- By Joshua Keating
Joshua Keating is associate editor at Foreign Policy and the editor of the Passport blog. He has worked as a researcher, editorial assistant, and deputy Web editor since joining the FP staff in 2007. In addition to being featured in Foreign Policy, his writing has been published by the Washington Post, Newsweek International, Radio Prague, the Center for Defense Information, and Romania's Adevarul newspaper. He has appeared as a commentator on CNN International, C-Span, ABC News, Al Jazeera, NPR, BBC radio, and others. A native of Brooklyn, New York, he studied comparative politics at Oberlin College.
It’s early to say how credible the reported assassination plot against Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is, but it is pretty clear that the Kremlin is taking full advantage of the timing of the announcement, just a week before the presidential election.
First, there’s the fact that Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s spokesman, said the arrest of two men after an apartment explosion is January was "was absolutely a plot to kill the prime minister," even before the Ukrainian government had confirmed it. Then there’s the confusion about when this arrest actually took place:
Channel One said the suspects were arrested on Jan. 4, but a statement released by the Ukrainian security services this month, which made no mention of an assassination plot against Mr. Putin, said the arrests were made on Feb. 4.
And as Miriam Elder notes, Russians have heard this tune before. Another attempt to kill Putin was "foiled" by authorities in Moscow the day Dmitry Medvedev was elected president in 2008. Many in the Russian opposition also believe that Putin may have been involved in a series of Moscow appartment bombings, blamed on Chechen militants, prior to his first election as president in 2000.
It’s certainly not outside the realm of possibility that Chechen militant leader Doku Umarov might have plotted to kill Putin, as the suspects say in their videotaped confession, but the timing of this information being made public does seem awfully convenient at a time when the opposition is showing more life than ever before.
John Hudson is a staff writer for Foreign Policy where he chases down stories from Foggy Bottom to the White House, the Pentagon to Embassy Row. Between 2009 and 2012, John covered politics and global affairs for The Atlantic Wire. In 2008, he covered the August War between Russia and Georgia for Salon.com and other news outlets. Over the years, he's dug up resignation-causing FEC documents; unmasked world-famous Internet trolls; exposed bizarre Photoshopping by government media; and revealed a secret Iranian military facility. John's weakness is cold craft beer from his birthplace of Grand Rapids, Michigan. He's appeared on MSNBC, BBC, C-SPAN, Fox News radio, and other broadcast outlets.| The Cable |
Glasser spent four years as co-chief of the Post's Moscow bureau and covered the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq for the Post in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, including the battle of Tora Bora and the invasion of Iraq. After returning to Washington, she edited the Post’s weekly Outlook section and led its national news coverage. Together with her husband, New York Times White House correspondent Peter Baker, she wrote Kremlin Rising: Vladimir Putin's Russia and the End of Revolution. Glasser previously worked for eight years at the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call, where she rose to be the top editor. She has served as chair of the Pulitzer Prize jury for international reporting and is a member of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on the United States. A graduate of Harvard University, Glasser lives in Washington with Baker and their son.| Argument |