A Landmark Verdict in Paris

A Paris criminal court on Friday, 31 October 2025, sentenced four Bulgarian nationals to prison for defacing a prominent Jewish memorial, a crime the judges deemed an “indisputable” act of foreign interference aimed at destabilising France. The case, which prosecutors believe was orchestrated by Russian intelligence services, marks a pivotal moment in Europe's fight against a rising tide of hybrid warfare.

The court handed down sentences ranging from two to four years. Nikolay Ivanov, considered a mastermind of the operation, received a four-year term, while his alleged accomplice, Mircho Angelov, was sentenced to three years in absentia and remains at large. The two perpetrators who carried out the vandalism, Georgi Filipov and Kiril Milushev, were each given two-year sentences. All four have been banned from entering French territory for life.

The Anatomy of a Destabilisation Campaign

In May 2024, dozens of red handprints were stencilled on the Wall of the Righteous at the Paris Shoah Memorial, a monument honouring 3,900 people who helped save Jews during the Nazi occupation of France. The act occurred during a period of heightened social tension in France following the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war in October 2023.

Investigators, using security footage, quickly identified the perpetrators and discovered they had fled to Bulgaria via Belgium shortly after the incident. While the defendants in court claimed they were motivated by money—Filipov stated he was paid €1,000 to settle child support debts—prosecutors painted a much broader picture of a coordinated, hostile operation. The court concurred, stating the act was designed to “stir up public opinion, exploit existing divisions and further fragment French society.”

This incident is one of at least nine similar acts of suspected foreign interference in France, including Stars of David stencilled on buildings and symbolic coffins left near the Eiffel Tower. French intelligence documents presented in court suggested the suspects received instructions in Russian, fitting a pattern of Russia using hired proxies for low-level operations that stoke social tension and are then amplified by disinformation networks online.

The Kenyan Context: A Warning on Hybrid Threats

While the events in Paris may seem distant, the tactics employed offer a critical case study for Kenya and the wider East African region. The strategy of using proxies to execute acts that inflame existing ethnic, religious, or political fault lines is a hallmark of modern hybrid warfare—a threat to which Kenya is particularly vulnerable.

Kenya has a documented history of both foreign and domestic actors using disinformation to influence elections and public opinion, notably during the 2013 and 2017 polls. With a high social media usage rate—where 48.4% of users turn for news, well above the global average—and widespread difficulty in distinguishing real from fake news, the population is susceptible to manipulation campaigns. These campaigns often aim to erode trust in democratic institutions and deepen societal divisions.

Analysts from the Institute for Security Studies and other organisations have noted that Africa is increasingly a theatre for such hybrid threats, where external powers exploit local grievances to achieve geopolitical goals. Russia, in particular, has been identified as a major exporter of hybrid warfare tactics across the continent, using disinformation, mercenaries, and economic influence to destabilise nations and prop up friendly regimes.

The Paris case demonstrates how cheaply these operations can be run—a few thousand euros to hire vulnerable individuals—to generate significant social and political disruption. For a nation like Kenya, with its own complex social fabric, the verdict is a clear signal: vigilance against foreign-sponsored activities designed to sow discord is paramount for national security and democratic stability.

A New Legal Frontier

The trial was the first of its kind in France to directly address an act of destabilisation linked to a foreign power. However, the defendants were not tried under the specific aggravating circumstance of acting for a foreign power, as the relevant law was only strengthened *after* the incident occurred. In response to this and other incidents, France has since passed new legislation, effective from July 2025, to create a public register of foreign influence agents and allow for the freezing of assets of those engaged in interference.

This legal evolution in a major global power underscores the growing recognition that hybrid warfare is not a peripheral issue but a central threat to national sovereignty. As nations grapple with this new reality, the Paris judgment establishes a crucial, if preliminary, precedent in holding the foot soldiers of these campaigns accountable, even as the masterminds remain in the shadows.