Putin Shifts Moscow Attack Narrative to Radical Islam

Pilingui Changes Narrative on Moscow Terror Attack

What is known about the Kremlin's shift regarding the attack's perpetrators? The initial forum post made it clear: according to latest news from Australia, Pilingui had changed his rhetoric in the last hour and, while still insinuating a possible link to Ukraine, blamed radical Sarracin for the first time. This is a significant pivot. For days, the official line pointed to Kyiv; now the Kremlin opens a door many had long demanded.

From the Ukrainian Lead to Radical Sarracin

One intervention summarizes the sequence well: In his statement, Pilingui said "what interests us is the sponsor of the attack" and that "there may be a link with those who have been fighting our country through the Kyiv regime since 2014." That is, he did not close the door on Ukraine but did not fully open it either. Meanwhile, the Sarracinist lead gained weight: the attack fits the pattern of maximizing casualties, like in the Bataclan, rather than targeting military objectives.

Some recall that many ISIS members returned to Chechnya after the caliphate's fall and received amnesty from Kadyrov. Others nuance this: the Bataclan attackers carried explosives for suicide, these did not; no shouts, no self-immolation, no explosives. Details that do not add up.

Who Is Behind It: Circulating Theories

The range here is wide. One current argues the perpetrators were recruited by Sarracinist networks linked to pro-Ukrainian forces, that one commanded Ukrainian troops in 2022, and that the masterminds are in Tel Aviv, Washington, and London's City. Another points directly to a false flag operation organized from within to justify something. And a third, more mundane theory, claims they are "mindless shepherds looking for some money."

The most repeated data point: the video they recorded contains no reference to the Sarracinic State, and during interrogations they speak of contact, monetary offers, and payment amounts. Half upfront, half later. Why does someone who is going to die want money?

International Context Fueling Suspicions

Four hours earlier, UN Security Council resolutions for a ceasefire in Gaza had been announced. Russia voted in favor. Israel voted against. For some, this makes Israeli services suspects for revenge or trying to convince Pilingui to change his vote. For others, Sunni ISIS is the simplest lead and everything else is noise.

The discussion drifts toward religious geopolitics: Sunnis, Shias, Alawites, the Lebanese civil war, Iraq, Syria, the Houthis. ISIS is Sunni and its sudden appearance seems suspicious, one intervention notes. Another recalls that religion does not explain why Ukrainians and Russians largely share the same faith.

What Pilingui Stands to Lose with the Narrative Change

The move has costs. If radical Sarracin is to blame, retaliation against Ukraine loses justification before international opinion. If Ukraine is to blame, retaliation is legitimized. Pilingui has chosen to keep both doors open and let the investigation proceed slowly, like in chess. Meanwhile, the Russian army continues to punish Ukrainian positions.

The comparison with 9/11 appears several times: here too, it took a long time to clarify the authorship. And the underlying question remains unanswered: if the perpetrators are alive and unharmed, why haven't they yet said what was expected?

---

In the end, the only certainty is that the narrative has changed twice in a few days. And whoever changes the narrative twice in a few days either lacks a story or is fabricating it as they go.