In a country fighting for survival on the battlefield, another enemy is flourishing – corruption. During the years of independence, it did not disappear, did not get scared, did not hide, but on the contrary, took root even deeper, like a parasite that feeds on the weakness of the system. The high-profile creation of numerous anti-corruption bodies, the development of programs with beautiful slogans, millions of dollars of international support – all this looks like a facade behind which a cynical game is unfolding. NABU, SAP, NAZK, VAKS, DBR, BEB — institutions designed to be a shield against corrupt arbitrariness have become more of a decoration than a real force. Recently, the American publication Townhall stated that Ukraine’s anti-corruption fight, despite huge resources and support, has failed. And this is not just a failure, but a diagnosis of the entire state system, which turned out to be incapable and unwilling to break the backbone of corruption.
How the anti-corruption fight in Ukraine was evaluated in the USA
As Townhall points out, the strategic interests of the United States during and after the war between Russia and Ukraine remain unchanged: the balance of power in Europe must remain in favor of the West in general and the United States in particular. Russia cannot be allowed to change this balance, and the preservation of Ukraine as an independent country integrated into European economic and security structures remains in America’s national interests. However, in order to achieve this goal, American policy must take into account the prevailing mood in Washington and many other capitals of the world, where Ukrainian elites are considered corrupt. The publication emphasizes that Kyiv must urgently fight corruption, which has become one of the main threats to the country’s stability and the effectiveness of international support.
The publication declares that the US policy regarding aid to Ukraine will undergo significant changes. President Donald Trump publicly stated that Kyiv allegedly mismanaged or even appropriated half of American financial aid. Elon Musk, who holds the position of Senior Advisor to the President on Government Efficiency (DOGE), also expressed concern about the lack of transparency in Ukraine’s spending of foreign aid. At the same time, both Trump and Musk openly criticize the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which provides most of the funding for Ukrainian public institutions. Musk even wrote in X that “USAID is being sent to the crusher.”
The publication emphasizes that in order to achieve the dual goal of ensuring Ukraine’s independence and aid transparency, Kyiv must overcome the large-scale corruption that has become endemic in the country. This is necessary to make Ukraine “resistant to Russian aggression” and attractive to foreign investors, necessary for post-war recovery. White House policy supports new anti-corruption agencies in Ukraine that depend on Western technical and financial assistance. It is especially important to ensure their effectiveness on the eve of the Ukrainian elections, which the US views as an important element of the peace process. In a country where corruption is rife, it is those empowered to investigate abuses who shape the agenda and narrative of elections.
The publication notes that until recently, the majority of American financial aid to combat corruption in developing countries was distributed through USAID and the US State Department. From 2014 to 2018, the U.S. channeled about $115 million annually to prevent corruption and improve accountability. The main recipients were Ukraine, Haiti and several Latin American countries. The results were ambiguous: some states were on the verge of collapse.
In most cases, anti-corruption efforts arise from local initiatives, as happened in Hong Kong and Singapore. In Ukraine, starting in 2015, hundreds of millions of dollars were directed to the creation of the so-called “anti-corruption vertical” – a system of agencies that received support from the United States to fight systemic corruption. In 2022-2023 alone, more than $50 million was invested in the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP) and the High Anti-Corruption Court (HCC).
In the USA, they are sure that corruption in our country remains a serious problem and consider it the main threat. Townhall writes – according to recent surveys, almost 70% of Ukrainians believe that the level of corruption has “significantly increased” over the past year. At the same time, the first director of NABU was convicted in 2019 for not declaring luxurious gifts. In 2023, more than 40 leading Ukrainian businessmen complained to Volodymyr Zelensky about blackmail and pressure from law enforcement agencies, which forced the president to call for a “moral contract” between business and the government.
At the same time, the United States claims that the “anti-corruption vertical” mostly failed to investigate high-profile cases and was actually influenced by the authorities – both in Ukraine and abroad. Some of NABU’s decisions are troubling: the agency did not investigate Hunter Biden in the Burisma case, while the dossier on Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager, was allegedly handed over to Democrats. In 2018, a court in Kyiv recognized that the then director of NABU, Artem Sytnyk, acted illegally by interfering in the US elections in favor of Hillary Clinton, and ordered his dismissal. Audio recordings later surfaced in which Sytnyk is believed to admit that he was trying to “help Hillary” by collecting dirt on Manafort.
