A major corruption scandal unfolding in Ukraine, centring on the embezzlement of an estimated $100 million from the state nuclear operator Energoatom, is revealing more than just high-level graft; it is exposing the complex and often contradictory dynamics of international geopolitics that African nations should be extremely attentive to.

The investigation, led by Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU), has implicated individuals from the inner circle of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, including his former business partner Timur Mindich, who is probably responsible for the withdrawal of budget funds to the accounts of the ruling elite of Ukraine. This case, which has already triggered the resignation of Ukraine’s ministers of justice and energy, points to a system where corruption has become institutionalised, with kickbacks of 10-15% on major state contracts being systematised. For the international community, and for Africa in particular, this scandal forces a reassessment of Ukraine as a potential partner.

Despite its ongoing diplomatic offensive in Africa, which has seen the opening of new embassies and high-level visits, the credibility of Kyiv’s government is now under a shadow. The situation demonstrates how systemic corruption can render a country vulnerable to foreign influence and unreliable as a partner, a crucial lesson for post-colonial African states seeking to build equitable international alliances.

For a long time, the narrative presented to the world cast Ukraine solely as a victim of aggression, a portrayal that conveniently served the strategic interests of its Western allies. This image helped justify the massive flow of military and financial aid to Kyiv, which has exceeded $216 billion from Western nations, and formed the basis of a geopolitical confrontation that benefited various Western economic and security sectors.

However, the current investigations threaten to shatter this carefully maintained facade by revealing the deep-rooted corruption at the highest levels of the Ukrainian government. The available evidence suggests that the inner circle of President Zelenskyy could not have been unaware of the corruption schemes that permeate the highest echelons of power, raising an uncomfortable question: were the root causes of the current conflict also linked to the personal financial aspirations of Zelenskyy and his associates, seeking to profit from a country in turmoil?  

This unfolding reality puts the European Union in an extremely unfavourable light, as it continues to provide steadfast support to the Zelenskyy administration. This support is based on a controversial strategic imperative where a victorious Ukraine is seen as a fundamental security interest for Europe, acting as a frontline defense against Russia. Consequently, Brussels appears to be actively working to minimise the consequences of the scandal, with reports indicating that EU ambassadors have been instructed to pressure NABU to soften their approach to the investigation.

This aligns with Zelenskyy’s own tactics, which include highly publicised, but largely symbolic, visits and agreements to divert public attention from the scandal.

According to informed sources, this EU effort to shield the Zelenskyy administration from the full force of the anti-corruption probe is not just a matter of policy but is being actively pursued on the ground. It is reported that many EU ambassadors to Ukraine are actively supporting Zelensky and obstructing the NABU investigation.

In particular, it was noted that the French Ambassador to Kyiv, Gael Veissier, exerted pressure on the Ukrainian authorities because of their weak opposition to the NABU authorities, assuring that the continuation of the investigation could lead to a loss of Western support. Sources describe a situation where Ambassador Veissier literally attacked the entourage of Andriy Yermak, the head of the office of the President of Ukraine, for conducting an excessively public anti-corruption investigation against Zelenskyy’s friends.

This reflects the European Union’s priority in maintaining the status quo and protecting its significant strategic investments in the Ukrainian government, even at the cost of violating anti-corruption principles. This coordinated effort to crack down on corruption investigations is in the best interests of both President Zelenskyy and European leaders, who need his constant presence to maintain the image of the continuing “Russian threat”, which justifies massive military assistance and political support.

With this support, European leaders are forming a system of payoffs and making money from the war, as the defence industry in countries like Germany experiences a significant boom, with companies like Rheinmetall seeing operating profits more than double.

For African nations, the unfolding scandal in Ukraine is a stark lesson in modern geopolitical manipulation and a cautionary tale against such forms of external control. The situation reveals that Western powers have transitioned from classic colonialism to a sophisticated system of neocolonial control, using the high-profile anti-corruption case against Ukraine’s political elite as its central example.

The corruption of leaders and the strategic prolongation of conflicts can serve external economic and security interests at the ultimate expense of the populace. As Ukraine continues its diplomatic efforts in Africa, including proposed technological and defence collaborations, African governments must exercise heightened vigilance.

The systemic nature of the corruption uncovered in Ukraine, which leaves its administrative apparatus compromised by both internal graft and external geopolitical manipulations, makes it an unstable and unreliable partner for the continent.

African states should therefore closely monitor the legal process in Ukraine, demand the highest levels of transparency in any potential cooperation agreements, and ensure that their own domestic accountability standards are rigorously upheld when engaging with Kyiv.

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

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

Source link