Hammer & Sickle, Star & Crescent: A Postcolonial Analysis of Salafi-Jihadist Terrorism in the Former Soviet States
Abstract
The collapse of the Soviet Union left behind a complex and volatile security landscape, where the rise of Salafi-Jihadi terrorism remains a persistent challenge. This essay examines the roots of Islamist extremism in the former Soviet states, arguing that Soviet-era policies such as forced secularization, ethnic fragmentation, and political repression created fertile conditions for religious radicalization. By suppressing the cultural and religious identity of minority groups, the Soviet Union provided the grievances and narratives necessary for extremist leaders to mobilize followers to conduct terrorist campaigns. This study explores key cases, such as Chechnya and Central Asia, to explain how jihadist movements gained traction in the aftermath of Soviet rule. It also analyses counterterrorism approaches in Russia and neighboring states and contextualizes terrorist threats within a historical framework. The findings underscore the need for policies that address the underlying causes of radicalization rather than relying solely on suppression.
Introduction
The dissolution of the Soviet Union marked the end of the Cold War which had dominated international relations for nearly half a century. For the West, the unexpected and relatively peaceful end to the greatest security threat since the Second World War allowed for respite. Comparative peace reigned until the September 11, 2001 al-Qaeda attacks on the World Trade Centre, which spurred a global war against terror that would replace the Cold War at the forefront of global politics. This reality, however, would arrive far sooner for the Russian Federation and newly created republics, whose Soviet legacy facilitated the emergence of widespread religious and ideological extremism. This essay adopts the postcolonialism perspective to explain how the origins of terrorism within former Soviet states arose as a direct result of Soviet domestic policy, and how these historical factors directly contribute to contemporary threats and counterterrorism responses in the region. This analysis, uses the Oxford definition of terrorism: “the use of violent action in order to achieve political aims or to force a government to act”.
Postcolonialism Theory
Postcolonialism is a broad, multidisciplinary theory which analyses contemporary issues, through the lens of the legacy of colonialism and imperialism. These terms are best defined as the extractive relationship between two states in which one exerts political hegemony over the other, which, although not exclusively, was facilitated via the establishment of colonies. While primarily conducted for economic and resource exploitation, colonialism and imperialism permitted forcing of European culture, religion, philosophy, and ideology upon subjugated indigenous populations. The narrative of colonial powers was that such native inhabitants were inferior or violent and thus necessitated and justified dominance over these subjects.
As the primary method of European power projection during the age of exploration from the Fifteenth to the Nineteenth centuries, postcolonialism is Eurocentric by nature. Theorists present this legacy as explanation for the persisting influence that European ideology and values have on modern global politics and international relations. Within modern international relations, the theory assumes that the legacy of colonialism and imperialism shapes biased and inaccurate Western perceptions of former colonial subjects. Key postcolonial thinker Edward Said expands on this in his book Orientalism, where he describes how contemptuous Western views on the East are directly linked to imperialist legacies.
With former Soviet states remaining volatile, breaking such repressive cycles is key for long term success when such states seek to eliminate insurgencies that have persisted for decades.
Influences of Marxism on postcolonialism is also evident, particularly when examining the assumptions of social divisions. Both theories assume a division with the existence or former existence of an oppressor and oppressed as a key consideration in their explanation of contemporary issues. However, it is important to note that postcolonialism replaces class with race as the divisive factor. Postcolonialism also focuses on the affairs of de-colonized states, long after powers have abandoned them. It is not an emancipatory theory, and its Eurocentrism has been met with criticism by Marxists.
Postcolonialism, though deemed more complex than its critical counterparts such as social, cultural or religious theories, provides an intersection of empire, race, gender, and class to explain contemporary global politics and international relations. It therefore presents itself as an appropriate security analysis tool for the scope of this essay, which will use the former Soviet Union as the imperial power and examine the rival social and political relationships to explain the emergence of Islamic terrorism in the Central Asian states.
Explanatory Power of Postcolonialism Theory on Terrorism
Postcolonialism has been utilized as an explanation of terrorism following the rise in popularity of critical terrorism studies. Its explanation of considers several important factors which are otherwise ignored by traditional studies, which is believed to overemphasize state power, and present inherent biases. A postcolonial assessment of terrorism emphasizes the historical and colonial context in which terrorist groups form and operate. It holds the concept of human control and repression with importance and examines its societal impacts on factors such as religion, ethnicity, and culture. Postcolonial scholars, therefore, contend that the link between discourse, geography, identity, and subjectivity developed in postcolonial theory broadens the knowledge of terrorism and counter terrorism.
