formidable capabilities of these networks in planning and executing complex attacks, which involved profound knowledge of the practical flaws and organizational deficiencies of Russia’s counter-terrorism and law-enforcement system. Attackers in both cases included individuals willing to die in the course of the attacks. The Russian authorities have dealt these networks a number of serious blows thanks to the strengthening of the Russian state and its security and law-enforcement apparatus, as well as to the increased involvement of local populations, including former rebels, in counter-insurgency and policing efforts. They have also significantly improved the security of critical facilities of land-based infrastructure, such as nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons facilities. Nevertheless, the security at some Russian fa- cilities, including maritime facilities, remains insufficient to withstand an assault by a well-organized terrorist group similar to those that attacked the Beslan school and Dubrovka Theatre, especially if it was assisted by insiders. These networks remain not only willing, but also capable of executing terrorist attacks in Russia with high impact and dramatic visibility.1 These trends suggest that the likelihood of a high-impact maritime terrorist attack in Russia is significant enough to require that policymakers in the sphere of counter- terrorism divert some of their attention from land to seas and rivers. 1 AGENTS OF TERROR 1.1 Networks of Radical Separatists Based in the North Caucasus Of all the agents plotting and executing acts of terror in Russia, terrorist networks based in the North Caucasus have the strongest motivation and greatest capabilities for acts of maritime terrorism, possibly of catastrophic proportions. As demonstra- 1 The nature and motivation of conventional guerilla and terrorist networks operating in the North Caucasus varies greatly. These include groups and individuals who fight for the establishment of an Islamic state in parts of the entire North Caucasus and groups and individuals who fight for a secular independent state of Chechnya or larger parts of the North Caucasus. For purposes of clarity, I refer to these groups as radical separatists. The line between these networks is often blurred, and some members switch from one to another. There are other groups that use violence against authority and enter into alliances with radical separatists but do not fit the criteria of radical separatists, such as organized crime syndicates and groups of avengers, who seek revenge for abuses by law enforcement and other government agencies. Simon Saradzhyan 171 Bilten Slovenske vojske ted by some of their previous attacks, these networks are prepared to inflict massive, indiscriminate casualties, making no distinction between state or civilian targets.2 Until several years ago, the Chechnya-based factions of these terror networks had been the most active, even displaying interest in acts of WMD terrorism. They acquired radioactive materials,3 threatened to attack Russia’s nuclear facilities,4 and attempted to put pressure on the Russian leadership by planting a container with radioactive materials in Moscow and threatening to detonate it.5 They also planted explosives in chemical storage tanks and scouted Russian military nuclear facilities.6 But their most stunning plot relates to maritime terrorism. This plan was uncovered in January 2002, when federal troops found the personal archive of the Chechen separatists’ late president Dzhokhar Dudaev. The archive, which was found in the Chechen village of Starye Atagi on 4 January 2002, contained a detailed plan to hijack a Russian atomic submarine. The commander of the Russian troops in Chechnya, Vladimir Moltenskoi, told reporters on 2 February 2002 that the plan provided for seven Slavic-looking fighters to seize a submarine from the Russian Navy’s Pacific Fleet sometime in 1995–96, and to blackmail Moscow into wit- hdrawing troops from Chechnya and recognizing the republic as an independent state. Moltenskoi said detailed military maps of Primorskii Krai, where the Pacific Fleet has bases, were found along with the plan. According to an April 2002 Russian television report, the plan specifically provided for taking a nuclear warhead from the hijacked submarine to Chechnya.7 A Chechnya-based correspondent of Russian State Television quoted what he described as the “last item” in the plan as saying “together with the hostage(s) … and the nuclear warhead they will leave for Chechnya in a plane.”8 It was a former officer in the Soviet Navy, Islam Khasukhanov, who allegedly developed the plan back in 1995; according to Moltenskoi, the then-chief 2 This article defines a terrorist act as an act of political violence that inflicts harm on non-combatants, but that is designed to intimidate broader audiences, including state authorities, and is an instrument used to achieve certain political or other goals. This article defines an act of catastrophic terrorism as a terrorist attack involving the use of chemical, biological, or nuclear materials or weapons of mass destruction, or conventional techniques to kill a significant number of people (1000 or more). 3 Chechen rebels removed several containers of radioactive materials from the Grozny branch of Russia’s Radon nuclear waste collection site prior to the seizure of the facility by federal troops in January 2000, according to a Russian magazine’s sources in the Russian Ministry of Defense. Yury Gladkevich, “Poshel v Gory,” Profil (20 March 2000), quoted in “Radwaste Reported Removed from Radon Facility in Grozny,” NIS Nuclear Trafficking Database, Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Monterey Institute of International Studies Nuclear Threat Initiative. 4 Then-Chechen president Dzhokhar Dudayev warned that his fighters might attack nuclear plants in Russia in 1992 to discourage Moscow from trying to counter his republic’s independence bid. He issued a similar threat again in 1995 when the military campaign was already underway in the republic. “Dudayev Grozit Perenesti Voinu v Glub’ Rossii,” Vecherny Chelyabinsk (1 February 1995). 5 Chechen warlord Shamil Basayev tried to blackmail the Russian leadership with a crude radiological device. Grigorii Sanin and Aleksandr Zakharov, “Konteyner Iz Izmailovskogo Parka Blagopoluchno Evakuirovan,” Segodnya (25 November 1995). 6 “FSB Says Major Terror Attacks Foiled,” Moscow Times (6 May 2005). 7 The Pacific Fleet operates no nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), but it still has a number of nuclear powered submarines, including those that can carry nuclear torpedoes. 8 Russian State Television, 26 April 2002, transcribed by BBC Monitoring on 26 April 2002. No other media reported this information, however. DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 172 Bilten Slovenske vojske of the Chechen General Staff Aslan Maskhadov personally reviewed the plan and wrote notes on it. Federal troops seized Khasukhanov during a raid in the Chechen town of Shali on 21 April 2002. Khasukhanov had served on Russian submarines before leaving the Pacific Fleet with the rank of naval commander to become chief of the operational department of the Chechen separatists’ general staff.9 In 2002, the command of the Pacific Fleet responded to reports of this plan to hijack a submarine by claiming that security at Russian military nuclear faciliti- es was adequate and that the planned hijacking would have failed in 1995. “This could happen only in a foreign fantasy-action movie. In reality, it is a doomed plan,” a spokesman for the fleet said.10 Yet, two years after Khasukhanov’s plan was supposed to have been implemented, a single sailor managed to take hostages and lock himself up in a Russian nuclear submarine in the most dangerous case of attempted maritime terrorism in Russia, which will be discussed in greater depth below. Dudayev’s archive also contained plans to blow up installations at nuclear power stations, military airfields, and oil refineries.11 Outside Chechnya, Dagestanbased terrorist groups have been very active in the North Caucasus. These groups staged two horrendous attacks in the Caspian Sea town of Kaspiisk targeting servicemen of the local unit of the Border Guard Service’s coast guard branch and general military personnel in another. In 1996 they bombed a re- sidential complex in Kaspiisk, destroying an entire section of the complex, which housed mostly servicemen of the local Coast Guard unit and their families. The blast killed sixty-seven people, including twenty-one children. The same Caspian Sea town saw these Dagestani-based networks bomb a military parade in May 2002, killing 43 and injuring 170, many of the victims being spectators and their children. Factions of these networks in North Caucasian republics of Ingushetia, Karachayevo- Cherkessia, and Kabardino-Balkaria have also displayed the capability to plan and execute complex attacks, such as seizures of urban areas accompanied by killing of military and law-enforcement personnel, with assistance of corrupted or ideolo- gically converted police officers. The Ingushetia-based faction has been so succes- sful in such attacks that the Chechen warlord Dokku Umarov, who is the current leader of the terrorist and insurgency networks in the North Caucasus, has appointed Magomed Yevloyev, leader of the Ingush terrorists and insurgents, to the post of the “Commander of the Caucasian Front” of the forces fighting to establish a caliphate in the Northern Caucasus and other parts of Russia with sizeable Muslim populations. 9 “Nachalnik Operativnogo Shtaba Maskhadova Gotovil Plan Zakhvata Rosiiskoi Atomnoi Podlodki (Chief of Maskhadov’s Operational Staff Was Preparing a Plan to Hijack Russian Atomic Submarine),” RIA-Novosti (25 April 2002). 10 “Komandovanie TOF: Chechenskim Boevikam Ne Pod Silu Zakhvatit Podlodku (Command of the Pacific Fleet: Chechen Rebels Are Incapable of Hijacking a Submarine),” RIA-Novosti (5 February 2002); available at http:// www.lenta.ru/vojna/2002/02/05/submarine/. 11 “V Chechne Nashli Plan Zakhvata Rossiiskoi Lodki (Plan to Hijack a Russian Submarine Found in Chechnya,)” Lenta.ru (4 February 2002). Also reported in “Nachalnik Operativnogo Shtaba Maskhadova Gotovil Plan Zakhvata Rosiiskoi Atomnoi Podlodki (Chief of Maskhadov’s Operational Staff Was Preparing a Plan to Hijack Russian Atomic Submarine),” RIA-Novosti (25 April 2002). Simon Saradzhyan 173 Bilten Slovenske vojske 1.2 Accomplices and Allies of North Caucasus-based Networks International Terrorist Organizations and Groups of Militants that Support Secession from Russia. The North Caucasus-based terrorist networks–and the Chechen faction in particular–have been in close contact with foreign militant Islamists, including those groups that resort to terrorism. The best-known successful act of what Russian authorities have described as maritime terrorism– the seizure of a ferry with Russian passengers on board off the Turkish coast–was carried out in the name of Chechnya’s separatist cause. Muhammad Tokcan, a Turkish citizen of Chechen origin and his armed supporters (who included Turkish citizens of Abkhaz origin as well as ethnic Chechens) hijacked the Avrasya ferry on the Black Sea and took more than two hundred hostages in 1996. Tokcan threatened to blow up the ferry, which was not far from away from the Bosporus Strait, which is only half a mile wide at its narrowest point, demanding an end to Russian military efforts to end Chechnya’s separatist bid. The hijackers eventually surrendered after a four-day standoff and were subsequently imprisoned, but two of them, including Tokcan, later escaped while others were released under an amnesty law.12 Apart from maintaining ties with militant representatives of North Caucasian Diasporas abroad, the Chechnya-based terrorist and insurgent networks have also maintained links with Al Qaeda, which has expertise in the field of maritime terrorism. Osama bin Laden has been actively involved in the terrorist insurgency in Chechnya since 1995, sending Al Qaeda agents to the North Caucasus and sponso- ring Chechen rebels.13 More recently, Russian security services and law-enforcement agencies announced in October 2008 that they had foiled plans by the chief of the North Caucasus-based terrorist networks and Al Qaeda’s lieutenant in the region to organize terrorist attacks in the area where Russia is to host the 2014 Olympic Games. Umarov and a certain Moganned, Al Qaeda’s “emissary” in the region, have plotted terrorist attacks in the Black Sea resorts of Sochi and Anapa, according to FSB. 14 North Caucasus-based terrorist networks can count on Al Qaeda to share expertise with them if they decide to plan and execute an act of maritime terrorism, since Al Qaeda has successfully carried out acts of maritime terrorism in the past. Operatives and/or allies of Al Qaeda have been responsible for the bombings of the U.S. Navy ship Cole and France’s Limburg tanker. The network has also designed attacks on a wide range of Western maritime targets, including military vessels, oil tankers, and 12 Interestingly, Tokcan then led another group of hostage-takers who seized 120 tourists and staff in a Turkish hotel in 2002, this time to protest against Russia’s second military campaign in Chechnya. He was subsequently sentenced to twelve years in prison. 13 The document was released by Judicial Watch, a U.S. public corruption watchdog, in 2004. 14 In the past, North Caucasus-based terrorist groups have enjoyed the cooperation of their compatriots when plotting attacks in Moscow. DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 174 Bilten Slovenske vojske cruise ships, according to information from Abd Al Rahman al Nashiki, the alleged organizer of both attacks and an Al Qaeda member.15 In addition to developing maritime and land-based conventional terrorism capabiliti- es, Al Qaeda has sought to acquire expertise in nuclear weaponry. Al Qaeda has tried to acquire a ready-to-use nuclear bomb or to develop one, and has considered striking a deal with members of Russian organized criminal groups.16 North Caucasus-based terrorists hope that Al Qaeda will supply them with nuclear weapons for the “jihad against the infidels” if it manages, for instance, to topple the government of Pakistan, given the close ties between Al Qaeda and the North Caucasus-based networks and the convergence of their goals in building a caliphate. Organized Crime. The North Caucasus-based networks have established tactical alliances with organized crime groups, primarily those that have been formed by natives of the North Caucasus across Russia.17 Such ethnically-oriented organized crime groups operate in many major Russian cities, including ports. In some instances, natives of Chechnya and other North Caucasian republics involved in ethnic crime rings outside the North Caucasus have returned to their homeland to fight on the sepa- ratists’ side or vice versa. Such gangsters can potentially take advantage of established criminal channels to help the North Caucasus-based groups to organize terrorist acts. An authoritative RAND study suggests that, while terrorists and organized crime figures are collaborating on land, there is little evidence that terrorists and piracy syndicates are collaborating. 18 According to the study, their interests may conflict, and thus hinder collaboration, since pirates depend on steady commercial activiti- es in the waters where they operate, while terrorists often seek to cause maximum damage and disruption. However, one could argue that pirates can still be contrac- ted for hijacking by terrorists who may keep the pirates in the dark about their real attentions. Also, some terrorist and militant groups, such as the Sri Lankan LTTE, have been involved in classical organized crime activities (such as illicit trafficking) to finance their activities (until its forces were effectively destroyed by Sri Lankan government troops in the spring of 2009, the LTTE had a fleet of ten ocean-going 15 Ali M Koknar, “Maritime Terrorism: A New Challenge for NATO,” Energy Security, Institute for the Analysis of Global Security (24 January 2005). 16 “We also believe that (Al Qaeda leader Osama) bin Laden was seeking to acquire or develop a nuclear device,” George Tenet, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, told hearings at the U.S. Congress in February 2002. Al Qaeda tried to acquire nuclear weapons and weapons-grade materials in Russia through local organized crime gangs, the Washington Times reported on 8 October 2002, citing a source in the U.S. defense community. Bill Herz, “U.S. says Al Qaeda exploring Russian market for weapons,” The Washington Times (8 October 2002). 