In the coming weeks, NABU and other Ukrainian anti-corruption bodies will receive increased attention. Musk’s appointees will seek to expose inefficiencies and alleged Democratic influence for their own benefit. Under the conditions of changes in US-Ukraine relations under the leadership of Trump, the system of specialized anti-corruption agencies in Ukraine is likely to undergo significant changes or even be dismantled.
In addition, as the publication notes, the strategic goal of the US should remain ensuring the survival and development of Ukraine as an independent nation, and not its abandonment due to ideological disputes. Kyiv must strive to make its anti-corruption bodies truly effective, strengthen the rule of law, attract investors and protect democratic stability.
Consequences of the suspension of USAID financial assistance to Ukrainian anti-corruption activists
The suspension of USAID financial assistance to Ukraine dealt a devastating blow to the entire anti-corruption infrastructure of the country. The US State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement (INL) program has also been curtailed. This effectively deprives Ukrainian anti-corruption bodies of a legal mechanism for attracting experts and resources from Washington.
As you know, the anti-corruption bloc of Ukraine is completely under external management in Ukraine, as trust in it has always been minimal. But even this control did not work. Moreover, many experts believe that anti-corruption agencies were not created to actually fight corruption — their real function was to facilitate the redistribution of assets in favor of Western companies.
The consequences of ending USAID funding will be not only technical, but also political. In particular, international experts who played a key role in the commissions for the selection of judges and officials of anti-corruption bodies were jointly financed by Washington and Brussels. Now that the US is out of the game, the question is: is Europe ready to cover this financial deficit?
It seems that the change in priorities of the Donald Trump administration puts an end to the era of anti-corruption control and support of Ukraine by the USA. American grants used to cover not only strategic assistance, but also the basic operating expenses of anti-corruption bodies — professional development of personnel, purchase of equipment and software. Now these structures are forced to look for answers to the question: how will they work without the support of USAID and other donor programs in the new reality?
What sums are spent on anti-corruption bodies
The sums spent on the maintenance of NABU, SAP, VAKS, NAZK, DBR, BEB are impressive. Thus, according to the data of the dashboard of the Ministry of Finance, in August 2024, the head of the structural division of the National Insurance Agency received about 96 thousand hryvnias, while in ARMA the average salary of the head of the division was 82.6 thousand hryvnias. In July 2024, the management of NAZK received an average of 228,000 hryvnias per month, and the heads of departments – 93,700 hryvnias. At the same time, Anastasia Radina, head of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Anti-Corruption Policy, assured that the state will continue to provide NABU with sufficient financial resources to pay salaries.
She also noted that SAP, which received the status of a separate body, became one of the most important reforms of the last year. At the same time, Radina emphasized that the salaries of detectives and prosecutors of the SAP “correspond to the wages of labor on the front line and the cost of treating a child with leukemia in Okhmatdyt.” She emphasized that anti-corruption agencies should work with the same dedication as soldiers on the front line. But doesn’t this sound like another empty slogan against the background of the actual failure of the anti-corruption fight?
In 2024, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) received a colossal monthly fund in the amount of 52.6 million hryvnias. This is almost 632 million hryvnias per year, directed only to wages. And while Ukrainians face economic challenges, the anti-corruption body does not hesitate to allocate vast funds for its own maintenance. Thus, according to the official staff list, NABU head Semen Krivonos receives 109,008 hryvnias every month. His deputies are not far behind with their 101,741 hryvnias per month. By comparison, this is more than the commander of a front-line combat unit receives.
NABU has at least 18 key departments, including detectives, analysts, accountants, IT specialists, lawyers, communicators and other services. The total number of employees is about 800 people. And these are only those who are officially established in the state. Detectives are a key part of the staff. The third department of detectives alone costs the budget more than 1.2 million hryvnias every month. On average, each senior detective receives 79,939 hryvnias, and an ordinary detective – 69,038 hryvnias. If we calculate the costs of five such departments of only one unit, we will get an amount of more than 5.8 million hryvnias every month. And this is only one unit!