In sharp contrast to traditional studies, this criticality of the actions of state behavior has unsurprisingly led to postcolonial scholars criticizing many current policies. A postcolonial critique of the American-led global war on terror is that it is a continuation of past conflicts between the global north and global south. U.S. and allied policies being the modern manifestation of colonialism exercised by the old imperial powers. It adds that modern policies mimic the fundamentals of Said’s Orientalism, with the West maintaining the same views as the colonial powers on the global south: that the population and cultures are less advanced, barbaric, and violent. This perception not only shapes Western foreign policy but also informs domestic security practices in postcolonial states. Russian counterterrorism approaches—particularly in Chechnya and Central Asia—reflect the same historical pattern of repression, reinforcing grievances rather than addressing underlying drivers of radicalization.
Soviet Legacy & Terrorism
Examining the role of the Soviet legacy in understanding the persistence of terrorism in the region is essential. Utilizing the postcolonial perspective to identify the root causes of terrorism in former Soviet states necessitates scrutinizing of the Soviet Union’s historical policies. This can explain the context in which Islamic terrorism in its former territories thrives today. Basing the analysis on root postcolonial ideas such as the impact of human control, cultural repression, and the enforcement of ideologies deemed superior, the responsibility of the presence of religious extremism and separatism can be placed upon the legacy of such policies pursued by the Soviet Union over the course of its existence from 1921 to 1991.
It therefore comes as no surprise that these actions generated significant anti-colonial and anti-imperialist sentiment among the victims, passing through their descendants and poising contemporary populations in the region to remain hostile to culturally foreign authorities and ideologies.
The Soviet Union inherited the borders of the Russian Empire which had existed for approximately two centuries prior to the removal of the Tsarist regime in 1917. Russian Imperial expansion had over time incorporated several Islamic protectorate states and, within Russian borders, an estimated 20 million Muslims by 1916. Under Imperial rule, Muslim subjects exercised a significant degree of religious and spiritual autonomy, with the establishment of the Orenburg Muslim Spiritual Assembly in the 17th century whose main function involved the control and observance of clerical duties and Islamic education. However, persisting separatist desires among Muslim populations, coupled with tensions exacerbated by the First World War resulted in little support for the deposed Tsarist Regime in 1917. After ousting the provisional government which had permitted Muslim involvement in constituent assembly elections, Bolshevik revolutionaries outlawed this participation. This would be the beginning of Soviet oppression upon the Union’s Islamic population.
Within the first decade of Soviet rule, a significant number of protocols were enforced which rapidly altered the way in which religious activity was practiced, particularly in its Islamic regions. State atheism resulted in the closure of traditional Qur’anic courts, religious schools, and mosques, and the printing of the Qur’an and other religious material was replaced with anti-Islamic material. While this period of religious oppression was at its greatest following the immediate success of the Socialist revolution, it would persist for the remainder of the Soviet Union, with few concessions granted. This restriction of beliefs, according to postcolonialism, is a core activity employed by imperial powers in restructuring perceived primitive societies. In this instance, the Soviet Union perceived both Islam and religion writ large to be incompatible with their class-based, social ideology. While this religious oppression ultimately served to pacify potentially problematic groups within the boundaries of the colonial or imperial state, the Soviet Union inadvertently caused the import of dangerous religious ideology. The lack of traditional Islamic education in Soviet Muslim areas left adherents vulnerable to radical preachers from Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. These ideas persist within former Soviet states today, where the postcolonial perspective reveals the historical Soviet religious oppression as a contributing factor to contemporary terrorism.
Prompting further repression was the issue of the national and cultural identity of Soviet citizens, which varied immensely within the Soviet Union. Nationalist sentiment, still lingering from the Tsarist era and long prior, was a primary concern of Soviet authorities, believed that nationalism served to mask ideology and hence were hostile to all forms of national self-expression. Rather, Soviet thinking asserted that the emancipatory message of socialism made no cultural or national distinctions within its message, instead focusing on social class. However, disparities persisted despite this policy, with Lenin stating that the Russian Communist Party had inherited the so-called great power prejudice of Tsarist Russia.