17 In October 2004, Russian media reported that Ruslan Elmurzayev, an ethnic Chechen and an employee of a Moscow bank, was one of the main organizers of the Dubrovka theater attack, and that it was financed through loans from his bank. Carl Schreck, “Prima Bank Linked to Dubrovka Attack,” Moscow Times (27 October 2004). 18 Michael D. Greenberg, Peter Chalk, Henry H. Willis, Ivan Khilko, David S. Ortiz, “Maritime Terrorism, Risk and Liability,” The RAND Center for Terrorism Risk Management Policy, 2006. Simon Saradzhyan 175 Bilten Slovenske vojske freighters).19 And Al Qaeda itself has owned and/or controlled somewhere between fifteen to twenty-three freighters sailing in the Mediterranean, Indian, and Pacific Oceans, according to estimates of the U.S. and Norwegian intelligence agencies.20 According to the Russian Navy’s assessment, the “line between piracy and maritime terrorism has already become blurred,” and the challenges of fighting piracy with that of fighting terrorism should be bundled together.21 Unsuspecting ‘Helpers’ and Insiders. Investigations of the 2002 Dubrovka Theatre hostage-taking and other suicide attacks revealed that members of these North Caucasus-based terrorist groups do not hesitate to solicit logistical and other assi- stance from rogue or unsuspecting natives of their home regions living outside the North Caucasus. Every large Russian city has a sizeable diaspora of natives from this region. The vast majority these Caucasian expatriates would never knowingly assist terrorists, but that does not mean that they cannot be unwittingly manipulated, par- ticularly through their willingness to offer aid to their exploited relatives and com- patriots. In one instance, Chechnya-based terrorists even claimed to have inserted a shakhid (suicide bomber) on a Russian atomic submarine. Soon after the sinking of the Kursk submarine in August 2000, the separatists claimed that the submarine was sunk by a Dagestani shakhid, but produced no proof. Law enforcement officials have denied that either of the two ethnic Dagestanis on board the Kursk could have done anything deliberate to sink it. 22 The official investigation into the deadly accident revealed no traces of sabotage. Clearly, those working at naval and other maritime facilities have the best opportu- nity to hijack vessels. Such crimes are more difficult to prevent, as insiders have the most thorough knowledge of the facilities’ vulnerabilities and can take advantage of the trust that they enjoy among their colleagues. The most serious type of insider threat is posed when an insider conspires with outsiders. While there have been no publicly known cases of subversion or sabotage at Russian naval and maritime facilities, there have been several instances when servicemen have been led to commit a crime for profit. Some officers and defense industry workers have already chosen to try to “earn” thousands of dollars from one single theft. This conforms to the findings of British nuclear security expert Gavin Cameron that the overwhelming motivation for most insider crimes committed by servicemen was a desire for individual financial gain.23 19 Ali M. Koknar, “Maritime Terrorism: A New Challenge for NATO,” IAGS Energy Security, published by the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, (24 January 2005). 20 “What Al Qaeda Can Do with A Terror Navy,” World Net Daily (October 2003), cited in Koknar, ibid. 21 From a 29 March 2008 statement issued to the author by the Russian Navy in response to his written questions on Russia’s response to maritime piracy and terrorism for a newspaper article. 22 Anna Badkhen and Simon Saradzhyan, “Investigation Opened Into Sinking of Kursk,” The Moscow Times (25 August 2000). 23 Gavin Cameron, “Nuclear Terrorism: Reactors & Radiological Attacks After September 11,” paper presented at the Symposium on International Safeguards: Verification and Nuclear Material Security, Vienna, Austria, 29 October–2 November 2001. DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 176 Bilten Slovenske vojske In the 1990s, when the Chechen rebel Khasukhanov allegedly planned to hijack an atomic submarine with nuclear weapons onboard, security at even some of the nuclear facilities of the Russian Navy was so lax that stealing uranium was easier than taking potatoes in Russia at one point, according to a Russian military investigator. This investigator probed the theft of four kilograms of highly enriched uranium (HEU) by the Russian Navy officer Alexei Tikhomirov in November 1993.24 Another theft of weapons-usable nuclear material occurred at a Russian naval facility in 1993. In July of that year, 1.8 kilograms of 36 percent-enriched HEU was stolen by two naval servicemen from the Andreeva Guba naval base near Russia’s Norwegian border.25 Such nefarious insiders will most likely refuse to cooperate with terrorists, as their motivation is personal financial gain instead of redress of political gri- evances. But they could be kept in the dark about the real intentions by the ter- rorists, who can pose as gangsters with criminal rather than political intentions. In one instance, an opportunistic insider agreed to commit an act for money that in- vestigators and prosecutors classified as terrorism, according to the Federal Security Service (FSB). Igor Senin, the deputy mayor of Zaozyorsk–a closed military town in northern Russia–was arrested by FSB agents in April 2006 and subsequently charged with plotting a terrorist attack off the coast of the Murmansk region, near the Kola Peninsula. The FSB issued a statement to assert that Senin had the planned bombing of an oil tanker in the Kolsky Bay in hopes of causing an environmental catastrophe. The official had planned to use a homemade bomb to blow up the tanker Teider in an act that would have caused at least forty metric tons of oil products to spill into the ocean, polluting at least five square kilometers of the sea surface. Senin was in fact a middleman between an unidentified client, who wanted to cause an oil spill for unknown reasons, and those who were to carry out the foiled attack, which prosecu- tors estimated would have caused some USD 26 million in environmental damage. The client gave Senin USD 100,000 to organize the attack. The official stood trial in 2007 on charges of having attempted to organize a terrorist attack, and was sentenced to over three years in prison by the Murmansk Regional Court. Rogue Elements within Law Enforcement. The corruption and ideological conver- sion of law enforcement officers by extremists in the North Caucasus has emerged as a major security threat, as the investigations of many major terrorist attacks have unearthed cases of corrupt or ideologically driven police officers who have assisted the attackers. Neither the boosting of passive defense measures nor increased pre- ventive strikes against militant hideouts will succeed in curbing domestic terrorism if the Russian authorities fail to take serious action to root out the corruption that 24 Oleg Bukharin and William Potter, “Potatoes Were Guarded Better,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (May/ June 1995). 