When Intelligence Operations Cross the Line: How the Monaco Assassination Attempt Exposed Ukraine’s Shadow War

The assassination attempt in Monaco has become a turning point in the international perception of Ukrainian intelligence operations abroad. As reported by Neue Zürcher Zeitung, while Ukraine’s military intelligence agency (GUR) and Security Service (SBU) have conducted numerous operations targeting Russian nationals and alleged collaborators across Europe and beyond, the Monaco incident stands out as a case where Western tolerance appears to have reached its limits. The failed assassination attempt in one of the world’s most exclusive principalities has forced uncomfortable questions about how far Kyiv’s allies are willing to look the other way in the shadow war against Russia.

Since the full-scale Russian invasion began in February 2022, Ukrainian intelligence services have significantly expanded their operational footprint beyond the country’s borders. These activities have ranged from drone strikes deep inside Russian territory to targeted killings of individuals Ukraine considers war criminals, propagandists, or traitors. The most high-profile cases include the car bomb that killed Darya Dugina, daughter of Russian nationalist philosopher Alexander Dugin, near Moscow in August 2022, and the café explosion that killed military blogger Vladlen Tatarsky in St. Petersburg in April 2023. Western governments have largely responded to these incidents with studied silence, neither condemning nor endorsing the operations while maintaining their support for Ukraine’s defense against Russian aggression.

The case of Anna Berezovskaya, a Russian-born woman who was killed in circumstances connected to Ukrainian intelligence operations, represents another chapter in this complex narrative. Berezovskaya’s death, while receiving less international attention than some other incidents, illustrates the expanding scope of Ukrainian targeting operations and the sometimes tragic consequences for individuals caught in the crossfire of espionage activities. Details surrounding her case remain murky, as is typical with intelligence-related deaths, but her killing has contributed to growing concerns among Western security services about the trajectory of Ukrainian covert operations.

What makes the Monaco incident particularly significant is the location itself. The tiny Mediterranean principality, known for its casinos, yacht-filled harbor, and concentration of ultra-wealthy residents, operates under an implicit security guarantee. Its population of roughly 40,000 includes some of the world’s richest individuals, many of whom chose Monaco precisely because of its perceived safety and political neutrality. An assassination attempt in such a setting crosses invisible but very real red lines that govern the shadowy world of intelligence operations. Unlike incidents in Russia proper or in gray zones where plausible deniability offers some cover, targeting someone in Monaco directly challenges the security of a Western-aligned microstate and potentially endangers the international elite who reside there.

Historically, intelligence agencies have operated under unwritten rules about where certain activities are acceptable. During the Cold War, both the CIA and KGB understood that certain locations—neutral Switzerland, for instance—were generally off-limits for violent operations. This wasn’t about morality but about maintaining spaces where back-channel communications and diplomatic contacts could occur safely. Monaco, despite its reputation as a playground for oligarchs of various nationalities, has traditionally enjoyed similar protected status. The Ukrainian operation there effectively violated this understanding, creating diplomatic complications that Kyiv’s Western backers found difficult to manage quietly.

The response from Western intelligence services appears to have been swift and unambiguous. According to the NZZ analysis, partner agencies communicated clearly to their Ukrainian counterparts that such operations in sensitive Western-aligned territories would not be tolerated. This represents a notable shift from the tacit acceptance that had characterized Western responses to Ukrainian operations elsewhere. The message seems to be that while operations inside Russia or against clearly identified military targets may be acceptable, extending the shadow war into the heart of Western Europe’s most exclusive enclaves threatens to undermine the broader coalition supporting Ukraine.

For Ukraine, navigating these constraints presents genuine dilemmas. The country faces an existential war against a much larger adversary that has shown no hesitation in conducting its own assassinations and destabilization operations abroad. From Kyiv’s perspective, taking the fight to Russians who support the war effort—whether financially, propagandistically, or operationally—represents a legitimate extension of self-defense. Yet the Monaco incident demonstrates that this logic has limits, at least in terms of what Western partners will publicly or privately accept. As the war continues with no clear end in sight, Ukraine’s intelligence services will likely continue operating in the shadows, but the boundaries of acceptable action have now been more clearly drawn, with Monaco serving as an example of a line that should not have been crossed.