The Myth of "Ubiquitous Corruption"
One of the most frequently repeated claims in Russian propaganda is: "Ukraine is absolutely corrupt, everything is embezzled, the state does not function." The formulation is intentionally absolute — without exceptions, without dynamics, without comparisons.
However, the very framing of the issue is manipulative. Corruption is not a binary state ("present / absent") but a measurable and comparable indicator, which directly depends on the presence of control institutions, press freedom, and active civil society.
Why Scandals Indicate a Functioning System
In Ukraine, corruption scandals become public not because "everything is stolen," but because they are detected, investigated, and discussed.
Since 2015, the country has established and operated:
- the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU);
- the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO);
- the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC);
- an electronic asset declaration system.
The existence of these institutions explains why cases against ministers, MPs, and officials become public — in authoritarian systems such cases simply do not arise.
What International Indexes Show
International organizations track trends, not propaganda clichés. According to Transparency International, Ukraine has shown steady improvement in the Corruption Perceptions Index since 2014.
The World Bank and IMF note progress in public procurement transparency, financial control, and digital governance (World Bank, IMF).
Absolute corruption implies a lack of independent investigations, courts, and press. Ukraine meets the opposite criteria.
Comparison with Russia
For contrast, propaganda often uses a false comparison: "Russia is also fighting corruption." But in Russia, there are no:
- independent anti-corruption courts;
- genuine investigations into high-level corruption;
- free media able to publish investigations without repression.
The World Bank and OECD note chronic opacity in Russian public finances, and corruption is systemic and opaque, without resulting in institutional reforms.
The Logical Fallacy of Propaganda
The claim "everything is embezzled" is an example of total generalization. It ignores:
- digitalization of public services (Diia);
- transparent electronic procurement (ProZorro);
- civil and journalistic oversight;
- judicial proceedings against corrupt officials.
In democratic systems, corruption is visible precisely because it is being fought. In authoritarian systems, it is hidden.
Why This Myth Is Used
The myth of "absolute corruption" serves a foreign policy function:
- to discredit Ukraine as an EU partner;
- to justify aggression and interference;
- to impose the image of a "failed state";
- to demotivate Ukrainian society.
However, the existence of reforms, investigations, and public pressure makes this myth untenable.
Conclusion
Corruption exists in Ukraine — as in any country in the world. But it is not "absolute," "total," or "incurable."
On the contrary: Ukraine demonstrates a rare post-Soviet example of institutional anti-corruption efforts with active public participation. The propaganda myth serves not analysis, but the justification of lies, aggression, and fear.
Main Sources and Materials
- Transparency International: Corruption Perceptions Index
- World Bank: Ukraine Overview
- OECD: Anti-Corruption Review Ukraine
- IMF: Ukraine Country Reports
- EU reports on anti-corruption criteria implementation
About the Authors
This article was curated and verified by a team of experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical analysis. Contributors have 15+ years of experience in research, legal documentation, and educational content development.
Methodology
The content on this site is compiled and verified by experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical research. Sources include official legal documents, national and international legislation, resolutions of the UN, reports from international organizations, and verified open-source evidence. Each claim is cross-checked against multiple primary and secondary sources, ensuring accuracy, neutrality, and reliability regardless of the topic—whether analyzing violations of Russian law, Ukrainian law, or international legal norms.
Expert Statement
The authors affirm that the information presented reflects established legal interpretations and documented facts. Analyses are grounded in international law principles and widely recognized geopolitical assessments. References to official documents and reports are provided to ensure transparency and trustworthiness.
Last modified date: 25/11/2025