25 Matthew Bunn, The Next Wave: Urgently Needed New Steps to Control Warheads and Fissile Material (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2000. The two servicemen were sentenced to five years and four years in prison, respectively, in November 1995. Mikhail Kulik and Vladimir Orlov, “Uranovaya Krazha: Istoriya Guby Andreeva, (Theft of Uranium: History of Guba Andreeva),” Moskovskiye Novosti (October 1995). Simon Saradzhyan 177 Bilten Slovenske vojske plagues the country’s law enforcement community, and that has already evolved into a major threat to Russia’s national security. There have been a number of cases in which North Caucasian extremists would either change their identities or surrender in order to join pro-Moscow police forces in order to obtain information to feed to their accomplices, or even to participate in attacks staged by the terrorist groups.26 While most cases of police officers joining forces with extremists for either religious or opportunistic reasons have occurred in the North Caucasus region, the corruption of law enforcement officials and employees of other government agencies remains a nationwide phenomenon that has allowed terrorist groups to strike Russian cities hundreds miles from their bases. A Moscow policeman was sentenced in February 2004 to seven years in prison for re- gistering Luiza Bakueva in Moscow in 2002 in exchange for a bribe. Having registe- red in Moscow, Bakueva participated in the hostage-taking at Moscow’s Dubrovka Theatre in October 2002 (the so-called Nord-Ost attack).27 1.3 Disgruntled Insiders When it comes to agents of maritime terrorism, it is a disgruntled insider rather than a North Caucasus-based terrorist that has come closest to committing an act of terrorism on board of a nuclear naval vessel belonging to Russia. In 1998, a young Russian sailor, Alexander Kuzminykh, locked himself in one of the fleet’s nuclear- powered submarines, threatening to blow it up. Nineteen-year old sailor Kuzminykh crept out of his cabin at night to kill six fellow servicemen before taking two other hostages inside the Akula-class hunter-killer submarine, which was docked at the fleet’s Skalisty base near Murmansk. Kuzminykh then locked himself and the two hostages in the submarine. Kuzminykh subsequently shot both hostages dead and repeatedly threatened to start a fire on board in order to detonate torpedoes from the nuclear submarine. FSB commandos remained unable to get to Kuzminykh until he shot himself inside the submarine, separated from the agents by a 10-cm-thick steel hatch.28 Since this incident, Russian authorities have significantly improved the recruitment and monitoring of personnel deployed on naval nuclear vessels and faculties to weed out disgruntled insiders. For one, all of Russian submarine crews–including those boats carrying SLBMs as well as other atomic-powered vessels–are now being manned only with professional sailors, with conscripts having been removed from 26 A case in point came when several policemen were arrested for helping Russia’s most wanted man, rebel warlord Shamil Basayev, slip in and out of the North Caucasus republic of Kabardino-Balkaria last year. Basayev—whom investigators believe to have ordered both the Beslan hostage-taking raid and the June raid on Ingushetia—lived in a private house in the republic’s town of Baksan for an entire month. Simon Saradzhyan, “Law Enforcement Turncoats, Russia’s Bane,” ISN Security Watch (2005). 27 Another such case has been heard in a Kislovodsk court. This court sentenced a local traffic policeman, Stanislav Lyubichev, to four years in prison for letting a truckload of explosives—six metric tons of hexogen, to be exact—pass through a checkpoint in 1999 with no questions asked. The explosives were later used to blow up apartment buildings in Moscow, killing hundreds of people in September 1999. 28 Simon Saradzhyan, “Sailor Kills Himself After Standoff in Sub,” The Moscow Times (15 September 1998); http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/1998/09/15/015.html. DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 178 Bilten Slovenske vojske service. The screening of candidates for positions as professional sailors needs to be improved, however, as evidenced by the case when a “drunken curious sailor” set off the fire safety system on a Russian nuclear submarine that killed twenty people in 2008.29 1.4 Ultranationalists The recent conviction of a Russian nuclear industry worker and several ultranationa- list skinheads for bombing attacks, which are felt to have been primarily motivated by racial hatred, demonstrate that some violent ultranationalist groups and individu- als in Russia are increasingly adopting methods used by terrorist groups. There are anywhere between 20,000 and 60,000 members of skinhead and other ultranationa- list groups in Russia. Of those members of these groups who are violent, most stick to street weapons, such as knives, chains, and iron bars. However, some of these groups have begun to expand their arsenal to include more lethal weapons, such as explosives and even mercury. For instance, In 2007, a group of ultranationalists in the Siberian city of Tomsk was convicted of terrorism and inciting ethnic hatred for a series of attacks, including setting up a booby trap under an anti-Semitic poster and spilling mercury in a restaurant owned by a Jewish businessman. In March 2007, six members of a skinhead group were detained in Russia’s maritime capital of St. Petersburg on suspicion of having been responsible for the bombing of a McDonald’s restaurant out of hatred for Americans as well as in honor of ultrana- tionalist leader Dmitry Borovikov, who was shot dead by police in 2006. Members of Borovikov’s group had been charged with killing several dark-skinned foreigners. They also acquired mercury and planned to spray or spill it to contaminate targeted facilities.30 Also in 2007, the Moscow Regional Court sentenced a former employee of a nuclear scientific research center to eighteen years in prison for the June 2005 bombing of a Moscow-bound passenger train from Chechnya in what the verdict said was an ethnic hate crime. Of special concern are cases in which ultranationalists who have studied technical sciences in Russian universities use their acquired knowledge to stage lethal hate crimes. A group of young men were convicted in May 2008 by the Moscow City Court of a series of hate crimes, including bombings. Among other attacks, they staged an August 2006 bombing at Moscow’s Cherkizovsky market, which is primarily pa- tronized by Asian customers. The attack killed eleven and injured forty-five. One of the attackers, Oleg Kostyrev, was a fourth-year student at the Dmitry Mendeleyev Russian Chemical-Technological University in Moscow. According to police, it was 29 The Russian daily Zhizn reported on 13 November 2008 that sailor Dmitry Grobov had testified that he had pushed a button to activate the fire-extinguishing system, which puts out fires by releasing deadly Halon gas, because he was curious. 30 These figures were given by the Moscow Bureau for Human Rights on 17 April 2005. Simon Saradzhyan 179 Bilten Slovenske vojske there that he acquired the diagram for the bomb used in the attack on the market, although the defendants insisted they had found the design on the Internet. In a worrying development, prosecutors revealed during the trial that one of the leaders of the group had written a book to propagate his ideas of xenophobic violence, in which he referred to himself as a “messiah.” As experience with totalitarian sects shows, their leaders’ and members’ rationale for actions is often rooted in religious beliefs that may justify not only violence against individual “aliens” or “non-belie- vers,” but even the pursuit of an Armageddon that can be brought by a terrorist act of catastrophic proportions, as it was the case with the Aum Shinrikyo apocalyptic cult in Japan. The fact that ultranationalist terrorists have so far limited themselves to land attacks does not preclude the possibility that they will stage sea or river operati- ons if they see an opportunity, such as cruise ship in St. Petersburg carrying tourists of the “wrong” ethnic origin or nationality on board. 2 RUSSIA’S MARITIME AND FRESHWATER ACTIVITIES The safety and security of maritime shipping, which accounts for 60 percent of Russia’s foreign trade,31 is of paramount importance to Russia. Russia’s 2001–20 Maritime Doctrine describes “maritime shipments” as being of “vital importance” to the country. Disruption of these shipments by a series of terrorist attacks would come as a tangible blow to the Russian economy. Maritime shipping is also the only transportation method available for some of the far-flung Russian regions, and di- sruption of maritime channels to these regions would create serious problems for the local population. Russia’s water frontiers span over 46,000 kilometers, including 39,000 km of seacoast. Given this vast coastline, the volume of maritime and river transporta- tion has steadily increased in Russia. The volume of cargo processing in Russia’s seaports is expected grow by 1.3 times between 2006 and 2010, while some 55 percent of the deadweight controlled by Russian companies will come to fly the Russian flag by 2010.32 Russian ports processed 407 million tons of cargo in 2005, including 173 million tons of dry cargo and 223.78 million tons of liquid cargo such as oil, compared to 113 million tons in 1993.33 These volumes have been forecast to increase further, albeit this forecast will probably have to be revised because of the recent global 31 At the same time, vessels carrying Russian flags account only for 4 percent of Russia’s foreign trade shipments, according to the 2006–10 Strategy of Development of Transport of the Russian Federation, endorsed by the government in July 2006. Perhaps this explains the low level of attention given by government agencies to piracy. 