Political Assassination via Drones: Changed in the ‘Rules of Game’
https://www.rozen-bakher.com/timeline-risks/03/05/2023/1603
Published Date: 03 May 2023
Risks Timeline by Dr. Ziva Rozen-Bakher
Comments on Contemporary Risks by Dr. Ziva Rozen-Bakher
Risks Timeline by Dr. Ziva Rozen-Bakher: https://www.rozen-bakher.com/timeline-risks-all
Dr. Ziva Rozen-Bakher
Researcher in International Relations with a Focus on Security, Political and Economic Risks for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and International Trade
03 May 2023 at 16:03. As I mentioned in my analysis about Political Assassinations from my Global Risks, political assassinations aim to lead to a transformation regime in a non-democratic way, like a coup, yet a coup is carried out by army players, while political assassination via traditional warfare (e.g., Rabin assassination) is carried out by civilian players. However, Political Assassinations via drones, especially by external players, changed the ‘Rules of Game’ in a very risky way that may be hard to understand at first sight. Political Assassinations via drones by external players try to overturn a rival regime by killing the political leader instead of winning a war against the rival country. For many years, countries used drones to kill terrorists (e.g., the USA against leaders of Islamic State), yet terrorists are not considered political leaders. Even the assassination of the Iranian army officer, Qasem Soleimani, via drones, changed the ‘Rules of Game’ because he was a commander of a unit in an army of a country, so it can be used as a precedent case for trying to assassinate army officers of rival countries. Nevertheless, the case of the attack drones on the Kremlin to assassinate the head of state, Putin, likely by external players, in the most prominent symbol place of Russia, the Kremlin, like the White House or Élysée Palace, definitely changed the ‘Rules of Game’ in a very bad way. Those who planned this attack did not take into account that they not only attacked the head of state of Russia but also the most symbolic place of Russia, the Kremlin in Moscow, the capital of Russia. Thus, if the architects of this attack planned to weaken Putin, then based on my analysis, they made him much stronger at the political level because this attack hit the most important place in Russia, the Kremlin. To illustrate how it was a bad idea, try to imagine what will be the reaction of Americans if a drone hits the White House. The Russians feel the same right now, namely that this attack is a de-facto declaration of war against Russia. Paradoxically, even if Putin takes this attack relatively calmly, then his Russian civilians, especially the patriot ones, will demand revenge for this attack even more than Putin.
Ukraine did not take responsibility for this attack, but if it reveals that Ukraine is responsible for it as expected, then my prediction is that nothing will be the same from now, in a bad way. Most importantly, any leader worldwide is now more at risk for Political Assassination via Drones due to the precedent case of the Kremlin.
Global Risks by Dr. Ziva Rozen-Bakher https://www.rozen-bakher.com/global-risks
Political Assassinations — Global Risks by Dr. Ziva Rozen-Bakher
