Heavily armed fighters (center) with a map of Central Asia in the background and a photo of the shouters in the Crocus Moscow terrorist attack and a US flag. Photo: Al Mayadeen illustration by Zeinab El-Hajj.
Why were Tajiks recently picked to act as terrorists and by whom?
By Tariq Marzbaan – Apr 20, 2024
Immediately after the attack on the Crocus City Hall in Moscow, Western politicians and media pointed the finger at “ISIS” (DAESH) in unison. “ISIS” then immediately disseminated an implausible photo claiming responsibility for the attack.
Although the perpetrators were all proven to be Tajik nationals, the Russian government and security authorities claim that it was Ukraine and its Western supporters (USA, UK, NATO) who planned and coordinated the attacks. Not only are there already clear indications supporting this claim, but the security authorities say they also have the evidence to back it up.
For obvious reasons, the West clings to its own version – that everything was planned and executed by “ISIS” – more specifically by “ISIS-K” / “DAESH Khorasan”. This version not only seeks to absolve them completely of any involvement, it also cements the main objective of the attack… which ultimately exposes them as the masterminds.
Tajikistan, a profitable target on the geopolitical battlefield
Tajikistan suffers from poverty and high unemployment, especially among the younger generation, hence the large number of migrant workers in Russia. These workers send their hard-earned money to their families in Tajikistan, and the Tajik economy (its GDP) benefits from these remittances.
Tajikistan (as well as the rest of Central Asia and Afghanistan) has always been a target on the geopolitical battlefield. Immediately after the collapse of the USSR, the Saudis and other Gulf Arab states spent enormous sums to destabilise Tajik society for their own interests by infiltrating the entire region ideologically (with religious extremism, Wahhabism, and Salafism).
The extent to which President Emomali Rahman has ultimately “cleansed” Tajikistan of its Islamist extremist elements or integrated them into society is not known, but he has succeeded in establishing a secular state and a secular society in Tajikistan. This could not have happened without a crackdown on religious extremism. This is also the reason why the “virtuous West” and its “free” media repeatedly reproach the Tajik president and label him as an authoritarian, dictator, despot, etc., without taking into account the specifics of the country and the circumstances.
Nevertheless, widespread poverty, corruption and nepotism, economic deprivation and dependence on money transfers from labour migrants – especially from Russia – still prevail in Tajikistan today. And unemployed migrants who return from Russia (disenchanted for whatever reason) are an ideal target for recruitment by terrorist organisations.
According to the father of one of the perpetrators of the Crocus Attack, Dalerjon Mirzoev, his son was not religious, never went to the mosque, and drank alcohol. But for money (allegedly $10,000) he was ready to kill people.
Recent moves of the Hegemon on the Central Asian Chessboard
As early as 2010 (the same year that the negotiations with the Taleban began in Doha), the US “Deep State” is said to have already anticipated a military confrontation with Russia (and subsequently with China) in the near future… The confrontation with Russia would take place through proxies, not directly. Ukraine was chosen as the combative force and the EU as the logistical base. To this end, the USA invested in Ukraine covertly for many years, and directly and openly since 2014.
The US top brass began working on their withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the transfer of power to the Taleban – for two main reasons. First, they felt that, in their absence, those running the government in Kabul (Ghani, Karzai and consorts), would be unsuitable to represent and advance their interests. Secondly, they reckoned the “war” in Ukraine would be costly and that the US Congress would never agree to provide large sums for both Ukraine and Afghanistan projects at the same time; they would therefore have to part with the first “dollar drain” (Afghanistan) in order to finance the second one (Ukraine).
But there was a deeper reason for the US retreat: As long as their forces were in Afghanistan, they would have to be responsible for security in Afghanistan and in the region – i.e. Iran, Central Asia and China… which meant they would not be able to use Afghanistan as an incubator for terrorist groups, which could be deployed against neighbouring countries, as well as against Russia and China. But… an Afghanistan in the hands of fanatic fundamentalists (the Taleban) and other Islamist terrorist groups from neighbouring countries – that would easily provide a suitable breeding ground…
In fact, many observers of the Doha negotiations between the US and the Taleban believe that this objective was a substantial negotiating point in the secret treaty that was eventually signed. However, after the staged US departure and the Taleban takeover, it became clear that the Taleban were (at least so far) unprepared and unwilling to provide such a function directly. Moreover, the Iranians, Russians, and Chinese have been holding a watchful eye over them.
