The Kremlin’s Response to Separatism and Islamization in Dagestan

The Kremlin is concerned about the growing tensions in Dagestan due to signs of separatism. According to sources close to the leadership of the Russian National Guard, Islamization is one of the threats in Dagestan that concerns the Russian Presidential Administration. The Mufti of the republic, Ahmed Abdullaev, who was previously considered a moderate religious leader, has reportedly become a central figure in the growing Islamization since 2017. He aims to dominate not only religious but also social and political life in Dagestan, proposing the introduction of Sharia law as the legal system and transforming the republic into an Islamic state. Supporters of the Mufti hold many key positions in the local government, raising serious concerns among federal authorities.

Ahmed Abdullaev is a prominent figure in Dagestan, known for his leadership within the region’s Sufi Muslim community. As the head of the Spiritual Administration of Muslims of Dagestan (SAMD), he plays a crucial role in the religious and social dynamics of the republic.

Potential Risks and Threats Associated with Abdullaev’s Activities

1. Sectarian Tensions: Dagestan’s religious landscape is marked by the coexistence of Sufi and Salafi communities. Abdullaev’s association with Sufism and his leadership position could exacerbate existing tensions between these groups. The historical rivalry has occasionally led to conflicts over religious practices and mosque leadership, potentially destabilizing the region.
2. Extremist Targeting: Leaders of traditional Islamic institutions, like Abdullaev, may become targets for extremist factions opposing their interpretations of Islam. Such threats not only endanger individuals but also pose broader security risks, as attacks on religious leaders can incite further violence and unrest.
3. Political Manipulation: The Russian government has, at times, leveraged religious figures to further its political agendas in the North Caucasus. Abdullaev’s prominence could make him susceptible to political pressures, potentially aligning religious institutions with state objectives. This entanglement might alienate segments of the population, leading to decreased trust in both religious and governmental bodies.
4. Inter-Ethnic Relations: Dagestan is home to numerous ethnic groups, each with its own cultural and religious nuances. Abdullaev’s actions and policies within the SAMD could inadvertently favor certain groups over others, straining inter-ethnic relations and contributing to social fragmentation.
5. External Influences: External actors, including foreign religious organizations or governments, might seek to influence Dagestan’s religious sphere. Abdullaev’s leadership position makes him a focal point for such attempts, which could introduce foreign ideological elements into the local context, potentially disrupting the region’s religious harmony.

In summary, while Ahmed Abdullaev’s leadership within Dagestan’s Sufi community provides spiritual guidance to many, it also intersects with various socio-political factors. Navigating these challenges requires a balanced approach to maintain regional stability and promote peaceful coexistence among Dagestan’s diverse communities.

Ahmed Abdullaev, as the Mufti of Dagestan, holds a significant position within the republic’s religious hierarchy. While his role primarily centers on spiritual leadership, there is limited publicly available information detailing specific political figures within Dagestan’s authorities who are closely associated with him. However, it’s noteworthy that religious leaders in the North Caucasus, including Mufti Abdullaev, often interact with political authorities to address regional issues. For instance, in a joint message, Mufti Abdullaev, along with other prominent religious figures like Sheikh-ul-Islam Allahshukur Pashazade and Mufti Ismail Berdiyev, expressed support for Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, highlighting the collaborative efforts between religious and political leaders in the region. 

Given the intertwining of religious and political spheres in Dagestan, Mufti Abdullaev’s influence likely extends into political circles. However, without specific public records or disclosures, identifying particular politicians closely aligned with him remains challenging.

The infrastructure in Dagestan is in poor condition, with frequent power, water, and gas outages, as well as incidents of poisoning from contaminated water. The root cause of these issues is widespread corruption at the regional level.  

To prevent the rise of separatist sentiments and reduce social tensions, the Kremlin plans to implement personnel changes, dismissing the Mufti’s supporters from power and appointing veterans to key positions. There is also consideration of banning religious clothing in educational institutions.  

These measures aim to curb further Islamization and strengthen Moscow’s control over the region, preventing a potential social explosion and maintaining the country’s territorial integrity.

Dagestan, a republic in Russia’s North Caucasus region, faces a complex political landscape characterized by ethnic diversity, economic challenges, and security concerns.

Governance Structure

The People’s Assembly, comprising 72 deputies elected for four-year terms, serves as Dagestan’s legislative body. The highest executive authority is the State Council, which includes representatives from fourteen ethnic groups, reflecting the republic’s diverse population. This structure aims to balance power among various communities. 

