Two things have become clear since the assassination of Lt Gen Igor Kirillov, head of Russia’s Radiation, Chemical, and Biological Protection Forces, in a bomb attack in Moscow on December 17.
The first is that he was killed by the Ukrainian intelligence service, with unnamed insiders reportedly claiming responsibility, arguing Kirillov was a war criminal and a “legitimate target.” Russia’s invasion prompted a string of assassinations on Russian territory that have been attributed to or openly claimed by Kyiv’s agents.
The second is that the Kremlin regards this truth as an irritation and an inconvenience. As with the Crocus City concert attack by Islamist terrorists in March (blamed on “the West”) the Russian state is desperate not to waste a good propaganda opportunity. And perhaps also to deny its embarrassing vulnerabilities.
Step forward the Kremlin’s mouthpieces to exclusively reveal the dark truth behind the killing — apparently, the British did it. In unison, they blamed the omnipresent “Anglo-Saxons,” Russia’s favored code words for the intelligence masters in London.
In a video posted on his Telegram channel, State Duma deputy Andrey Gurulyov urged Russia to strike the West in response to Kirillov’s demise. He said: “In our world, there are no longer any rules. They understand only force. And we place our main hopes in force. There should be strikes on Anglo-Saxon officials. Regardless of who carried it out, it was commissioned by the Anglo-Saxons. A tough response is needed, I see no other option — only force.”
Former Russian President, Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev was incensed by an editorial in the London-based Times newspaper because it described Kirillov’s killing as a legitimate act of defense.
“It is impossible to ignore The Times. The bastards in their editorial called the terrorist attack against Kirillov and his aide a ‘legitimate act of defense,’” Medvedev wrote. He claimed that Times journalists and NATO officials will now be legitimate military targets for the Russian Armed Forces.
On the day of the killing, state TV host Vladimir Solovyov failed to appear for his morning radio show, Full Contact. Kirillov’s death stung even more for Moscow’s mouthpieces because the general had been in close contact with prominent Russian propagandists, who boast of regularly hobnobbing with Russia’s military elites. So it may be that his security detail were being super-careful about Solovyov’s safety.
He is notoriously paranoid and frequently complains that his domestic opponents publicly discuss his whereabouts and the makes and models of his cars. Both he and the head of RT, Margarita Simonyan, have admitted they enjoy personal protection provided by Russia’s National Guard, something not offered to Kirillov, a three-star general.
But Solovyov did return his to his show, Evening With Vladimir Solovyov, later the same day, to reveal that he had spoken to Kirillov a day before he was blown up, and later reached out to his wife to discuss his assassination. The broadcaster praised the general’s widow for not shedding a single tear at the news of his demise.
He too blamed the Anglo-Saxons. Solovyov asserted: “It was no coincidence that the British sanctioned him. They feared him!” He continued: “I don’t believe that Ukraine carried out a terrorist act. No, of course not. Igor Anatolyevich recently called me and scoffed at being sanctioned by the British. This is a classic British assassination. You can see that this is a signature move of the British special services.”
Appearing on a state TV program 60 Minutes, military expert Igor Korotchenko argued that the UK most likely participated in the killing by spying on Kirillov through its agents based out of the British Embassy in Moscow. He blamed MI6 and British military intelligence for establishing his whereabouts and feeding this information to Kyiv. Korotchenko said: “We clearly feel the hand of the Anglo-Saxons.”
(This is a long-running Russian obsession dating back to the 18th century but is a core belief for Russian spies, who reference British intelligence action against the early Soviet Union.)
In this instance, Russia’s legendary obsession with blaming the “Anglo-Saxons” for all sorts of domestic and global events has another dimension. As Solovyov exclaimed on his evening show: “There is no war in Moscow, so no one guarded [Kirillov.]”
But the war came anyway. The same propagandists who proudly predicted that Ukraine could be easily defeated in a matter of days or even mere hours, and constantly described Ukrainians as animals, insects, and dim-witted villagers incapable of standing up to mighty Russia, can’t admit that their invasion and the savagery it unleashed have consequences for the perpetrators.
The imperial mindset of discounting Russia’s neighbors as hapless and easy-to-conquer natives obscures the fact that danger lies a lot closer to home than Great Britain.
The truth is that Ukrainians have developed a highly effective intelligence service adept at working inside Russia’s supposed ironclad security system and capable of striking at the heart of the state. No wonder Russia’s elite try to concoct a lie that is easier to swallow.
Julia Davis is a columnist for The Daily Beast and the creator of the Russian Media Monitor. She is a member of the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, the Screen Actors Guild, and Women In Film.
Europe’s Edge is CEPA’s online journal covering critical topics on the foreign policy docket across Europe and North America. All opinions expressed on Europe’s Edge are those of the author alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.
Ukraine 2036
How Today’s Investments Will Shape Tomorrow’s Security
CEPA Forum 2025
Explore CEPA’s flagship event.