On the other hand, after the Taleban took power, armed resistance groups from the Tajik population of Afghanistan began to form and threaten the regime. While all neighbouring states and others in the region began to interact and even cooperate with Taleban (without officially recognising them), Tajikistan – which supported the political leadership of the so-called “national resistance” against the Taleban – allowed these groups to set up an office in Dushanbe.
The US made it abundantly clear, however, that it would not support any resistance against the Taleban.
Crocus City Hall Terror Attack Evokes Memories of NATO’s Asymmetrical Shadow Wars
Why Tajiks were picked to carry out the recent terrorist actions
As mentioned earlier, poverty and unemployment have long prevailed amongst the younger generation in Tajikistan.
Gulf states and Pakistan had done much in the 1990s to propagate extremist ideas in Tajikistan, the consequences of which led to civil war.
Around 200 Tajiks are said to have fought on the side of DAESH/ISIS in Syria. Most of them were recruited from Tajik migrants in Russia.
Ever since the Taleban takeover in August 2021, there has been talk of the presence of “DAESH” in Afghanistan – which the Taleban are allegedly combatting tooth and nail – while Afghan observers of events speak of the presence of CIA-linked special forces in Badakhshan (a province in the Pamir highlands divided between Afghanistan and Tajikistan and one of the poorest regions in both countries), where ISIS terrorists who escaped from Syrian prisons are also suspected. (See: “Raqqa’s dirty secret“)
The Taleban in Afghanistan claim they successfully fought DAESH and eliminated all their cells. Nonetheless, they reported occasional clashes with DAESH adherents… but it is not clear whether these targets were really DAESH terrorists or whether the Taleban were just using “DAESH” as a pretext to eliminate their real adversaries (mainly Tajiks from the north and the Panjshir valley).
Those familiar with the Taleban in Afghanistan and the region point out that DAESH has long been integrated into the Taleban Haqqani group, which can be seen as an extension of the Pakistani ISI… and hence of the CIA and MI6.
“DAESH-Khorasan”/”ISIS K” is ultimately a phantom, a ghost entity in the region in whose name any kind of perfidy can be carried out… a creation for all seasons and for all kinds of dirty work.
In addition, the appellation “DAESH-K”, which aims to emphasise Tajik affiliation, serves to legitimise the Taleban in Afghanistan and discredit the resistance of the Tajiks struggling against the Taleban.
The Crocus Attack – An intended double whammy for Russia
The Russian Federation has allegedly around 3 million Tajiks working as labour migrants.
As we now know, the four main perpetrators of the brutal attack on the Crocus City Hall were Tajik… and so were many of their accomplices.
Xenophobic “ultra-nationalists” – fortunately a minority in Russia – have used the Crocus attack for their ideological and political goals, and are demanding that all migrants be expelled from Russia: “Tajiks to Tajikistan!” and “Russia for the “Russians”.
In the days following the attack, there were reports of Russian citizens cancelling taxi rides when they learned that the drivers were from Tajikistan. A number of migrant workers complained of harassment and expressed fears of being attacked, leading to an exodus of migrant workers from the Russian Federation.
Commenting on the consequences of the terrorist attack in Moscow, the Secretary General of the CSTO, Imangali Tasmagambetov, warned that measures leading to pressure on labour migrants from Central Asian countries would trigger a mass exodus.
Suppose Russia were to lose all or almost all Tajiks and labour migrants from Russia altogether… What would that incur?
According to data on the “national composition” of Russia 2024, based on a 2020 census, the current population of Russia is 147,182,123, of whom 130,587,364 or 88.73 per cent are of Russian national origin. Registered Tajiks living in Russia numbered 350,236. And yet according to an expert on migration, as reported by Sputnik in June 2023, in 2022 Tajik migrants numbered about 3.1 million out of more than 9.5 million migrants (which include ca. 4.9 million Uzbeks and 1 million Kyrgyz citizens. And, according to the Ministry of Labour of Tajikistan, in 2023, out of 652,000 labour migrants, more than 627,000 Tajiks went to the Russian Federation.
