On Monday, November 10th, Ukrainian anti-corruption agencies revealed that several of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s long-time associates and other members of the government were allegedly involved in taking roughly 100 million dollars in kickbacks from Ukraine’s energy sector, while millions of Ukrainians experience blackouts due to Russian attacks on infrastructure (Asadzade).
This news comes as Ukraine approaches almost 4 years in the Russo-Ukraine War and over 360 billion dollars in aid from 41 countries.
With winter quickly approaching, when temperatures regularly drop below -5 °F (-21.6 °C), and many families unable to afford generators, this case has sparked anger among Ukrainians and their allies (International Rescue Committee).
The current list of suspects includes Timur Mindich, a businessman and close ally of Zelenskyy, Justice Minister German Galushchenko, Oleksiy Chernyshov, a former deputy prime minister of Ukraine and a close ally of Zelenskyy who has been involved in a separate corruption scandal since the summer, Ihor Myroniuk, an ex-adviser to Galushchenko and former deputy head of the State Property Fund, and Dmytro Basov, former head of the Energoatom security department (POLITICO).
Currently, German Galushchenko and Energy Minister Svitlana Hyrnchuk have both resigned, while Timur Mindich has fled Ukraine.
This scandal threatens Ukrainian democracy from two angles. The first is undermining the trust of the EU, while Ukraine has rigorously pursued membership since Russia’s invasion. While the second is the furthering of political rifts within Ukraine itself.
In the European Commission’s yearly report of potential EU members–released before the corruption scandal–Ukraine is praised for the reforms made regarding public administration, democratic institutions, rule of law, and the rights of national minorities to meet EU standards. However, EU officials also noted problems with Zelenskyy’s push to end the independence of Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies–the same agencies that later exposed the energy kickback scandal. Due to intense criticism and the largest street protests since the beginning of the war, Zelenskyy quickly backed down from his push, yet the European Commission noted the lasting negative impact on the president’s credibility (Dickinson).
Now, facing the current scandal, Ukraine’s bid is under threat. EU membership requires strict rule-of-law, anti-corruption, and governance reforms as core accession conditions. Allegations of entrenched corruption in the energy sector signal weak institutional oversight and resistance from oligarchic networks–suggesting Ukraine is further from EU benchmarks than previously thought.
However, this is not the only perspective. One European Commission spokesperson said, “This investigation shows that anti-corruption bodies are in place and functioning in Ukraine.” And since the scandal, Zelenskyy promised “full transparency, long-term support for the independent anti-corruption authorities and quick further measures in order to win back the confidence of the Ukrainian population, European partners and international donors.” (Hockenos).
The future of Ukraine’s EU bid will largely depend on the government’s reaction to these charges and the following actions taken against corruption. However, this leads to the next danger of internal divisions that threaten democracy.
The political ramifications of the scandal have deepened, emerging fractures within Ukraine’s governing coalition, contributing to a broader shift towards polarization. The scandal exposes tensions between reform-oriented actors seeking institutional checks and those prioritizing executive cohesion during wartime. Several members of President Zelenskyy’s Servant of the People party have openly criticized the administration’s handling of the case and suggested creating a cross-party “coalition for national resilience.” Their call reflects growing concern that excessive centralization of power in the executive branch may have contributed to weak oversight mechanisms and enabled the alleged corruption. Civil society organizations and anti-corruption experts, already uneasy from Zelenskyy’s previous attempt to limit anti-corruption agencies, have renewed demands for transparent investigations and systemic reforms rather than limited resignations and replacements (Kramer). At the same time, Zelenskyy and other government officials have repeatedly emphasized the need for political unity, worrying that if Ukraine becomes politically divided, their international support may be at risk (Zelenskyy).
Additionally, polarization is not isolated to the government. On one side, many citizens–already facing blackouts, war, and economic strain–are furious, viewing the alleged kickbacks as a betrayal of public trust and an abuse of resources that the people of Ukraine are desperate for. On the other side, critics warn that the scandal may be weaponized for political ends and thretens governmental unity.
As investigators reveal more details about the extent of the alleged kickbacks and the involvement of high-level officials, public trust in government decision-making has continued to erode. During war, when social unity is essential to sustaining governance, these internal divisions risk hindering policy coordination and weakening consensus on the reform agenda central to Ukraine’s EU membership bid and overall democratic trajectory.
Looking ahead, the durability of Ukraine’s democratic institutions will depend on whether political leaders can convert this crisis into an opportunity for institutional renewal rather than partisan escalation. Sustained transparency, credible prosecutions, and stronger safeguards against executive overreach will be essential. Without these steps, the combined pressures of war, corruption, and polarization may pose a lethal threat to Ukraine’s democracy.
