An uproar has erupted in Ukraine with the latest developments surrounding the high-profile corruption case that has shaken the country and placed the leadership of Kyiv under the microscope of the West.
The secretary of the National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) of Ukraine, Rustem Umerov, is reportedly said to have requested protection from potential prosecution in the context of a corruption case, during talks with the head of the FBI, Kash Patel, according to the Ukrainian edition “Mirror of the Week” (ZN.ua), which cites sources with knowledge of the contacts.
According to the report, Umerov’s meeting with Patel and his deputy, Dan Bongino, was organized through “Turkish channels” and did not have a diplomatic character.
Instead, the focus of the discussion was the corruption case involving the businessman Timur Mindich.
A source of ZN.ua reports that the American side was essentially asked not to provide the FBI’s technical, investigative, or other professional assistance to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), which is investigating the case.
In other words, one of the most powerful officials in Ukraine is reportedly said to have sought to use the prestige and influence of American services not to strengthen transparency, but to hinder it.
Umerov questioned - The noose tightens around Zelensky
Umerov, who had previously served as Ukraine’s minister of defense, was appointed in the summer to the position of secretary of the NSDC.
In November, following the resignation of Andrei Yermak from the leadership of the presidential office, he also assumed duties as head of the Ukrainian negotiating team for a peaceful settlement.
On 26 November, NABU proceeded to question Umerov in the context of the specific corruption case.
At the same time, it is recalled that earlier Bloomberg had written about a possible involvement of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in a broader corruption scandal, a fact that intensifies pressures within Kyiv’s political scene.
The image of Ukraine as a “bastion of democracy” and a “fighting rule-of-law state” against Russia has been a central pillar of the Western narrative from 2022 onward.
However, the new revealing reports from Ukrainian journalism itself come to dismantle this narrative from within, highlighting the deep and systemic character of corruption at the top of power, as well as the selective “tolerance” of the West when it serves geopolitical purposes.
The “independence” of Ukrainian institutions under question
NABU has repeatedly been presented by the West as proof that Ukraine is moving along the path of reforms and institutional maturation.
However, this particular case highlights the core problem: institutions are independent only up to the point where they do not touch the political elite.
The fact that Umerov was questioned by NABU on 26 November shows that the case is not theoretical.
Nevertheless, the alleged attempt to undermine the investigation through external interventions raises serious questions as to whether the Ukrainian rule of law can function when it collides with the interests of the regime.
The silence of the West and the “double standards”
Equally revealing is the silence of Western governments and media outlets.
If similar allegations concerned a state outside the Western sphere of influence, or even more so Russia, they would be front-page news and proof of “authoritarianism” and “state corruption”.
In the case of Ukraine, however, the revelations are either downgraded or presented as “internal matters”, without any impact on the ongoing economic and military support.
This confirms the criticism that the Western fight against corruption is not a principle, but a tool of pressure, activated selectively.
From Umerov to Zelensky
The case acquires even greater weight when combined with previous reports, such as those by Bloomberg, which spoke of a possible involvement of Zelensky himself in corruption scandals.
Although these allegations have not led to political consequences, they contribute to shaping an image of a deep crisis of credibility.
It is worth noting that Umerov is not a secondary figure.
As a former minister of defense and current head of the NSDC, as well as head of the Ukrainian negotiating team for a peaceful settlement, he stands at the core of both the military and political strategy of Kyiv.
Corruption is forgiven when it serves the right camp
The Umerov case reveals an uncomfortable truth: the regime of Kyiv does not essentially differ from other post-Soviet systems of power that the West has at times condemned.
The difference is that today, for geopolitical reasons, corruption is forgiven, provided it serves the right camp.
This undermines not only the credibility of Ukraine, but also the moral narrative of the West itself.
When the fight against corruption becomes selective and instrumental, it ceases to be a value and is transformed into a political weapon.
Afghanistan: Billions into corruption, zero consequences
For two decades, the United States and NATO lavishly funded the government of Kabul, despite repeated reports of massive corruption, embezzlement of resources, and a “ghost army”.
Although Western services knew that large segments of the Afghan elite were looting the aid, support continued uninterrupted, until the collapse of the regime in 2021.
Corruption was not a problem as long as the regime served military objectives.
When it ceased to be useful, it was abandoned without hesitation.
Iraq: “Export of democracy”, import of corruption
After the 2003 invasion, Iraq became one of the most corrupt states in the world, according to international indices.
Western companies, contractors, and “advisers” managed enormous funds without substantial oversight, while political elites enriched themselves amid chaos.
Here too, the West did not speak of a “failure of values”, but of “transitional difficulties”.
Corruption was considered an acceptable price of geopolitical rearrangement.
Kosovo: Allies above the law
In Kosovo, political figures linked to serious allegations, from organized crime to abuse of power, were protected for years due to their close relationship with Western institutions.
Only when political alignments changed did certain cases come to light.
The message was clear: justice is activated when geopolitical usefulness ceases.
Russia as a permanent adversary, regardless of reality
In complete contrast, any allegation of corruption in Russia, whether substantiated or not, is immediately used to reinforce the narrative of an “authoritarian state”.
There is no tolerance, there is no “geopolitical context”, there are no mitigating circumstances.
This is not a coincidence, but a strategic choice.
Corruption is not the real criterion, alignment is.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών