Is Corruption A “Myth” Part Of New Yermak-Led Marketing Campaign? Ukraine US$750 Billion Potential Corruption Pandemic. Macron- Quid Pro Quo! A Vice President For Ukraine?
Corruption In Ukraine A “Myth” According To Minister. Is This New Yermak-Led Government Of Ukraine Marketing Campaign: Nothing To See Here- Fleece As White As Gold…
Prime Minister Of Ukraine Seems To Believe Larger Numbers For The “Pot Of Gold” Equate To Increased Support For Ukraine. Larger Numbers Are Fuel For Pandemic Of Public Sector And Private Sector Corruption.
Ukraine Wants US$750 Billion For Itself. Marshall Plan After WWII Was Approximately US$215 Billion (today’s value) And Supported Seventeen Countries.
Politically Intoxicating? Filet Of Sole Topped With Hazelnut And A Crispy Rice Fondant.
President Macron And Quid Pro Quo
Ukraine Companies Will Want Their Share Too
A Vice President For Ukraine?
Begin with news: According to the Ministry of Defense of the United Kingdom, approximately 54% of the territory of Ukraine seized since 24 February 2022 by the armed forces of the Russian Federation has been reclaimed (permanently or temporarily) by the armed forces of Ukraine. The armed forces of the Russian Federation control approximately 18% of the territory of Ukraine as defined in 1991 and again in 2014 prior to the armed forces of the Russian Federation invading the Donbas Region (Luhansk Oblast and Donetsk Oblast) and Crimean Peninsula.
The war is unlikely to end in the form of a switch- commenced on 24 February 2022 and cease on a specific date. Probable is word war will be replaced by cease fire, armistice, peace treaty, or a continuing conflict similar in operational scope as existed from 24 February 2014 to 23 February 2022. Watch for a rheostat, slowly dialing downward in rhetoric followed by discussions and then negotiations. What will be triggers for changes in attitude by Moscow and Kyiv? Money spent- particularly taxpayer debt incurred by other countries, citizens being killed, and media losing interest.
Whichever head of state refuses to meet for discussions and potentially negotiations, there will be a heavy price paid because those third parties who are funding the war will have had enough of a war that transitions into a mano-a-mano arm wrestling match or, as Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine, recently remarked a boxing match so he could “punch [Vladimir]Putin [President of the Russian Federation] in his face.” Reminiscent the tough-guy remarks by then candidate former Vice President Joseph Biden (2009-2017) in 2016 when he shared about Donald Trump, then presidential nominee of the Republican Party, “If we were in high school, I’d take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him.” Mr. Trump’s response: “Oh, trust me, I would kick his ass. He’d be easy.”
The war continues because third parties are funding it. More accurately, taxpayers are borrowing to fund it and going into debt to fund it. Defending freedom, however defined, is not free.
Institutionalization Of Dishonesty (Or Delusion) By The Government Of Ukraine?
Is the message from Kyiv that the Zelensky Administration believes Brussels (European Union (EU) headquarters), Canberra, London, Ottawa, Tokyo, and Washington are gullible and stupid- that the government of Ukraine can do what it wants, say what it wants, and will get what it wants?
On point- a former Minister of Defence of Ukraine shared recently during a television interview a false statement that there is “no hesitancy” by governments to support Ukraine. He is wrong on the facts. If there were no hesitancy, the distance since 24 February 2022, and well prior to that date including from the period 24 February 2014 through 23 February 2022, between what governments believed the armed forces of Ukraine “needed” for defense and what the armed forces of Ukraine “wanted” for defense would have been far narrower. Even today, the armed forces of Ukraine are not receiving what the armed forces of Ukraine want. Issues of concern remain about technology transfers to the armed forces of the Russian Federation should technologically advanced military equipment be accidentally obtained due to misfire, malfunction, or theft. Issues of concern remain that what has been since 2014 a proxy war against the armed forces of the Russian Federation by members of the thirty country North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) along with other governments could become a direct conflict. The government of Ukraine has not so quietly advocated for just this scenario.
Another example- the considerable number of days required by the twenty-seven member European Union (EU), other country governments, and separately the Biden-[Kamala] Harris Administration (2021- ) to work with the United States Congress to move from proposals for commercial, economic, humanitarian, and military assistance to Ukraine to delivering that assistance. The number of days for discussion has increased consistently as has the length of the war.
