Volodymyr Zelensky’s failed attempt to subordinate Ukraine’s anti-corruption organs to his prosecutor general’s office has drawn widespread Western criticism. Just weeks earlier, accusations of authoritarian consolidation, opposition attacks, and crony cover-ups would hardly surface in Western discourse beyond stigmatized circles of “Russian propagandists,” “tankies,” or MAGA supporters.
Now many influential international publications are interpreting the crackdown as an attempt to disrupt investigations into Zelensky’s inner circle. The EU unprecedentedly even cut its wartime financial aid. In the most significant protest since the imposition of martial law in 2022, thousands of Ukrainians, primarily young people, demonstrated against the new law, which could remove the independence of two key anti-corruption bodies.
The July escalation included the persecution of prominent “anti-corruption civil society” figures and even the detention of anti-corruption detectives as alleged Russian collaborators. Legislation was rapidly passed removing the independence of the anti-corruption organs, which were then withdrawn equally rapidly the following week under both EU and public pressure.
However, contrary to the mainstream narrative, this represents neither a clash between “Zelensky’s authoritarianism” and “Ukrainian robust civil society” nor any proof of Ukrainian democracy’s “resilience.”
The episode exposed three fundamental problems with the dominant Western interpretation of the Russia-Ukraine war. First, it shows just how selective the supposed concern over authoritarian and repressive trends in Ukrainian politics really is, with the latest developments troubling neither Ukrainian “civil society” nor…
Auteur: Volodymyr Ishchenko
