During the early stages of the conflict in Ukraine, when the Russian Army was closing in on the capital city of Kyiv, the Ukrainian government found itself in urgent need of weapons. In a surprising turn of events, they reached out to Serhiy Pashinsky for help. Pashinsky, a former lawmaker with a reputation for alleged corruption, was living in political exile at the time, having been sidelined by President Volodymyr Zelensky’s anti-corruption agenda.
Despite his tarnished image, Pashinsky had connections in the arms business and a knack for navigating bureaucratic obstacles. These qualities made him invaluable in the midst of war. He answered the call for help and, as a result, a company closely associated with him, Ukrainian Armored Technology, emerged as Ukraine’s leading private arms supplier. The company experienced a significant increase in sales, totaling over $350 million in the last year alone.
However, Pashinsky is once again under investigation by Ukrainian authorities. They are examining Ukrainian Armored Technology’s pricing and Pashinsky’s financial relationships with procurement officials and foreign companies. Recently, the intelligence service conducted a search of a state-owned company’s offices to gather evidence related to the ongoing investigation.
This situation reflects a lesser-known aspect of Ukraine’s war strategy. In their rush to arm the front lines, Ukrainian leaders have turned to figures from the country’s corrupt past and temporarily set aside anti-corruption policies. Suppliers who have previously cheated the military were no longer blacklisted, and transparency measures aimed at preventing self-dealing were abandoned. Paradoxically, this occurred while President Zelensky’s administration pledged to continue the fight against corruption. This has led to awkward contradictions, such as the administration relying on someone they had branded a criminal to provide weapons while investigating him simultaneously.
In the short term, this gamble has paid off, as Ukraine managed to repel Russian forces long enough for international aid to arrive. Ukrainian Armored Technology has secured lucrative contracts to support the war effort. However, the long-term risk is that these temporary changes become permanent, allowing individuals like Pashinsky to amass even more wealth and influence.
Ukrainian officials are aware of this risk, acknowledging the need for immediate access to significant amounts of weaponry when the war broke out. The investigation reveals how Ukraine’s desperation led to inflated prices and layers of profit-making. Pashinsky’s network operates by exploiting the system, buying and selling weapons multiple times to increase prices and generate profits for associates before eventually selling the arms to the military at the highest price. While this may be legal, it is a tactic that the Pentagon avoids.
Much of the funding for this system comes from European aid, according to insiders. European and American officials are cautious when discussing Pashinsky, fearing that acknowledging his role may support Russia’s claims of widespread corruption in Ukraine’s government. Privately, however, they acknowledge that the re-emergence of figures like Pashinsky is one reason why ammunition is being purchased for Ukraine rather than simply providing financial aid.
Pashinsky denies having any financial interest in the arms business, though government officials claim that he is the crucial negotiator on behalf of Ukrainian Armored Technology when dealing with the government. Despite his outward denial, documents and testimonies indicate that Pashinsky played a significant role in the company’s operations.
Critics of Pashinsky argue that he is taking advantage of the current environment where weapons are prioritized at any cost. However, even his detractors recognize that he thrives in this environment. Good governance groups and political adversaries express concern over his resurgence, but the prevailing sentiment is that Pashinsky is well-suited to operate within the current system.
In 2015, Pashinsky attempted to influence Nelly Stelmakh, a military procurement official, to purchase fuel from his preferred vendor instead of the lowest bidder. When Stelmakh refused, she encountered trouble and faced government interrogations. Eventually, the government went ahead with Pashinsky’s vendor choice, selecting vendors who charged less, but without considering the possibility of even more affordable options. Despite the brief controversy, no consequences followed.
Pashinsky has faced numerous criminal investigations and corruption inquiries over the years, but none have resulted in convictions. He maintained his innocence, attributing the investigations to Russian disinformation campaigns. While he acknowledges the ongoing criminal investigation, he contends that it stems from officials’ misguided perception of arms sellers making excessive profits. He portrays himself as a responsible citizen who has always remained loyal to his country.
Although there is widespread concern about corruption in Ukraine, Western governments still want to support the country against Russia. Purchasing ammunition for Ukraine rather than providing direct funding is motivated, in part, by the re-emergence of figures like Pashinsky.
In conclusion, Serhiy Pashinsky’s involvement in Ukraine’s arms industry showcases the compromises made by Ukrainian leaders in their pursuit of weapons during the war. Despite his contentious past, Pashinsky has become a key player in the arms business, taking advantage of the urgency and profit potential created by the conflict. While his actions have yielded short-term success, there is a lingering concern that these temporary changes will perpetuate corruption and enrich individuals like Pashinsky. Ukraine’s future stability and anti-corruption efforts may be undermined if such practices become ingrained in its systems.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
