Recent events in Ukraine have once again raised the topic of corruption, monopolization of power, and unique traits of the nation’s political system. The author discusses why certain government decisions, such as the non-transparent appointment of officials, are unsurprising and how this relates to the concept of the 'natural state'.
Referring to analysis by Douglass North, the article explains that in countries with ineffective state structures, real governing mechanisms often differ from those prescribed by law. In Ukraine, decision-making frequently bypasses the Verkhovna Rada in favor of informal settings and lacks public debate or coalition-building. This is attributed to the monopolization of power and the absence of a competitive political process.
There have been positive changes and reform efforts in sectors like 'Ukrnafta' and the 'Docheyn' platform for the military. However, overall, reforms are considered underappreciated and insufficient. The author underscores the importance of independent anti-corruption agencies and judicial investigations into abuses, especially during wartime.
Examples from South Korea are provided, where, despite the country's economic miracle, there were major corruption scandals and trials concerning former presidents. This serves as inspiration for Ukrainian society to retain faith in its development prospects.
The key conclusion is that Ukraine remains a transitional democracy, where honest initiatives coexist with remnants of the past system. Civil society, independent institutions, and gradual reforms should lay the foundation for a transparent and open state.
The article calls on citizens not to lose motivation, to support independent bodies, and to demand transparency, accountability, and genuine anti-corruption efforts from the government even in wartime. Step by step, the nation can make progress even under difficult historical circumstances.