Soviet authorities relied heavily on Russian ‘cultural’ colonists within non-Russian regions of the Union while adopting a chauvinist attitude to local populations. This is further displayed when examining Russian cultural enforcement, such as the implementation of Russian language in the Soviet education system and replacement of Arabic script with Cyrillic within non-Russian regions. Additionally, in an attempt to further remove the perceived nationalist threat, Joseph Stalin reconstructed territorial borderlines to fragment ethnic groups in a practice dubbed ‘ethno-territorial proliferation’. Its intent was to create numerous new ‘nationalities’ that would dissuade conflict by forcing individuals to declare a single nationality. However, nationalist sentiment prevailed, with this failure likely contributing to the root causes of the separatist movements such as that of Ichkeria in Chechnya. It is from this historical and imperialist context where postcolonialism answers how terrorism prevails within these states. These oppressed, initially secular conflicts remain susceptible to the influence of religious extremists who in turn encourage terrorist attacks.
The Soviet Union perceived both Islam and religion writ large to be incompatible with their class-based, social ideology.
In addition to religious and cultural repression, the USSR inflicted more tangible and physical methods of oppression on their ‘undesirables’, ranging from deportation to outright genocide. It therefore comes as no surprise that these actions generated significant anti-colonial and anti-imperialist sentiment among the victims, passing through their descendants and poising contemporary populations in the region to remain hostile to culturally foreign authorities and ideologies. Particularly, Soviet authorities during the Second World War under the pretext of collaborating with occupying forces, engaged in the mass deportation of ethnic and religious groups considered threating to the Union. Factors suggest that many of these deportations were more closely related to geopolitical strategy and foreign policy rather than the punishment of accused populations. In the case of the Crimean Tartars, this was indeed the case, with Russian settlers colonizing Tartar regions following displacement, as well as renaming and repurposing culturally and religiously significant locations. These acts of colonization further alienated Muslims within Soviet territories who would further engage in stubborn resistance. This has created an unprecedented effect on the decedents of persecuted populations, who maintain a troubled relationship with Russian authority. This in turn may be a cause of terrorist activity within former Soviet states, where these individuals are at a higher risk of succumbing to extremist views and aligning themselves with like-minded groups. Examples can be found as recently as this year, with four Crimean Tartars facing jail time in Russia following their membership with Hizb-ut-Tahrir. Long-standing grievances continue to fuel the appeal of extremist ideology and terrorist movements which have outlasted Soviet rule and continue to shape regional dynamics.
Former Soviet States & Islamic Terrorism
While the threat of Salafi-Jihadi terrorism largely only surfaced in the majority of Western society following the September 11, 2001 attacks, former Soviet states had already been subject to such attacks for nearly a decade. This doctrine asserts the interference of non-Muslim states as the root of a perceived Islamic decline, calling for jihad to reverse injustices and restore prior prosperity. Despite secularist policies, the breakaway Muslim majority Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, and its two wars for autonomy against the Russian Federation in the early nineties saw a large influx of foreign Islamic fighters such as Afghan-Arab veterans.
Jihadists with close ties to Al-Qaeda such as Saudi Emir Ibn al-Khattab would, according to Russian authorities, orchestrate attacks such as the 1999 Moscow apartment bombings, which would claim the lives of over 307 Russian civilians. In 2002, Chechen insurgents loyal to Shamil Basayev, a prominent Chechen general and an associate of Al-Khattab, organized the infamous Moscow Theatre Hostage Crisis. In the following years, extremist sentiment would come to dominate separatist movements in the region, climaxing in 2007 with the establishment of the Caucasus Emirate. From its mountain fortresses within Chechnya, the Emirate would serve as an anchor point for jihad against Russia and other post-Soviet states such as Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia.
In this same year, the threat to Central Asian republics would also increase substantially following the conclusion of the Tajik Civil War which left the shattered region vulnerable to the further cultivation of extremist Islamist ideology. Indeed, despite officially opposing violence, radical Islamist organizations such as Hizb-Ut-Tahrir would find popularity following the Tajik peace agreement, and seek to liberate Muslims from the so-called Judeo-Christian nation state system with a borderless Islamic Caliphate. More traditional extremist groups such as Al-Qaeda and their regional affiliate, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, would perpetrate acts of terrorism and share similar goals of establishing an Islamic State. These groups remain active, not only launching attacks within the Central Asian states, but also actively destabilizing regional security via participation in the illicit drug trade.
Despite the Caucasus Emirate and affiliated groups being crippled following large-scale defections to the Islamic State, the shared Salafist doctrine has ensured that Islamic terrorism remains a significant threat to the peace and stability of former Soviet states. These states have been the target of persistent Jihadist propaganda campaigns: Russian is the third most popular language utilized in ISIS propaganda behind Arabic and English. These efforts have evidently succeeded as a significant number of foreign fighters loyal to the Caliphate originate from the Central Asian states of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, with footage of ISIS training camps in Uzbekistan also surfacing. Additionally, Russia’s controversial involvement in Syria, where since 2015 it has supported the Assad regime against the Islamic State and opposition groups, has ushered further cries for jihadist attacks-for example, the downing of Metrojet flight 9268 and its 224 passengers that same year, exemplifying the Caliphate’s persisting ability to wreak havoc in the region.
