Is The Nemtsov Murder The First Shot Fired In The Russian Spring?


Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

With the recent assassination of Russian opposition figure, Boris Nemtsov, both Russia and the world seem to yet again be standing at the edge of a dangerous precipice. Domestically, Russia must now contend with the turmoil that results any time a high profile political assassination takes place.

Internationally, however, the killing of Nemtsov represents the possibility of a dangerous escalation in international relations since, at best, Western powers will undoubtedly seize upon the assassination as an opportunity to blame Putin directly and paint the Russian President as the next Adolf Hitler. At worst, however, the assassination of Nemtsov may be the fruit of NATO destabilization tactics in the form of a false flag committed for the purposes of initiating a color revolution and/or other forms of internal disruption in Russia.

Nemtsov, was apparently shot four times in the back as he was crossing a bridge in Moscow. It is unclear as to the exact location of Nemtsov’s death but reports claim that the bridge was in sight of the Kremlin.

Reports also suggest that Nemtsov was shot with a pistol from a white car which subsequently fled the scene. It is unclear how many assassins were in the car but some reports indicate that “several people” got out of the car.

Nemtsov’s body lay conveniently on the ground exposed for photographers to take plenty of shots with the Kremlin in the background, drawing the obvious implications.

Immediately after the news broke, Barack Obama publicly condemned the “brutal murder” and “called on the Russian government to conduct a ‘prompt, impartial and transparent investigation’”. Obama’s comments were, of course, yet another example of rhetorical meddling in the internal affairs of Russia with intent to negatively affect world public opinion and, at the same time, addressing a world power that is itself equipped with nuclear weapons as if it were a vassal state. The statements by a President who has overseen institutionalized torture the world over, the jailing of whistleblowers, the assassination of political leaders, domestic political prisoners, and even domestic torture and “disappearance” black sites is one that truly rings hollow.

Regardless, the US has clearly committed to pushing the propaganda line that Putin is personally responsible for the murder of Nemtsov in true “Russian Mafia” “Russian strongman” fashion. As is necessary for propaganda aimed at the American public, the narrative has been kept quite simple – Nemtsov opposed Putin politically so Putin had him killed. Case closed.

As Tony Cartalucci writes,

The provocative murder in the center of Moscow, in close proximity to the Kremlin itself, would lead the more gullible members of the general public to imagine President Putin himself leaning back in his office chair with a rifle sticking out the window of the Kremlin, and gunning down his rival – in true super villain form.

Yet there is much reason to believe that Putin was not responsible for Nemtsov’s murder. In fact, there is the distinct possibility that either members of Nemtsov’s own movement or, more probable, members of the Atlanticist color revolution apparatus were the true perpetrators.

Who Benefits the Most From Nemtsov’s Murder?

While any political figure would clearly benefit from the disappearance of his rival or opposition, and while Kremlin-based political assassinations are by no means out of the question, the fact is that it is not Putin who would benefit the most from the assassination of Boris Nemtsov, but instead the very movement of which Nemtsov was a part and the US/NATO forces that wish to see chaos and revolution sewed in the streets of Moscow.

In fact, out of all concerned parties, Putin would be the least likely culprit in the assassination of what is essentially a failed opposition leader, especially considering the fact that Putin’s approval ratings are higher than any other Russian leader in modern history.

As even the US State Department’s propaganda outlet, Voice of America, was forced to admit, the protests that will take place after the killing of Nemtsov will be much larger as a result of his death than they would have been if Nemtsov were still leading them. VOA writes,

With the murder of Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov, gunned down on a Moscow street, the fiercest critic of President Vladimir Putin has been removed from the political stage. But it remains to be seen whether, in death as in life, Nemtsov will remain a threat to Putin’s rule.

Already, city authorities have approved a mass march for up to 50,000 people in central Moscow on Sunday. The march, expected to be far larger than the scheduled protest rally it replaces, will provide a powerful platform for Kremlin critics who suspect a government hand in Nemtsov’s death.

Even officials in Putin’s government seem to sense the danger that the former first deputy prime minister’s martyrdom might pose, hinting darkly that Friday night’s drive-by shooting may have been an deliberate “provocation” ahead of the planned weekend rally.

