The interconnected world, a hallmark of 21st-century globalisation, has ushered in an era where the foundational concept of state sovereignty faces unprecedented challenges. While historical treaties from Westphalia to the UN Charter meticulously defined and guarded the state’s exclusive authority over its territory and internal affairs, the advent of information warfare (IW) has blurred these lines. Recent events, notably the youth-led protests in Bangladesh (2024), Nepal and Madagascar (2025), and ongoing demonstrations as of the time of writing, in Morocco, present a compelling case study of how foreign malign influence (FMI) can weaponize digital platforms to undermine state sovereignty, even in the absence of traditional military intervention.
Sovereignty Under Siege: A Historical Perspective Meets Modern Threats
The evolution of sovereignty, from the territorial integrity established by the Treaty of Westphalia (1648) to the principle of non-intervention reinforced by the UN Charter (1945), has consistently emphasized the state’s supreme authority within its borders. However, informational warfare introduces a novel form of external interference, penetrating the cognitive domain of a target state’s population without crossing physical boundaries. This digital penetration directly challenges the core tenets of non-interference.
The Treaty of Utrecht (1713) and the Congress of Vienna (1815) solidified notions of defined territories and legitimate governance. Yet, FMI campaigns today seek to destabilise these very elements by eroding public trust in institutions and leaders, attacking their legitimacy through narratives propagated online. Furthermore, the Treaty of Versailles (1919) emphasized national self-determination, a principle now under direct assault as FMI attempts to manipulate the popular will and hijack national decision-making processes.
Gen Z and the New Battleground of Influence
The recent wave of Gen Z-led protests offers a stark illustration of this new paradigm. In Bangladesh, Nepal and Madagascar, these movements reportedly contributed to government overthrows, while similar dynamics are unfolding in Morocco. A striking feature of these protests is their organisation and coordination through online forums and social media networks. Participants often appear to echo similar messages and demands, leading to suspicions of a coordinated information operation.
The Malagasy President’s remark, following the dismissal of his Prime Minister and government, that protesters continued to insist on his own resignation, underscores this point. It suggests a fixed, escalating narrative impervious to genuine concessions – a hallmark of an effective FMI campaign.
This phenomenon is consistent with FMI tactics that leverage genuine domestic grievances but then amplify and redirect them towards more radical objectives. By saturating online spaces with specific, often inflammatory, narratives, FMI actors can create digital “echo chambers,” making it appear as though a singular, extreme demand represents the will of the populace. This subverts the very notion of popular sovereignty, replacing organic dissent with externally guided agitation.
The Sovereignty Trap: Government’s Dilemma
Governments confronting these digitally amplified protests face a profound dilemma – a “sovereignty trap” orchestrated by information warfare. Any traditional response risks validating the FMI narrative and incurring severe international backlash:
- Use of Force: While an inherent right of a sovereign state to maintain order, deploying force against protesters in the age of ubiquitous recording devices and instant global dissemination is immediately weaponized by FMI. Images of state repression are framed as “police brutality” and “authoritarianism,” leading to international condemnation, sanctions, and further erosion of state legitimacy.
- Internet and Speech Restrictions: Restricting internet access or freedom of speech, while a state’s sovereign prerogative over its communication infrastructure, is presented by FMI as proof of a tyrannical regime afraid of its own people. Such actions rarely curb organising effectively (as protesters find workarounds) and instead further isolate the government, undermining its claims of democratic legitimacy both domestically and internationally.
Navigating the Digital Front Line: A Path Forward
To counter this sophisticated form of sovereignty erosion, governments must adopt a nuanced, multi-pronged strategy that moves beyond traditional security responses:
- Address Genuine Grievances: Proactively identify and visibly address core domestic issues that fuel discontent. Genuine policy reforms and transparent accountability mechanisms can de-legitimise the FMI narrative by demonstrating a responsive and effective government.
- Expose Malign Influence: Develop robust capabilities to detect and transparently attribute FMI operations. Publicly exposing foreign actors and their tactics, backed by credible evidence, can inoculate the population against manipulation without demonising legitimate dissent.
- Build Digital Resilience: Invest in digital literacy programs for citizens, empowering them to critically evaluate online information and recognise manipulation tactics. Simultaneously, governments should engage proactively on social media, countering disinformation with facts and offering alternative, positive narratives tailored to digital natives.
- Strategic Restraint: Exercise extreme caution and restraint in using force or restricting digital freedoms. Prioritise de-escalation, dialogue, and rights-respecting policing models. Any necessary security actions must be proportionate, transparent, and independently verifiable to prevent FMI from exploiting them for propaganda.
The emergence of Gen Z protests, potentially influenced by foreign actors using information warfare, is a potent reminder that sovereignty in the 21st century extends beyond physical borders into the digital and cognitive realms. Governments must adapt their understanding of threats and their response strategies to defend their national integrity against these evolving forms of intervention.
References
Boratov, S., (2025). “Cognitive Warfare and Democratic Resilience: Security Challenges in the Age of Influence. Research Gate. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5377564
History Guilds. The Treaty of Versailles. History Guild. https://historyguild.org/the-treaty-of-versailles/