Another example- despite repeated requests by the government of Ukraine to the State of Israel to provide one or more of the Iron Dome anti-missile defense systems, which United States taxpayers provided more than US$1 billion to jointly develop with the State of Israel, the government in Tel Aviv has refused- because its belief that cooperation with the armed forces of the Russian Federation relating to military operations in the Syrian Arab Republic are more important to the citizens of the State of Israel. Ukraine has a sizable population of the Jewish faith and President Zelensky is of the Jewish faith.
Another example- Despite continuing, and very public and pointed and argumentative statements by President Zelensky and members of the Zelensky Administration to cease all non-humanitarian purchases from the Russian Federation, those governments whose taxpayers are borrowing funds to support Ukraine, directly and indirectly, have continued to purchase non-humanitarian products, primarily commodities, from companies located in the Russian Federation and export non-humanitarian products to the Russian Federation. Three examples: People’s Republic of China, Republic of India, and Republic of Turkiye.
No Corruption Here
Last week, Serhiy Marchenko, Minister of Finance of Ukraine, who has a reputation as a cerebral thinker: “Now is not the time to postpone any support, to just be tired of Ukraine and Ukraine’s problems ... because the next time, you realized that without Ukraine, Russia will come closer to the European border. It’s about self-preservation, it’s self-protection — this should be in the minds of EU [European Union] citizens. It’s not charity to support Ukraine. We are trying to protect freedom and democracy of all (the) civilized world.”
Unfortunately, Minister Marchenko transitioned to an absurd statement about the past, present, and future of Ukraine relating to corruption. His thesis: the 24 February 2022 invasion and further invasion of Ukraine by the armed forces of the Russian Federation created a foundation and altered the DNA from which all corruption within a country of forty-four million citizens, all commercial, economic, and political influence of “oligarchs” has since vanished. But, more significantly, there never was corruption.
Minister Marchenko: “There is no time for oligarchs. There is no time for corruption in Ukraine. Half our budget is military expenditure, so half is totally social and humanitarian expenditures leaving no room for misconduct. And I would prefer that this myth or this story about Ukraine’s corruption will evaporate after the war.”
While Ukraine has improved its ranking in the corruption perceptions index published annually by Transparency International, the country ranked 122 out of 180 countries prior to 24 February 2022.
Astonishingly, Minister Marchenko’s adherence to dreaming was shared by Torbjorn Becker, Director of the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics: “If a country is not spending money wisely when it’s being attacked by a neighbor like Russia, we know that they would have lost the war by now. So, the fact that Ukraine is still there and defending its territory is one of the testaments that corruption should not be our focus now when we are talking about support to Ukraine.” Fortunately, Mr. Becker has no operational control or responsibility for the execution of taxpayer borrowed funds as they permeate Ukraine. To remind Mr. Becker- corruption was rampant in World War II by both Allied parties and Axis parties. Corruption remains today in Ukraine.
This gentleman, however, does have both responsibility and authority. Ville Itälä, Director-General of the Brussels, Belgium-based European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), is charged with investigating “fraud against the EU [European Union] budget, corruption and serious misconduct within the European institutions, and develops anti-fraud policy for the European Commission [EC].”
Mr. Itälä in an interview shared that the twenty-seven EU-member governments “have more responsibility for control” of how funds allocated by the EU are directed. His most compelling statement: “More money, more fraudsters.” With respect to Ukraine, he said that “All have an interest that money goes to the right place,” within two monitoring tracks: Assisting the government of Ukraine to improve anti-fraud efforts and investigating the use in Ukraine of EU-provided funds. If there was no fraud in Ukraine, why would improvement of ant-fraud efforts be necessary?
Were These Berlin Conference Messages A Mirage?
On 25 October 2022 in Berlin, Germany leadership of the European Commission (EC) representing the EU, heads of state (four; two virtually), heads of government (three- including the Prime Minister of Ukraine; one virtually), ministers (including the Minister of Finance of Ukraine), representatives of international financial institutions, experts from think tanks, and participants from non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) convened for the International Expert Conference on the Recovery, Reconstruction and Modernisation of Ukraine hosted by the government of Germany. There was unanimity among the two hundred participants (and 124 government representatives) that corruption and lack of democracy and lack of transparency remains in Ukraine post-24 February 2022 as it has since 1991 and again past 2014 and through recent elections. Some of the most insightful panelist comments:
“Ukraine must have a democratic transformation.”
“Ukraine must continue its democratic transformation in order for European integration to be a reality.”
