By equating corruption to treason, Zelenskyy’s office is manipulating the public’s desire for justice, said Vitaly Shabunin, head of the Anti-Corruption Action Center (Antac), a Ukrainian nongovernmental organization that monitors graft. In reality, Shabunin added, Zelenskyy’s office is pursuing other goals: to protect high-level officials from corruption charges and obtain tools to destroy opponents.
OP is known tankie just fyi. Doesn’t justify US or Ukrainian actions but make sure you understand that the reason for posting this isn’t out of any actual concern for human beings. They’re also peddling covid conspiracies
Thank you. I hate tankies.
I’ve heard this term on Lemmy and pretty much nowhere else. What is a tankie?
Authoritarian communist, it can be hard to pin down what they stand for, because they aren’t clear on much except, “death to America”, and a hatred of capitalism (understandable tbh). They tend to be pro-Russia and pro-China.
I’ve heard the term a while, but lemmy is the first time I actually interacted with any.
It’s such a broken mindset. They just want to trade one set of chains for another. China and Russia aren’t even communist anymore. They are both capitalist with totalitarian characteristics.
Huh, TIL. Thanks!
This user has posted this same comment in multiple threads. Clearly they have an agenda or something.
Bad faith personal attacks clearly are a sign of “concern for human beings,” we could all learn from you.
“I know you are but what am I”
Tankies really have no coherent arguments
Interesting.
Ukraine is known for thorough corruption at many levels of government. Zelenskyy first got elected for that reason- he was originally an actor who starred in a movie about a politician who decided to end corruption. He then ran for office on that platform and won. But when the system is thoroughly corrupt through and through, fixing it is not an overnight process.
My initial thought is perhaps this anti-corruption unit is itself corrupt, so it’s making up an excuse to justify its own existence.
As for high profile corruption being swept under the rug- what I know of Zelenskyy suggests he would be less likely to turn a blind eye to that. I could of course be wrong though. And I suspect if he brings a high profile treason corruption case against a few well known people and has them jailed or shot for treason, that will send a very strong message to the rest that this isn’t tolerated anymore.
That will of course put a target on Zelenskyy’s back, but that’s always been the case (especially since Russia invaded).Razor. Dude didn’t take the treasury and a US Uber at the start of the war but signed up for the hard stuff of leading the country.
This simple miscalculation in character cost Putine everything.
Whatever draft dodgers like Trump are accusing him of - the reality remains, he did not run and instead bailed western balls to the wall to give his country what it needs to beat the vatniks
Yes exactly. And that’s why I don’t jump to the assumption that Zelenskyy himself is corrupt or he is covering for the corruption of others.
A dude that would tolerate corruption doesn’t say ‘I need ammunition not a ride’. He could have bailed at any point, still could. But he shows no signs of losing resolve.
If Zelenskyy is trying to keep inner circle corruption private to avoid public spectacle, I suspect that whoever is found guilty will probably end up wishing they were arrested publicly rather than dealing with the security service.TF are you talking about “Vatnik”?
Are you asking for google education?
My initial thought is perhaps this anti-corruption unit is itself corrupt, so it’s making up an excuse to justify its own existence.
Can you clarify on the logic of this? I’m not sure I get it.
Absolutely!
I find in life it’s generally useful to not take things at face value, rather, ask what set of situations and motivations would make people say and do the things they are saying and doing? Asking that question a lot about a person and looking at a lot of their words and actions tells you an awful lot about a person, taking people you know at least something about and asking that about how they are acting tells you a lot more about that situation than you’d get at first glance.
So here we have Zelenskyy, a person elected on a platform of fighting corruption, and an anti-corruption unit whose official assigned mission is to find corruption and root it out and punish the corrupt. That SHOULD make them allies if not friends. And yet, Zelenskyy has just transferred the bulk of their mission away from them, to the security service. He’s also elevated the level of crime that corruption is classified as, and thus also the level of investigation and punishment it would carry.
So I ask, why would he do such a thing? Why would an anti-corruption President transfer anti-corruption activities away from the anti-corruption unit and to the security service? What is the motivation for this action?
And why does the anti-corruption unit respond with such a serious accusation (that the motivation is to cover up corruption of the inner circle)?So let’s start with the first question- why did this change happen?