32 According to the 2006–10 Strategy of Development of Transport of the Russian Federation, endorsed by the government in July 2006 33 According to the then-head of the Federal Agency of Maritime and River Transportation Alexander Davydenko’s 2006 interview, “Uzkie Mesta Graydushchei Navigatsii,” Transport Rossii (December 2006). DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 180 Bilten Slovenske vojske economic crisis. The Russian government has predicted that Russian have should be processing a total 540 million tons of cargo per year once global trade recovers.34 In addition to maritime channels, Russia also has thousands of inland waterways, rivers, and channels. These freshwater shipping lanes total 101,600 km, and faci- litate shipments to sixty-eight out of Russia’s eighty regions, These lanes annually transport 23 million passengers and 130 million tons of cargo,35 and some of them are choked by heavy traffic. For instance, vessels often spend two or three days passing through a 55-km stretch of a waterway that connects the Gorodetsky dam and Nizhniy Novgorod, rather than the three or four hours that their speed would allow.36 Transportation of passengers by water will also increase by eight to ten times between 2005 and 2010, according to the 2006–10 Strategy of Development of Transport of the Russian Federation. 3 POSSIBLE SCENARIOS OF MARITIME TERRORISM Russia has a number of large seaports, as well as several major cities located in close proximity to seas or major rivers. Some of these population centers are not located directly on the sea but in deltas of rivers that empty into the ocean–such as St. Petersburg and Astrakhan–while others are seaports with sizeable populations, such as Novorossiysk. Yet other cities are located on the coast, but do not have large ports, such as Sochi. Sochi, where Russia is to host the Winter Olympics in 2014, is located in proximity to Georgia’s breakaway province of Abkhazia, which remains volatile, with assassinations and bombings occurring regularly. Russia’s own volatile North Caucasian republics are only a few hundred kilometers east of Sochi. There is a pos- sibility that insurgents based in the North Caucasus will try to discredit Russia’s as- sertions that the Southern Federal District, which includes both Sochi and the North Caucasus, is safe and secure and under the firm control of the authorities by staging attacks across the region, including in Sochi itself, before or during the 2014 games. One of Russia’s busiest ports is Astrakhan, which is connected to the Caspian Sea by a 160-km channel, which is crossed by four ferry links.37 This port, where members of the North Caucasus-based networks have retreated to regroup and rest, has also been the site of potential terrorist attacks. In 2004, FSB agents foiled an attempt by terrorists to blow up a gas facility in this city. A less busy but important still transportation lane is the Neva River, in the delta of which sits St. Petersburg, Russia’s former imperial capital. St. Petersburg has seen 34 According to the then0head of the Federal Agency of Martiime and River Transportation Alexander Davydenko’s 2006 interview, “Na Puti k WTO, Chto Eshche Uspeem,” RZhD-Partner Port (January 2006). 35 Interview with Alexander Davydenko, “Uzkie Mesta Graydushchei Navigatsii,” Transport Rossii (December 2006). 36 Ibid. 37 According to an interview with the then head of the Federal Agency of Maritime and River Transportation Alexander Davydenko, titled “My Naidyom Argumenty i Dlya Ministrov, i Dlya Sudovladeltsev,” Gudok (8 February 2006). Simon Saradzhyan 181 Bilten Slovenske vojske no attacks by terrorist networks based in North Caucasus, which reflects the fact that it has no landmarks of great appeal to terrorist groups when compared to Moscow. But that is bound to change, as St. Petersburg–the hometown of Russia’s two latest presidents–has begun to acquire some of the functions of a capital city. It has already become home to Russia’s Constitutional Court, and the Russian leadership is also considering relocating the command of the Russian Navy there. 3.1 Explosion of a Nuclear Weapon in a Port City According to the worst-case scenario, radical separatists based in the North Caucasus could hijack a submarine with nuclear warheads on board, as they have planned in the past. They could then try to deploy the weapons in the nearest port city and detonate them. But such an operation could be relatively easily foiled, as the hijacking of a submarine would immediately alert the authorities, while the launch of nuclear weapons would require the ability to break lock codes and other special expertise that the hijackers may find very difficult to obtain. Alternatively, such a terrorist group could steal an atomic bomb and then smuggle it in a shipping container via sea routes to a major port city. Only anywhere between 8 and 30 percent of transit cargo containers are checked by the Russian customs agency, which is responsible for safety and security checks, such as screening for WMD.38 Another way to avoid checks could be to ship the bomb concealed inside a load of scrap metal.39 Casualties from the explosion of a nuclear weapon in a city would vary, depending on location and time, but we can assume that an explosion of a nuclear warhead in a city would immediately kill tens of thousands and would send panic waves across the entire continent. In 2005 the United States government conducted an exercise, involving the smuggling and detonation of a ten-kiloton nuclear device in the port of Charleston, South Carolina, the fourth-largest sea container port in North America. In such a scenario, a potential fatality count would be 10,000, while the number of those severely injured could reach 30,000.40 And if terrorists were to smuggle a ten- kiloton bomb and detonate it in New York City’s Times Square on a busy afternoon, up to one million would die, according to Graham Allison, one of the leading U.S. experts on nuclear terrorism.41 38 Interview with Alexander Davydenko, “Na Puti k WTO, Chto Eshche Uspeem,” RZhD-Partner Port (January 2006). 39 “For instance, a federal official familiar with New York harbor, pointed to a scrap metal terminal in Jersey City and stated to a reporter: ‘If I wanted to bring an atomic bomb into the port, I’d do it through that scrap operation.’” William Finnegan, “Watching the Waterfront,” The New Yorker (19 June 2006). 40 According to U.S. Army General Bruce Davis. “Nightline: Loose Nukes On Main Street,” ABC News Transcripts (12 October 2005). An explosion of a twenty-five-megaton nuclear warhead over the heart of Detroit or St. Petersburg, for instance, would immediately kill anywhere between 200,000 and 2 million people, according to The Effects of Nuclear War (Washington, D.C.: Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress, May 1979). 41 Graham Allison, Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe (New York: Times Books, 2004). DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 182 Bilten Slovenske vojske In the hypothetical scenario outlined above regarding the hijacking of a Russian nuclear submarine, after the nuclear weapon was detonated, the terrorist leaders would then try to compel the Kremlin to first pull Russian troops out of parts of the North Caucasus and then enter negotiations on establishment of an independent state in the region by threatening the authorities with another attack. As stated above, terrorists have already tried to subject the Russian leadership to nuclear blackmail. Russia’s then most notorious terrorist leader–the Chechen warlord Shamil Basayev– tried to blackmail the Kremlin with a crude radiological device that he planted in Moscow. Fortunately, the scenario involving the seizure and detonation of a Russian Navy nuclear missile is highly improbable, as functioning nuclear weapons are accorded the highest security in Russia and would be extremely difficult to steal. 