Fighting on Two Fronts: Ukraine’s High-Stakes War Against Wartime Corruption

While Ukraine fights to survive a protracted Russian invasion, it is also fighting a quiet, parallel war against the systemic corruption that has historically undermined its institutions and spoiled its image abroad.

Officials and analysts say that by aggressively targeting lawmakers, military procurement schemes, and state-owned enterprises, Ukrainian authorities are trying to send a signal to their own citizens as well as to the European Union: money cannot be wasted on corruption at a time when the army needs every cent, and that Brussels must see that even while fighting a war, Kyiv is progressing down the path toward European Union membership.

In recent weeks, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, known as NABU, and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, or SAPO, have announced several new cases. The agencies said on Tuesday that they have notified an official of Ukraine’s domestic intelligence agency, the Security Service of Ukraine, he is suspected of trying to arrange a $150,000 bribe to help return money seized during a search and close a criminal case.

Days earlier, NABU and SAPO said they had exposed an alleged scheme involving the embezzlement of armored vehicle parts by a deputy commander of a military unit in the Kharkiv region. They have also reported cases involving an alleged $1 million bribe for drone supplies, road repair corruption, and a suspected 170 million hryvnia energy-sector embezzlement scheme involving Energoatom, Ukraine’s state nuclear power company.

The most politically damaging case remains the so-called Operation Midas investigation, in which Ukrainian anti-corruption authorities alleged a $100 million kickback scheme linked to Energoatom. The case shook Kyiv because it touched the energy sector at a time when Russia was attacking Ukraine’s power grid and because people close to the president’s political circle were drawn into the investigation. Reuters reported that the scandal intensified pressure on Kyiv to show progress against corruption as it sought EU membership and Western financial support.

OCCRP has also reported on several Ukrainian corruption cases during the war, including an alleged $17 million military procurement scam, a $3.3 million fraud probe at Kharkivoblenergo, and the long-running “Golden Mandarin” case, in which investigators say suspects misled the European Court of Human Rights to siphon money from the Ukrainian state budget. Together, the cases show that wartime corruption in Ukraine is not limited to one sector: it reaches defense, energy, local infrastructure, courts, customs, and state-owned companies.

Yaroslav Zhelezniak, a Ukrainian lawmaker, told OCCRP that the fight against corruption is Ukraine’s “number one” issue in public opinion polls, because “every hryvnia stolen from the Ukrainian budget is a hryvnia stolen from the army.” He added that NABU is now doing “the most important work after the military,” helping Ukraine spend its resources more effectively and resist Russia.

Ukraine’s anti-corruption drive is also shaped by external pressure. On June 15, 2026, the EU and Ukraine opened accession negotiations on the so-called “fundamentals” cluster, which covers rule of law, fundamental rights, democratic institutions, public administration reform, and economic criteria. The Council of the EU said progress under this cluster “will determine the overall pace of negotiations.”

EU Ambassador to Ukraine Katarína Mathernová said in May that strengthening the rule of law “remains essential for Ukraine’s progress towards EU membership,” adding that the country had made significant progress in building anti-corruption institutions but that “important work still lies ahead.”

Ukraine’s National Agency on Corruption Prevention has also said the country’s draft Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2026–2030 is tied to its international legal obligations.

But there were attempts to slow down the progress. In July 2025, Ukraine’s parliament passed a law that critics said would undermine the independence of NABU and SAPO. OCCRP reported that the agencies warned the law would “destroy” Ukraine’s anti-corruption infrastructure. After rare wartime protests and pressure from European partners, Zelensky reversed course and signed a bill restoring the agencies’ independence, though legal experts later warned that some concerns remained.

Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, called corruption “an ally of our enemy,” arguing that it degrades state institutions and drains resources that should support Ukrainian soldiers or protect critical infrastructure. “During war, it is especially clear that corruption can kill,” she told OCCRP. “For us, this is a security issue, not only a question of justice.”

NABU and SAPO are crucial to fighting high-level political corruption because they were created in response to public demand that no one in Ukraine should be untouchable because of political privilege or office, Kaleniuk added.