The most obvious answer to me is that Zelenskyy feels the anti-corruption unit is not doing their job well enough. Specifically, if corruption has infiltrated many levels of UA government, that he may feel the anti-corruption unit is itself corrupt, or that they are otherwise ineffective and are not finding enough corruption fast enough. So he gives the job to an agency that 1. has no history of dealing with corruption and thus potentially is less likely to itself be corrupt, and 2. has very sharp teeth as it is used to dealing with much worse things than domestic corruption. And he gives them the order to bite hard- by framing corrupt government officials as traitors and ordering them charged accordingly, the security service has a real mission that they will take seriously and assign good agents to.And then, why does the anti-corruption unit speak out in this way?
Well they obviously don’t like losing stature, and perhaps they are just pissed off at potentially losing their jobs. So it could be plain old revenge- throw some accusations at the President who spat in their faces. But this feels a bit sharper than that. They didn’t just say this was a bad idea (‘why are you benching the most talented anti-corruption agents in such a critical time?’), they are throwing a specific accusation (‘this is only happening so corruption of the inner circle can avoid being publicized’). That’s a pretty strong accusation.
So I look at these questions, and ask what situation would cause both Zelenskyy’s action and the anti-corruption unit’s accusation in response? I come up with two possible answers.
-
The most likely one to me seems that the anti-corruption unit is either itself corrupt or is generally ineffective, and thus Zelenskyy is unhappy with them and that’s why they are losing the assignment. And so they fight back hard, probably because (if they are corrupt) they know the security service will find that out, so they want to at least muddy the water first and make the whole process seem politically-motivated and itself corrupt. That way when they are themselves accused of corruption, they can claim it’s for political reasons, not because they are actually corrupt.
-
The other possibility is that their accusation is valid- that this change IS intended to cover up inner circle corruption or deal with it more quietly. And that possibility has three sub-possibilities.
2a. Choice A is that Zelenskyy is only acting on the advice of corrupt advisors, who are feeling heat from the anti-corruption unit and have persuaded Zelenskyy to transfer anti-corruption activities away from a unit that is hot on their tails. They feel they can better control the security service and direct them away from their own corruption, so they advise Zelenskyy to do this and he does it because he is focused on the war with Russia and mistakenly trusts those advisors who are themselves corrupt.
2b. Choice B is that Zelenskyy has identified corruption within his inner circle and needs it dealt with strongly, quickly, and quietly- without creating a public situation that can be exploited by Russia or his political opponents (who may themselves have Russian influence). So he DOES want the security service to deal with Cabinet-level corruption quietly as is being accused, but that won’t result in the guilty being punished any less harshly.
2c. Choice C is the least likely IMHO- that Zelenskyy himself is corrupt, or has decided to allow or tolerate a certain amount of corruption within his cabinet, perhaps from corrupt people who have proven themselves useful in some other way.
So of those 4 choice, choice 1 and choice 2b seem the most likely to me. And given that this anti-corruption unit has been working at their mission for years and there’s still tons of corruption in UA, that says to me they are probably not very good at their jobs. Thus, I advance Choice 1 as the most likely option.
Thank you for taking the time to write out your explanation and analysis! Very well put!
Most welcome :)
-
What do you know about Zelensky? Did he slide into your DM? Seriously, you know exactly what everyone else knows about Zelensky… and also ignore his appearance in the Pandora papers.
Lol
Ukraine has been known as corruption-country in europe for years.
This is a good thing
Ok, since the title and summary really don’t explain at all what the problem is, I think those two paragraphs are much better:
Two senior officials following the proposal, who were granted anonymity to speak candidly, say concerns are growing within Ukraine’s anti-graft agencies that Zelenskyy’s plan will take top corruption cases away from their oversight and pass them to the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), which falls under the president’s command.
The SBU could, potentially, have the power to bury corruption cases involving top officials. The move, the officials say, could put Ukraine’s anti-corruption infrastructure under threat, and anti-corruption watchdogs are sounding the alarm.
But Politico, owned by very agenda-driven Axel Springer SE are hardly an unbiased an neutral news source these days.
Some of what they write here is not very consistent:As journalists and anti-graft organs start to uncover more alleged corruption schemes during the first months of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion which began in February 2022, Zelenskyy thinks those days were so tough that officials should be cut some slack.
“February and March 2022 — it was a fight for the existence of Ukraine. If I see the corruption cases dated that time, I demand solid evidence. If there is one [evidence], the guilty must be punished by court, not public opinion,” Zelenskyy said in a televised interview. “As for my idea of equating corruption to state treason during wartime, I think it will be a very serious instrument to make them not even think about it [corruption].”
How does “I want solid evidence and then I want it to be counted as treason” equate to cutting someone some slack?