Essentially, Nemtsov has had the bad fortune to find himself more valuable to the color revolution apparatus (NED/Soros/CIA/USAID/etc.) dead than alive. Considering the fact that Nemtsov, as a leader, never amounted to anything formidable, it is easy to draw this conclusion. Despite numerous connections to the Western color revolution machine, Nemtsov’s influence and effectiveness as a change agent only seemed to be declining in power, particularly as Putin’s approval skyrocketed.

As Tony Cartalucci commented,

The diminutive and previously ineffective protests carried out by the opposition will now be “far larger” and serve as a “powerful platform for Kremlin critics,” a reality that simply would not have existed had Nemtsov not been murdered. 

One must also factor in the United States’ various proxy conflicts it is waging against Russia, and seemingly losing – including in Syria and Ukraine. The opportunity to spread chaos in the streets of Moscow would not only benefit the US and its agenda beyond its borders, but is in fact America’s stated foreign policy.

So why would Putin decide to assassinate an opponent when he has such a high approval rating? If the need to assassinate Nemtsov ever arose would it not have arisen at a time in which Putin’s rule was threatened by a growing opposition force? It certainly would have not arisen at a time when the opposition was being relegated to the political back burner. It would not have arisen when the popularity of the opposition was taking a nosedive.

At this point, the story that Putin decided to, at this moment, assassinate a lagging political opposition figure should rank right beside the story that Bashar al-Assad waited until he was winning the war and UN chemical weapons experts were present in the country before launching a volley of chemical weapons attacks against the opposition.

As Paul Craig Roberts stated,

Russians at every level are astonished at the virulent propaganda and lies constantly issuing from Washington and the Western media. Washington’s gratuitous demonization of the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has rallied the Russian people behind him. Putin has the highest approval rating ever achieved by any leader in my lifetime.

Convenient Timing Of The Murder – Two Days Before A Major Protest March

As mentioned above, Nemtsov’s murder was committed only two days prior to a scheduled protest march to take place across Russia. These protests were expected to be of rather low turnout considering the high approval rating maintained by Vladmir Putin. However, with the killing of Nemtsov, these numbers are expected to swell, with tens of thousands of people currently filling the streets of Moscow as of March 1. Concurrent protests are taking place in large Russian cities like St. Petersburg as well.

With a lagging opposition and the fact that the killing of one of the leading figures of that opposition would offer a major shot in the arm to the movement, Nemtsov’s murder is quite a “convenient” development for the color revolution forces that seek to destroy Russia’s national governmental structure.

Consider also the nature of the march taking place across Russia that was being supported and lead by Boris Nemtsov – the Vesna Youth Movement. Vesna, in Russian, translates to “Spring,” thus meaning that the movement taking place across Russia is, in actuality, an incarnation of the “Spring” movements that have been backed by the West across the Arab world and in Ukraine under the name of the Euromaidan. This March 1 protest is thus another attempt by NATO at a Russian Spring for the purposes of removing Vladmir Putin from power and bringing the Russian state under the heel of  Atlanticist rule.

Nemtsov’s Connection To NATO, US, Western Color Revolution Apparatus

Nemtsov was not merely an “opposition figure” to Vladmir Putin, he was an obvious agent of the Western-controlled color revolution apparatus that spans quasi-official destabilization organizations of the US State Department like USAID and the NED to George Soros’ Open Society Institute and Solidarity Centers.

Indeed, Nemtsov’s connections span a number of these and other related color revolution organizations across Russia.

Acting as leader of American-supported “opposition” protests for many years, Nemtsov was actually photographed entering the US Embassy in Moscow for the purposes of attending a meeting with the US Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul. McFaul, of course, had served on the board of both the National Endowment for Democracy and Freedom House, both major participants in Western-inspired color revolutions the world over.

McFaul was quite open about his participation and the participation of the organizations of which he was a part in the act of destabilizing sovereign nations and overthrowing their governments for the aims of the Anglo-Americans and NATO. In 2004, McFaul even penned an op-ed in the Washington Post entitled “‘Meddling’ In Ukraine Democracy Is Not An American Plot,” where he openly admitted the role that the NED, Freedom House, IRI, NDI, Solidarity Center, Eurasia Foundation, Internews, International Renaissance Foundation, and USAID played in the 2004 Orange Revolution.

In addition to his connection to McFaul, Nemtsov also maintained a connection to the NED via his adviser, Vladmir Kara-Murza, who had attended a number of NED forums in the past. In 2011, Kara-Murza attended an NED presentation titled “Elections In Russia: Polling and Perspectives,” and in 2013 “Russia: A Postmodern Dictatorship?” The latter presentation was jointly conducted by the NED and the Institute of Modern Russia, a Neo-Con/anti-Russian propaganda operation to which Kara-Murza is a Senior Policy Advisor. Kara-Murza is also connected to the Solidarnost group, a Western-supported destabilization organization.