3.2 Explosion of a Dirty Bomb in a Port City In another potential terrorist scenario, radical separatists could hire organized criminals to either bribe or coerce personnel at a nuclear facility to steal weapons- grade material or spent nuclear fuel. They could also try to steal nuclear materials during transport, as there have been cases when such material disappeared during transit or in the process of being prepared for shipment. Even though North Caucasus- based separatists are not known to possess the expertise to build an atomic bomb with stolen weapons-grade material, they could still pack the spent fuel with explo- sives and then deploy it in a shipping container in St. Petersburg, Vladivostok, Sochi, or any other major Russian port. A dirty bomb made with 50 kilograms of spent fuel packed around 45 kilograms of conventional explosives could kill hundreds, if not thousands, although many of the deaths would occur weeks and months later from radiation exposure.42 3.3 Hijacking of an Atomic-Powered Vessel with Subsequent Sabotage of its Reactor Another scenario could be an attempt to seize an atomic-powered vessel and sabotage its reactor. Radical separatists might place their agents as insiders on the ship’s crew; take hostages; plant explosives at the reactor; and then try to coerce the Russian lea- dership into entering negotiations on secession of parts of the North Caucasus. If either the terrorists or disgruntled insiders or both had managed to not only seize a nuclear-powered vessel and sabotage its reactor, but also to blow it up in the harbor of a major Russian port city, the consequences would have been disastrous. In addition to the immediate casualties, an explosion of a nuclear reactor would have long-term effects on the health of thousands, if not tens of thousands of people if it occurred in a major Russian coastal city.43 It would also have a psychological impact as great–if not greater–than that caused by a dirty bomb attack. 42 James Kitfield, “Threat Assessment: Could Terrorism Go Nuclear?” National Journal (19 December 2001). 43 This assessment is according to Vladimir Kuznetsov, a former inspector at Gosatomnadzor, a nuclear security watchdog, and author of Yadernaya Opasnost (Nuclear Danger) (2003). Simon Saradzhyan 183 Bilten Slovenske vojske It is important to bear in mind that sabotaging modern nuclear reactors, which feature many redundant safety functions, would require profound know-how, including knowledge of which equipment would need to be destroyed to cause a reactor meltdown and where it is located. 3.4 Bombing of an Oil Tanker or an Oil Terminal As noted above, a corrupt Russian municipal official has already plotted to blow up an oil tanker off the coast of Russia’s Murmansk region. Apart from this plot, there has been no publicly known attempt to cause a massive oil spill in Russia’s territorial waters. However, we can discern from this incident that terrorist groups could in theory seize an oil tanker–for instance, at Russia’s busy Black Sea port of Novorossiysk–and blow it up. The damage of such an attack would be mostly economic and environmental. Prosecutors have estimated that the aforementioned potential spill of the oil tanker in the Kolsky Bay would have caused at least 40 metric tons of petroleum to be released into the sea, causing millions of dollars worth of environmental damage. We could also extrapolate the economic costs from the bombing of the Limburg tanker in October 2002. The bombing contributed to a short-term collapse of the in- ternational shipping business in the Gulf of Aden and nearby waters, and caused rates among Yemeni shippers to soar by 300 percent, and reduced Yemeni port shipping volumes by 50 percent.44 Obviously, the spilling of 90,000 barrels of oil into the Gulf of Aden also caused serious ecological damage. We can also only guess what damage the destruction of an oil terminal could cause in Russia’s oil shipment hub, the Black Sea port of Novorossiysk. For instance, the 2004 attack against the oil terminal in Basra, Iraq, was carried out by suicide bombers in three inflatable boats. The attack killed two U.S. Navy servicemen and shut down the terminal for two days, causing almost USD 40 million in damage.45 3.5 Disrupting the Shipping Operations of a Major Port Some of Russia’s waterways are so clogged that the sinking of a vessel could paralyze traffic in them for protracted periods of time. As was mentioned above, the high level of congestion in the waterway connecting the Gorodetsky dam and the city of Nizhniy Novgorod makes this shipping lane exceptionally vulnerable to such a disruption, whether due to the intentional scuttling of a ship or to the destruction of a bridge. Russian government agencies and research organizations have done no publicly available studies on what economic damage the long-term disruption of shipping on internal waterways could cause. 44 Paul W. Parformak and Jonn Fritelli, Maritime Security: Potential Terrorist Attacks and Protection Priorities (Washington, D.C.: Report prepared for the Congressional Research Service, 9 January 2007). 45 Ali Koknar, “Maritime Terrorism: A New Challenge for NATO.” DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 184 Bilten Slovenske vojske 3.6 Bombing of an Explosives Warehouse in Port Facilities such as fertilizer plants and industrial refrigeration warehouses could under certain conditions be turned into “weapons of mass destruction,” according to a study released in Russia in 2002. 46 An explosion at a refrigeration warehouse would lead to an enormous fire, which would release tons of ammonia into the air, possibly poisoning thousands of people over an area of several square kilometers, the study warned. In fact, Russia has already seen one attempt to execute such an attack. FSB agents foiled a 2004 attempt by two members of an extremist group based in the North Caucasus to blow up a gas facility in Russia’s port of Astrakhan, which is located in the delta of the Volga River that flows into the Caspian Sea.47 3.7 Seizure of a Passenger Vessel and Publicized Mass Execution of Those on Board As stated above, the hijacking of a passenger ship is the only act of maritime terrorism that has thus far been committed by groups seeking the secession of parts of the North Caucasus from Russia. That attack–the hijacking of a passenger ferry bound for Russia from Turkey by Chechen separatists in January 1996–ended peace- fully, although it could have become a highly public bloodbath in the vicinity of the heavily traveled Bosporus Strait had the hostage-takers decided to implement their threats against the ship’s defenseless passengers. Having seen that hostage taking alone failed to have any impact on the Russian government’s decision making, terrorist groups contemplating the seizure of passenger ships may opt for escalation and execute their hostages instead, for maximum media exposure and public shock. As a U.S. Coast Guard analyst noted, “in terms of the probability of something happening, the likelihood of it succeeding, and the consequences of it occurring, ferries come out at the very high end.”48 According to an authoritative RAND study, onboard bombings present the greatest combination of threat and vulnerability among all forms of assault on ferries and other passenger vessels.49 3.8 Bombing of a Dike Some of Russia’s major dikes, which are connected to rivers, are located upstream from sizeable cities, making them potential targets for terrorist attacks. The then-head of the Federal Agency of Maritime and River Transportation Alexander Davydenko noted in a 2006 interview that there was a particularly serious “terrorist threat” to the 46 Alexander Fyodorov, ed., Terrorism in the Metropolis: Assessing Threats and Protecting Critical Infrastructure (Moscow: PIR Center, 2002). 47 The FSB press service announced that its agents managed to prevent two men from blowing up a gas distribution facility on 14 November 2004. 48 Eric Lipton, “Trying to Keep the Nation’s Ferries Safe From Terrorists,” The New York Times (19 March 2005), as cited in Parformak and Fritelli, Maritime Security: Potential Terrorist Attacks and Protection Priorities. 