“Since 1991, choice by successor governments in Ukraine toward command-control like U.S.S.R. has hampered development and transformation of the economy.”
“Energy is the poster-child of corruption in Ukraine. Solution: 1) Integration into EU market- business practices. 2) Coordination of international assistance (Ramstein Format possible). 3) Use donor funds to leverage private capital.”
“Investment Funds should manage the state budget of Ukraine to mitigate corruption.”
“For Ukraine to be bankable there must be substantial reforms.”
“Investment projects must be bankable not only supportable.”
“We lend money, and we want money back.”
“Need predictability in money deliveries.”
“Donor competition is a problem”
“Converge, not compete. There are too many ‘Marshall Plans’ as governments want to put their name on things.”
“Ukraine was immensely corrupt prior to the invasion by Russia on February 24th [2022]. The war has not miraculously vaporized that thirty-plus year developed DNA. Everyone needs to remember this.”
The proper strategy for the government of Ukraine is acknowledge fully the history of corruption in the country and request a level of intervention from outside of the country that would normally be considered an infringement upon the sovereignty of any country.
Yes, request, rather demand, that the members of the international community who are using their respective taxpayer resources to borrow funds that are then tasked directly and indirectly for Ukraine provide, at the expense of the government of Ukraine, financial auditors, quasi-judicial appointees, and Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) authorization for the creation of commissions throughout Ukraine with subpoena powers, to inspect each and every U.S. Dollar, Euro, Pound Sterling, Yen delivered to the country. The goal is for Ukraine to be the example of responsibility rather than an example of adherence to its past.
For a useful reference point as to how small an amount of funds may influence and corrupt elected and appointed politicians, observe and absorb how alleged (innocent until proven otherwise) payments of a few million Euros, Pounds, and U.S. Dollars along with all-expenses-paid travel excursions, by governments (including Morocco and Qatar, thus far) to members of the European Parliament (EP), to members of the United Kingdom Parliament, and by numerous governments to members of the United States Congress. Corruption is not solely defined by an exchange of currency or gift, there is also corruption of the process- commercial, economic, and political that often take form in an individual or group of individuals focusing upon enhancing their status, the power with a result being delay, obfuscation, ego enhancement, additional paperwork, all examples of a perverted power-hungry madness and cruelty.
Would not most people be intoxicated? Private aircraft travel, motorcades, receptions, hotel suites, room service, private tours, awards, honorariums, speaking fees, book contracts, free vacations (Joseph Biden, President of the United States, with an approximate net worth of more than US$10 million, is adhered to these). Last week, EU leadership in Brussels dined on “mushroom brioche followed by a filet of sole topped with hazelnut and a crispy rice fondant. Dessert was a Christmas bauble dessert, followed by coffee.” How many taxpayers of the EU-member countries have recently enjoyed such lavishness? How might the decision-making process of EU leaders be influenced if they ate sandwiches?
If the approximately US$349 billion estimated for the cost of reconstruction for Ukraine provided by the Washington DC-based World Bank is accurate, then given there will never been a global effort nearing this value, not a significant quantity of brain use required to believe the level of corruption, outright theft, will be on a scale that dwarfs the hundreds of billions of United States taxpayer funds that were misused, misdirected, and stolen out of the more than US$2 trillion directed to the conflicts, wars, and reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan.
The 2022 value of the Marshall Plan (1948-1951) for the reconstruction of most of the European Continent is approximately US$215 billion. Encyclopedia Britannica: “On the basis of a unified plan for western European economic reconstruction presented by a committee representing 16 countries, the U.S. Congress authorized the establishment of the European Recovery Program, which was signed into law by U.S. Pres. Harry S. Truman on April 3, 1948. Aid was originally offered to almost all the European countries, including those under military occupation by the Soviet Union. The Soviets early on withdrew from participation in the plan, however, and were soon followed by the other eastern European nations under their influence. This left the following countries to participate in the plan: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and western Germany.”
An important note: The approximately US$215 billion spent in seventeen countries. Governments, with their inherent self-interests; NGOs, with their inherent self-interests; the private sectors, with their inherent self-interests, and the government of Ukraine, with its inherent self-interest seek as much as possible for use in Ukraine regardless of whether Ukraine has the capacity to absorb the funds or truly needs the funds.
A crucial point to remember- repeatedly. Taxpayer borrowed funds sought for Ukraine are for reconstruction of infrastructure damaged and destroyed, not for the construction of a 21st Century Ukraine; a Ukraine 3.0 or above. That transformation is for the taxpayers of Ukraine to fund along with private sector funds as the marketplace may support.