In fact, Nemtsov himself was co-Chairman of the Solidarnost organization, considered to be the umbrella organization of the “Russian opposition,” boasting of infamous NATO color revolution and destabilization agents like Russian oligarch Mikhail Khordokovsky, Alexei Navalny, Garry Kasparov (also a founder of Solidarnost).

Consider F. William Engdahl’s article from January, 2012, entitled “Regime Change In The Russian Federation? Why Washington Wants ‘Finito’ With Vladimir Putin,” regarding the Solidarnost movement. Engdahl writes,

Nemtsov, one of the most prominent figures of the Putin opposition today is also co-chairman of Solidarnost, a name curiously enough imitated from the Cold War days when the CIA financed the Polish Solidarnosc workers’ opposition of Lech Walesa. More on Nemtsov later. 

And on December 15, 2011, again in Washington, just as the series of US-supported protests were being launched against Putin, led by Solidarnost and other organizations, the NED held another conference titled, Youth Activism in Russia: Can a New Generation Make a Difference? The featured speaker was Tamirlan Kurbanov, who according to the NED, “most recently served as a program officer at the Moscow office of the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, where he was involved in developing and expanding the capacities of political and civic organizations; promoting citizen participation in public life, youth engagement in particular.” The National Democratic Institute is an arm of the NED.

In regards to Nemtsov specifically, Engdahl writes,

In 2009 Kasparov and Boris Nemtsov met with no less than Barack Obama to discuss Russia’s opposition to Putin at the US President’s personal invitation at Washington’s Ritz Carlton Hotel. Nemtsov had called for Obama to meet with opposition forces in Russia: “If the White House agrees to Putin’s suggestion to speak only with pro-Putin organizations… this will mean that Putin has won, but not only that: Putin will become be assured that Obama is weak,” he said. During the same 2009 US trip Nemtsov was invited to speak at the New York Council on Foreign Relations, perhaps the most influential US foreign policy think-tank. Significantly, not only has the US State Department and US-backed political NGOs such as NED poured millions into building an anti-Putin coalition inside Russia. The President personally has intervened into the process. 

Ryzhkov, Nemtzov, Navalty and Putin’s former Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin were all involved in organizing the December 25th Moscow Christmas anti-Putin rally which drew an estimated 120,000.[1]

Engdahl also writes of Nemtsov’s notorious corruption as well as the fact that his goals of “reformation” are nothing more than the implementation of the dictates of the IMF and World Bank, i.e. mass privatization and austerity. Indeed, whenever one reads of Nemtsov’s tenure as Governor or Nizhny Novgorod, the inevitable presentation provided by mainstream Western press is that he was a successful “reformer” bringing an a major increase in industry and economic activity. In fact, his “free market” reforms were marked by chaos but resulted in praise by the iron-fisted austerity ghoul Margaret Thatcher.[2] Engdahl writes,

Along with Navalny, key actors in the anti-Putin protest movement are centered around Solidarnost which was created in December 2008 by Boris Nemtsov, Vladimir Ryzhkov and others. Nemtsov is hardly one to protest corruption. According to Business Week Russia of September 23, 2007, Nemtsov introduced Russian banker Boris Brevnov to Gretchen Wilson, a US citizen and an employee of the International Finance Corporation, a financing arm of the World Bank. Wilson and Brevnov married. With the help of Nemtsov Wilson managed to privatize Balakhna Pulp and Paper mill at the giveaway price of just $7 million. The enterprise was sucked dry and then sold to the Wall Street-Swiss investment bank, CS First Boston bank. The annual turnover of the mill was reportedly $250 million.[3] 

CS First Boston bank also paid for Nemtsov’s trips to the very expensive Davos World Economic Forum. When Nemtsov became a member of the cabinet, his protégé Brevnov was appointed the chairman of the Unified Energy System of Russia JSC. Two years later in 2009 Boris Nemtsov, today’s “Mr anti-corruption,” used his influence reportedly to get Brevnov off the hook for charges of embezzling billions from assets of Unified Energy System.[4]

