Corruption and oligarchs: How the West seeks reasons not to help Ukraine

But in any case, the context and temporal frames of discussions about these stereotypes are important. It seemed that during the war, the focus and priorities should have changed somewhat. Yet, the war has lasted so long that it has become a routine for Western observers, who have started to revisit the issues that were on the agenda before the full-scale invasion.

The other day, The Times published an article with the provocative title Energy ‘corruption’ leaves Ukrainians facing a deadly freeze. I haven’t seen a reprint in Ukrainian media, but it has gained traction in narrow professional circles. The author discusses kickbacks in the construction of energy infrastructure protection facilities without excessive specificity. 

And there are issues with this article and its narrative.

While not downplaying the issue of corruption, it’s important to remember that the image of total corruption in Ukraine has long been promoted by the Russians. Why aren’t we accepted into the EU? Because of corruption. Why not into NATO? Because of corruption. Why shouldn’t we deal with them and put an ‘X’ on them? The answer is well known. And the list goes on.

 In 2020, Donald Trump called Ukraine the most corrupt country in the world. In 2022, his son repeated this same claim, which may carry significant weight in the new American administration.

It doesn’t matter that there are loud corruption scandals with large sums in countries worldwide, including the U.S. It’s almost a habit to mention Ukraine when discussing them. It’s always easy to explain a problem in Ukraine without delving into it, simply by shifting the blame to corruption. Such articles only reinforce these stereotypes.

I understand that the author of the article in The Times, Maxim Tucker, spent many years at Amnesty International, where the issue of corruption was always a concern. Therefore, it’s possible that this topic remains particularly sensitive for the author. And indeed, this is the same Amnesty International that, in 2022, effectively sided with Russia, accusing Ukraine of war crimes. Sort of victim blaming.

The only significant point that author Maxime Tucker misses when discussing the risks to the energy system and threats to energy supply this winter is this omission. It completely upends everything, and I suspect the author doesn’t fully understand that his conclusions are not entirely accurate.

The problem is that it’s unrealistic to protect all energy infrastructure with concrete bunkers. In the spring of this year, Russia actively targeted thermal and hydroelectric stations, including their machinery rooms, which cannot be safeguarded by any sarcophagi.

The only option to protect these facilities is with air defense systems. And that’s what we lack – we still haven’t received a significant portion of the air defense systems that were promised to us long ago. Energy companies were restoring their facilities after the spring attacks, hoping that these air defense and missile defense systems would arrive in time for winter.

I believe that the spread of the arguments presented in the mentioned article could later be easily exploited by those partners who promised air defense systems but didn’t provide them. The key message that could be heard will be that Ukrainian corruption is to blame for the outages, and not the lack of the necessary and promised weapons.

It’s good that, unlike the report from the aforementioned Amnesty International, we’re not being told that we’re somehow violating our right to self-defense. I wouldn’t be surprised if the accusations of corruption are raised to divert attention from the promised but unreceived weaponry.

Overall, reading the article gives the impression that it’s not the Russians who are to blame for continuing to attack us with missiles using Western components. It’s not the West, which can neither stop the supply of these components to Russia nor restrict the operations of Russia’s shadow fleet, which helps fund this war. It’s not the lack of air defense systems that’s to blame. It’s the same old Ukrainian corruption! Isn’t this victim blaming?

With one issue already blamed for outages and blackouts - widespread and pervasive corruption - dealt with, let’s turn to another problem that hasn’t been mentioned for a while: the oligarchs.

The head of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development made a statement that the bank won’t provide funding to DTEK because it’s owned by an oligarch. If we play with words, the statement from the EBRD president could be translated as: “We won’t be lending to the largest private energy company in Ukraine at a time when the Russians are trying to bomb Ukraine’s energy infrastructure and essentially destroy Ukrainians, because we’re principled.” Or it could be put this way: “Ukrainians, you don’t need heat and electricity to solve the problem of oligarchs right now!”

The war has weakened the influence of the oligarchs," says the EBRD president, "but after it ends, the situation might change." So, maybe we’ll talk about it after the war, Madam President? Of course, that’s if we survive - if we’re not ground down, frozen, or struck by another Oreshnik.

If we’re serious about discussing energy reforms during the war, it’s worth looking at the reports from the European Commission and the G7 countries. These reports state that Ukraine is making steady progress on reforms, including in the energy sector, and is meeting all the benchmarks set before it.

The U.S. and the European Commission seem to be well aware of the situation. They are allocating €107 million to the company to support it through this winter. This isn’t about supporting a company; it’s about supporting a country that has been defending itself for three years. It’s about supporting energy workers who have been under targeted fire from the aggressor for the third year running.

Many in the West are already tired of our war and would prefer to forget about it. This likely explains the return to myths and narratives that were promoted before the full-scale invasion. In skillful wordplay, twists using stereotypes and clichés, and attempts to shift blame, the key is not to cross the line into victim-blaming. Because, in the end, the wordsmiths and champions of principles might themselves become victims of the very same aggressor.

Source

About the author. Andrian Prokip, energy analyst at the Ukrainian Institute for the Future.

The editors don't always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.