Corruption in Ukraine has been endemic since Ukraine was one of the fifteen republics of the U.S.S.R. and then from 1991 when Ukraine became a sovereign nation. Corruption, which is not unique to Ukraine, has been a core principle for commercial, economic, and political leadership in Ukraine at the national, regional, and local levels.
Corruption continues today- and is known to government leadership throughout those countries whose taxpayers have been and continue to be asked to borrow funds for uses relating to the war in Ukraine- which they are neither responsible for starting nor ending.
Which leads again, as it has since 24 February 2022, to the estimated costs for the reconstruction of Ukraine, not, important to note again, for the construction of Ukraine or for the development of Ukraine, but targeted directly at replacement of infrastructure damaged and destroyed due to decisions by the government of the Russian Federation implemented by the armed forces of the Russian Federation.
The first, and only source of primary funding should be from the assets of the government of the Russian Federation, and individuals and companies and organization subject to government of the Russian Federation jurisdiction whose assets have been adjudicated fully and transparently- and where the defendants have opportunity to mount a defense through all levels of the judiciary, before the assets shift from seized to confiscated and then monetized.
There remains, and must remain, solely one party responsible to write the checks for what has happened in Ukraine from 2014 onward in those areas within the territory of Ukraine occupied by the armed forces of the Russian Federation. The address is Kremlin, Moscow.
There remains US$340 billion in Central Bank of the Russian Federation (CBRF) funds residing in accounts at various financial institutions located outside of the Russian Federation that should shift from having been frozen to confiscated and then redirected for uses relating to Ukraine. A telling backgrounder: The CBRF made no effort to return funds to Moscow prior to 24 February 2022 nor did the CBRF attempt to return funds following 24 February 2022. Why? Because the government of the Russian Federation believed regardless of what decisions it implemented relating to Ukraine, the funds, as sovereign monies, would be returned to the Russian Federation. Or, the government of the Russian Federation believed that the funds would be a cost-of-doing-business relating to Ukraine- and reparations, if any, would be deducted from the funds which, important to note, continue to earn interest. On idea: Use today for Ukraine (and those countries who have endured most from refugees from Ukraine) the interest on the CBRF frozen funds, which totals more than US$2 billion at a rate of approximately US$200 million per month?
There are voices in the legal community who remain uncertain as to the viability and appropriateness of confiscating and then seizing CBRF funds for use relating to Ukraine: https://www.lawfareblog.com/legal-challenges-presented-seizing-frozen-russian-assets
Everything that countries are offering to Ukraine should designated as loans and financing to be repaid rather than gifts and grants. Why? So that all the funds borrowed by taxpayers will be among those on the list to be subtracted from the approximately US$340 billion in Central Bank of the Russian Federation funds frozen. The focus must remain upon reimbursements to the governments of those countries which have contributed commercial, economic, military, and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine.
Within the last week, Denys Shmyhal, Prime Minister of Ukraine, has increased his estimate for the reconstruction of Ukraine from a generally-accepted value of approximately US$349 billion provided by the Washington DC-based World Bank, to approximately US$750 billion.
These estimates are in addition to what the government of Ukraine wants and expects from those taxpayers who have already delivered and promised nearing what will be US$200 billion by 24 February 2023. Prime Minister Shmyhal desires approximately US$7 billion per month for operational expenses- so US$84 billion for calendar year 2023 and quite possibly beyond 2023. And approximately US$20 billion to repair electric grid, gas pipeline, and water delivery facilities along with some housing damaged and destroyed by the armed forces of the Russian Federation primarily during the last three months. If the armed forces of the Russian Federation continue to target energy facilities in Ukraine, rather than focus directly upon the locations of the armed forces of Ukraine or civilians in Ukraine, the US$20 billion will likely increase to US$40 billion as some of the same electric grid, gas pipeline, and water delivery facilities will be repeatedly targeted upon completion of their repair.
So, for 2023, the government of Ukraine will likely request approximately US$124 billion for operations and energy facility repairs. Then, there is the approximately US$100 billion in military equipment provided primarily by members of the thirty country North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and other countries. Total commitments likely to be sought by the government of Ukraine for 2023 is approximately US$224 billion. Remember- this does not include reconstruction monies.
Thus, the third-party commitments to Ukraine from 24 February 2022 through 24 February 2024, could be US$408 billion. Part of the math: US$7 billion per month for twenty-four months is US$168 billion. Two years of military support at US$100 billion annually is US$200 billion. Add US$40 billion for energy infrastructure repairs. That is governments borrowing- taxpayers owing.
