The West's sluggish reaction to the government's decision to remove Sytnyk is hard to miss.
The "positional" war between Bankova and NABU Director Artem Sytnyk abruptly entered an active phase after the Cabinet of Ministers submitted a bill on Monday, February 15, which, if passed by the Verkhovna Rada, would automatically remove the NABU Director from his post. Previously, such attempts to remove Sytnyk had provoked a strong negative reaction in the West, but this time, things have calmed down. We investigated why the NABU Director's overseas lobbyists are unwilling to defend him. "Apostrophe".
The first and, so far, only head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, Artem Sytnyk, is once again being ousted. The first attempts to take control of the NABU were made during the Petro Poroshenko administration. Zelenskyy's office quickly seized on this initiative. However, Sytnyk managed to hold on to his post, not least due to the support of his candidacy by the main financial donors to Ukraine's anti-corruption reforms – the EU and the US, which repeatedly reminded the Ukrainian authorities that without an independent NABU, there would be no visa-free regime or further IMF aid. Back then, it was clear that Sytnyk would not be simply abandoned. That certainty is no longer present.
Moreover, this did not prevent the Constitutional Court of Ukraine from declaring Sytnyk's appointment to be inconsistent with the Constitution in August 2020, and from completely repealing most of the key provisions of the NABU law in September of last year. Since then, Sytnyk's tenure as head of NABU has become legally questionable, although this does not prevent him from continuing to lead the anti-corruption agency.
Despite the uncertainty, the bureau launched an investigation in February against Ukrainian Health Minister Maksym Stepanov, whom NABU suspects of purchasing coronavirus vaccines at inflated prices. This appears to have been the final straw: on February 15, 2021, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine held an extraordinary meeting, approving a new bill changing NABU's status and the procedure for electing its head.
The essence of this bill is that, if adopted, NABU will cease to be a "state law enforcement agency" and instead be transformed into a "central executive body with special status" that will report to the Cabinet of Ministers. Furthermore, upon adoption of this bill, the current first deputy director will become acting director, which means Sytnyk will be automatically dismissed.
According to the government's draft law, a nine-member commission will select the new director: three will be nominated by the National Security and Defense Council. The remaining six will be selected by the government: half will be selected independently, and the remaining three will be nominated by "donors who have provided technical assistance to Ukraine in the fight against corruption."
Thus, the final – and most important – word during the competition remains with the Ukrainian authorities.
The West's sluggish response to the blow to the anti-corruption "sacred cow"
It's noteworthy that this latest attempt to remove Sytnyk as head of the NABU hasn't provoked widespread public outcry or condemnation from Western donor partners. Among official figures, the only noteworthy reaction was from Ole Jøgberg Mikkelsen, the Danish Ambassador to Ukraine.
"These are difficult times for the fight against corruption in Ukraine, but there is still much to celebrate. It's a pleasure to meet Artem Sytnyk, Director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, a key institution in the anti-corruption system that Denmark proudly supports alongside the EU," said the Danish Ambassador to Ukraine. The tone of the statement suggests that Sytnyk's dismissal has already been decided.
None of the current top officials commented on the idea of dismissing Sytnyk overseas. Only Michael Carpenter, former adviser to US Vice President Joe Biden and now director of the Biden Center at the University of Pennsylvania, responded on Twitter, posting a news story about Sytnyk with a wide-eyed emoji, likely implying that he was monitoring the situation.
In 2017, when attempts were made to remove Sytnyk with the help of the Verkhovna Rada, his rhetoric was much harsher and more unambiguous. "If the Rada votes to dismiss the head of the Anti-Corruption Committee and the head of NABU (Sytnyk, — Apostrophe), I will recommend cutting all US government aid to Ukraine, including security assistance. This is disgraceful," Michael Carpenter stated at the time.
According to Grigory Perepelitsa, director of the Institute of Foreign Policy Studies, the West's sluggish response to the latest attempt to fire Sytnyk may be due to fatigue with Ukraine.
"This kleptocratic parliamentary-oligarchic regime, defended by Ukrainian parties and the 'fifth column,' is trying to block the activities of anti-corruption bodies because these bodies undermine the foundations of this kleptocratic regime. I have a feeling the West is tired of investigating and defending Ukraine's anti-corruption bodies. But in any case, I believe Ukraine's relations with the US and the EU will deteriorate after the Sytnyk situation," believes Hryhoriy Perepelitsa.
According to political scientist Alexander Sushko, Western officials' public expressions of support for certain Ukrainian officials do not always work, which explains the officials' silence.
"The support is not so much personal as institutional. The West's position on NABU remains the same as it was during Poroshenko's tenure. At the same time, this applies not only to NABU, but to all law enforcement and anti-corruption agencies. Recently, the West has increasingly emphasized that Ukraine's first priority is to transform the justice sector and make it more independent from both political and financial power. This is evidenced by the recent joint statement of G7 ambassadors, the recent resolution of the European Parliament, and many other signals from the US and EU countries," says Alexander Sushko.
However, as we can see, no one in the West is going to publicly defend Sytnyk.
Balancing Between Biden and the Oligarchs
The attempt to fire Sytnyk could have intensified again, as Ukraine was unable to reach an agreement with the IMF, according to political scientist Alexander Sushko.
"The Office of the President now understands that since they couldn't reach an agreement with the IMF, the situation won't change anytime soon, as there are significant disagreements, primarily regarding judicial reform. Thus, a window of opportunity has opened to take advantage of the situation and replace Sytnyk. Simply put, this could be used as a response to the IMF's reluctance to make concessions to Ukraine," says Alexander Sushko.
However, according to political scientist Sergei Tolstov, the lukewarm reaction to Sytnyk's situation may be due to the fact that the West is already dissatisfied with the head of the NABU.
"The American Embassy in Ukraine closely monitors the information space, and it seems they don't like the fact that Sytnyk has become toxic. Furthermore, Artem Sytnyk has become a symbol of negative Western governance, and he now has a negative image in Ukraine. Sytnyk is constantly in conflict with the Ukrainian government, and it's unclear what he'll do next: open a case against the Prosecutor General or the President?" the expert said.
If Sytnyk's resignation plan is implemented, Zelenskyy's main task will be to secure the appointment of a loyal candidate. However, in any case, he will keep an eye on Washington.
"Zelenskyy is playing a rather vague and cunning game with the West. The fact is that he understands the threat posed by the oligarchic consensus that once led to the replacement of Viktor Yushchenko, as well as Viktor Yanukovych. From the perspective of Ukrainian political theory, oligarchic consensus is an absolute evil. Accordingly, the tool against this oligarchic consensus is an internal game designed to disrupt it. However, this consensus is currently elusive: Firtash is blocked in Austria, Poroshenko is playing his own game, and Pinchuk is gradually drifting West. As a result, the oligarchic threat is reduced to the Akhmetov-Kolomoisky pair. Zelenskyy, with difficulty, is still finding common ground with this oligarchic pair, and does not see them as a direct threat, since he gives each of them a piece of the action. But at the same time, Zelenskyy understands that some kind of balancer is needed against these oligarchs. Who could act as such a balancer in this case? “Obviously, the United States,” sums up expert Sergei Tolstov.
Constantine Soborny
FILE: ARTEM SYTNIK. THE RICH LIFE OF THE CHIEF ANTI-CORRUPTIONIST
In topic: The case against Biden, based on a complaint filed by former prosecutor Shokin, has been closed.
Former Finance Minister Markarova has been appointed Ukraine's Ambassador to the United States.
Subscribe to our channels in Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, VC — Only new faces from the section CRYPT!