Asadzade, Ulviyya, and RFE/RL’s Ukrainian Service. “Left In The Dark: Ukrainians Facing Another Cold Winter As Russia Targets Energy Infrastructure.” RFE/RL, 16 Nov. 2025, www.rferl.org/a/ukrainians-brace-harsh-winter-energy-crisis-russian-attacks/33591917.html
Dickinson, Peter. “EU Praises Ukraine’s Progress but Warns Zelenskyy over Corruption.” Atlantic Council – UkraineAlert, 4 Nov. 2025, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/eu-praises-ukraines-progress-but-warns-zelenskyy-over-corruption/.
Hockenos, Paul. “Europe Is Selling Ukraine a Pipe Dream.” Foreign Policy, 18 Nov. 2025, https://foreignpolicy.com/2025/11/18/europe-ukraine-eu-pipe-dream-membership-corruption-zelensky/. Foreign Policy
Jayanti, Suriya Evans-Pritchard. “Zelenskyy Faces the Biggest Corruption Scandal of His Presidency.” Atlantic Council – UkraineAlert, 17 Nov. 2025, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/zelenskyy-faces-the-biggest-corruption-scandal-of-his-presidency/. Atlantic Council
Kramer, Andrew E. “Zelenskyy’s Image Is Stained as Corruption Inquiry Shakes His Inner Circle.” The New York Times, 19 Nov. 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/19/world/europe/ukraine-zelensky-corruption.html. Russia Matters+1
International Rescue Committee. “What Ukrainians need to survive winter.” The IRC, 6 Nov. 2023, www.rescue.org/article/what-ukrainians-need-survive-winter
“Єдність потрібна нам як ніколи, аби в нашому домі був досто …” President of Ukraine, 2025, https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/yednist-potribna-nam-yak-nikoli-abi-v-nashomu-domi-buv-dosto-101493
“The Ukraine corruption scandal explained: The $100M plot rocking Zelenskyy.” POLITICO Europe, 13 Nov. 2025, https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-corruption-scandal-explained-100m-plot-rocking-volodymyr-zelenskyy-energy-sector/
This post does a nice job laying out the dual threat Ukraine faces. That is, damaged EU credibility and internal polarization, but I think there’s an interesting tension here regarding corruption scandals that can actually be evidence of democratic health.
You mention that one EU spokesperson framed the investigation as proof that anti-corruption bodies are in place and functioning. This reflects a real insight about how we measure democratic resilience. Corruption has the ability to exist in every political system. What distinguishes democracies isn’t necessarily the absence of corruption, but whether institutions can expose and punish it. By that standard, the fact that Zelenskyy’s own allies are being investigated by independent agencies he previously tried to weaken is actually a significant sign of institutional strength.
This creates an interesting situation for how we evaluate Ukraine’s EU prospects. A country that successfully hides its corruption might look cleaner on paper than one whose independent institutions are actively rooting it out. If the EU penalizes Ukraine for scandals that only came to light because oversight mechanisms worked, it sends the wrong kind of signal that it is better to suppress investigations than allow them to succeed.
That said, you rightly highlight the polarization risk. Wartime conditions make this especially dangerous. But the alternative, using wartime unity as justification for suppressing accountability, would be far more damaging to democratic legitimacy in the long run.
Hi Ainsley! My first thought when reading your argument was how dangerous it could be for Ukraine to face political divide at a time when the country has experienced such devastation and turmoil. Ukraine has received hundreds of billions of dollars in funding from the EU, the United States, the United Kingdom, and more. In addition, Ukraine has received both humanitarian and military support from international powers. Nations have largely supported the efforts of Ukraine as an act of resistance to Russia’s undemocratic practices, and ultimately in an attempt to prevent the spread of autocracy outside of Russia.
So what happens when Ukraine itself engages in such undemocratic behaviors? What we do know is that the changing of leaders in the midst of active war is a risky act – one that can jeopardize Ukraine’s efforts and make them subject to seizure by Russia. As you mention, the well-being of Ukraine’s democratic institutions is now dependent on whether or not they can shift this crisis into an opportunity to reinstate their democratic norms. What you could expand on however, is what this looks like. How, particularly during a lengthy war, might Ukraine find ways to dedicate time and effort to its own institutions? Perhaps in the case of Ukraine, democratic reinforcement will have to be made with the assistance of outside nations and powers. In addition, what possible responses could outside powers have to Ukraine’s actions? Would it be feasible to remove funding and support from Ukraine, or does the fight against a greater autocratic force make this incident negligible? Otherwise, your post was incredibly well executed, and left me with few questions or considerations not mentioned in the post.