Sabotage is a better word since it is not loaded politically. It does not infer a reason nor motive. Just that something happened which was deliberately done by someone.
Like I said sabotage isn’t loaded and does not depend on the motive. Only that something was disrupted on purpose.
> destructive or obstructive action carried on by a civilian or enemy agent to hinder a nation's war effort
Using this reasoning you could argue that any negative comments about the war towards a russian could be construed as sabotage, because it goes against Russian war-propaganda.
In comparison this act is probably more disruptive then anti-war sticker bombing in grocery stores (https://t.me/nowarmetro/465) and most people would call that sabotage.
But like I said, sabotage is not loaded. It can cause anything from a minor or trivial disruption, to a major destruction. It can have a positive or negative message, or even no message at all.
Eg about using Tor to get access to forbidden news.
(Maybe the way it was done, won't work in practice, but if you pretend it worked, as a thought experiment?)