49 Michael D. Greenberg, Peter Chalk, Henry H. Willis, Ivan Khilko, and David S. Ortiz, Maritime Terrorism, Risk and Liability (Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Center for Terrorism Risk Management Policy, 2006). Simon Saradzhyan 185 Bilten Slovenske vojske vulnerable Khimki water reservoir, which is located close to Moscow, and where the surface of the water is 40 meters higher than the altitude of Red Square.50 In the same year, the then-head of the Federal Security Service Nikolai Patrushev told a session of the National Counter-Terrorism Committee, which he chaired, that groups of Chechnya-based terrorists had planned to stage a series of explosions at hydro-technical facilities in Russia. He said the threat was most serious in the south of Russia, at such locations as the dikes of the Volgograd and Tsimlyanski water reservoirs, as well as at facilities in the Saratov region and the North Caucasian republic of Dagestan. Patrushev said an inspection of these dikes and reservoirs has revealed that they were not sufficiently protected. “A sabotage or terrorist attack on one of these (facilities) can cause catastrophic consequences, including big human casualties and serious economic losses,” Patrushev said. “This threat is very real.”51 There are some other potential scenarios for acts of maritime terrorism that should be kept in mind, and that must be taken into account in any comprehensive strategy to address maritime terrorist attacks, including: – Ramming tankers and other ships or offshore oil and gas platforms with high-spe- ed boats – Bombing ships in port or underwater pipelines with underwater explosives52 – Mining of a port harbor – Use of a small, high-speed boat to attack an oil tanker or offshore energy platform – Anattack on a port or a major coastal city with biological or chemical agents 4 THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO THREAT OF TERRORISM, INCLUDING MARITIME TERRORISM53 Russia’s organizational and legal response to terrorism has undergone major changes in the wake of a number of horrendous terrorist attacks, including the dramatic hostage situations at Moscow’s Dubrovka Theatre in 2002 and at the Beslan school in 2004. A number of laws have been passed to improve the government’s response to terrorism. Among the measures that have been introduced is the use of the armed forces and security services to fight terrorists abroad. If diplomatic methods of resolving a hostage crisis that involves Russian citizens abroad do not do not succeed, the President of the Russian Federation has the power to issue an executive order to have 50 “My Naidyom Arguymenty i Dlya Ministrov, i Dlya Sudovladeltsev,” Gudok (8 February 2006). 51 “Khorosho Zabytaya Trevoga,” Vremya (8 November 2006). 52 According to a study by RAND, suspected members of Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) are known to have enrolled in scuba diving courses in the Southern Philippines. See Greenberg, et al., Maritime Terrorism, Risk and Liability. 53 This section is partially based on the chapter “Russia’s System to Combat Terrorism and Its Application in Chechnya” in Simon Saradzhyan, National Counter-Terrorism Strategies (Brussels: NATO, December 2006). DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 186 Bilten Slovenske vojske Russian troops conduct an anti-terrorist operation outside the borders and territorial waters of the Russian Federation. Such operations are conducted in accordance with the international treaties to which the Russian Federation is a signatory, and with the Russian Federal Law on “Countering Terrorism.”54 This 2006 law introduced the use of the armed forces and other units to fight terrorism away from Russian soil. The law also empowers the president to decide whether and where to use armed forces against terrorists abroad. Among other things, this landmark law has given the authorities the right to sink and shoot down hijacked vessels and aircraft, even if the latter have hostages on board. In another significant development, the law also gave the lead role in fighting terrorism to the Federal Security Service (FSB) in a clear effort to centralize command over counter-terrorism activities. In coordination with this counter-terrorism law, the Russian president also signed a decree establishing a National Counter-Terrorism Committee (NCC) in February 2006. The president put the FSB in charge of this permanent body to coordinate the federal agencies’ response to terrorism. A number of other federal bills have been introduced to ban authorities from con- ducting political negotiations with terrorists, as well as to permit the confiscation of property of terrorists and outlaw handing over the bodies of slain terrorists to their relatives. Most recently, Russia adopted the Concept of Countering Terrorism in the Russian Federation. The concept, which was approved by President Dmitry Medvedev in October 2009, notes WMD aspirations of terrorists and admits there are internal root causes for terrorism. It also notes geographic expansion of terrorism, improve- ment of terrorist groups’ organizational skills, formation of large terrorist organiza- tions with developed infrastructure and increasing nexus of terrorism and organized crime. However, the document contains no references to maritime terrorism. The most recent strategic document to touch upon the Russian state’s response to terrorism is the new Military Doctrine. The doctrine, which President Dmitry Medvedev signed off on after a number of delays in February 2010, lists interna- tional terrorism among major external threats and lists “fighting piracy, ensuring security of maritime shipping” and “ensuring security of the economic activities of the Russian Federation in the World Ocean” among the armed forces’ peacetime missions.55 Interestingly, Russia’s 2001–20 Maritime Doctrine does not list terrorism among the maritime challenges that Russia faces. 54 From a 3 April 2008 statement issued to the author by the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation in response to his written questions on Russia’s response to maritime piracy and terrorism for a newspaper article. 55 “Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation,” February 5, 2010. Official web site of the Russian president. Simon Saradzhyan 187 Bilten Slovenske vojske 4.1 Key Agencies’ Evolving Organizational Response to Maritime Terrorism The Federal Security Service (FSB). As was noted above, the FSB has been given the lead role in fighting terrorism in Russia. FSB officers chair the NCC and sit on this committee’s regional counterparts to oversee routine counter-terrorism policy making. They are also tasked with leading the aforementioned counter-terrorism Federal Operational Staff and regional Operational Staffs in cases of terrorist attacks. FSB also has the power to send its commando units abroad to strike terrorist groups and their bases. The FSB also has the Border Guard Service under its command, including its coastal guard forces. These coastal guard units are tasked with the challenge of protecting Russia’s 46,000 km of water frontiers, including 39,000 km of seacoast.56 The Defense Ministry. Russia’s Defense Ministry, as in many other countries, is taking on an increasingly prominent role in anti-terrorism operations. The fact that both the Defense Minister and the chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces sit on the National Counter-Terrorism Committee reflects the role that Russia’s political leadership would like the military to play in fighting terrorism. Defense Ministry forces play auxiliary roles in CT operations, such as providing air transportation and fire support, including attack planes and gunships for law-enforcement units pursuing groups of insurgents and terrorists. The 2006 law on terrorism makes the military responsible for sinking hijacked ships and shooting down hijacked airliners. Of course, of all the branches of the armed forces, it is the navy that bears the main responsibility for fighting maritime terrorism and piracy threats. As of 2003, the Russian Navy had 146 combat warships, including 70 ocean-going vessels, compared to the Soviet Navy’s total of 703 (including 380 ocean-going vessels) in 1985.57 The Russian Navy’s operational capabilities on the world’s seas have decreased by two-thirds since the disintegration of the Soviet Union, according to Russian naval experts’ estimates. Prosecutor General’s Office. The Prosecutor General’s Office and its Investigative Committee are tasked with investigating rather than interdicting terrorist incidents. The committee investigates and prosecutes all major terrorist attacks. The General Prosecutor’s Office also has special departments responsible for overseeing indi- vidual law-enforcement agencies and could help to entice them to shift their focus from response and post-facto investigation to deterrence and prevention. 