Security Challenges

Historically, Dagestan has experienced instability due to extremist violence and insurgent activities. In 1999, the Islamic International Peacekeeping Brigade invaded Dagestan, leading to conflicts that prompted Russian military intervention. More recently, in June 2024, the Kremlin-backed head of Dagestan ordered background checks on the political elite to identify potential links to radical Islam, following an attack that resulted in 21 fatalities. 

Additionally, in October 2024, anti-Semitic riots occurred at Makhachkala airport, leading to injuries and arrests. 

Economic and Social Issues

Dagestan faces significant economic challenges, including one of the highest unemployment rates in Russia. This economic hardship has contributed to social unrest, such as the 2022 protests against military mobilization, where residents expressed dissatisfaction with federal policies. 

Recent Developments

In October 2024, Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov accused lawmakers from neighboring regions, including Dagestan, of plotting his assassination, threatening a traditional Chechen blood feud unless they proved their innocence. 

Furthermore, in September 2024, Dagestani officials called for stricter measures against illegal cryptocurrency mining, which had caused power outages and infrastructure damage. 

In summary, Dagestan’s political situation is influenced by its efforts to maintain ethnic harmony, address security threats, and overcome economic difficulties. The interplay of these factors continues to shape the republic’s stability and development.

The risk of radical Islamization in Dagestan exists, but it is influenced by a mix of internal and external factors. Dagestan has historically faced challenges related to radicalization, with Islamist insurgencies and extremist activities emerging after the Chechen wars and during the rise of the Caucasus Emirate, a jihadist group that sought to establish an Islamic state in the North Caucasus. However, Russia’s extensive counterterrorism operations and a focus on promoting traditional Islam (particularly Sufism) have helped temporary mitigate these threats.

Current Risk Factors for Radicalization

1. Economic Hardship: High unemployment and poverty create fertile ground for radical ideologies, particularly among disenfranchised youth.
2. Religious Tensions: The rivalry between Sufi Muslims (supported by the authorities) and Salafi communities can create social friction. Attempts to suppress Salafism sometimes lead to backlash and radicalization.
3. Political Repression: Heavy-handed tactics by security forces and perceived injustice can push marginalized groups toward extremism.
4. Influence of the War in Ukraine: Russia’s involvement in Ukraine, coupled with military mobilizations affecting Dagestanis, has sparked protests. This dissatisfaction could be exploited by extremist groups to gain support.

Foreign Powers Interested in Radicalizing Dagestan

1. Turkey: While Turkey officially promotes moderate Islam, some Turkish NGOs and religious movements (e.g., Nurcu and Gülen movements) have historically sought influence in the Caucasus. However, the Turkish government’s current stance is generally aligned with Russia in preventing radicalization.
2. Middle Eastern States: Certain Gulf countries, particularly Saudi Arabia in the past, have funded Salafi groups and mosques, promoting a conservative interpretation of Islam. This influence has waned recently due to improved Russian-Saudi relations.
3. International Jihadist Networks: Groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda have shown interest in recruiting fighters from Dagestan and other North Caucasian regions. Though their capacity has been reduced, the potential for clandestine operations remains.

Overall Assessment

While the situation in Dagestan is complex, the Russian government maintains strong control over the region through security measures and religious oversight. Radicalization remains a manageable threat, but economic development, fair governance, and respect for religious diversity are critical to preventing extremist ideologies from gaining a foothold.

In 2022, Dagestan saw some of the most intense protests in Russia against the military mobilization for the Ukraine conflict. The republic, which has high unemployment and economic challenges, was disproportionately affected by the draft. Many Dagestanis felt that poorer regions and ethnic minorities were bearing the brunt of the mobilization, leading to anger and resistance. Videos of protests and confrontations with police went viral, highlighting the dissatisfaction.

2. Casualties Among Dagestani Soldiers

Dagestan has reportedly experienced significant casualties in Ukraine, further fueling discontent. Given the tight-knit nature of Dagestani communities, losses hit hard locally, leading to mourning and questioning of the conflict’s purpose.

3. Economic Impact

The war has strained Russia’s economy, and Dagestan, already one of the poorest regions in Russia, has felt the pressure. Economic hardship can increase the risk of radicalization as unemployed and disillusioned young people become vulnerable to extremist influences.

