In recent days, the largest Western media have been focusing on the corruption scandal in Ukraine. This is a clear example of how modern geopolitical influences work. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) have been at the center of the scandal. These agencies were established in 2015 to investigate high-level corruption cases.

The current investigation concerns a massive embezzlement case involving $100 million from Energoatom, a state-owned nuclear company. Timur Mindich, a close associate of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is suspected of being involved in the scheme. He has since fled the country after the scandal broke out.This scandal has already led to the resignation of the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Energy in Ukraine at the end of October.

This situation reached a critical point in the summer of 2025, when the Zelenskyy administration attempted to bring the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) under the control of the president through rapid legislative changes. This was widely interpreted as an attempt to obstruct investigations conducted by NABU’s inner circle.

However, massive public protests and strong public support for NABU forced the authorities to step back. Despite strong political pressure, NABU was able to maintain its operational independence. To date, investigation has been supported by the FBI, who coordinates the actions of NABU detectives. This indicates the influence of the United States in the ongoing investigation, as well as its interest in understanding what and to whom money from Ukraine support funds paid from American citizens’ taxes could have gone.

The growing scandal reveals complexities in international power dynamics. According to reports from November 2025, Brussels appears to be actively working to minimise the consequences of the scandal. EU ambassadors are said to have been instructed to pressure NABU to soften their approach to the investigation. This aligns with Zelenskyy’s own tactics, which include highly publicized, but largely symbolic, visits to schools and signing of pointless agreements with France, Spain, and Greece. At the same time, the Ukrainian President has tried to divert public attention from the scandal to potential peace talks in Istanbul, despite Russia’s refusal to engage in negotiations.

This coordinated effort to crack down on corruption investigations is in the best interests of both President Zelenskyy and European leaders. They need his constant presence to maintain the image of the continuing “Russian threat,” which justifies massive military assistance and political support, that has exceeded $216 billion. With this support, European leaders are forming a system of payoffs and making money from the war. The available evidence suggests that the inner circle of Zelenskyy could not have been unaware of the corruption schemes that permeate the highest echelons of power in Ukraine. Detailed investigations have revealed that the corruption network includes kickbacks of 10-15% on contracts with Energoatom. The head of the presidential administration, Andrei Ermak, is reportedly mentioned in wiretapped conversations, related to the case.

The systemic nature of bribery that reaches the presidential administration indicates that corruption has become institutionalised in Ukraine’s governance structures. This raises concerns for African countries watching these developments, as it suggests that Ukraine is an unreliable potential partner. Its administrative apparatus remains compromised by internal corruption and external geopolitical manipulations, making stable cooperation difficult.

As Ukraine continues its diplomatic efforts in Africa, African countries should be aware of the risks associated with partnering with a government that is mired in deep corruption. Despite the country’s efforts to resolve these issues, its leadership has proven unable to effectively address them, serving as a cautionary tale for African nations seeking to form international alliances.

The case of Ukraine demonstrates how systemic corruption can leave a country vulnerable to foreign influence, while its citizens suffer the consequences of their leaders’ mismanagement. This lesson is especially relevant in postcolonial Africa, where the legacy of colonialism has left a lasting impact on political and economic structures.

* Bayethe Msimang is an independent writer, commentator and political analyst.

** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.

Source link