Nemtsov also took money from jailed Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky in 1999 when the latter was using his billions to try to buy the Russian parliament or Duma. In 2004 Nemtsov met with exiled billionaire oligarch Boris Berezovsky in a secret gathering with other exiled Russian tycoons. When Nemtsov was detailed by Russian authorities for allegations of foreign funding of his new political party, “For Russia without Lawlessness and Corruption,” US Senators John McCain and Joe Liberman and Mike Hammer of the Obama National Security Council came to support of Nemtsov.[5] 

Nemtsov’s close crony, Vladimir Ryzhkov of Solidarnost is also closely tied to the Swiss Davos circles, even founding a Siberian Davos. According to Russian press accounts from April 2005, Ryzhkov formed a Committee 2008 in 2003 to “draw” funds of the imprisoned Khodorkovsky along with soliciting funds from fugitive oligarchs such as Boris Berezovsky and western foundations such as the Soros Foundation. The stated aim of the effort was to rally “democratic” forces against Putin. On May 23, 2011 Ryzhkov, Nemtzov and several others filed to register a new Party of Peoples’ Freedom to ostensibly field a presidential candidate against Putin in 2012.[6]


While the murder of Boris Nemtsov may have come as surprise and a shock to many observers, some may have seen it coming from a long way off. In 2012, the same year that Nemtsov spoke to Foreign Policy and called for sanctions on officials in the Russian government for human rights violations, Putin warned that Nemtsov might be targeted for assassination not by the Russian government but by the very interests that were assisting him in his promotion of international aggression against Russia.

“They are looking for a so-called sacrificial victim among some prominent figures,” Putin said. “They will knock him off, I beg your pardon, and then blame the [Russian] authorities for that.”

While the possibility that Nemtsov could have been assassinated by Russian government officials certainly exists, the much more likely scenario is that NATO intelligence and “revolutionary” networks were responsible for his murder.

The facts, however, will never stop the American press from moving forward with blatant lies and conjecture nor will it ever stop an American populace from believing said blatant lies and conjecture.

Indeed, the Western press is firmly committing itself to the line of “Putin did it.” A recent fact-deprived op-ed by destabilization artist Garry Kasparov in the Wall Street Journal that reads more as a pep rally for war and personal hit piece is case and point. Not only does Kasparov blame Putin for Nemtsov’s death, he blames Putin for virtually everything except the Holocaust and 9/11. These accusations are almost always made through implication rather than direct assault, however.

Kasparov closes his article with the rally cry of the so-called Russian opposition which is, itself, nothing more than NATO with a Russian mask when he writes that “We may never know who killed Boris Nemtsov, but we do know that the sooner President Putin is gone, the better the chances are that the chaos and violence Boris feared can be avoided.”

Despite the major propaganda assault, however, the most likely culprit in the assassination of Nemtsov are the very agents using his name as a rally cry in the Western press and the streets of Moscow today.

Nemtsov was a tireless worker for NATO and the destabilization of Russia, his own color revolution star was becoming outshined by others such as Kasparov and Khordokovsky. It is thus very likely that he was becoming more useful to the color revolution apparatus dead than alive.

With Putin maintaining such a high approval rating from the Russian people, the Russian Spring needed a shot in the arm and what better way to do that than with a martyr? If this is, in fact, the case, then Boris Nemtsov must have drawn the short straw.


[1] Yulia Ponomareva, Navalny and Kudrin boost giant opposition rally, RIA Novosti, Moscow, December 25, 2011.

[2] Chinayeva, Elena (1996). “Boris Nemtsov, A Rising Star of the Russian Provinces”. Transitions 2 (4): 36–38.

[3] Business Week Russia, Boris Nemtsov: Co-chairman of Solidarnost political movement, Business Week Russia, September 23, 2007, accessed in

[4] Business Week Russia, Boris Nemtsov: Co-chairman of Solidarnost political movement, Business Week Russia, September 23, 2007, accessed in

[5] Business Week Russia, Boris Nemtsov: Co-chairman of Solidarnost political movement, Business Week Russia, September 23, 2007, accessed in

[6] Russian, Vladimir Ryzhkov: Co-chairman of the Party of People’s Freedom, accessed in

Recently from Brandon Turbeville:

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of six books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real ConspiraciesFive Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, and The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria. Turbeville has published over 500 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV.  He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) 

Thank you for sharing.
Follow us to receive the latest updates.

Like Us On Facebook
Follow Us On Twitter

Send this to friend