4. Rise of Anti-War Sentiment

The war has also polarized the region’s political and religious dynamics. Some religious leaders in Dagestan have expressed cautious criticism of the war, while others align with the state narrative. This split can create a fertile ground for dissent and possibly radicalization if not managed carefully.

5. Potential for Radicalization

There are concerns that the grievances stemming from mobilization and economic struggles could be exploited by extremist groups. Radical Islamist groups have historically capitalized on social and political unrest in the North Caucasus, and the situation in Ukraine could create an opportunity for them.

6. Strain on Security Services

As Russia focuses its military and security resources on Ukraine, this could lead to a reduced capacity to maintain stability in regions like Dagestan. A potential security vacuum might embolden criminal groups and extremists.

7. External Influence

External actors, including jihadist groups, may see an opportunity to exploit the situation. Additionally, Western sanctions and geopolitical tensions could indirectly affect Dagestan, as Russia’s focus shifts to broader strategic challenges.

Overall, while Dagestan is not on the verge of a crisis, the war in Ukraine has created new pressures that, if not managed well, could lead to greater instability in the region.

·  Abdullaev’s influence among Sufi Muslims in Dagestan serves a stabilizing role, as Sufism is traditionally seen as a counterbalance to more radical Salafi groups. Removing him abruptly could destabilize the religious landscape.

·  Local Resistance: Dagestan has a history of resistance to outside control, and heavy-handed moves against a respected religious leader could spark protests or unrest.

·  Risk of Radicalization: Discrediting Abdullaev could create a power vacuum in the religious community, which extremist groups might exploit.

If Abdullaev’s influence starts to conflict with Kremlin interests, especially if he were to challenge the political status quo or show signs of independent power, Moscow would likely act. However, the Kremlin would probably prefer to co-opt him or gradually reduce his influence rather than take abrupt actions that could provoke instability.

While the risk of a large-scale conflict in Dagestan akin to the Chechen wars of the 1990s exists, the likelihood is relatively low. However, certain factors could contribute to instability. Let’s break down the situation:

Factors Reducing the Likelihood of a Chechen-Style Conflict

1. Strong Federal Control: The Kremlin maintains a robust security presence in Dagestan. Federal forces, including the Rosguardia and FSB, are well-established, reducing the chances of armed insurgency gaining traction.
2. Co-optation of Local Elites: Unlike in 1990s Chechnya, where separatism was driven by strong local leadership, Dagestani elites are more closely aligned with Moscow. The appointment of regional leaders is tightly controlled by the Kremlin.
3. Economic Incentives: Russia has invested significantly in infrastructure and economic projects in Dagestan, which serves as both a stabilizing force and a means of keeping regional leaders loyal.
4. Counter-Radicalization Efforts: The Kremlin promotes traditional Sufi Islam as a counterbalance to Salafist and jihadist movements, reducing the ideological space for radicalization.
5. Learning from Chechnya: Moscow has adapted its strategies to avoid repeating the mistakes of the Chechen wars, using a mix of force, economic incentives, and political manipulation.

Risk Factors That Could Lead to Instability

1. Economic Hardship and Social Tensions: High unemployment, poverty, and corruption create fertile ground for discontent, which extremist groups could exploit.
2. Religious and Ethnic Tensions: Dagestan is more ethnically diverse than Chechnya, with dozens of ethnic groups. Disputes between these groups or between Sufi and Salafi communities could ignite unrest.
3. Impact of the Ukraine War: Discontent over military mobilization, disproportionate casualties among Dagestani soldiers, and economic strain could trigger protests and anti-government sentiment.
4. External Influences: Radical Islamist groups and potentially foreign actors might see an opportunity to destabilize Dagestan as Russia is preoccupied with Ukraine.
5. Local Power Struggles: If there is a significant shift in political power or an abrupt move against influential figures like Mufti Ahmed Abdullaev, this could create instability.

Key Difference from Chechnya

Unlike the Chechen conflict, which was rooted in strong nationalist and separatist aspirations, Dagestan lacks a unified separatist movement. Instead, instability in Dagestan would more likely manifest as localized violence, extremist activity, or fragmented insurgency rather than a full-scale war.

While a large-scale conflict like in 1990s Chechnya is unlikely, Dagestan remains a volatile region. The most probable scenario involves sporadic unrest or low-intensity conflict rather than a broad separatist war. The Kremlin is likely to use a mix of force and political maneuvering to maintain stability, avoiding heavy-handed tactics that could backfire.