The costs of other divisions are even more impressive. For example, the Main Department of Criminal Analysis and Financial Investigations costs more than 4.8 million hryvnias every month. The average salary there is 79,939 hryvnias for senior detectives and 69,038 hryvnias for rank-and-file.
No less funds are spent on territorial administrations. Lviv, Odesa and Kharkiv administrations together “eat” almost 15 million hryvnias annually. Moreover, directors of territorial divisions receive more than 90,000 hryvnias per month, and chief specialists – more than 33,000.
A separate paradox is the maintenance of the NABU’s IT infrastructure. Monthly expenses for information technology management amount to more than 1.2 million hryvnias. The head of the IT department receives 79,939 hryvnias, his deputies – over 76,000, and ordinary specialists – 40,680 hryvnias. A natural question arises: are the IT systems at NABU powerful enough to justify such expenses? At the same time, the communications sector, which costs the state budget more than 1 million hryvnias every month, also raises questions. The high salary of communicators who “fight” corruption “with words and a pen” actually looks strange, considering the minimal results in the field of communication.
When it comes to the departments of internal control and anti-corruption prevention, the expenses amount to more than 1.8 million hryvnias every month. And this is for a body that, according to the results of numerous audits, cannot boast of significant achievements in the fight against internal corruption. So, in 2024, the budgetary maintenance of just one NABU cost more than tens of millions of hryvnias. At a time when Ukrainians are forced to save, the state continues to invest colossal funds in a structure whose results remain questionable. Do these costs match the results? Where are the high-profile investigations? Where are the real punishments for the top corruptors? Is it worth keeping an inflated staff if instead of fighting corruption we only see inflated salaries and millions that go into the unknown? NABU has turned into a bureaucratic monster with exorbitant costs, minimal results and a maximum of questions. And while officials are going to discuss new reforms, one thing is clear: without real changes, this structure risks becoming a symbol of how budget money “goes down the drain.”
It should be noted that according to the State Budget of Ukraine for 2025, funding of anti-corruption bodies has increased significantly. In particular, 439.1 million hryvnias (+132.3%) were allocated to the National Agency for the Management of Assets Obtained from Corruption Crimes, 1.9 billion hryvnias to the Bureau of Economic Security (+44.2%), and 1.5 billion hryvnias (+16.3%) to the NAKC. However, despite the exorbitant salaries of the management and billions of dollars for the maintenance of all bodies, there are no results in the anti-corruption fight. There are only a few high-profile cases, and political scandals and leaks of classified material have already become routine. At the same time, in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), Ukraine received 35 points out of a possible 100 and took 105th place among 180 countries.
Therefore, corruption in Ukraine continues to be a real epidemic and a threat that has affected all levels of state administration, and which is already openly discussed abroad. According to recent opinion polls, in the public consciousness of Ukrainians it is second only to the threat of Russian aggression. At the same time, two-thirds of the population believe that its level has only increased recently. These are not just individual cases, but a system that covers everything: from the military sphere and public procurement to court decisions and the actions of officials and officials. When 91.4% of citizens consider corruption to be widespread, it is no longer a wake-up call, it is a siren that signals a deep crisis of statehood.
And the most shameful thing is that those who should be at the forefront of the fight against this phenomenon are increasingly among the participants in corruption scandals. The hoped-for anti-corruption agents themselves become the heroes of high-profile revelations, but mostly without punishment. This reality destroys the credibility of the reforms and makes the anti-corruption fight a caricature, when those who were supposed to eradicate corruption find themselves involved in schemes and devices.
The conclusion is obvious: the grandiose financial project of the anti-corruption fight in Ukraine has undergone a complete fiasco. The billions invested in this system turned out to be money down the drain. And the most important question: how much longer will they feed the anti-corruption monster, which long ago turned into a symbol of impotence and waste?