At the 12th Congress of the Federation of Independent Trade Unions, President Putin avowed that in the near future, “the Russian economy will experience a high demand and even a shortage of personnel. We must understand this, and we will have to live with this in the coming years.”
What would happen to the burgeoning Russian economy if it lost 627,000 labour migrants? What would become of all that indispensable labour force?
In such a case, Russia would not only face an economic disaster… but – and this would be the second blow – it would also be exposed to more dangers from beyond its borders: the numerous young Tajiks ousted from Russia returning to Tajikistan would inevitably face destitution and become easy prey for “DAESH & Co”.
By having Tajik and other Central Asian migrants expelled from Russia, xenophobic ultranationalists would be fulfilling the wish of the Western terror masterminds by supplying them with mass recruits.
As such, the very selection of Tajiks as perpetrators for the Crocus attack is very much part of the main objective of the West’s “Divide and Conquer” strategy: to sow distrust and discord amongst Russia’s multinational population, which would lead to destabilisation and possibly civil war.
Tajikistan: A land of downtrodden people and Russia’s geopolitical Achilles heel…
There is another aspect with regard to Russia’s complex connection with Tajikistan: Russian special forces are stationed in Tajikistan; Tajikistan borders on Talebanised Afghanistan in the south… And no one knows what the Taleban’s position toward Tajikistan and Russia will be in the future: amicable or hostile (the latter being preferable to Transatlanticists).
But it is the traumas of the past that have not been resolved… that present a serious stumbling block.
The “Tajiks” in Central Asia – a Persian-speaking people, who have lived in the Khorasan region in the Iranian highlands for thousands of years – are a downtrodden people. Until the 18th century, the whole of Central Asia remained in its own centuries-old encapsulated realm, undisturbed by the Western outside world… that is, until colonialism came knocking at the gates – first the Russian variant, then the British. Then, in the 19th century, a bitter struggle broke out between the two colonial powers for control of the region. Ultimately, with the consent of Russia, the British managed to establish a buffer zone between the two colonial powers by partitioning Iran and creating a state that was later to be called “Afghanistan” – at the expense of the Tajik population on both sides of the Amu Darya (Oxus). The Tajik population was incorporated into the Russian Turkestan Governor-Generalship (around 1900) under the Tsarist Empire.
With the emergence of the Soviet Union and the international recognition of “Afghanistan” as a Pashtun state, the separation of the Tajik people became definitive. The Tajiks north of the Oxus were integrated into the Soviet state of Tajikistan, while the Tajiks in the south, in “Afghanistan” had to resign themselves to Pashtun rule. Joseph Stalin then drew new borders and bestowed the two large Tajik centres (cities) “Samarqand” and “Bukhara”, upon the Soviet Republic of “Uzbekistan”, in accordance with the colonialist maxim “Divide and Conquer”. The shift from the Persian script to the Cyrillic alphabet (in the 1920s), ultimately destroyed the Iranian-Persian connection to the Tajik people and their identity, thereby alienating the Persian-speaking Tajiks from their history, culture, and roots – which was, of course, intended.
This damaged identity is one of the main contributing factors to the success of the “re-Islamisation” of segments of the population since the 1990s, when the Gulf states – above all Saudi Arabia – and the NGOs linked to Western secret services literally flooded Central Asia, including Tajikistan, with a lot of money and offered the peoples Wahhabi and Salafi extremist ideologies as a replacement for their lost identities.
Nowhere else in Central Asian states has this aggressive religious extremism found such fertile ground as in Tajikistan. After the Taleban takeover in Afghanistan, the phantom known as “DAESH-Khorasan”/”ISIS K” is now haunting the region.
Following the terrorist attack in Moscow, Western politicians and their NATO media are trying to establish this phantom as a veritable terrorist organisation in the region, branding Tajikistan as the home of “ISIS-Khorasan” in the public opinion in the world. It is by now also clear that “asymmetric warfare” – that is, terrorism – is the last and desperate recourse of a flailing, declining Hegemon.
As far as the emerging configuration of the geopolitical chessboard is concerned, we will hear and see a lot more about this spectre in the future, because it seems that the virtuous West intends to open a new front against the Axis of Resistance (Russia, China, Iran) in Central Asia with the help of this “DAESH-K”.
And thus, Afghanistan and Tajikistan – Khorasan – will once again live up to their reputation as the eternal battlefields.