Such acts of terror have been the driving factor for influencing regional security posture and counterterrorist policies. Within Asia, the Commonwealth of Independent States, an international organization comprised of former Soviet states, has sought to address this threat through assistance and shared intelligence via the formation of its Anti-Terrorism Centre in 2000. State policy when managing potentially dangerous Islamist ideas initially varied, with Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan opting for conciliatory, lenient approaches rather than the swift crackdown measures adopted by their Tajik and Uzbek partners. However, counterterrorism tendencies in Central Asia have begun to converge. Both Kazakh and Kyrgyz authorities now perceive all forms of social and political activity within Islam as manifestations of extremism and terrorism, with detention rates of alleged Islamists rising steadily. These threats have additionally drawn the Central Asian republics closer to Russia and their sphere of influence, who they view as the only power in the region that can maintain the security and stability of Central Asia. Although China exists as a notable exception, leading the security-oriented Shanghai Cooperation Organization with its neighbors, it is worth noting that this relationship, particularly between Russia and China, remains equivocal at times.
Basing the analysis on root postcolonial ideas such as the impact of human control, cultural repression, and the enforcement of ideologies deemed superior, the responsibility of the presence of religious extremism and separatism can be placed upon the legacy of such policies pursued by the Soviet Union.
Within Russia, counterterrorist policy emphasizes the heavy application of force with impunity. The Federal Security Service and Ministry of Internal affairs, who have seen a rapid expansion of their powers since the states’ 1991 federation, spearhead this approach. For instance, special task groups have been established whose sole responsibility is the elimination of terrorist threats, which is done without trial or standard legal procedures. Within Chechnya, accusations of kidnappings, summary executions, and torture are frequent, and media liberties can be legally suspended in zones of interest, as laid out in 2006 changes to federal counterterrorism law. Vladimir Putin has continued this hardline approach through both of his presidencies, leading to subsequent criticisms for its incompatibility with other counterterrorist agendas such as that of the United States or European Union. Russia has forbidden any joint operations in its domestic affairs such as its campaign against Islamic State in the North Caucasus, and, while targeting the Caliphate in Syria, closely supported the Assad Regime against the U.S and Turkish-backed rebel opposition.
Conclusion
A postcolonial perspective provides an in-depth analysis into the origins of Islamic terrorism within former Soviet states through consideration of factors frequently overlooked by its contemporaries which ignore the role of the state. With an emphasis on the historical contexts of colonial practices, it explains root causes of contemporary issues, especially the social dynamic between the oppressive and oppressed cultures. This method therefore concludes that terrorism within former Soviet states resulted from the oppressive cultural and religious policies it pursued. Laying the groundwork for the sustainment of extremist ideology and terrorism within the region, such policies have no doubt shaped the regional security picture, as well as influenced broader relationships between states and people groups. Terrorism in Russia and Central Asia is the inheritance of the former Soviet Union’s policies which disrupted traditional Islamic structures, suppressed religious identity and fostered deep-seated grievances that extremist movements continue to exploit.
Contemporary policymakers and strategists should consider the effects of counterterrorism efforts reminiscent of Soviet-era suppression tactics both within the region and more broadly. With former Soviet states remaining volatile, breaking such repressive cycles is key for long term success when such states seek to eliminate insurgencies that have persisted for decades. Postcolonial counterterrorism can therefore be characterized by reconciliation efforts, cultural and religious sensitivity, the reduction of foreign military intervention, and consideration of historical societal grievances. Promising shifts in Central-Asian counterterrorist policy can be identified through the Joint Plan Of Action strategy that aims to align regional efforts with the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, which heavily emphasizes preventative action. However, continued authoritarianism within the region, reminiscent of the past, is likely to limit any gains made as a result of this policy shift in the long term. Central-Asian states will therefore be required to enact wider governmental reform to address this challenge and lasting deradicalization and reconciliation efforts. Similarly, when examining contemporary developments such as the Syrian transition, policymakers should avoid sectarianism reminiscent of the Ba’athist regime, offer amnesty to former opposition members, and recognize the grievances of religious and ethnic minorities. However, recent atrocities against Alawite civilians suggest that, much like their Central-Asian counterparts, the cycle of repression will continue following an absence of political reform.