56 The coast guard vessels inspected 27,000 fishing vessels in 2005, intercepting 500 Russian and foreign poaching ships to confiscate 2,400 tons of fish and seafood, according to Vice Admiral Vyacheslav Serzhanin, commander of the Coast Guard directorate of the Border Guard’s Organizational Department. 57 “Kuda Plyovot VMF Rossii,” V.V.Zabros (31 October 2007); available on the web site of the graduates of the Popov Naval Radioelectronics Academy, at http://vvmure1987.ru/index.php?nma=catalog&fla=stat&cat_ id=22&page=1&nums=103. DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 188 Bilten Slovenske vojske Interior Ministry. One of the problems exposed by the Beslan tragedy has been the failure of the Interior Ministry and other law enforcement agencies to shift the focus of its operations from responding to terrorist acts to preventing them from taking place. NCC’s then Chairman Patrushev made clear at the time that preven- ting terrorism is one of the key institutional challenges that his committee needs to resolve as soon as possible.58 The Interior Ministry also supervises Russia’s rough equivalent of the United States’ National Guard, known as the Interior Troops, which play an important in respon- ding to a terrorist attack under way. These Interior Troops also have special units of combat divers that can be called into action should a maritime terrorism scenario materialize. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS That only one act of maritime terrorism, targeting Russian citizens and Russian assets, has been carried out and several more attempted reflects the global trend. Seaborne strikes have constituted only 2 percent of all international terrorism incidents over the last thirty years, according to the RAND Terrorism Database.59 The RAND study suggests that acts of maritime terrorism are rare because operating at sea requires specific skills in addition to those specialized competencies needed to operate a ship, such as surface and underwater demolition techniques. It also requires access to appropriate assault and transport vehicles and the ability to mount and sustain opera- tions from a non-land-based environment.60 Yet, in spite of these difficulties, maritime terrorism should not be discounted as a negligible threat in Russia for a number of reasons. The first reason is the improvement of security at land-based military facilities. Government agencies have implemented extensive measures to harden inland targets to such an extent that the targets located on rivers and seas are becoming relative- ly more attractive as targets for groups who have previously have considered these water targets to require too many resources and special skills to attack. Second, the increasing frequency and importance of maritime shipments make them easier and higher-impact targets. Maritime shipping already accounts for 60 percent of Russia’s foreign trade, and has been forecast to continue to grow, although the current economic crisis will probably slow down or arrest this growth. There are also large areas in Siberia where water is the only possible venue for cargo transpor- tation, with neither roads nor railways connecting these areas to ‘mainland’ Russia. Also, as Russia’s oil output had grown dramatically in the several years prior to 58 Interfax-AVN (20 March 2006). 59 See Greenberg, et al., Maritime Terrorism, Risk and Liability. 60 Ibid. Simon Saradzhyan 189 Bilten Slovenske vojske eruption of the economic crisis in Russia in the fall of 2008, so have shipments of oil in tankers from Russia, making it easier to plan an attack on such a tanker to cause a massive oil spill that would cause economic and ecological damage to Russia. And, while rebels in Chechnya have largely abstained from attacking the oil infrastruc- ture, perhaps because they have benefited from the oil industry financially, in other parts of Russia terrorist networks have attacked facilities with the aim of inflicting economic damage, including electricity lines in the Moscow region and gas pipelines in Tatarstan. The third reason that maritime terrorism should not be discounted, despite its rarity, is that maritime violence is no longer out of sight. The rapid development and inc- reasing availability of technologies used to record and transmit visual and other data, ranging from personal mobile phones equipped with cameras to professional cameras mounted on media helicopters, mean that maritime targets are no longer out of sight and, therefore, their value increases in the eyes of terrorists, who always seek to maximize the impact of their actions on their target audiences. While conventional maritime attacks will be easier to execute in the future, I would argue that endemic agents of terror in Russia are more likely to attempt acts of ca- tastrophic proportions. The terrorist networks based in the North Caucasus should have realized by now from their own experience that nothing short of catastrophic terrorist attack would coerce Russian authorities to negotiate; not even a terrorist act on the scale of the Beslan siege, in which more than one hundred children died, succeeded in forcing the Kremlin to the negotiating table If these networks’ leaders ask themselves what single event can reverse their fortunes in the fight to defeat Russia and establish an independent state in the North Caucasus, what is the single option they should focus their energy and capabilities on, the answer most likely would be a nuclear terrorist attack staged from land or water. An alliance of North Caucasus-based terrorist groups, corrupt law enforcement officials, and venal insiders would be impossible to interdict, especially if the hijackers are well organized and armed and are prepared to die, thinking they are fighting a holy war, in which they have already dehumanized the enemy and its infidel civilians and in which the reward for their “martyrdom” is paradise. Russia needs to continue to strengthen lines of defense against catastrophic terrorism. However, no matter how many lines of defense are built around Russia’s facilities, borders, and key terminals, these efforts will prove futile unless the nation’s security culture improves and nefarious insiders are winnowed out. Russian law enforcement agencies must also be cleansed of corrupt or disloyal officials who may provide safe passage to terrorists for material gain or ideological reasons. These agencies and security services should acknowledge the emerging terrorist threat posed by ultranationalists armed with technical knowledge and access to hazardous materials. And these agencies should continue to keep groups on the DYNAMICS OF MARITIME TERRORIST THREATS TO RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE 190 Bilten Slovenske vojske run—no matter their political or ideological orientation—that might be intere- sted in both nuclear and conventional maritime terrorism. The authorities should also address root causes and contributing factors behind the indigenous terrorism, including poverty, unemployment, abuses of the population in the North Caucasus, spread of religious extremism and ethnic intolerance, lack of education opportuniti- es and others. 1. Michael D. Greenberg, Peter Chalk, Henry H. Willis, Ivan Khilko, David S. Ortiz, 2006. Maritime Terrorism, Risk and Liability. The RAND Center for Terrorism Risk Management Policy,. 2. Graham, Allison, 2004. Nuclear terrorism: the ultimate preventable catastrophe. New York, Times Books. 3. Saradzhyan, S., 2006. Russia’s System to Combat Terrorism and its Application in Chechnya. National Counter-Terrorism Strategies. Brussels: NATO, December. 4. Parformak, Paul W., and Fritelli, Jonn, 2007. Maritime Security: Potential Terrorist Attacks and Protection Priorities. Washington, D.C., Report prepared for the Congressional Research Service, 9 January 2007. Bibliography Simon Saradzhyan