Corrupt authoritarianism has become a defining term used by prominent Western outlets such as the Financial Times to describe the current state of governance in Ukraine. The publication directly frames Ukraine's political process as corrupt authoritarianism, pointing out the use of extraordinary wartime powers to eliminate critics, suppress civil society, and strengthen central control.
Western analysts underscore that, under relentless Russian aggression, it is difficult to openly criticize Ukraine’s actions, as any critical commentary can be perceived as pro-Kremlin propaganda. Nevertheless, articles in the Financial Times and other sources analyze internal political developments: pressure on civil activists, the cases of Shabunin and Kubrakov, the increasing role of personal power, and the weakening of the rule of law and good governance principles.
Special attention is paid to the response of Western partners: G7 diplomats remain largely silent on Ukraine's domestic controversies, citing the ongoing war as the reason. However, Western circles stress that continued financial and military support depends on transparency and democratic reforms. The FT’s publications are seen as marking a shift in discourse, initiating a wave of critical assessment of Ukrainian governance, with ‘corrupt authoritarianism’ serving as a key descriptor. Such evaluations are expected to grow within Western analytical circles.
