TELEGRAMAs Tools for Hybrid Threats, Apps Like Telegram Must Be Accountable

By Fitriani

The arrest of Telegram founder Pavel Durov in France has underscored the urgent need for more regulation of messaging and social media platforms that can be exploited for hybrid operation by both states and non-state groups. 

Once celebrated as the ultimate tool for free communication thanks to its encryption and lax moderation practices, Telegram now stands accused by French authorities of facilitating criminal activities and possibly being exploited for hybrid threats, particularly by Russian state actors. Hybrid threats blend military force with non-military tactics including cyberattacks and disinformation. 

To counter these threats, policymakers around the world must prioritize regulation, platform accountability, and the promotion of alternative platforms that are less susceptible to misuse, while also protecting free speech. It’s a delicate balancing act. 

Telegram’s role in such hybrid operations, particularly in the context of Russian state-backed activities, have become increasingly evident. The platform has been used not only for legitimate private communication but also as a tool for spreading disinformation, propaganda, and extremist content. This is particularly concerning in conflict zones such as Ukraine, where Telegram has 7 million users, including government officials and opinion leaders. 

Despite Durov’s claim that his platform is not backed by the Kremlin, Telegram’s financial ties to Russian oligarchs and state-controlled entities suggest otherwise. Investments from figures such as Roman Abramovich and Sergey Solonin—both of whom are linked to the Russian government—raise significant concerns about the platform’s susceptibility to state influence.  

This financial entanglement is alarming given Telegram’s extensive reach across Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East—regions that are subject to Russian hybrid operations. 

The Russian government’s 2018 attempt to block Telegram and the app’s purported relocation to Dubai may have been a strategic façade, giving cover to Telegram channels that promote pro-Russia narratives including glorifying separatists, justifying the invasion of Ukraine and spreading extremist propaganda—some of which reportedly fueled the recent anti-immigration riots in the UK.  

This maneuver preserved the illusion of Telegram’s independence while keeping it accessible for Kremlin use, which aligns with Russia’s hybrid strategy. It’s an entirely understandable tactic; using disinformation to weaken adversaries either as an alternative or as a complement to military confrontation is a cost-effective approach. 

Claims that Telegram’s servers and data centers are located in Russia, and are therefore subject to Russian laws, raised doubts about the platform’s pleas of independence. This raises serious security concerns, particularly for users who challenge the Russian government or operate in conflict zones where hybrid tactics are prevalent.