Prime Minister Shmyhal, who also opined that he doesn’t believe in a ceasefire (taxpayers in other countries might disagree) between the armed forces of Ukraine and the armed forces of the Russian Federation, is mistaken by embracing an ever larger estimate for the reconstruction of Ukraine believing that the larger the number, the more enticing will become sustained and increased support for Ukraine because government leadership and company executives in those countries which have provided support to Ukraine will salivate at additional commercial opportunities. With respect to behavior scientist Mr. Pavlov, any person may be conditioned to respond to nearing US$1 trillion.
Here, the Prime Minister does have, sadly, a valid point, though he did not say it. Politicians are addicted to Other People’s Money (OPM), particularly, the OPM that comes from their constituents, taxpayers.
They view Ukraine as a potential decades-worth, and for them multiple terms in office as a result, of Shangri-La commercial contracts- reconstruction, construction, redevelopment, development, refinance, finance (micro, small, medium, large, extra-large, colossal), restructuring, structuring, and initial public offerings (IPOs). And, when those politicians who have shepherded hundreds of billions of dollars in additional taxpayer debt depart their elected or appointed positions… they will then move to consulting and other highly-compensated activities (speaking, writing, NGOs) and focus upon? Where those funds, courtesy of taxpayer debt, they helped to authorize are going relating to Ukraine.
Boryspil International Airport (KBP) in Kyiv, along with airports in other primary cities in Ukraine, will receive immediate funding once the commercial and general aviation airspace in Ukraine is operational. Why? New general aviation terminals to provide services for the many privately-owned and charter aircraft transporting government officials, former government officials, company executives, and wealthy individuals salivating to connect with opportunities and, sadly, for some to reconnect with casinos and strip clubs.
Insiders May Outflank Outsiders
If someone owes money, the loaner may choose a variety of means to obtain repayment. Sometimes, when a debt is deemed unrepayable, by choice of the person owning the money, the loaner may, for spite, on principle, spend more to recover the money than is owed.
With Ukraine, if the government obtains access to the US$340 billion in Central Bank of the Russian Federation funds frozen since 24 February 2022, then outside interests would have limited sway as to how the funds are dispersed and, most significantly, any influence as to requiring transparency, accountability, and most importantly, opportunities to limit corruption.
The only means of outside interests to demonstrably influence the how the government of Ukraine uses funds for reconstruction is to control the funds- disperse only after a public, transparent, and thorough process of Request for Proposals (RFPs).
However, the government of Ukraine’s position will expectantly be that any funds sourced from the government of the Russian Federation, for example those from the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, should be provided directly to the government of Ukraine for institutions within Ukraine to determine how the funds are used within Ukraine. The premise will be logical: The armed forces of the Russian Federation inflicted damage upon the territory of Ukraine so funds belonging to the government of the Russian Federation, the aggressor, belong to the government of Ukraine- absent desires of third parties.
Third parties did not inflict damage to Ukraine, but if third party taxpayers are paying for what the armed forces of the Russian Federation did in Ukraine, then those third parties legitimately have a voice have the voice, as to how funds are spent in Ukraine.
Investing in Ukraine should not be equated with the reconstruction of Ukraine. Investment funds should not be sourced from Central Bank of the Russian Federation frozen assets. If companies want to invest, if international financial institutions want to provide guarantees for those investments, nothing wrong with that. Ukraine was not in mothballs prior to 24 February 2022. Ukraine is not a recently-discovered Shangri-La from the motion picture Lost Horizon.
Ukraine is not a country of forty-four million citizens who have no idea what a cellular device is, What WhatsApp does, unaware of the cable series The Crown, embrace the old U.S.S.R. description of clothing (one size fits all), or participate in Raves.
The public and private sector has more than thirty years of experience with operating in Ukraine- and knows well the value from and the issues with operating in Ukraine.
Macron And Quid Pro Quo
Emmanuel Macron, President of the Republic of France, last week brought to the light what had previously been relegated to the shadows…. Quid Pro Quo.
The government of France expects that its support for Ukraine entitles France-based companies to a meaningful share of the reconstruction monies in the form of contracts. The financial support provided by France to Ukraine will be rewarded. The government of Ukraine will prioritize opportunities for France-based companies to participate in reconstruction (and construction) projects in Ukraine. Prioritization will be a massive problem for the government of Ukraine.
One issue for the government of Ukraine- it will want to create a list which will include the names of companies identified, a list with many rows. A problem will be every government will want their companies to be listed first- particularly those whose heads of state, heads of government, cabinet members, who were first to visit Ukraine after 24 February 2022. Some of whom have visited more than once.
So, how does the first line become a second line and then a third line. Challenging to determine who will be 1st when no one wants to be 2nd. Now multiple the challenge by fifty countries. There will be no means not to upset political leaders and company executives.
President Macron, along with other heads of state and heads of government, may be disappointed in that what they expect might be directly connected to funds sourced within their respective countries.
Once the war has transitioned into a peace, armistice, stalemate, whatever moniker is decided upon, first insurance companies outside of Ukraine will determine the suitability of providing coverage for reconstruction projects- can the projects be safely begun and completed; what is the likelihood of a return by the armed forces of the Russian Federation. Next, the government of Ukraine will encounter enormous pressure from Ukraine-based companies, the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament)- whose members represent both those companies and their employees, to award reconstruction (and construction) contracts to Ukraine-based companies.
A now becoming foundational argument- Why would be the interest of the taxpayers of Ukraine for the government of Ukraine to increase further the per capita ratio of sovereign debt by accepting loans from international financial institutions and government agencies and private lenders when there remains US$340 billion in Central Bank of the Russian Federation assets frozen and available for confiscation and the reallocation to Ukraine to pay for the reconstruction of the country?
For the governments whose taxpayers are borrowing funds to support Ukraine, they will want a return on that investment. For 2023, the total global commitment to Ukraine will be approximately US$224 billion, with the United States taxpayers accounting for more than US$110 billion.
A Vice President For Ukraine?
Does President Zelensky view Andrii Borysovych Yermak, Head of Presidential Administration, as standing behind President Zelensky or beside President Zelensky? Importantly, from what perspective does Mr. Yermak see the relationship?
The Constitution of Ukraine does not provide for a Vice President. Should the president be unable to serve, the chairperson of the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) becomes president.
There remains speculation (or gossip) amongst supporters of President Zelensky and opponents of President Zelensky that Mr. Yermak may convince President Zelensky to seek a change to the Constitution of Ukraine using the war, concerns about President Zelensky’s safety, and importance for continuity of government should anything happen to President Zelensky, to create the position of Vice President. Thus, align the structure of government with other governments, particularly with members of the European Union to which the government of Ukraine aspires to be a member, and the United States and United Kingdom, whose continuing support is essential for the operations of the armed forces of Ukraine.
Might President Zelensky then seek for Mr. Yermak to be appointed Vice President of Ukraine? Senior officials in governments which have consistent interactions with the government of Ukraine, particularly with members of the Presidential Administration and with members of the Cabinet, believe Mr. Yermak is the most powerful individual in the government of Ukraine- surpassing President Zelensky.
Members of the Cabinet privately confirm that Mr. Yermak exercises his powers as Head of Presidential Administration in an extraordinarily expansive manner- and that he did so prior to 24 February 2022 and has expanded exponentially that personal power base since 24 February 2022. Ministers are responsible to President Zelensky. Ministers report to Mr. Yermak.
Despite what may be a new marketing campaign by the Zelensky Administration to not only question whether corruption existed prior to 24 February 2022, but that since that date corruption has evaporated from the DNA of all 44 million citizens of Ukraine, corruption has been endemic in Ukraine since it was a Republic of the U.S.S.R., from the time it became an independent country in 1991, and through 24 February 2022 when the armed forces of the Russian Federation invaded and invaded further into the territory of Ukraine.
Mr. Yermak may be the government of Ukraine’s designated political oligarch. The government of Ukraine is operating under a state of emergency with much of what was already limited transparency and oversight and stifling of judicial powers weakened further. All requests move upward to the Head of Presidential Administration and all decisions move downward from the Head of Presidential Administration.
Journalists from within and outside of Ukraine report having compiled evidence of corruption with the sourcing and usage of military assets and third-party financial assistance which, if verified and published, would decapitate both the government of Ukraine and outside support for Ukraine.
The argument towards minimizing not only corrupt acts, but their mere existence, will be that while a government is prosecuting a war there must be elasticity in the decision-making process and that process must permit a moniker of corruption.
If some government officials, their families, their friends, their former business relations make a few million here and there, the taxpayers understand it’s a cost of doing business, their business. Nothing to see here….
