X Close

Russia is turning the tide in the intelligence war

The Kremlin wishes to show it too can infiltrate the enemy. Credit: Getty

The Kremlin wishes to show it too can infiltrate the enemy. Credit: Getty

20 July 2025 - 8:00am

On 10 July, a man was gunned down in broad daylight in Kyiv. He was Colonel Ivan Voronych, a senior Ukrainian intelligence officer and veteran of covert special operations. His death did not go unpunished. Last Sunday, Kyiv’s SBU intelligence service said it had executed two agents of Russia’s FSB security service in connection with the killing.

Such tit-for-tat operations may seem, on the face of it, to be nothing new. Assassinations have long proven merely one front in the wider war, with Ukraine netting such high-profile targets as the Russian generals Igor Kirillov and Yaroslav Moskalik. Demonstrating no lack of ambition, Ukraine’s spies claim to have a hit-list for further attacks.

While covert operations may have constituted an area of success for Kyiv, the loss of a man of Voronych’s standing suggests the tide may now be turning in Moscow’s favour. “I want to believe that it has begun,” crowed Kremlin propagandist Alexander Kots, “the enemy has to be afraid on his own territory”.

So what is behind the Kremlin’s success? Its spooks are likely still smarting from being outfoxed by Operation Spiderweb, a covert drone attack conducted on their own land and so meticulously plotted over 18 months that the Ukrainians even released the footage afterwards. Unsurprisingly, the Kremlin now wishes to show it too can infiltrate the enemy.

Voronych’s death may also be the result of earlier efforts. Back in 2023, Moscow set up the Department of Special Tasks, a spy unit bringing together powers and personnel from across Russia’s intelligence services and dedicated to recruiting foreign agents and carrying out murders and sabotage. The Department of Special Tasks is staffed by some of the oldest hands in Russian intelligence and they do not require Putin’s approval for specific operations. With Moscow’s spies needing to prove their value after the intelligence failures of the initial invasion, expect them to compete with one another and push their already broad limits, in much the same way as Ukraine’s rival SBU and GRU intelligence agencies jostle for glory.

Western security officials indicate that the Department’s activity dropped when Donald Trump became US President, as the Kremlin tried to establish friendly relations with the new administration. With US-Russia relations having hit a new low, Moscow has no reason to hold back on its murder and sabotage operations. Besides, with its battlefield progress advancing at a grinding pace, targeted killings constitute a way of damaging the enemy, gaining headline-grabbing victories for domestic consumption, and sowing fear among Ukraine’s elites — all at a low cost.

Moscow’s way of working constitutes a hydra that is almost impossible to defeat. Poor and vulnerable Ukrainian youths are groomed remotely via messaging apps and persuaded or tricked into conducting sabotage, arson and bomb plots. Unable to shut down operators located abroad, Kyiv has launched a domestic public awareness campaign. Yet, for every Ukrainian adolescent frightened by the government’s messaging, there is likely to be another tempted by the talk of Kremlin cash.

While teens scattered across the country might be useful guns for hire on a small scale, Moscow has other, far more powerful weapons in its arsenal. The Base, a neo-Nazi group, has claimed involvement in Voronych’s killing. A shadowy far-Right terrorist organisation founded in America by alleged Kremlin spy and ex-Pentagon contractor Rinaldo Nazzaro, it has been battling to create an all-white ethnostate in western Ukraine and offering to pay for targeted killings to destabilise Kyiv.

The death of Ivan Voronych is a profound tragedy for Ukraine — not only because it marks the loss of a senior official, but also because it underscores Russia’s increasing success in targeted assassinations. Kyiv should heed the warning from The Base: “The shooting of the SBU colonel is not the end, but only the beginning”.


Bethany Elliott is a writer specialising in Russia and Eastern Europe.

BethanyAElliott

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

1 July 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam